Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"APR" wrote in message
...


I think you may be missinterpreting Jim's intentions here. What may be
frustrating Jim is that people propose scenarios that they will argue
for using intangibles, and will not make any attempt to provide
something tangible to support their arguements. This does tend to
cause some level of frustration in those who have knowledge anad
experience, and are use to working with facts.


Given that this group is not entirely made up from 'industry pros' (real
or imagined) or 'audio/electronics engineers' (?), there will be
instances where people cannot easily argue their case with *tangibles*
and/or supply meaningful research data. It is up to the 'technical
types' here to find out what point such a person is making without
expecting said 'tangibles', if they wish to take issue with such points
without the frustration you mention.

The problem is that if someone makes a claim but provides no assessable
evidence or details, then may be impossible to assess what they say.
This isn't a matter of how technically capable anyone may be, but of having
no assessable information.


Actually that is *your* problem not *the* problem. The person making
the claim has no problem here.




Of course, it is up to the person making the claims if they are willing to
give any evidence/details when asked. Just as it is up to others to decide
if the claim is worth taking seriously or not.


Yes, and since most audiophiles are busy enjoying their systems rather
than gathering evidence those who demand evidence to support claims are
SOL.

Scott