fredex said:
The always have been....the best designed systems spend +80% on the speakers.
If you are spending more on electronics, you are putting your money on the wrong component.
rdf said:
The sceince is out there to be read and there is nothing more to prove with metals. I simply put money behind my tests/challenges and if there are so many that think they can easily tell any difference this should be easy money.
The Subjectivists mantra.....
First, subjectivists do not believe BIAS like brand name, looks, $$$ impact what they hear some how they think the Ear is more then just a tool and they do not realize the brain does all the processing using ALL variables and signals from the Ear is just a small part of the whole process... Conclusion any listening test has to be done in a controlled environment because all those BIAS variables must be removed.
Second, Subjectivists come up with every lame excuse in the books for why a simple blind test does not work. The only valid reason is that they can not accept the truth.
Thirdly, Subjectivists argue that measurements can not be done to explain what they hear different...what a shocker there.
In the end Subjectivists have ONE premise.....they hear a difference (in crude invalid tests). Of course they ignore the measurements, they ignore the BIAS in their very simplistic listening experiement and they ignore the science behind metals (Not much more can be discovered there).
Subjectivists have the same mind set as religious factions do...pick one there are many in the world. You arguements are no different then theirs and you rely on a very simplistic faith, you are so wrapped up in the faith that any discovery of the truth would unravel a tight little audiophile world that has been created.
Its a pointless debate and the only thing that everyone needs to do is to educated themselves on a little science that surrounds audio (disagree or agree) then do CONTROLLED tests.....how you do them is up to you but ensure all the BIAS is controlled.
Interesting read but its time to ge off this dead horse.
Steve Eddy said:
BS, he wasnt the one that balked at supplying cables...Name calling in my world its the people that can not put up the product that are the weasels.
Okay, now Im out. Have fun beating a dead horse 😀
doug20 said:
No, the BS is yours.
It wasn't Fremer who balked at supplying cables. It was Pear Audio.
Fremer offered to use his Tara Labs cables. It was Randi the weasel who balked at that.
se
Steve Eddy said:
This is detailed ad nauseum at Randi's site. No need to cut'n'paste, you're a pretty web-savvy dude
Is funny you keep posting Randi the weasel....Fremer is a complete butthole too about this, his passive/agressive ways makes me laugh.....you should try to be a little less hypocritical about one side since both sides took it down hill in an hurry.
From what I read Fremer has yet to do a proper DBT just to prove to himself that cables are not audibly different (if they do not alter the FR).
He has no reason too, he isnt in the business to be objective, logical or scientific.
Does it matter, Fremer should put up the $$$ since it would be so easy to win more....In the end Fremer was the pussy in my books...I would say it to his face too because I can 😉
Damn, I have to get out of the dead horse beating 😱
From what I read Fremer has yet to do a proper DBT just to prove to himself that cables are not audibly different (if they do not alter the FR).
He has no reason too, he isnt in the business to be objective, logical or scientific.
Does it matter, Fremer should put up the $$$ since it would be so easy to win more....In the end Fremer was the pussy in my books...I would say it to his face too because I can 😉
Damn, I have to get out of the dead horse beating 😱
doug20 said:
So you're not disagreeing that Randi is a weasel.
In the end, it was Randi who disingenuously pulled the rug out from under Fremer and just as disingenuously made Fremer out to be a coward.
se
Steve Eddy said:
Both became AHoles in the whole mess from what I read. Fremer has a history of being one though. I have no idea about Randi, I think he has done some great debunking in the past so he gets a little more crediblity in my books.
I think its disingenuous for Fremer not to bring the right cables agreed upon to the table. Its not Randi's fault the cable company refused to do it. Fremer has a legion of followers someone should have stepped up, the cost is a problem for him?
IMO, Randi was just tired of the whole thing and was an a$$ about it (I would be too).
Fremer still has not done a DBT from all I have read, its not that hard you know!
Just to set the record straight and to show that SY's claim is false and that Fremer neither insisted on breaking protocol nor then refused to be tested, here is the original offer put forth by Randi:
We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.
In addition to the Pears and the Transparents, Fermer also suggested using his own Tara Labs cables.
Randi actually said he would prefer this, as they were cables that Fremer was already familiar with, but said that he would first have to talk to his "advisers" about it before fully agreeing to it.
It was at this point that Pear Cables informed Randi via EMail that they would not provide their cables for the challenge.
Randi immediately published a news item titled "BLAKE WITHDRAWS FROM PEAR CABLE CHALLENGE" (which as far as I've been able to determine, has since been "scrubbed" from Randi's website).
In it, Randi wrote:
...this retreat by Adam Blake effectively closes the current challenge, much to the relief of both Fremer and Blake, of course. Actually, I must admit that this was a rather clever way of squirming out of the huge dilemma in which these two blowhards found themselves.
However the "current challenge" was not limited exclusively to the Pear cables. The Transparents were a second option, and it was still possible at this time that Fremer's Tara Labs cables could be a third.
In other words, Randi disingenuously used Pear's withdrawal to yank the rug out from under Fremer by closing the challenge which again was not exclusively limited to the Pear cables, and then he just as disingenuously states that Fremer had cleverly squirmed out of a "huge dilemma."
The man is a WEASEL.
Simple as that.
se
We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.
In addition to the Pears and the Transparents, Fermer also suggested using his own Tara Labs cables.
Randi actually said he would prefer this, as they were cables that Fremer was already familiar with, but said that he would first have to talk to his "advisers" about it before fully agreeing to it.
It was at this point that Pear Cables informed Randi via EMail that they would not provide their cables for the challenge.
Randi immediately published a news item titled "BLAKE WITHDRAWS FROM PEAR CABLE CHALLENGE" (which as far as I've been able to determine, has since been "scrubbed" from Randi's website).
In it, Randi wrote:
...this retreat by Adam Blake effectively closes the current challenge, much to the relief of both Fremer and Blake, of course. Actually, I must admit that this was a rather clever way of squirming out of the huge dilemma in which these two blowhards found themselves.
However the "current challenge" was not limited exclusively to the Pear cables. The Transparents were a second option, and it was still possible at this time that Fremer's Tara Labs cables could be a third.
In other words, Randi disingenuously used Pear's withdrawal to yank the rug out from under Fremer by closing the challenge which again was not exclusively limited to the Pear cables, and then he just as disingenuously states that Fremer had cleverly squirmed out of a "huge dilemma."
The man is a WEASEL.
Simple as that.
se
doug20 said:
The Pear cables were NOT the only cable on the table.
Also on the table were the Transparent Opus MM SC's, and also the possibility of Fremer's own Tara Labs cables.
He was beyond a a$$ about it. He was a liar and a weasel.
That has absolutely nothing to do with SY's claim that Fremer insisted on breaking controls and refused to be tested. He never had the chance to do anything like that. Randi disingenuously yanked the rug out from under him.
se
Disingenous??
you followed the same fiasco I followed...of course you did, you said you were there.
I do not know you or any of them, I have read enough from Fremer to know he isnt a nice guy to many people. From your posts you are a fremer friend or fan, both makes you bias in this matter and so I take your opinion on it with a grain of salt.
None of this matters no one has proven any of this stuff to be audibly different in a controlled test and until you do so you have nothing but faith.....I like science myself.
OK guys. This thread is deteriorating into mudslinging.Please do not post unless you have factual and relevant information pertaining to the thread topic.
Unless the discussion improves we will have to take action (Brett and AndyG please note especially - your public battle will not be tolerated here)
The fact is, SY's particular point is not discussed at all. The last post I am able to locate has Randi showing he had to go to an emergency room on a Friday and thus was unable to confer with his "advisors" in time and was unable to meet some "deadline" and that was the end of it.
Perhaps when one of Randi's advisors informed him that there was a very distinct possibility that Fremer, under a properly performed test, could distinguish Monster cable from the Tara Lab cables in his own listening environment (a test that was under consideration), Randi's heart began to flutter at the prospect of being hoist by his own petard to the tune of $1,000,000. Fortunately, it wasn't serious and Randi only suffered a close call (in more ways than one).
We have to remember that among the the charges Randi had made in the course of a rant early on inductance, capacitance, skin effect and other measurable or calculable parameters in a cable will have no effect on the sound of an audio system. The realization that this may not be the case also may have influenced his decision to cancel the challenge. Clearly, he was in over his head at the outset.
John
doug20 said:
Yes, disingenuous.
disingenuous lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere
When the challenge as proposed could have been met using one of at least two, and possibly three different cables, it is disingenuous to close the challenge because the manufacturer of one of those cables refused to supply cables for the test, and even more disingenuous to say that Fremer had cleverly squirmed out of a huge dilemma.
I'm neither a friend nor a fan of Fremer. I only knew him through his column in Stereophile which I seldom if ever read (I'm an Art Dudley fan).
What I was, before this incident, was a fan of Randi.
But there was simply no escaping his duplicity here.
That's completely irrelevant to the issue here.
The issue was SY's claim that Fremer insisted on breaking controls and refused to be tested.
That claim simply isn't true.
And I say that in spite of the fact that I am both a friend and a fan of SY.
se
To be clear, I claim the first, not the second. He said he was willing to be tested if he provided cables that were not part of the agreed-on protocol.
Heck, I'd make the same offer, being sure (or course) that the cables I provided would cause an audible frequency response error.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.