![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.79.86.51
I'm curious in the past 40 years if anybody ever published a test with calibrated measurements of the green or what ever color pen is used on the CD edge.Now I know countless people have heard a difference and I don't want to debate that. I'm quite sure they did hear a difference.
But if there is truly a difference, we should be able to measure it!
Now some will say that not everything can be measured. I'll give that some slack for an all analog system from microphone to speaker. However this is a digital recording. By the very nature of digital audio, it already has been measured. The instantaneous voltage of the analog audio signal has been measured 44,100 times a second. If there is a audible difference, the exact sample value will have to be a different number at the same point. Jitter buffers, error correction, does not matter. If you capture the SPDIF output and compare in a DAW, there has to be a difference if a difference is heard. The player processing jitter would be the same so if it's different from the "green pen" playback, that too can be measured on a DAW.
So where's the beef?
Edits: 06/20/23 06/20/23 06/20/23 06/20/23
If I were to establish a hypothesis for why a green pen might help the sound. I would say: Some of the laser light striking the CD is defracted/deflected sideways and it strikes the side of the CD, and is then reflected back and then defracted/deflected back and picked up by the light sensor, causing some "noise" in the audio signal. The green mark on the side of the CD would reduce some of that reflected light.
Is this possible, sure. Is this a problem, I have no idea. But I would suggest worrying about speaker room interactions and smooth speaker frequency response first which has a first order impact on sound.
However, if you are willing to spend a few bucks on a green pen and mark the edge of your CDs to boost your audiophile ego, go for it - it hardly costs anything, but some free time.
Do I think it can make a difference - I do, although very small. But I would not bet my house on it, nor have I marked the edges of my CDs, at least not many - I did a few back when this was discussed more to boost my own audiophile ego...
Retsel
Nt
Most obnoxious thread I've had the displeasure of reading.
I'm a big fan of tweaks, they are part of the magic of being an audiophile, I don't spend my time looking at an oscilloscope, I actually listen to music. I can't always explain why something works, or doesn't (yes, sometimes it doesn't work!) but who cares?
When I DO measure, I measure my speaker system, my room acoustics.
Audiophile life is, in truth, easy: if you're skeptic about something, don't buy it. PERIOD. no one is pressing a knife under your throat forcing you to buy "gizmos".
No need to bore people to death with conspiracy theories. Especially when we are talking about something as easy, cheap, and "innocent" as green marker on CD edges.
Nt
Yet more accolades from AIX Records.
https://www.realhd-audio.com/?p=3460
![]()
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
does AA need the money so bad that we have to put up with Kait? A lot of us are asking you to do what you did with Romy and expel and ban the creep.
At least pretty please keep him in his own pen, like maybe Prop Head or Iso
Nt
on other forums ...
https://www.stereophile.com/content/absolutely-classless-stereophile
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
As J. Atkinson (editor of Stereophile) stated during the course of the Stereophile forum round table discussion with Michael Green, May Belt, Peter Belt, forum moderator Toledo, assorted trolls and your humble narrator, the level of animosity never reached the point where he felt he should step in. Nothing wrong with free and open debate. Learning can sometimes be a painful experience. Lol
Edits: 06/29/23 06/29/23 06/29/23 06/29/23
creep
One Amir might actually enjoy, if only to confirm his own prejudices.
Send him two identical CDs, one green-edged and one plain, to analyze and compare the data streams. He has the gear to do it quick 'n' easy.
If he finds any MEASURABLE difference at all, then we can argue 'til the cows come home whether or not it is or "should be" audible. If not, we're back to endless, pointless, quarrelsome threads like this one.
You wrote,
"If he finds any MEASURABLE difference at all, then we can argue 'til the cows come home whether or not it is or "should be" audible. If not, we're back to endless, pointless, quarrelsome threads like this one."
> > > > You forgot the word fun.
creep alert
Nt
when are going to learn
What do you think the green pen does to the CDP ???
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
The CD format is 40 years old. Over that time period how many engineers and scientists have been involved in producing and improving this technology?Also we have advanced to DVD, BluRay, and Ultra 4K optical disk formats on the same form factor and disc technology.
Still no edge treatment, little magic dots, isolation mats that actually stress the clamping mechanism. None of this has any accredited support.
Edits: 06/27/23
How would you know whether it works or not until you try it or at least see a review. More silly scientific-sounding mumbo jumbo from our resident pseudo scientist. Begone, troll!
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23
" ... How would you know whether it works or not until you try it ..."
The answer to that is simple. The optical device either accurately reads the data or not. It is easy to determine if the data read is correct or not. If the data is correct, than any deviation is an alteration of accuracy.
The alteration then puts you into subjective land. You are then making a subjective argument that your personal preference is better or worse than someone else's personal preference versus that of the accurate interpretation of the original data.
One can prove accuracy without the tweak device. Anything beyond that is an alteration of accuracy.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
That's a very large amount of mumbo jumbo. Why not cut to the chase, use a green marker on a CD? Or is that too much trouble for your sensitive intellect?
That sir, is actual computer science. Predictable, repeatable and consistent math and science.If it as malleable as you imply, computers would never work.
I remember the arguments about different lossless formats being better or worse than another or "generational fade" arguments about making a copy of a copy. Generational fade may be an issue for analog pressings but not digital. The only way for digital to fade is if something is broken (or pilot error).
I wrote tests to prove to myself to convert lossless formats from one to another across multiple generations and back again. The only thing that changed was the meta data supported (or not) by each format. The raw PCM data stayed identical with no "generational" or "lossless format" losses or alterations.
This reminds me of a teak device that was tested by ASR. The only improvement the add-on device made was to a poorly engineered DAC with bad noise isolation. For that one instance, it was still cheaper to purchase a properly engineered DAC with noise isolation then the "tweak device" plus a poorly engineered DAC.
I am all for tweaks, that actually work and address real issues.
Since all of my shiny discs are ripped bit-perfect to NVMe and SSDs will the green pen make them even more bit-perfect ???
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23
You wrote,"Since all of my shiny discs are ripped bit-perfect to NVMe and SSDs will the green pen make them even more bit-perfect ???"
Well, Mr. Smarty Pants Computer Science, since virtually all CD players - which are what we're talking about on this thread - aren't bit perfect, I'd say you answered your own question. We get a lot of logical fallacies here.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
Strange, my cheap drives have replicated bit perfect read/writes generation after generation for years.Care to prove your statement ? You seem to keep grasping at straws.
Have you ever used binary diffs on raw PCM data payloads to prove or disprove your statements (I want you to honestly answer this question) ? Part of science is testing your hypothesis and facing the test results and adjusting your hypothesis accordingly.
You maybe conflating very early optical readers on flawed OSes that couldn't simultaneously handle ripping and background tasks from decades ago. Those days are long gone. See my previous comments about being "broken and/or pilot errors".
You are also loosely implying that the green pen implements error correction to non-existent read errors on functional systems which is erroneous at best.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Edits: 06/27/23
Have you ever used the green pen? If not it's you who's grasping at straws and shooting blanks in the dark. I do not have to prove my statements, this is not a peer review forum or any such thing. If you haven't experimented with absorbing scattered laser light you have no case.
You obviously have not tested the raw binary PCM data to confirm/refute your faux claims. The tools are readily available, easy to use and they are FREE. No reason NOT to use them (unless there are vested intere$t$ in play).
Pity that you are so attached to your unfounded beliefs.
I see an M by your moniker so monetary influences maybe the key factor here giving higher priority to placebos over actual scientific analysis tools that debunk the placebos.
When in school, I used to work in the hospital. It was amazing to observe what a periodic syringe full of normal saline injected into an IV line already attached to a bag containing normal saline could do to cure cyclic chronic pain complaints. The complaints would crescendo according to injection intervals and then immediately subside until the next cycle. Truly amazing to observe.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
You make a lot of pretty ridiculous assumptions.
Edits: 06/28/23
"... The benefit of such a large reduction in visible and invisible background scattered light is a marked increase in signal to (noise + distortion) ratio. All improvements to the optical reading process are multiplied by a factor of two downstream. There is no substitute for Signal to Noise Ratio. ..."There is so much wrong with this, I don't know where to start.
Bit depth determines SNR. CD's are 16-bit (at best, you can record 2-bit audio on a 16-bit medium).
Your tweak can NOT increase bit-depth unless, it re-records the original performance in a higher bit depth. To do that, you have also mastered time travel in both directions.
Once you are bit perfect, you can't increase SNR (bit depth) with magic films from a fixed bit-depth source.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Edits: 06/28/23
He does that too!Look up the "Clever Little Clock" on his WEB site
Edits: 06/28/23
I have held the distance record for quantum teleportation for a great many years. Even the the Chinese s isn't it's have the official record of 870 miles (they started out with just a few meters) I have the unofficial record of 10,000 miles, set about 15 years ago. It was from Virginia to Australia, a lot more than 10,000 miles if there was a satellite link involved, which there probably was. So it was probably more than 44,000 miles. The Teleportation Tweak. Accept no substitutes.
Edits: 06/29/23 06/29/23 06/29/23 06/29/23 06/29/23
Nt
Nt
![]()
I'm taking up your valuable twighlight time and feeding you more shit to chew on while you fashion your next faux audio dream recipe. I'm sure you will think it sounds so much better in your Sony Walkman and won't wait for the next formal review of waste and worthlessness.
He must have a few post-doctorates degrees in creative writing.
I will give him that !!!
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Learning new information can often be quite painful, people oft prefer to act like they know everything already.
"An ordinary man has no means of deliverance."
"A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
![]()
he's insulting, derogatory, and annoying. Did I miss anything?
He's a specimen, an old one in his eighties from Virginia
Is his site satire or does he actually sell the stuff ?If people buy it, humanity is doomed more than I thought.
He is actually advertising boxes of rocks.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Edits: 06/28/23
You have yet to present any reproducible findings or diagnostics.
The only time I got read errors was with dirty or physically damaged discs.
Many discs could be restored to zero read errors by simply cleaning and / or polishing them. NOTE: This implies being able to know the difference between read errors and bit-perfect.
In addition to using buffing compounds at home, my local record/CD store has a disc polishing machine that uses varying grits of polish to take out scratches and is able to resurface all but the most damaged discs.
I have one disk that actually has a small pin-hole in the metallic layer straight from the factory. No surface scratches what so ever. That track is impossible to repair.
As for the distortion, it is not something that can be made to sound better. It audibly presents as a glitch or pop in a given track where the damage occurs, not a constant filter, thus further debunks the idea if a green "filter".
See again my previous comments of "broken and/or pilot errors".
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Nt
Nt
Maybe your mom while you're trying on her underwear.
no thank you, your comebacks are lousy and are as bad as your magazine reviews. You are truly the King of Losers who will do anything for money. Who's your next online victim you lonesome loser... Reprogram your magic phone and quit playing with yourself.
long live the Queen
Post your data from your testing of scattered laser light. Show us the numbers against the thresholds for accurate data recovery.
Edits: 06/28/23
What about this? what about that? Lol
If there was a test it would receive the same reception as AudioScience Review.
Yes, you're right. Flat Earthers' cannot be convinced otherwise.But the more intelligent readers will see the truth and perhaps spend their money more carefully with these tweak products.
And I am NOT calling tweak users non-intelligent. In fact many are well educated and successful, hence they can afford high end components. But they lack specific knowledge in Physics and Electrical Engineering. This is where one group of professionals help another but in a different field. And it's free advice, take it or leave it as one wishes.
Edits: 06/26/23
Geez, he's still pretending to be an engineer.
No, he has no reason to pretend. He really is an engineer.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
You wouldn't know an engineer if one walked up and peed on your leg.
perhaps IEEE should use you for aiming practice
"A little bit to the left and try again on Geoff's head, he likes that"
Nt
Nt
Nt
and a bunch of us would love it too
Nt
OK, in this example I explained how digital audio is in it's self a measurement process and relatively easy to do highly accurate comparisons.
What did I get wrong?
All you have to do is listen. Where's the beef? If you can't hear the difference on your system who cares about measurements? Not everything that can be measured is audible. There are many variables here. Shall we review them?
"Not everything that can be measured is audible."So then what's the point of the tweak if the result is not audible?
Edits: 06/27/23
Variables for Green Pen listening test (or any audio listening test) - short list1. Is the listener actually capable of discerning subtle differences or is he just blowing smoke?
2. Is the Test system up to snuff? Or is it a mediocre piece of crap?
3. Are there errors in the test system, is everything broken in and warmed up, correct polarity, etc.?
3. Did tester follow directions properly, for example is the disc absolutely level during play? Or is the tester all thumbs?"Any idiot can get negative results for a controlled blind test." - old audiophile axiom
Edits: 06/28/23 06/28/23
I don't think you understand my proposed test at all.1)We are only listening to see if a supporter heard a difference. Then we are doing a binary file compare to the same musical passage with and without any edge treatment. This rules out any human bias.
2)The quality of the test systems is not highly relevant. Again we are comparing two digitally (SPDIF) captured passages from the same CD player / transport.
3)We are only concerned with errors from the CD player. These must be weighted as a few random errors are possible but the percentage should be the same in both cases (or not, this is a test).
4) Andy errors from physical leveling would be the same in both cases, so it can be cancelled out of the final results.
Edits: 06/28/23
Sounds like you would be perfect for that job. Let us know your test procedure and test plan.
Exactly, the overlords and pseudo scientists at ASR would assert that conscientious and thorough scientific protocols for controlled double blind testing were not followed. Lol
Edits: 06/25/23 06/25/23
When are audiophile tweaks ever tested? You probably won't find tests for the Green Pen, the Purple Pen, Black Pen (inner edge), Silver Rainbow Foil, Cream Electret, cable lifters, tiny little bowl resonators, 3M electrical tape CD damping, record clamps, crystals, Clever Lil Clock, audiophile fuses, fuse direction, cable direction, demagnetizer for CD or LP, cryogenic treatment of electronics, CDs or LPs.So many questions, yet you haven't actually tested a green pen for yourself. Not that curious, eh?
Edits: 06/24/23
As long as people buy the tweaks that is what matters. Whether they make a difference can only be assessed by controlled listening tests and subjectivists don't want to be tested. 'Tweaking' is what audiophiles do and they love to show they can 'improve' things or have the most stuff.
Nt
Nt
Things are observed, like an apple falling from a tree, a green pen enhancing the sound of a CD. Then we step back and determine why.Your answer just reinforces the fact that these audio tweaks are just placebos of the mind and have no scientific basis.
Otherwise they would be easily demonstrated and shut the naysayers up.
Also four days passed without even a single comment to my post. Seems none of the supporters want anything to do with formal testing.
Edits: 06/25/23 06/25/23
Like all pseudo science types you won't test it yourself, even thought it would very easy to do so. You'd rather go on and on how you're right and everyone else is wrong. So typical of naysayers. They always say science is on their side. I've already explained how the green pen works and why it's only partially effective. You have to have some knowledge of physics, however, which is probably where you got lost. You don't even have to perform thr experiment or test, you just have to follow the logic.
Edits: 06/25/23 06/25/23
Nothing you wrote follows from what I wrote!
I am very careful to not say I am always right, or even ever right. I think your issue is that I have suggested, on specific occasions, that your understanding is not complete.
Talking of pseudo science types, that description fits you exactly. You drop in a few buzz words, the odd physics based pop-quiz - and I am sure you always correct - but they in no way relate to audio in any meaningful way.
Your challenge is to close that gap and show a meaning.
Gusser and I are engineers and we are all about the meaningful, making things work and understanding when they don't. Practical. We don't muse on abstract things like what would really happen to someone who crossed the event horizon of a black hole - though, I think, we could both nominate someone to try it on.
My background in education and experience is theoretical and experimental physics (theoretical propulsion and fluid dynamics, statistical thermodynamics, nuclear engineering, math up the wazoo) as well as large system testing. I was the government witness for the final testing of a billion dollar aircraft-to-pilot communication system. I have many years in product development of quantum mechanics based audio devices. Hel-loo!You say you're "about the meaningful making things work and understanding when they don't." I would say more like excellent examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Maybe you should consider going back pronto to whatever school you went to and demand your money back.
Edits: 06/25/23 06/25/23 06/25/23 06/25/23
We know your background because you post about it so you don't need to use it as an intellectual shield. My challenge to you is to show how this knowledge has given you insight or are you just using it in an attempt to impress people.
Dunning-Kruger? 'The Office' is OK, but the UK orignal is superior.
I rarely bring up my education or experience. But whatever. I notice you have run out of ammo. Maybe time to reload.
.. is that I replied to your post instead of Gusser's OP by mistake.
He simply asked if the green pen had been tested and my reply, intended for him, is that if tweaks are selling what is the incentive for the manufacturer to run tests that could prove it not as effective as advertized or not in any way effective. I suppose, because you are in the tweak business, you thought I was having a pop at you - there is a line already formed for that :)
You wrote,"He simply asked if the green pen had been tested and my reply, intended for him, is that if tweaks are selling what is the incentive for the manufacturer to run tests that could prove it not as effective as advertized (sic) or not in any way effective."
That's a wild theory, where did you hear that? On an audio forum?
Even if the manufacturer published test results the naysayers wouldn't believe them anyway and would most likely accuse the manufacturer of falsifying the data. It's because they are overly suspicious, I.e., pseudo skeptics. Once the intrepid pseudo skeptic gets into his head that something doesn't smell right it's all downhill from there. Nothing you can do or say will change his mind. Not to mention that it's good sport, going after tweak manufacturers, no? Lol
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23
is going to be a trial sport for the next Olympics. I won't be competing as there are many better than I.
My OP was intended for the entire group here. And I do realize that no "green pen" vendor wants to go there. And I also clearly acknowledged I am not debating those who claim a difference is heard. That is a pointless argument as no one can hear exactly what another hears.
It is sad there is no technical discussion or technical opinions expressed of my proposed test technique.
One person here does respond but with insults? That's not how engineering and scientific professionals converse.
Geoff's behavior here is in stark contrast to someone who has the background Geoff claims.
Your comments simply reflect your ignorance of both technical issues involved, which I have explained may times as well as how the whole product testing is supposed to work, which I have also gone to great lengths to explain. If you're pretending to be dense you're doing an excellent job.
Edits: 06/26/23
Correct me where I am wrong, but you only proposed a theory of laser light scatter being a problem. You offered no measurements of this light scatter nor did you do any data integrity tests.The only test you proposed is to try it and see if one hears a difference. If you are who you say you are, you should know full well the potential errors from such an empirical test.
And once again, I answered your last post here without resorting to playground insults. Is this the only way for you to engage in a technical discussion?
Edits: 06/26/23
You're confused. My explanation of the problem of scattered light in CD players is neither a claim or a theory. A person doesn't have to back up ever single statement he makes. This is not some peer review publication. And you are not a peer anyway, although you're pretending to be one. You seem to be under the impression the Green Pen is my product. You're confused again.As for technical arguments you don't have one. All I've seen is a lot of posing from you. Like when you use the term technical discussion.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
That's all you ever do here. You refuse to engage in any deeper technical discussion. And don't try the old "you would not understand it anyway". If that's the case, that's my problem. The real problem is that you don't know my background at all and therefore I or even some else may call any BS you try to use.
It's a rather common tactic by some of these tweak vendors. "Oh, it's deep quantum theory and you wouldn't begin to understand it so just take my word for it, the product works".
No, it's actually you who refuses to engage in technical discussion here. I have already given the technical explanations for what's going on here with the green pen. And I've explained why testing the Green pen has serious pitfalls. So perhaps it's time for you to hit the library and due some due diligence before huffing and puffing yourself up. Nothing but personal attacks from you this entire thread. S or get off the pot. Unless you can actually give me a technical argument to the points I've made I'm afraid this conversation can serve no purpose any longer. The ball is in your court.
Edits: 06/27/23
Well I'm sorry if you perceive my questions about a technical test routine as attacks.As for your claims, yes, I do see your logic and I don't question the possibility. But I do question if it really happens and then if it has an effect on the audio signal. That has not been tested yet or has it? That was my OP along with a suggested way to do it.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23
I tested the Green Pen and it works, you can put your mind at ease. I explained the shortcomings of the Green Pen already, maybe it was over on the other Green Pen thread. And I developed a superior device - the perfect solution, if I do say so myself - that absorbs all wavelengths of scattered light, not just visible red, which is a relatively small percentage of the CD laser light. Thus the invisible part of the CD laser is absorbed, and that's the majority of the nominal 780 nm laser.Other colors can be used on CDs besides green. Because the colors of the paint on the CD label influence the sound by interfering with the scattered light, further improvements to SQ can be obtained by careful application of other colors. And black should only be used to mark the inner lip of the CD, never on the outer edge.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
z
Nt
You just claimed you have come up with a device to correct error producing scattered laser light which in your words has never been addressed by the established manufactures.As optical disc technology and the need for accurate data recovery goes far beyond music CD's these days, I would think your invention would be worth tens of millions?
Edits: 06/28/23
Just think, all optical media, DVD, BluRay, CD, picture quality and sound quality, let's say the Green Pen improves SQ 10-25% and DVD picture quality 20-35% then my new product improves SQ improves SQ 50-80% and picture quality 50-80% all things being equal. Gotta be worth more a hundred bucks, right?
Edits: 06/28/23 06/28/23
I also don;t think you want to get into the video claims with me as that's my primary career and experience focus.As the video (and audio for that matter) is compressed on DVD or BlueRay as well as an encryption algorithm is applied, your claims become even more ridiculous.
Edits: 06/28/23
If there was a buck to be made with enhanced video quality, don't you think the studios would have jumped on this a long time ago and added an up charge for said enhancement ???
Imagine getting 1080P picture quality from STDDEF content and bandwidth !!!
Compression tech would be obsolete.
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Try to escape the reality tunnel you're trapped.in.
Sorry, never subscribed to the shroom and LSD fads but I am sure many of those in the studios have and would have jumped on the green film to make copious amounts of currency if it worked.
It is not a secret after all or maybe it has been kept from them by the MIB ?
QUICK, set up a meeting with the Sony and Phillips execs before someone else does. Or, you could use time travel to go back in time and negotiate an earlier contract with them. Either way, it is a win/win !!!
.
2022/03/30 Historical Records CENSORED
Nt
An approach would be:
1. Verify that the data read off the disk in real time is the same.
2. Verify if there is a difference in the eye-diagram from the transport (and also at the DAC chip because there could be a jitter filter in-between)
3. Verify the isolation between transport servo power supplies and audio power supplies (or look for servo induced spurs at the DAC output).
4. Controlled listening tests - is the tweak actually identifiable by listeners?
Edits: 06/26/23
Let's start there. Controlled by whom? On what test system? Who are the listeners? You probably didn't get the memo that negative results of a controlled blind test don't mean anything.Controlled blind tests, the favorite tool of the earnest pseudo scientist. "I bet it can't pass a DBT." Of course they never actually do DBTs themselves, it's always someone else's job.
"The best laid plans of mice and men oft go awry." Old audiophile axiom
Burn the witch! Burn the witch!
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
I wrote in this thread that I don't care about the protocol, I simply forward the concept of finding out if people really can differentiate between things they say they can when they control the test.
Basically, Audiophilia is about saying 'I am great at listening'. Reviewers especially so - so let's test them.And what if people ace the test - wouldn't that be a positive thing for the audiophile world? The naysayers would have to shut up and go home. Come on Geoff, get on board, you have nothing to lose but your self doubt!
Edits: 06/27/23
A real skeptic would have tested it himself ages ago. You fall into the category of bogus skeptic and tweak denier.
I am a real skeptic. I tested the Green Pen many years ago AND developed the world's first and only true scattered light absorbing system. You are three paradigm shifts behind the power curve.
Your scattered light absorbing system sounds interesting but I won't ask for any evidence it works.
Hearing is believing. Seeing too, since it can be applied to BluRay players, dvd players, and CD players for better SQ and PQ. The best invention since Skippy peanut butter.
There's better peanut butter out there too.
What are you now, about 120? Or are you speaking to me from beyond the grave?
Edits: 06/28/23
I don't care about the protocol just something that recognizes listeners are very prone to confirmation bias and have poor aural memories.
The Placebo effect is straight out of the Pseudo Skeptic's Handbook. Give me a break. They say DBTs eliminate bias. Are you backing down from your own protocol? LolWhat wrong with getting a placebo effect if it improves the sound? What's the difference? Take two placebos and see me in the morning.
If bias was at play, wouldn't your expectation be the tweak was a hoax and therefore you'd get negative results? Hel-loo! I love it when pseudo skeptic throw around terms, as if.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
I deliberately avoided the three-latter acronym that must not be said in front of audiophiles. Just decide on a protocol that everyone agrees on (as if). Yes, I am truly skeptical by nature so my confirmation would likely steer me to no difference for many things that I am skeptical about. That's the whole point of controlled listening tests - to eliminate the bias.
The correct, though less common, use of the term "pseudoskepticism" refers to those who declare themselves merely "skeptical" of a concept, but in reality would not be convinced by any evidence. Common targets of this kind of pseudoskepticism are global warming,[1] evolution, AIDS, GMOs, vaccines, and even religion. This essentially is cloaked denialism, as there is a vast amount of real evidence which these pseudoskeptics willfully ignore. Saying "I am skeptical of X" seems more reasonable than saying "I don't accept X and never will regardless of the evidence", even if the latter is more accurate.
Real skeptics are always prepared to change their positions based on new evidence, consistent with the scientific method. An example is Einstein's Cosmological Constant, which has gone through a number of revisions as to whether it applies or not[2] — thus making skeptics who changed their mind on that issue when the scientific consensus changed, prima facie real skeptics. Clearly, if people change their mind on a topic, that is a positive defense against an accusation that they will not change their mind on that topic.
In the exchanges we had about CD transports, and the green pen, I think I was a clear and open as I could be as to why I didn't accept your blanket statements. I like to think I am open minded enough to accept things if they do work even if the reason is not clear. Though it is likely that if I don't expect a difference I am less inclined to try it but that is not the same as never accepting anything regardless of the evidence. Talking of evidence, your stand is always that you don't need to prove anything so, by your definition, I can't be a pseudo-skeptic because there will never be any evidence.
A word I like, but never get much chance to use, is specious. This means superficially plausible, but wrong. That is how I feel about your products but I don't know for sure they don't work because there is no evidence. So, let me coin the word pseudo-specious for your products.
Nt
And That's the problem with me just "trying it" It works both ways, the believer will most likely hear a difference and the naysayer will not.
Hence, why we have calibrated test procedures to remove thus human bias.
Yes, I like the addition of items 2&3 and they should be checked but keep in mind, if item #1 is good, then items 2&3 must be within specification at least for the SPDIF output.
We don't want to use a DAC for capturing into a work station. The test here is to validate the data. Analog means going through a CD player DAC and then ADC conversion within the workstation, Risk here for minor errors to be introduced.
As for if the laser scatter is influencing the CD player internal DAC, that's another test albeit a good one.
As for item #4, listening, yes I would have to have a report from a listener who heard differences so we could look at the data in those specific areas.
he is a paid inmate and so called 'manufacturer' and we wonder why Rod doesn't banish him, he is the present day annoying Romy type. Nothing but insults and trouble
a lot of us wish for him to just go away for good. This place will survive eloquently. Let him find somewhere else to sell his rocks, lies, and tweaky shit
Nt
Please post a link to a paper you have published with peer review? Then we will have to determine if you are actually Geoff Kait.
Nt
I also asked if you could post a published accredited research you authored.You made the claim of being an accredited scientist with an impressive career history. In fact it's on your WEB site.
So show us something to back that up?
Edits: 06/26/23
This is not show and tell, scooter. Am I going to be investigated? Should I lawyer up?
You are being investigated here. No need for a lawyer as this is not an actionable case for either side.But you advertise products and list your credentials on your WEB site. You also announce the same here to reject arguments challenging your claims.
I have posted numerous technical arguments on this subject and not once did you address my specific technical examples. Additionally now when asked to provide some proof of your posted impressive scientific background you refuse.
And instead of a polite refusal as a legitimate educated scientist of your claimed caliber would respond, you respond with taunts and insults. That alone calls into question of your claimed background. People of that level do engage in taunts and insults when their background is questioned. They don't have to. Their credibility speaks for it's self.
Edits: 06/26/23
So far all I've seen from you is a lot of personal attacks, scooter. You don't have any technical arguments. You like to use a lot of technical sounding, words, I'll give you that. But you're a fake. Now run down to whatever podunk school you went to and demand your money back, which I imagine was no more than 200 dollars.
Edits: 06/26/23
I would say there is no reason for you to "lawyer up". Our government doesn't seem to prosecute people who break the truth in advertising laws anymore.It's a shame, those laws protected folks against people like you.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 06/26/23
What, did someone open the flood door for creepy inmates? Go stalk somebody else, scooter.
From the FTC
"When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it's on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence."
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Ignorance begets fear, you sick little monkey.
Your attorney should know.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Nt
"Brilliant Pebbles significantly improves dynamic range and lowers distortion of the audio system."
"When the Intelligent Chip is placed on top of a CD Player it automatically upgrades a CD (or any optical disc) when the CD is allowed to play for 1-2 seconds. The upgraded CD will lack the typical digital shrillness, hardness and thinness, be more correct-sounding and have considerably better inner detail and dynamics."
"What makes them intelligent? (1)They know when a disc has already been treated and won't spend unnecessary energy. (2)They know when the disc in the player is completely treated and won't spend unnecessary energy on the disc."
"Codename Blue Meanies operates via mind matter-interaction. The subconscious mind interacts with room boundaries, i.e., closed-in spaces, producing a claustrophobic reaction that interferes with and degrades the listener's sensory perception."
Your website is full of wild claims and you know it. How can you say that you always tell the truth when you just lied to me about not making claims?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
If I told you the CD laser produces a nanoscale width beam because the laser is a quantum mechanical device would you scream bloody murder? If I told you there's a supermassive black hole in center of the Milky Way would you scream bloody murder? If I told you black holes spin at the speed of light would you demand proof and sue me? If I say all wire is directional would you sue me?Also, I have gone to great lengths to explain some of my most "puzzling" products. The Teleportation Tweak, The Intelligent Chip, The Clever Little Clock all have detailed explanations. Also, crystals, vibration isolation.
Edits: 06/27/23 06/27/23 06/27/23
since he won't stop with his crap and go away. I'll sign it
Nt
Nt
As usual your rebuttal is deflecting. All you say is the pen treatment as well as your other CD tweaks reduces laser light scatter or something along those lines. Yet you offer no scientific data or measurable test results to back up your theories. This test is well within our technology to perform.While I have no psychologist training or background, it is well published that the human mind is highly subject to expectation bias as well as our senses being biased by mode, food, intake, fatigue. In other words, listening to something that is suggested to be good yet not understanding the underlying science and technology is quite subject to Placebo effect.
We are not talking about the art here. There is no test to say if a song is good or bad. That is entirely subjective. But the technology is not.
Now if you can offer some technical data to help verify your theory, I am all ears. But if you can't, insulting and belittling those who ask for more data hardly puts you in an area of credibility.
And I am not saying I am right. I am saying the abundance of evidence outside the audiophile tweak crowd as well as the technology manufactures, for over 30 years now, do not believe this is a problem.
I only ask to see some scientific data. Nobody has provided that to date. And consider the fact that we have greatly advanced the CD optical disk technology with BluRay and now 4K or Ultra Blu Ray. Yet the rim treatment still has not been commercially implemented.
Edits: 06/25/23 06/25/23
You still don't get it. I am under no obligation whatsoever to provide test data, evidence or proof about anything. If you want to obtain the services of an independent testing facility knock yourself out. You appear to be filled to the brim with old wives' tales, conspiracy theories and other assorted pseudo skeptic garbage. What's next, a challenge that the green pen can't pass a controlled double blind test? You guys knock me out.
You use the word "scientific" a lot. Nice touch, even though you're obviously pretending.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: