Mains filter test results
 

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 21:37:14 +0000, Glenn Richards
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Nope. Committed atheist, and have been ever since I was old enough to
know what it meant. (So about age 7 then...)
Really? And yet you believe in 'cable sound' in the absence of any
reliable and repeatable evidence that it exists? Fascinating.....

Put it this way...

I've never seen or heard any evidence of the existence of God, Allah, or
any of the other 101 different deities worshipped by various religions.
All I've seen are kooks stamping their feet and waving their arms around
going on about "miracles" and "the second coming" etc etc. And any
so-called "miracle" can usually be explained by science, if not now then
eventually.

On the other hand, I've heard quite clear and reproducible differences
between the sound of different cables, both interconnect and speaker
cables. The first time being in a hi-fi shop, when a friendly assistant
demonstrated the difference between a freebie and a Sonic Link Pink,
knowing full well I wasn't in a position to buy anything at that stage
(this was during my student days). At the time I was a hardened sceptic
as far as cables were concerned, and indeed was still using freebie
cables in my home system. So I wasn't expecting to hear any difference
at all, and was somewhat amazed when there was indeed such a big difference.

But if you say you can't hear a difference between cables, I believe
you. I believe anyone that says they can't hear a difference. I've known
people that couldn't tell the difference between a £99 midi system and
£4k worth of separates (my last g/f for example).

But I don't believe you if you say "there is no difference", because
clearly there is.

Bull****. You just *believe* that there's a difference, but you duck
any chance to *prove* that you really can hear a difference, even when
there's an easy £1,000 up for grabs. Pathetic.

Indeed, all the ducking and diving seems something of an indication
that you don't really believe it any more, but you have to maintain
the bull**** level to save face. Even more pathetic.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Mains filter test results
 

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

Bull****. You just *believe* that there's a difference, but you duck
any chance to *prove* that you really can hear a difference, even when
there's an easy £1,000 up for grabs. Pathetic.

Indeed, all the ducking and diving seems something of an indication
that you don't really believe it any more, but you have to maintain
the bull**** level to save face. Even more pathetic.


Stewart, right or wrong, no-one can deny that you have an
endearing literary style:-)

Mains filter test results
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Indeed, all the ducking and diving seems something of an indication
that you don't really believe it any more.

Well... sometimes I read the discussions in here and wonder. Then I go
back to the system, and try swapping some interconnects around. And
every time I hear a difference, which is consistent and repeatable.

Every test I've ever done, blind or straight, has resulted in a clearly
audible difference.

I've long suspected that some are more sensitive to this kind of thing
than others. For example, the 15kHz whine of a CRT display with no sync
input drives me to distraction (it's the sonic equivalent of Chinese
water torture). And back in the days of cassette, I could detect a tiny
error in speed (and hence pitch) on various cheap cassette decks.
Couldn't always put my finger on it, but it didn't sound quite "right" -
when playing a 1kHz test tone through it and measuring with a DFM the
error was about 5-10Hz.

If you can't hear the differences, good for you. It means you've got
more to spend on music rather than the means to play it.

--
Glenn Richards Tel: (01453) 845735
Squirrel Solutions http://www.squirrelsolutions.co.uk/

IT consultancy, hardware and software support, broadband installation

Mains filter test results
 

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....
--
Tony Sayer

Mains filter test results
 

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:33:33 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....

Are you by any chance a greengrocer?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Mains filter test results
 

In article , Don Pearce
writes
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:33:33 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....

Are you by any chance a greengrocer?


Nope...Y U ask,,
d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Tony Sayer

Mains filter test results
 

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:46:44 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Don Pearce
writes
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:33:33 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....

Are you by any chance a greengrocer?


Nope...Y U ask,,

All those apostrophes in your plurals where there should be none. They
are known as greengrocers' apostrophes because of their proliferation
on their price list signs.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Mains filter test results
 

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:46:44 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Don Pearce
writes
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:33:33 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....

Are you by any chance a greengrocer?


Nope...Y U ask,,
d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Tony Sayer

Apostrophes?

Mains filter test results
 

"Bill Taylor" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:46:44 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Don Pearce
writes
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 13:33:33 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Glenn Richards
writes
tony sayer wrote:

Just for the record, I've worked in broadcasting for 38 years
And just for the record, most FM radio stations sound pretty poor.
Radio 1 is compressed so much it has a dynamic range of about 2dB.
Radio 2 is generally OK, Radio 3 sounds very good apart from the
music...
....thats not Rod's doing is it?....

Pass. He said he worked "in broadcasting". So I was merely making an
observation about what broadcasting is like these days.


Yes well there are a few engineers still left, in a minority, and plenty
of accountants, general purpose "suit's" and bull**** mongers, and of
all those he would be the least responsible for all the malaise's you
referred to.....

Are you by any chance a greengrocer?


Nope...Y U ask,,
d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

--
Tony Sayer

Apostrophes?


No - apostrophe's....

Mains filter test results
 

In article , Glenn Richards
wrote:


Every test I've ever done, blind or straight, has resulted in a clearly
audible difference.

I've long suspected that some are more sensitive to this kind of thing
than others.

That may be so. Alas, although you keep making claims like the above, you
also IIRC consistently refuse to participate in any form of test run by
someone else whose outcome would have the ability to either support or
contradict what you assert. This would involve more than the reports you
make here on occasion, I'm afraid.

In particular, despite it having been explained on more than one occasion
that Stewart himself need not be directly involved for you to 'win his
cash' and for people to know the results of such a test, you repeatedly
have refused to participate in the test for which he offers 1000 UKP for
anyone who can show the ability you claim to a defined level of statistical
confidence.

This is a shame as it rather undermines your assertions, and means that
those of us who would be very interested if you *could* show your beliefs
are well founded have only your repeated assertions to go on. Alas, when
you report your own 'tests' they are generally accompanied by you giving
details of your own 'test proceedures' which show clear flaws and undermine
any ability of others to take your claims seriously, or perform any
assessment of what you assert.

For example, the 15kHz whine of a CRT display with no sync
input drives me to distraction (it's the sonic equivalent of Chinese
water torture). And back in the days of cassette, I could detect a tiny
error in speed (and hence pitch) on various cheap cassette decks.
Couldn't always put my finger on it, but it didn't sound quite "right" -
when playing a 1kHz test tone through it and measuring with a DFM the
error was about 5-10Hz.

If you can't hear the differences, good for you. It means you've got
more to spend on music rather than the means to play it.

I have no idea if you can hear things that I cannot. That may be so for all
I know. Alas, so far as I have been able to tell, you haven't provided any
reliable evidence on this point. All you seem to have done is keep making
assertions about what you say you can hear, and reporting tests which show
the proceedures you follow tend to be flawed...

Unfortunately, repeated assertions of the above kind, and repeated 'tests'
with much the same flaws, don't really get us any further as you are simply
adding successive nulls to the pile of reliable evidence... :-/

We can speculate about all kinds of theoretical possibilities. What we lack
from you is any *reliable evidence*, I'm afraid. Hence it remains
impossible to assess your assertions and so becomes hard to take them very
seriously when the above has been repeatedly pointed out to you.

Speculations, and assertions of belief, are not evidence that the belief is
well founded in physical reality. Nor that the cause of any 'changes' which
may exist are what you assume.

I would personally find it very interesting if your assertions *did* turn
out to be well founded. That is why I seem to have wasted so much time over
the years paying attention to what, otherwise, seems like a rather futile
arguments.

Alas, what makes this a waste of time is people who keep making the
assertions, but then refuse to participate in a *suitable* test protocol
whose results could be analysed in the way which would be normal for the
scientific method. Thus all we have in the end - over decades of many
people making such claims - are their assertions presented in a way
indistinguishable from an article of faith on their part. Alas, this is not
evidence of anything beyond a statement of faith.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html