At what point does audio snake oil become fraud? - Page 11

Militant objectivist...spare me.



As a brief response, that makes sense to me. Define what you want the receiver to do, develop a short list commensurate with the budget, and figure it out. At the very end, it just might come down to factors one's completely not aware of. I'd sure be curious what Amir might choose and why if his budget was a hard $600.

So to be clear and this is the question to the few of you and not just AJ, that how the amp and DAC performs is not part of the equation seeing how you did not list them. Correct? You deleted them in my question and I want to make sure you did not do that on purpose.

Believe it or not, I just did exactly that!

To me, it's part of the short list. If you can't afford it, you can't afford it, no? How do you evaluate the DAC in a $600 receiver that you'll never find review measurements on and intend on using in a multichannel setup?

Guilty as charged. Don't look in the mirror but you do too . Why else would you debate the spelling of a word over and over again?


See above on the spelling bit .


I asked earlier for someone to give examples. None were given. Pick any technical field that you think I should not have argued and we can discuss something meaningful.


Entire group? Didn't I clarify that multiple times? That we are discussing a few people who are disruptive, rarely discuss the science of the position they are taking, hiding what audio equipment and experiences they have? I thought I did .

There are countless objectivists who do not post nonsense pictures and posts and live on information free one-liner posts complaining about what position someone else is taking. I consider myself one of them and many others who hang out here and WBF. As I noted earlier, two of our supermods there staunch objectivists.

Somehow you want to create a defense by attempting to put an entire community at fault where I am talking about the few who looted the downtown shops. That is not my position and I have constantly corrected you and others attempting to make it so.

Proper objectivity is critical in analyzing audio performance. I don't consider what the militant objectivists do proper objectivity. If you don't understand the science of how a DAC works, you have no business claiming they all perform the same. If I don't understand how a car engine works and what its specifications mean, I have no business saying they all accelerate the same. Yet that is precisely what is stated here and indirectly sanctioned by a defense such as yours.


Again, I love to see some examples. I provided the link to the DAC thread. You see that the person who threw gasoline over the fire was Arny, not me. Grand claims were made that then triggered with me saying, "wait a minute." In our most recent debate thread, it was another grand claim by him that all pro amps act like a wire. Prior to that, it was me who post measurements of cables showing the audiophile cable was actually the underperforming one. If I wanted to argue for the sake of arguing, why would I do that?

I do that because objectivity calls for that. It calls for using measurement equipment to chatracterize things. It calls for running spice simulations of real cables to see what effect they have in audio band. And then sharing that data even if it doesn't serve some hard over position one way or the other.

Where would I find such posts from you all complaining about my posts? When did you admit to an opposing point of view and went further to put forth data and measurements to support the same? I don't see that. I see blind faith by some not schooled in the science and engineering, based on what makes sense in their gut and what they have read online. That would be fine if they didn't then attempt to preach said gospel. But that is not where they stop. They roam from thread to thread, hoping to convince everyone.

Then I ask them if they have an engineering degree and I hear sound of crickets. I ask them what double blind testing they do in selection of their own equipment and I hear excuse after excuse that it is too hard, etc. On what basis are you defending such people? And get angry with me? Would you rather see no one discuss the science so that your side looks good? Is that what we strive for in a forum called AVS? Supporting beliefs?


As I noted, that is not the case. Here is the specifics:


As to not being wrong, I have been wrong and catastrophically so. I have discussed my failings online for the world to read. I have yet to see the other side to the same and do so willingly without being asked repeatedly and even then, it is hard to read in their words whether they truly are accepting the error.


Compromise with whom? The militant few who are determined to death to drive out the other voice? What would compromise would mean in that context? Did you read the de-mag thread on WBF? Did that not look like me taking your side of the fence? What did that get me in this thread? Nothing. People then picked on other members there and what I said in a post. The entire context of me going strongly to disprove the claims of the product was dismissed. Or else, why would you say what you just did?

So it is not about that. You want to win a word argument and are going to throw all the daggers you have . I get it. But let's be honest for a second and don't make this about me.


It is pretty simple. Go on WBF and register. Then send a PM to Steve Williams. He used to go by obgyn here. Ask him why he left. Then pick the names of any other who post there and has an alias here but doesn't post. A few were mentioned by others already.


Who is buried in Grant's tomb? WBF was formed (and before it UHE Forum) precisely because folks left and needed a new home. I was approached to help create it due to my technical experience. Some of the immigrants there read the posts here and any time there is an argument, I get a lot of PMs from them on WBF and here, shaking their head saying how happy they are that they not having to put with the type of arguing the militant few put forth.


No, you are the blow puffing your chest . You have no data whatsoever but are so sure you are right about these people leaving simply because you think you are right and I must be wrong. That is what I deal with. Here is a situation that is quite black and white. Folks left and left for good and are posting on a new forum created after their departure. Yet you are so confident that you are right. Even after telling you my first hand experience of this, you doubt it. So as I said, you put your gut feeling ahead of the facts. That is not being objective.

By listening, Chu. Your ears are much better than any meter, dontcha know?

What is part of your short list? The DAC and amplifier performance in an AVR?

That's right. Now, how does the prospective buyer evaluate the DAC performance given that the most they can spend is $600 for a multichannel receiver?

He (and every audio rationalist I'm aware of) would say measurable differences exist between DACs; and that typically these aren't audible. So don't worry much about DACs; DACs should be way, way down your list of audio 'upgrades'. You seem to have a really hard time grasping this.




Don't bother unless spending money brings you joy in and of itself. ... or youv've actually run out of important issues to deal with in your listening room.



You're a smart guy. What is so friggin' hard to understand? No, it never hurts to see bench test results. But TYPICALLY they are so good for DACs , and amps in AVRs in the ways that actually matter audibly, that gear in those classes are commodities. Choose by features of the AVR, the load you'll be presenting to the amp, cost, appearance.


Much will hinge on how you define 'audiophiles' herem, Amir. You mean AVSF readers? They're pretty savvy in those regards. Lots of focus on room and loudspeaker performance here. Absolute Sound/Stereophile readers? Typical internet audio forums like Asylum? Another story.

The way clown college audiophiles discuss speakers has, until relatively recently, been divorced from stuff that, e.g., Toole et al. have shown actually matter. And Toole et al. have shown that the way people , 'audiophiles' certainly included, typically CHOOSE loudspeakers (and in the case of certain high-end magazines, recommend as 'speaker of the year) is fraught with bias.

(Yeah, I know Atkinson does quasi-anaechoic measurements. But there's a sort of firewall between the bench test and subjective reviews, like the one between news and editorial is major newspapers. The disconnection between his results and the reviewer gushing, can be interesting or comical by turns. )

And rooms? yeah, there's lip service at clown college about controlling room artifacts. But in terms of attention paid, it's presented as if it was on par with finding the right DAC or amp. That's absurd. Plenty of CC audiophiles aren't even on board with multichannel audio (which can obviate some room artifacts) or even sub + mains systems (which can provide flexiblity for dealing with modal issues). 'Purism' is a pestilence in 'high end'.



Yes, and Arny will say the same, if you emphasize the word *CAN*. We're talking likelihoods, and no one says it's *zero*.



Don't be obtuse. The answer should be obvious by now. I'm getting tired of repeating it. Hint: what's the burden on someone who has claimed to see something that's a priori very unlikely?




Actually, not only on AVSF (see, for a very recent example, the MCACC thread) but on other audio forums (including WBF, where I'm "sasully"), I very much like to share information and links, and help out those trying to grapple with audio issues. People here on AVSF who 'know' me know that too, and have already mentioned that to you. You ignored it, since the data doesn't fit your preconceptions.


Btw, I like the Amir who posts on this thread ("JBL Calibration Synthesis Video")

The one I'm dealing with here is a self-righteous, un-self-aware, conceited schoolmarm obsessed with maintaining rhetorical advantage: in a word, tiresome. Can you send him away please and bring the other one here?

"Performs"? What DAC/amp "performance" parameters is a 2011 AVR end user (viewing/listening) to be concerned with Amir? Do you have some audible concerns, or is it time for your useless "data" carpet bombing facade of "science" to hide behind?


. Here is your entire quoted from post, verbatim:


And you wonder why all except yourself (and a slurper or two) see you as a overactive imagination, paranoid, angry little man. Sheesh.

cheers,

AJ

It is? Why? Do you expect the DACs and Amps to sound different?

I'm running with your comments on the DACs. As for the amps, I'd make tentative selections to narrow down the short list based on their stated ability to drive the speakers while keeping in mind I'm also using a sub.

No it is not time for any of that. I am simply trying to determine what your position is and it seems so impossible to get. I didn't think the question was complicated at all but the answer seems to be somehow. So once more, if someone is shopping for an AVR, is your position that they should or should not worry about DAC and amplifier performance in them?

If you don't have a position that is fine to say also.


No, I meant that you deleted the the mention of DAC and amp out of what you quoted from me: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=299

This is the part you left in, "to someone shopping for a new AVR?"

That was not the sum total of my question, now was it? The rest of the sentence mattered as it was specific to those two components (DAC and amp).


Angry and little? Why those two words are always put together in insults? Reminds me of the all time greatest Bill Cosby special on HBO:

Bill Cosby: "And tired" always followed sick. Worst beating I ever got in my life, my mother said, "I am just sick..." And I said, "And tired." I don't remember anything after that.

What do you mean you are "running with my comments?" I am asking you if someone is buying an AVR, would your advice is to look at the performance of its DAC. If so, can you point me to any thread where you have given such advice?


So what you are saying is that amplifiers do make a difference in AVRs and they should be a buying criteria? If so, can you please expand on that? Please note that I am asking in the context of you giving advice to others, not what you bought for yourself.

See above. FWIW, I don't get involved in threads giving receiver advise or recommendations.

Now, from the first quote above, it seems to me that you place an importance on the DAC and amp. So I ask you once again, how do you evaluate the DAC in a $600 receiver? If you think it's irrelevant, then just say so. If you think it ought to receive due consideration, then say how one goes about it.



You first.

Also comical are his lame attempts to correlate his measurements with his reviewers' gushings.


Well, he's either obtuse or he's a troll. Maybe we should take a poll?

Andy Dufresne: How can you be so obtuse?
Warden Samuel Norton: What? What did you call me?
Andy Dufresne: Obtuse. Is it deliberate?
Warden Samuel Norton: Son, you're forgetting yourself.
Andy Dufresne: The country club will have his old time cards. Records, W-2s with his name on them. Sir, if I ever get out, I'd never mention what happens here. I'd be just as indictable as you for laundering that money.
[Norton slaps the table]
Warden Samuel Norton: Don't you ever mention money to me again, you sorry son of a bitch! Not in this office, not anywhere!

WAY better than Dune.

Well, Dune didn't have Morgan Freeman & Tim Robbins! I still like Dune although I would've hoped that Virginia Madsen was dressed in something a lot more revealing. Back in the day she was just knockout looking.

Krab, you ever seen Amir assist some of the folks with their mid level receiver choices?

lmao, love that movie. This thread was a fun read early First two pages had great on-liner type posts, too funny but somehow it got serious and we all know where it was going.


I have to ask.... Why is there always a discussion about another forum when Amir posts in any thread?


Could it be that he owns that "other forum".....hmmmm. To actually post this...."It is pretty simple. Go on WBF and register. " to me is just too weird (business ethics come to mind). Does AVS really want someone on their website recommending members to go signup on another forum. I think there is a HUGE conflict of interest going on here.

Can we please get this thread back on track.

• Magic molecule stretching blocks
• Aliens
• Snake Oil
• Ancient astronauts
• Magic hockey pucks
• Pyramid construction techniques
• Herbal supplements
• Michael Jackson
• Suckers
• Unseen forces
• Voodoo
• Psychics
• Audiophiles

See what above? You quoted me. What in your own words is your position of the people you agree with on this thread? Does DAC performance matter in an AVR or does it not? Surely this is a simple answer to give seeing how strong you all feel about these DAC discussions. Can you not tell me what your position nets out in this regard? You can't be that unsure about it, can you?


Looks like the plot is lost . This whole discussion started with Krab claiming that I misstate your collective position. Are you honestly saying that your position depends on what I say? And that if I don't say it, you have no position on the matter otherwise?

One of the best movies ever made. I must have memorized every line in it. I have to remember to not disagree with you on anything. Anyone who likes this movie, can't be wrong about much else.

Suddenly, diomania's refrain takes on relevance.

Not really. You are hoping to find a debate-style way out. Problem is, that just makes things worse. I mean how bad can it get when you can't give a simple answer to a simple question?

So let me bring it to close. This is what started it, an extract of what I said on WBF:

"Well, once upon a time there was a forum where a couple of people were taking a beating to every audiophile there, claiming a $200 AVR was just as good as any other product and that a $1 DAC in a receiver performed the same as a dedicated DAC."


If what I said was "fish fertilizer" then it should have been very different than the truth. Yet, after three pages of asking you what it is you actually hold relative to those features in an AVR, none of your are forthcoming.

What good is all of your arguments if it is not to be used to make a buying decision? What good is all of your arguments when you can't even summarize them as I did? What good is all of your arguments when you can't even have a straight discussion as to what *you* believe?

It is a silly defense anyway. You should absolutely believe and say what I said on your behalf. It is the logical conclusion supported by your facts as you believe it. That you try to distance yourself with these debating tactics shows that you are more interested in covering each other's backs than discussing audio and your specific position of it.

If someone asks me the same question I give them a test. I ask them to compress some music at 320 kbps and compare it to the CD. If they can't tell the difference they should absolutely, positively close their eyes and buy that AVR using its feature list than DACs, Amps or whatever. This covers vast majority of audio users. See, I have no trouble whatsoever articulating my position. But somehow it is sooooo difficult for you to do the same. It is all wrapped up in a half a dozen posts and ended with that one-liner that you are copying the guy who believes in aliens. I didn't think there was a way for you to ever put down your marketing psychology background in your post but you just did that, by siding with that poster. And for that, I thank you relative to future posts to come .

No, it's not, and you are not the arbiter of what anybody else believes.

The basic problem is this: "we" know that you know what "we" believe, so all your questions about what "we" believe are just trolling. And no one wants to give you the satisfaction. Apparently, people can string you along for days like this.

I would add that if they think they can tell the difference, they should take truth serum and try again.

What kind of performance are you asking about, audible or measurable? You should clarify it.

But just the same I have the right to summarize the way I see it. And that is what I did. If you don't like it, you can disagree but until you explain what you do mean, I won't change my understanding of your position.


Nothing could be further from the truth. Remember, I post that sentence in another forum without any of you present. So surely it was not meant as trolling. So please put aside these debating terms. They don't work on me .

Further, the facts are absolutely positively clear here. I have been in countless debates with all the people disagreeing with me here on DACs. When discussing jitter, they uniformly hold the position that it is not audible. If it is not audible, then it reasons that the $1 DAC is the same as an external box -- precisely what I said which raised all of these objections.

Tell me how it is consistent to fight me over thousands of posts (literally) stomping your collective feed that jitter doesn't and that digital audio reproduction is more perfect than people's hearing and in the next breath, claim that what I said above is not its corollary. It absolutely is.

And it is not like I didn't give you a chance to say otherwise. I asked half a dozen times what you would say about the performance of a DAC in an AVR. If your position is so clear and that I know it, why wasn't it stipulated?

But by all means, why don't you answer the question. Does the DAC performance matter in an AVR? Give that answer and then we can see which one of us is right .

And we have the right to tell you you're wrong, without feeding the troll.