No, Dan has talked with me by telephone, but I have not tried his 'Goop'. Still, I believe him to be serious, until proven differently.
I've no doubt he's serious about goop, I hope is isn't serious about some other the other crap though.
I’ve always prided myself in being open minded but even I’m edging towards ‘not likely’
disclaimer......although, I do believe there are things going on that you eggheads (term of endearment!) aren’t picking up on.
disclaimer......although, I do believe there are things going on that you eggheads (term of endearment!) aren’t picking up on.
Some possible food for thought: https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/esplab/...s/168/2018/01/Huang_Magical-contagion2017.pdf
So to speak, when I was about 12 or 13 a friend claimed that you would weigh more than an extra pound by eating a pound of bread. I had filters for nonsense well established long before this. I have to admit I have known people that would never read a book or magazine that anyone else had touched, bought new shoes every two weeks, and never wore any underwear more than once (even checking in the store to make sure no one had touched it).
SY is great except in one way he wasnt ---- every uttered thought, test, deed or comment was accompanied with did you do a DBLT? Only such test mattered to him as 'proof'. Really annoying in his insistence and repetitiveness on the subject.
🙂
-RNM
Where did he go and why?
-RNM
So you require peeking so as not to make a "mistake". As far as I'm concerned sighted listening is random data of little or no value at all. Did you ever consider that sighted many folks would say the expensive choice was no better than the cheap one out of bias, I would think you would also demand DBT.
The space here is virtual where has no meaning.
Ah, but contagion isn't always about bad things, if one reads on it can confer good things too.
The research on contagion is probably the best thing we have for understanding the human propensity to believe things such as that bit-identical files can be imbued with audibly different properties.
Last edited:
It is perceived so from the perspective of the person holding the belief. Just as once-touched magazines mostly seem a bad thing to one holding beliefs/perceptions regarding contamination.
Maybe helpful to look at positive contagion at: Contagion heuristic - Wikipedia
Well, since Dan has claimed -
Max Headroom said:
This is easily verifiable and basically impossible with an LCD or OLED TV. If this claim turns out to be false, which is highly likely if you know anything on how displays operate, why should we believe anything else he says?
It's not like I'm going to say "Oh, that one thing Dan said has turned out not to be true, now I have to change my whole world view!"
Okay, so were does "it matter most" and is there a hypothesis, oh excuse me, a theory, of what it does that might help the sound of a hifi component?
I recognize one material as possibly being an "active ingredient." This might work like ... oh, I won't say, lest it give a "plausible" explanation to someone who might not otherwise have had one.
Although my biology is only ''O' level standard, I recall that poop isn't really an excretion. That's just a colloquialism. Excretions (as I was taught) are waste products from cells.
And some of us have wizened to spending much time here at all. I rolled the rock up the hill only to watch it go back down one too many time. Also, academic arguments are only vigorous because they don't matter. Anything serious was settled and moved part immediately.
But there's no need to argue small points here anyways as there are more than enough patently absurd claims to run with.
I can name 3 different material applications for audio, that seem to work. First there was the Belt products, composed of cremes, etc, then Bybee, usually put into some framework like wood or plastic, and now, Max's 'Goop'.
I don't know specifically WHY these products seem to work, but I find that they usually do, for me at least. It doesn't matter WHY, as much as it matters what works when you use or apply these products.
I don't know specifically WHY these products seem to work, but I find that they usually do, for me at least. It doesn't matter WHY, as much as it matters what works when you use or apply these products.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.