99% of this thread are posts deleted from the http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119676-enabl-listening-impressions-techniques.html thread.
Posts 210-220 is the latest garbage run - and hopefully the last.
From the other thread:
Posts 210-220 is the latest garbage run - and hopefully the last.
From the other thread:
I took out the trash again. If I see you guys do that again tonight I'll just put you in the bin and trash your posts. It's easier that way. I'm tired of all your ********.
Isn't one of the tenants of experimental science, that someone else should duplicate an experiment?
John's test's were quick & nasty (IMO), far from definitive & conclusive... they bring up more questions than they answer -- a recent paper i read that did conclusiviely show something (and relevent to the discussion -- humans have a threshold of <5uS in detecting timeing differences), took 5 years of work to complete.
dave
I would suggest rather than trying to discredit the results of my tests you might try to explain why you think they don't have merit. I haven't posted in this thread for a long time, but I do check in periodically. You state that the data brings up questions but fail to bring to light what those questions are nor do you attempt to answer them. It's the same old story, isn't it. Those who take the other side will continue to make their claims without any solid evidence to back them up, though for 2 years this has been promised. Mean while, any and all data that has been presented shows the reality of the situation.
And of course no one on the other side has attempted to duplicate my results, or they have and haven't posted them. The reason should be clear to all without bias. And that is exactly the problem, bias. And that is exactly what experiments remove. If dlr chooses to accept my data without trying to duplicate them it is his prerogative. I would take issue with those proponents of enable who make statements regarding data and yet do not themselves try to duplicate the results. The test are straight forward. If you don't believe them then it is the proponents task to present data which contradicts the result and substantiates their claims. Otherwise you are just making noise. We can be sure that the proponents will not post results which support the data that has been reported and they will continue to attempt to discredit data which is contrary to their position, regardless of the source. It is a case of politics vs. science.
Promises have been made for a couple of years here and nothing to support any claim has been presented.
We have seen this so many times, green pens, digital clocks, maybe you recall the warnings of the 80's: once you play a digital recording through you system it becomes irreversibly digitalized, ruining the sound forever; Totem Breaks, cable lifts, $44,000 field coil drivers.... The list goes on and on.
Now I'll go back to ignoring this thread as it contributes nothing.
cable lifts and green pens....You forgot vibration stones. I never read about digital recording digitalizing a system, hehe! Those crazy audiophiles 😉
Thanks John K. (for your site and common sense). You saved me lots of reading 😀
I also agree that opinion without valid testing data is just opinion that shouldn't be voiced..."Just do the controlled tests" seems to be the last thing on anyone's mind in the audio world.
Interesting & useful. Yes (less so now that there are no pictures)
Definitive & conclusive. No.
i believe these are the relevant posts
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119677-enabl-technical-discussion-13.html#post1464783
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119677-enabl-technical-discussion-14.html#post1464870
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/119677-enabl-technical-discussion-18.html#post1465750
dave
Yea, agreed.
I don't give today's patent process any attention as they are too often used only as copyright; not for legitimate unique invention. Everyone sells their products using the 'patent' buzzword to death and it is gullible people that lick it up. The result is no value to the word or the process at all. Look at Tekton design. 'patent' is smeared all over the adverts but there isn't anything unique or patent-worthy in the entire Tekton lineup. The same goes for Bose. Shoving a driver in a box a 'different way' is not worthy of a patent imo. Something like electrostatic speakers as opposed to conventional drivers, sure. That's worthy stuff.
I've had people here try to convince me that moving mass and motor size is irrelevant despite an entire industry of evidence to the contrary. I'm amazed at all the outlandish claims and unsupported junk that comes from this forum; which is supposedly comprised of educated adults. Early on I saw this place as a potential gold mine of useful information. I was wrong.
I have no opinion either way of Enabl because I have no hard data either way. But the drivers Enabl-ed for me sound great. The untreated driver sounds great too.
Excuse me I have to go don my boots, which I fixed with Gorilla Glue and 15 minute epoxy (patent pending).
dlr, john k
Wow, I have to hand it to you guys for sticking with this topic for so long and with such opposition. My hat's off to you both (and some others as well) for trying to inject some math/science/reality into this debate! Thank you for taking all the time you do to reply here. Truthfully I gave up on this thread (and several others here on diyaudio) months ago and only look in now and again to see if it has improved all all. Sadly, not.......
Steve.
Wow, I have to hand it to you guys for sticking with this topic for so long and with such opposition. My hat's off to you both (and some others as well) for trying to inject some math/science/reality into this debate! Thank you for taking all the time you do to reply here. Truthfully I gave up on this thread (and several others here on diyaudio) months ago and only look in now and again to see if it has improved all all. Sadly, not.......
Steve.
The patent process (be it as it may) is essentially a copyrite process for ideas which may or may not represent any novel utility here-to-fore un-documented or disclosed publicly.
Your idea may or may not work as your white paper describes. However, my point was the patent itself and the patent process which I don't have to agree with.
Worse yet, here in the US, the examination process rarely entails any prior art searches outside the patent literature. I once worked for a company that got sued for patent infringement by another company who had seen one of our products at a trade show, took samples and literature, then applied for a patent and got it. The examiner never bothered to actually see if that "invention" was already for sale by someone else...
My opinion is that it was only good for one reason. Those who don't know how worthless a patent really is, are impressed enough by you having one to give you the time to impress them with your claims and a working sample.
Trying to use one to defend intellectual property requires pockets the depth of a Microsoft. And, $10k will get you a territorial patent and $30K will get you a world patent. Neither one is actually worth the money, unless you know you can defend it. With something as unusual as EnABL or some of the other off beat ideas I have, a patent really is not worth the effort or money spent.
Especially not when there are so many smart, knowledgeable folks on one web site, that you can parade your underwear in front of, while pretending the usual nonchalance of royalty. And for that very thing, that pick it apart attitude vs go get 'em anyway dichotomy, I am extremely thankful and I hold each and every one of you in high esteem.
Bud
Trying to use one to defend intellectual property requires pockets the depth of a Microsoft. And, $10k will get you a territorial patent and $30K will get you a world patent. Neither one is actually worth the money, unless you know you can defend it. With something as unusual as EnABL or some of the other off beat ideas I have, a patent really is not worth the effort or money spent.
Especially not when there are so many smart, knowledgeable folks on one web site, that you can parade your underwear in front of, while pretending the usual nonchalance of royalty. And for that very thing, that pick it apart attitude vs go get 'em anyway dichotomy, I am extremely thankful and I hold each and every one of you in high esteem.
Bud
Or perhaps the truth is more of the lines of: Those who don't know how worthless a patent really is are impressed enough by you having one.
In today's scientific community patents are basically the equivalent of reviewed publications on a resume. Of course, journal review is a more rigorous process because those who review a potential publication are usually experts in the field. Not only does defending a patent take money, it requires that the claims be substantiated. Look luck with that one Bud.
patent value??? eye of the beholder...
dunno about that... I've made more than 6 figures left of the decimal off my patents and technology back in the late '80's (now expired as of 2007) and I didn't even have to file them myself (assigned to the now defunct Burlington Industries, )... ya just gotta know how to use them, how to write them, how to protect the intellectual property within, and (likely most importantly, they gotta have some sort of innate value to someone else, often lacking in most of the hundreds I've read)
Alas, most of the "high-end exotica audio" patents I've read don't hold much water...
heck, I've moved on into the Byzantine world of medical billing and collections.... much more complex than all this talk about boundary layers, diffraction,patent value, etc...😀
John L.
dunno about that... I've made more than 6 figures left of the decimal off my patents and technology back in the late '80's (now expired as of 2007) and I didn't even have to file them myself (assigned to the now defunct Burlington Industries, )... ya just gotta know how to use them, how to write them, how to protect the intellectual property within, and (likely most importantly, they gotta have some sort of innate value to someone else, often lacking in most of the hundreds I've read)
Alas, most of the "high-end exotica audio" patents I've read don't hold much water...
heck, I've moved on into the Byzantine world of medical billing and collections.... much more complex than all this talk about boundary layers, diffraction,patent value, etc...😀
John L.
And where would this thread be if Dave and I weren't here to heckle you. Seems to me that anything an acoustic wave travels over should be enabled, or so the story goes. 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.