power cord break-in or burn-in is there such a thing?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#464
Hi,

Unless when it comes to your claims on power cords,
Click to expand...

Claims? No, observations and experiences, yes.

There's no Bonanza here for any Millwood to be found.

Unless...Unless of course the bank sees a market here?

There's always a market for selfdelusion and fraud, I reckon?

This must be disappointing to some but let's move on...

Cheers,😉
 
#465
fdegrove said:
Sure about that?
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Why not collect some useful tis and trick that do have a reasonable chance to work?

Maybe in another thread perhaps?

Wouldn't that be more valuable?
Click to expand...

Mmmmm. Debatable. The most significant tips and tricks involve the listening environment itself, and most audiophiles either don't have any interest or can't get away with it because they married the *****wife From Hell. 🙂

se
 
#466
Hi,

The most significant tips and tricks involve the listening environment itself, and most audiophiles either don't have any interest or can't get away with it because they married the *****wife From Hell.
Click to expand...

Oh dear...
Guess we'll just have to resort to the invisible ones then?

LOL, ROTFLMAO and not necessarily in that order...:clown:

Still cracking,😉
 
#470
fdegrove on South Africa:
Marvelous country with lots of springbok. (Nickname for SA inhabitants).
Click to expand...
You are seriously misinformed, Frank... much like many of your audio perceptions. Clearly you've never set foot in the country, or if you did you weren't paying attention. FYI the "springbok" is a small antelope common to the drier plains viz Karoo and Kalahari. There is no nickname for our inhabitants locally or over in Europe, in your back yard. BTDT more times than I can count and obviously more times than you've been down here. Or perhaps I was just paying attention. We do have a nickname for chaps who like to shoot their mouths off for it's own sake though... we call them "poepholle". You probably know enough Flemish to get your ears around that one, Frank.

John Curl on health:
About 1/3 of a century ago, I started taking multiple vitamins, in doses stronger than the 'minimum dose' recommended by doctors. Soon, I was not getting as many medical symptoms that sometimes brought me to be seen by a doctor. To me, this was progress, and I was not going to ignore it. Today, stronger multivitamins are recommended by many authorities, than were recommended 1/3 of a century ago.
Click to expand...
Sure, go ahead. But let me tell you a few things you may not know. With 4 exceptions (ADE & K), all vitamins are water-soluble so your kidneys simply excrete all excess beyond RDA. Too much of vtamins A, D, E and K and I guarantee you won't be around for another 1/20 century, let alone 1/3. Those are TOXIC. Oh and be careful of vit C in large doses, especially with excessive calcium intake. Makes for marvellous kidney stones which are f*#@king painful! Tip: make sure you get plenty of Zinc, Magnesium and Vit B6 (pyridoxine)... free medical advice...

Peter Daniel on PC proof:
I'm ready now, come over. Or, if you prefer, I'll come over to your place, providing you cover expenses. I was always curious about South Africa.
Click to expand...
Sure thing, Peter. I'll pop right over. Geography is such a convenient little obstacle sometimes...

Bratislav on snake oil:
Mpingo blocks ? "Magic" C37 lacquer ? Writing strange characters in reverse onto your bedroom mirror ? Surely there's a fine line where audio croses into the outright lunacy.
Click to expand...
Right on... and I think that line you see is Wunderkabel @ $431,10 a running foot. 😀

Frank on Medicine:
If I may say so, the man could have saved himself alot of money by sticking to fruits, veggies, nuts and what have you. All of which are more easily absorbed by the human body and in higher percentage rates (percentagewise) than anything looking like a pill or tablet. Not to mention the more complex natural states of minerals, vitamins, spores and whatever there is in natural supplements. Things aren't as black and white as they seem, medical follow up should be based on the individual, not the medically average.
Click to expand...
No Frank, they are not as black and white as they seem... to you. Fruit and nuts are great but MANY have complex chelates and other chemical compositions making mineral and vitamin absorption MORE DIFFICULT. Ironic eh? Pun intended! I would honestly recommend you stick to power cords Frank.

Steve on medical research:
Thing is, even placebos have an efficacy rate. Sometimes even greater than the medications they're being used to test.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Factamundo. Mind over matter, much like many of these power cord "facts" which go unrecognized in the face of one's ego. BTW I think we should change the name from Wunderkabel to PlaceboKabel and jack up the price...

Frank on fraud:
There's always a market for selfdelusion and fraud, I reckon?
Click to expand...
For the first time I agree with you, Frank.
 
#471
Peter Daniel on PC proof:
Peter Daniel said:

and we all well know, that arranging such experiments and presenting the satisfying proof is practically almost impossible, if not only for a simple reason of time and space restrictions.
Click to expand...

DrG on PC proof:
Sure thing, Peter. I'll pop right over. Geography is such a convenient little obstacle sometimes...
Click to expand...


This time I agree with you, DrG.
 
#476
Steve Eddy said:


Not according to Bedini's patent. In his patent he clearly shows that spinning a CD in a relatively weak magnetic field not only results in the data on the disc changing (i.e. data compression), but its physical location changes as well.

Wanna know how he proved it? This is hilarious.

He took a Kodak PhotoCD and copied an image off it onto his computer's hard drive. Then he spun the CD in the magnetic field and copied the same image into a different directory on his hard drive.

Then he pulls each image into PhotoShop and saves them out as PostScript files.

Then he takes a text editor and counts the number of lines of text in each of the PostScript files and finds that there are fewer lines of text in the file for the "clarified" disc.

Then he uses a comparison utility to compare the differences of the two files and comes up with a number of differences.

I repeated this test and came up with the same results. Except I didn't use any "clarifier." I just copied the same file off the CD into two different directories and repeated what he did. I also did the same to some other graphic images that were already on my hard drive.

Seems that when PhotoShop saves out a PostScript file, the algorithm causes the files to be different.
se
Click to expand...


Interesting. The first note is that Bedini is obviously either a
charlatan or completely ignorant of anything having to do
with computers. His proof method is not very intersting or
relevant for the purpose and it tells us nothing interesting.
Unless you had managed to repeat
it without any Bedini treatment at all, I would have said that
he somehow had managed to cause data corruption, which at
least I don't want on my CDs.

Then, why did you get different results? That is not immediately
obvious. If the source was a Kodak photo CD, did you use the
full-resultion image in Kodaks own image format (forgot it's
name)? More interestingly , why on earth did Bedini save the
images as postscript??? I didn't even know yo could save a
photo-type image in postscript, but I am no expert on postscript
although I have occasionally had to hack postscript files to make
them print properly. Anyway, what one must do in this
case to get any meaningful interpretation at all from these
experiments is to actually study and compare the postscript
files to figure out how they differ.

Let me suggest a better experiment. Convert both images to
bitmaps, and take the difference between these. If the result
turns out anything different from a pure black image, ie. an
all-zero bitmap, there must reasonably be data corruption in
one or both of the original images.


BTW, we have a funny guy here in Sweden who suggests
a lot of more or less reasonable tweaks. One of the latter is
is to take an old 5 1/4" floppy disc, cut it down to CD size and
put in on top of the CD when playing it. He even claims that
the actual data on the floppy matters and I think he even sells
such floppies or can provide you with the most suitable data for
free.


PS. Note that I do not say anything about the Bedini clarifiers
per se, but only about the so called proof as described by Steve.
I do not know enough about them to have a strong opinion.
 
#477
john curl said:
This isn't how it is or has to be, folks. IF one must insist on proof of anything that works, in your experience, of how it works, you will lose years, if not decades of potential improvement in your life situation.
Click to expand...

The problems come when we assume something 'works' after a non-critical, causal experience, only to discover years later that the effect disappears when put under closer scrutiny.

Read any hi-fi magazine and you will spend years, if not decades, installing all the purported tweaks and improvements (never mind all the time you spend earning the money to pay for it). I don't have the time or energy to try everything, and my experience is that some things are a hell of a lot more important than others.

That's why people need a filter, before they're even willing to try something. Asking for blind test results (or physics-based explanations) is simply the filtering process in action.

Cheers
IH
 
#478
john curl said:
Ok folks, I give up. I have nothing else to offer.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you're giving up on, John. Don't give up on
your vitamines if you think it helps and you're not taking near-
toxic doses. (I don't think that is what you referred to, though.)

If you are referring to the issue of proofs, then I agree with
your previous post that one cannot always wait for proofs
before trying/doing anything. I would say that almost everyting
we do in our daily lives are things we do without any proof that
it is the best way or even a good way to do it.

However, the issue that usually causes the type of discussions
seen in this thread is the distinction between doing something
yourself because you think or is even convinced that it is good
and on the other hand making a claim to convince others that
this is the case. I personally have no problem with people
reporting that they find a certain audible difference when doing
a particular tweak. I do have a problem when they claim that
there is beyond any doubt a clear difference and everybody
who don't believe them is an idiot, which unfortunately is not
uncommon (I do absolutely not put you in this latter group
John, don't worry). While many of us have a healthy scepticism
and don't immediately buy such claims and run away to buy
a handful of $1000 power cables or capacitors or whatever
just because somebody says they make a tremendous difference,
thera are, unfortunately, many people who are very eager to
jump on to such things without even asking themselves if
this claim can be trusted. It is to a large extent to help this
latter group of people from being fooled and broke that I and
some other people like to ask for, if not proof, so at least some
more substance to the claims made. The other point is that I
do not automatically entirely dismiss such claims, even when I
find them very hard to believe. I might then ask for better
arguments for the claims to try figuring out if there might after
all be something to the claim, however unreasonable it seems.

As most of you know, I do find people who claim to have
infallible hearing which cannot be deluded by psychological effects
to be ignorant, to put it mildly. However, I should point out, that
I do find the opposite type of person just as ignorant, if not even
more so. Even if a particular phenomenon seems unreasonable,
it cannot be safely dismissed by some simple handwaving
referring to some textbook theories. There might be things we
still don't know, the theories referred to may be simplified ones
that hold only under certain conditions, there may be variables
we have not taken into consideration etc.
 
#479
Christer said:
There might be things we
still don't know, the theories referred to may be simplified ones
that hold only under certain conditions, there may be variables
we have not taken into consideration etc.
Click to expand...


you are absolutely right, Christer. Theories are a highly simplified and ever evoluting perspective on the world and they are doomed to be wrong at any given time in the sense that newer and better theories will supersede them in the future.

However, before we point to the (definitive) deficiencies of any theory, we need t make sure that the "thing" we think the theory fails to explain actually exists. In this case, it is entirely possible that Frank indeed can hear individual electrons flowing in his magic power cords and shielding those neutrinos hitting his cords makes a audible difference. But can he really hear it?

before we blame the theory, let's make sure that Frank can hear what he claims to have heard. Wouldn't that be a reasonable first step in expanding our knowledge?
 
#480
don't give up John.

As long as the conversation remains civil (no, that doesn't include calling others "morons", or giving people middle fingers no matter how desire Frank thinks his middle fingers are)), it should be enjoyable.

a while ago, someone asked what's wrong with having delusions if it is part of the process one's brain goes through to enjoy music. The same can be said about those claims and associated proofs: they are part of DIY audio and what's wrong with making baseless claims and insisting on factual and logic proofs?

so as you can see, it is part of the whole deal, 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom