Peter Daniel said:
OTOH, you and Mr Fitzpatrick, acted very childishly right from the beginning
What did I do?
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
What did I do?
That's exactly how my 6 years old daughter would describe those devices:
Bill Fitzpatrick said:Those squiggly wood pieces are called "snakes."
The black metal rods in front of them are hollow and hold the oil.
Shakto Stone
till said:for everyone what he deserves...
Heh, I want a Shakti Stone on my grave.They should last a lifetime under normal conditions and can be easily transferred to future cars or components you may own.
Peter Daniel said:
That's exactly how my 6 years old daughter would describe those devices:
Well, good for her. She can recognize a scam when she sees one.
Peter Daniel said:
I am very much tempted to use till's expression:
...but I will not.
I would like to see where exactly I "pretty much called you a narrowminded moron". Please provide a quote.
OTOH, you and Mr Fitzpatrick, acted very childishly right from the beginning, without any respect for efforts of others. Your rude behaviour and lack of understanding for never ending quest for better sound is a shame to diyAudio, which I have to remind you once again, features in its logo the expression: "projects by the fanatics, for the fanatics".
Obviously, majority of people who spoke in this thread, don't qualify as fanatics, and I'd rather described them as armchair critics. I don't even know why you actually spoke here, as the person who opened this thread was specifically asking "If anyone built a pair of Shaktis?"
So if you don't have anything constructive to add, please keep away from this thread. This is a formal moderator's warning. I don't want to go as far as applying a formal Citation, but it seems like this might be the only way to let people speak freely on this board, without being afraid of naysayers, whose favourite passtime is critisizing the efforts of others.
Well thanks for providing the quote in this post, so I dont have to go back and search for the first time you implied that im narrowminded and not too clever.
Your moderators hat obviously fell down over your eyes, since you cant see that youre not in a position in this thread to use it, your own behaveoure taken into account.
I personally find it very important to take the steam out of scams like this one as effectively as possible, and I sure wish others would do the same for me should I at some point come to believe in some sort of scam.
Such is as far as im concerned constructive for the forum as a whole, and for the people whom have been caught by the scam.
At this point there are plenty of warnings included in this thread,so its no longer an add for a scam.
Considering the turn this thread have taken, this is it from my side. It is obviously no longer a discussion, but just a place to vent frustrasions.
Magura
At this point there are plenty of warnings included in this thread,so its no longer an add for a scam.
I only hope the moderation of this thread (and others) does not turn into advertisment for voodoo & scam. There is a tendency....
till said:
I only hope the moderation of this thread (and others) does not turn into advertisment for voodoo & scam. There is a tendency....
Worry not.
(no mod hat on here!!) People have the right to believe in the Tooth Fairy and pixie dust. They do NOT have the right to believe in these things and to expect that other adults won't laugh at them.
Magura said:
Well thanks for providing the quote in this post, so I dont have to go back and search for the first time you implied that im narrowminded and not too clever.
I would still like to see where I implied that. Otherwise, I might very well imply that you are a liar.
narrowminded and not too clever
My, oh my. Maybe aurally challenged or cochleary disabled, but certainly not narrowminded. I personally respect people with disabilities even if they are in a stage of angry denial.
SY said:
People have the right to believe in the Tooth Fairy and pixie dust. They do NOT have the right to believe in these things and to expect that other adults won't laugh at them.
However, this forum should also provide them the right to discuss any topic they wish, without being attacked by others and laughed at. At least this is my understanding and that's why we have so many different sections and that's why each thread has a title. The moderators should looked into, that this right is being enforced.
However, this forum should also provide them the right to discuss any topic they wish, without being attacked by others and laughed at. At least this is my understanding and that's why we have so many different sections and that's why each thread has a title. The moderators should looked into, that this right is being enforced.
Well, are the moderators in agreement that no dissention should be allowed, or is that your opinion backed up with your cop icon?
While all viewpoints shold be allowed, think of the diservice you would be doing newbies to audio or people new to this forum, if by banning opposing opinions, you allow them to get the impression that all these gizmos are accepted by all. By not allowing people to express their sceptisism, you are promoting the impression that all of us here agree with these "theories" and devices, which is flat out untrue. Many here are FANATICS about not being taken in by BS and trying to differentiate between BS and not so BS.
It is hard, which is what makes this sport so interesting!
While I don't condone the mudslingling here, EVERY thread which discusses unprovable issues (that means about all of 'em) MUST allow a disenting view, or it inaccuratly reflects the opinions of the DIY Audio group as a whole.
Then again, sometimes a thread just reaches it's limit, and it needs to be shut down..... like maybe this one..
Shakti Products etc
Hi Tom,
I am sorry for the bad jokes. I have no experience with these Hallographs.
Anyone who wants to try The Shakti Products, the VPI Magic Brick, Samba Clip, Bybee Quantifiers or whatever may do so, of course!
I am always very sceptical and do only believe a tweak after I heard it on my own equipment at home.
Peter I really thought you made a joke with post # 25.
So I leave this thread and will no longer interfere.
A good friend of mine has the Shakti Stones and he swears these are an improvement. I don't hear any effect.... Also I dropped one stone, my fault.
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=tweaks&n=45651&highlight=elso+shakti&r=&session=
Hi Tom,
I am sorry for the bad jokes. I have no experience with these Hallographs.
Anyone who wants to try The Shakti Products, the VPI Magic Brick, Samba Clip, Bybee Quantifiers or whatever may do so, of course!
I am always very sceptical and do only believe a tweak after I heard it on my own equipment at home.
Peter I really thought you made a joke with post # 25.
So I leave this thread and will no longer interfere.
A good friend of mine has the Shakti Stones and he swears these are an improvement. I don't hear any effect.... Also I dropped one stone, my fault.
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=tweaks&n=45651&highlight=elso+shakti&r=&session=
Hi,
Duh??? What's that doing here?
IOW, since when is EMI shielding something nobody can explain?
Cheers,
P.S. Not wanting to launch an avalanche of Shakti Stones landing in Kwakwater...
the VPI Magic Brick
Duh??? What's that doing here?
IOW, since when is EMI shielding something nobody can explain?
Cheers,
P.S. Not wanting to launch an avalanche of Shakti Stones landing in Kwakwater...
Now tell me, what impression this gives to newbies?
That the operation of devices which have no actual experimental support and are claimed to operate outside of physics ought to be presumed fraudulent until such actual evidence is presented?
Hi,
Which only tells us that they didn't work for you and we shouldn't replace Shakti Hallographs with hatracks.
By your logic hatracks are fraudulent devices.
Cheers,
Hey, I did try the hat-rack experiment!
Which only tells us that they didn't work for you and we shouldn't replace Shakti Hallographs with hatracks.
By your logic hatracks are fraudulent devices.
Cheers,
SY said:
That the operation of devices which have no actual experimental support and are claimed to operate outside of physics ought to be presumed fraudulent until such actual evidence is presented?
This statement is patently fraudulent. I can site dozens of reviews, formal and informal, which atest to their validity. You can site zero reviews stating they don't work.
These reviews and mine are "experimental support" they work. You have produced no evidence that they don't work.
Please site the laws of physics these violate.
I have recieve a bunch of requests for plans for these so I am encouraged that some people are reasonable and intellegent.
Please email me if you would like to build them yourself and experiment. Of course you will have to give up membership in the "know it all" club.
By your logic hatracks are fraudulent devices.
As acoustic modifiers, yes. As devices to hold your hats, they seem to work just fine.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- General Interest
- Everything Else
- Anyone else build a pair of Shakti Hallographs?