Moving cables around killed dynamics for days anyone else experience this?

It is not so much incoherent, it is just that I dont want to conclude and throwing in the basket of illusions all experiences of people who move cables and affirm to hear some differences...In the same way, I listen to your argument, and they are not neutral, your agenda is dismissing any " audiophile claims" … Audiophiles are a crowd akin to anti-vaxing…Case closed... :)

I know perfectly well all there is to think about your vision of the world: astrology, anti-vaxers, audiophiles, crystals users, etc. all the same... Am I forget something ? oh yes, intelligent design, homeopathy, tarot reader,...the list is too way longer to make, but you know it is very easy to read your mind set...

ok I apologize for throwing oil on a fire...


A remark : by the way I never experience in my own audio system that moving my cable makes a difference in itself, except this one : it is better that some cable dont touch some other one... That one I verify and experience by myself ...Then unlike you I dont dismiss all "audiophiles" in the same bin trash... My best to you... And to all...

mahgister

Or thinking that no sane mind can affirm this idiocy, you will arrive at the right conclusion that is mine : it is a waste of time to attack dogmas, all the times, with some people....

Well, that’s confusing. Which is it? Is it a waste of time to attack dogma at all times? Or only with some people?


And why not with "some people?" Perhaps you mean that some people have such a dogmatic stance it is a "waste of time" to argue against their position because, being dogmatic, they won’t change their stance anyway.


But that is to ignore the existence of people who are not dogmatic about the issue under discussion, who could change their mind or amend their view based on the case made by either side.


If you have anti-vaxers dogmatically making false claims about the dangers of vaccines you don’t refrain from critiquing them because those people may be dogmatic. They are promulgating false ideas, and it helps to challenge false or poorly reasoned ideas for the benefit of others who might be influenced by those dogmatic claims.

Use your intelligence not to judge too swiftly...Use the context of a discussion to read something that can make sense out of your world...

Sure. But isn’t that precisely what we want? "Context?" Instead of one side being dogmatically presented, doesn’t presenting alternative positions about a claim provide MORE context from which we can "use our intelligence" to judge?  And yet, you seem to advise against producing alternative positions in the face of dogmatic statements.

Forgive me, but I find much of what you write on this to be incoherent.I’m not asking that you "argue," but it’s up to you if you can or wish to clarify.
Cheers.

mahgister,

In the chaos of cables mess in a studio, all the subtle "cues" of the changing sound are lost, and cancelled constantly one another, minutes after minutes...A tangle knot of cables moving will maintain a general figure of sound that will not be disturbing, like ONE cable in a peculiar environment, where the same ears lived alone and attentive to the subtle details....And these " subtle" changes are not always measurable, and if they are, in some private room, it will be difficult to summon the expertise necessary to do it in the exact same condition at another times... Ok I will silence myself …. My best to all...

Well, that's a whole lot of conjecture or assertions.

Any actual evidence for them?  Do you have much experience actually working in pro sound?

Again...look at the type of claims being made for moving cables by the OP of drastic audio changes from moving a cable, including loss of bass, dynamics, highs.  You really think if this phenomenon were common that people recording/mixing in studios wouldn't have noticed?

A mixer/recordist works very intently on the sound he's getting, often changing little things for very subtle effects, be it microphones, mic positions, or adjusting EQ etc.  If a cable merely moving actually altered the highs/bass/dynamics to the significant degree claimed by the OP,  that would be heard!  It would necessitate for instance ADJUSTING EQ settings to compensate "damn, I'd spent all that time getting it sounding precisely how I wanted, but now the sound has changed and I have to start again!"

This DOES NOT HAPPEN (in any situation I've ever heard about) which is why it's the provenance of subjectivist audiophiles, but not professionals who spend their careers in sound.

In my daily job doing sound design I am adjusting mix levels and often EQ of many tracks combined (for a given movie scene I may have, say, 6 - 10 stereo tracks, and 12 mono tracks...sometimes many more! - that I'm carefully mixing so the addition of one sound *just barely* alters the whole combination.  I have to sometimes move cables and this never results in the sonic changes mentioned by the OP, or anything that changes the very careful, subtle mixing I achieved).  


Which is just what would be expected.  Unless the cables in question were insufficient for the job or somehow defective enough to screw up the sound if moved.  (Which is certainly an issue: rule one when having sound problems is usually "check your cables."  But that is for significantly audible defects brought on by some failure in the wiring, not the phenomenon claimed by the "cable lifers" here). 

If you think about what I said you have the choice:

You can say that some idiot dont want to attack dogmas... Like you say that I am...

Or thinking that no sane mind can affirm this idiocy, you will arrive at the right conclusion that is mine : it is a waste of time to attack dogmas, all the times, with some people....Use your intelligence not to judge too swiftly...Use the context of a discussion to read something that can make sense out of your world...


You look like me when I was 16 years old and I play to dismantle the arguments of anybody without never listen to reason....My best to you , I am too old to argue... :)

mahgister

I dont understand that people use their intelligence to defend dogmas or attack dogmas...

I can understand being puzzled about defending dogmas.


But...criticizing dogma is a bad thing?

Whatever leads you to that conclusion?

Typically a dogma is: "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true."

Do you think that’s a good thing? Is there any "authority" (especially in audio) that you know whose statements we must take as "incontrovertibly true?"

If not, why should you think that someone taking a dogmatic stance on an issue - audio or otherwise - means no intelligent person ought to analyze or critique that claim?


That sounds bizarre and unworkable. So...what point are you actually making, I"m wondering?

I dont have opinion or experience with the moves of cable and the changing sound...I respect equally those who have report positively about that and those who are not..The 2 opinions and experience are intriguing and interesting...

Cool. But then...who here do you think is defending dogma and what dogma would that be?

In the chaos of cables mess in a studio, all the subtle "cues" of the changing sound are lost, and cancelled constantly one another, minutes after minutes...A tangle knot of cables moving will maintain a general figure of sound that will not be disturbing, like ONE cable in a peculiar environment, where the same ears lived alone and attentive to the subtle details....And these " subtle" changes are not always measurable, and if they are, in some private room, it will be difficult to summon the expertise necessary to do it in the exact same condition at another times... Ok I will silence myself …. My best to all...

In the workplace you describe, you’re just duplicating a product, not listening like you would at home. As long as it sounds OK and meets the standards, you can then can it and sell it.

nonoise, you’ve missed the point.

If moving a cable changed sound to the degree some audiophiles claim that would be a serious problem for live events. The OP talks about the sound becoming "horrible," bass and dynamics going away, highs losing live etc. If those sonic effects really arose from cables being moved around it would be HEARD and a real problem in the pro audio world.But it’s not. And not because pros don’t care about how things sound. Pros spend more time than most audiophiles on sound, and doing real field work/experimentation with what actually alters sound and to what degree.

Further, your response ignored my reference to studio settings, in which virtually no engineers worry about bass/dynamics/highs being seriously, audible degraded by having moved a cable. Engineers, mixers, recordists etc listen very critically to sound all day long, for sound quality. (I would defy most audiophiles here to identify, for instance, subtle frequency anomalies and how to ’fix them’ to precision a good mixer can provide).

If moving cables collapsed sound, made bass/dynamics etc go away this is something pros would NOTICE and CARE ABOUT. But they don’t bother with it because it’s essentially a non-issue.Audiophiles in their homes are of course free to imagine whatever they want :-)

I dont understand that people use their intelligence to defend dogmas or attack dogmas...

I dont have opinion or experience with the moves of cable and the changing sound...I respect equally those who have report positively about that and those who are not..The 2 opinions and experience are intriguing and interesting... This debate cannot be resolve once and for all without our own involving experience...And it will be only our personal conclusion, because in audio the conditions of experiment are most of the times too peculiar or complex to reproduce with the same electrical grid, the same system, the same room, etc. and different ears also...

It is better to open the brain to the heart and to the ears … :)


I propose a blind test:
close your eyes, listen to the brain; after that listen to the heart... Assess the difference for yourself, and choose your boss...

Good one, prof! Textbook pseudo-scientific anti-audiophile screed with a little pseudo-philosophy thrown in for good measure. Filled to the brim with non-sequiturs and strawman arguments. 

Sure: Among audiophiles, who have also discussed "for decades" the "sonic effects" of a vast amount of pseudo-scientific "effects" (often barely that). There is literally no pseudo-scientific idea that an audiophile hasn’t come up with, that didn’t have some portion of audiophiles saying "He’s right! I can hear the difference!" That’s because audiophiles generally don’t employ methods that control for their imagination. 
That’s understandable to some degree due to practicalities involved, but many audiophiles go further to even deny the problem even exists.

So it's all conveniently down to a nicely worded, broad generalization.

Back to moving cables changing the sound: In the pro sound world, who use vastly more cables than audiophiles, no this does not come up. That is beyond using cables along well known parameters. I’ve recorded in, visited, and worked in many pro studios and not ONCE has this worry of "moving cables will change the sound" been either a problem or even raised as a problem. Because generally, there doesn’t seem to be good reason (beyond subjective audiophile hand-wringing and an appeal to golden ear hearing) to think it’s a problem.

In the workplace you describe, you're just duplicating a product, not listening like you would at home. As long as it sounds OK and meets the standards, you can then can it and sell it.

If significant sonic changes occurred to cables simply because they were moving, guitarists would have had to stand statue still while performing on stage lest their sound keep altering. But they don’t do that, because they don’t have to. Guitarists (and other musicians) have used cables that writhe around on the stage or recording floor as they move and no engineers stress about "sound obviously changing" (even with unbalanced cables) due to "cables moving" (so long as the cables can stand the stress of movement, aren’t landing on power cables or whatever). Look at photos of Led Zeppelin or any other band performing. Look at the cables snaking all over the floor. The horror! 

In a live performance, I can't imagine how one would know, let alone ascertain, how a performance would sound before, after, or while moving. Talk about a red herring. Why didn't you include a revolving stage while you were at it? 

And when recording, engineers/musicians move cables around all the time and NO ONE says "We’d better wait a few hours - or days - for the cables to "settle" again or we can’t get the sound right. That nonsense doesn’t fly in virtually any pro setting. It’s the provenance generally of hand-wringing subjectivist audiophiles, for good reason.

Has it ever occurred to you that the signal is getting through during the recording but it's with the playback at home in a settled environment that one can hear it? Two completely different settings.

All the best,
Nonoise

Moving cables and the affect it can have on your sound has been discussed for decades.

Sure: Among audiophiles, who have also discussed "for decades" the "sonic effects" of a vast amount of pseudo-scientific "effects" (often barely that). There is literally no pseudo-scientific idea that an audiophile hasn’t come up with, that didn’t have some portion of audiophiles saying "He’s right! I can hear the difference!" That’s because audiophiles generally don’t employ methods that control for their imagination.
That’s understandable to some degree due to practicalities involved, but many audiophiles go further to even deny the problem even exists.


Back to moving cables changing the sound: In the pro sound world, who use vastly more cables than audiophiles, no this does not come up. That is beyond using cables along well known parameters. I’ve recorded in, visited, and worked in many pro studios and not ONCE has this worry of "moving cables will change the sound" been either a problem or even raised as a problem. Because generally, there doesn’t seem to be good reason (beyond subjective audiophile hand-wringing and an appeal to golden ear hearing) to think it’s a problem.


If significant sonic changes occurred to cables simply because they were moving, guitarists would have had to stand statue still while performing on stage lest their sound keep altering. But they don’t do that, because they don’t have to. Guitarists (and other musicians) have used cables that writhe around on the stage or recording floor as they move and no engineers stress about "sound obviously changing" (even with unbalanced cables) due to "cables moving" (so long as the cables can stand the stress of movement, aren’t landing on power cables or whatever). Look at photos of Led Zeppelin or any other band performing. Look at the cables snaking all over the floor. The horror!


And when recording, engineers/musicians move cables around all the time and NO ONE  says "We’d better wait a few hours - or days - for the cables to "settle" again or we can’t get the sound right. That nonsense doesn’t fly in virtually any pro setting. It’s the provenance generally of hand-wringing subjectivist audiophiles, for good reason.

Moving cables and the affect it can have on your sound has been discussed for decades. This is not something new or earth shattering.
However, when it comes up now and again for discussion, oh how the knives come out.

I can’t believe this is even worthy of discussion.......moving your cables changes something...not the speakers......same equipment....but just moving your cables.

The insanity this hobby brings. It must be an "Audiophile Poltergeist"  that is behind this phenomenon.

This thread should in fact serve as an example to newbies in the hobby how people who never experiment with any cables are experts on all cable related matters

+1 @thyname  Perfect!

All I did was utter the word pseudo-skeptic and one suddenly pops up. Am I psychic? 😳 Give my regards to Davy Crockett.

I just love this thread. I am referring people from other sites to this one as an example of how insane audiophile drivel can be. Simply unbelievable that this could even be a topic that any would think is serious.
  All kidding aside though I moved from Texas to Tennessee and it took a half year before the cables recrystalized into audiophile capable quality again. I know a dude who moved to Australia and until the cables reacclimated themselves to southern hemisphere dynamics the signal ran backwards. I kid you not. No really it did. Darndest thing he ever saw and if he had not witnessed it would not have believed it. He flew back to the states for a visit recently and was telling me about it all. It was very difficult understanding him until I figured out he was talking backwards until he reacclimated to the northern hemisphere again.

No Geoff, you are wrong. This thread should in fact serve as an example to newbies in the hobby how people who never experiment with any cables are experts on all cable related matters

Actually, this thread should serve as example to newbies that there are indeed determined glib pseudo skeptics right here on this forum and on this thread who would have you believe it’s best to be closed-minded and pseudo-skeptical when it comes to anything that is half way controversial in this hobby.

This type of thread can act as a warning to any newbie thinking about going down the audiophile path. The level of audiophile nervosa that can arise in a purely subjective paradigm is really something (virtually anything you do can be perceived as "changing the sound" so careful about touching anything in your system and don’t forget to hold your rosary beads!).


Audiophiles who talk like this about cables would have a heart attack (if they thought consistently about these things) watching the type of cables and how they are moved and strewn around in making the recordings they cherish.

Imagine if the pros believed all this stuff. "Hold on guys, Eddie just moved his cable, we have to hold off another day for recording until it settles again."

Yeesh.

I move my cables around all the time. ALL the time, because I’m often switching them between various speakers I own. Or merely re-adjusting them along the floor (they are in a fairly high traffic area in our house).   Does the sound ever change, the soundstage collapse, the sound get duller etc? No. Never.

But then I guess I haven’t spent the mega bucks on high end cables that can’t handle that type of abuse ;-)

Use the FORCE Luke-=-

Have you thought that maybe it’s you that is hearing differently? 

Your blood pressure changed, your relaxation of body changed, medications you are on affect hearing and blood flow, you are calm or your frustration changed and you hear different due to body changes. 

@waipuna
Cd players comprise mechanical parts & electronic circuits; Wires are just thin rods of metal. How do these compare in yr analogy?
Btw, are you sure of this "molecular" flow or are you thinking of directional flow of electrons?

Schroeder is wrong. Cables develop directional molecule flow. When you disturb the cables that is compromised until they have time to form again. The wiring and the dialectric both. Some people believe that all cd players sound the same.

Interesting that the conversation has turned to Global feedback vs Non-feedback design, or simply we hear and like the audio waves that our own ears can interpolate not necessarily better specs in test measurements.

Distortion, distortion and distortion, we all hear and sum things up just a little bit different inside of our own minds.

Hey! @gratefuleric grab a strong cup of java and sit down and watch Unidentified: Inside America's UFO Investigation and report back ASAP.

I think that measurement has value for design, independent of listening tests...

I think that listening tests have value for us independent of the measuring tests...

I think that the correlation between measurement tests and listening tests is great audio science...


But my ears-brain always smile, without or with science... :)

Interesting. 
Thanks!

Nelson Pass makes amps that purposely distort the signal to make them work with certain speakers. I know a recording engineer who bought one of his designs and said it was one of the worse sounding amps he's ever heard. He even called Nelson and told him so and they discussed it.

The recording engineer thinks it's that he makes his amps to get the best out of whatever speaker that's taken his fancy at the time. He noticed that if there's ever a picture of Nelson with a speaker in the background, the amp he's working on is probably meant to match that speaker, and most of them are widebanders. 

This is not to say that Nelson can't make a great all around amp: it's that he sometimes chooses not to. Even Sarjan at 6moons (who's on great terms with Nelson) describes in detail how his amps are skewed in certain ways to accommodate certain speakers. 

All the best,
Nonoise

I believe that’s a logical fallacy.

Nelson Pass, Rob Watts just examples.
IMHO measurements have value only in case of strong correlation with listening tests.

When people with such experience in audio like Nelson Pass, Rob Watts talk about measurements and correlation between SQ and measurements I respect their opinion.
But how many people with such knowledge experience in audio are exist?

Yeah. And how many like Stan Ricker?

One year at CES they're having some kind of problem with the PA. Well not really what most would even call a problem. From where I was standing way in back it sounded like a perfectly normal PA. But some people up closer and near the middle were complaining. 

Frantic running around on stage. Frantic checking of connections. Some old guy yells out something about a cap, or resistor. I forget. Couldn't hear from where I was anyway. Not the point.

Point is it was some small part in some random PA system causing a "problem" so small most weren't even aware of it, and yet some guy in the audience knew what part and he knew this just by listening.

If anyone reading this was there please chime in because as I recall the news swept through the crowd to where in no time even guys like me standing way in back knew it was Stan Ricker who heard and knew with his ears exactly what was wrong and how to fix it.

And they did what he said and all was well.

So look, its not like anyone is saying measurements don't matter AT ALL or aren't worth doing AT ALL. Is just that in the final analysis the measurements are secondary to the human experience. 

When people with such experience in audio like Nelson Pass, Rob Watts talk about measurements and correlation between SQ and measurements I respect their opinion.
But how many people with such knowledge experience in audio are exist? 

It's been my experience that those who hear a difference don't usually cite scientific findings to explain what they hear as they trust their ears.

Bingo!

That's why science exists in the first place, to explain human experience. Human experience does not exist to explain science. The people who think otherwise have it exactly backwards. They are deeply, deeply confused.

Because every second person on any audio forum likes to talk about science and measurements.

It's been my experience that those who hear a difference don't usually cite scientific findings to explain what they hear as they trust their ears.
Once the topic of "science' is breached, then, of course, it will be discussed.

But how many people here have any education in electronics, physics and psychoanalytic?

Lots. Some here are highly steeped in the sciences you mention and some haven't bothered participating in a long time due to the acrimony imparted by those who refuse to accept that one needn't need a degree in order to sense something accurately.

Most of they didn’t study out of these disciplines.
Unlike most of people here, I have BSc in electronics. But I don’t have enough knowledge to enplane most process in audio scientifically

That could be true re: most. Having that degree and admitting that you can't explain some of it scientifically is a step in the right direction, though. It's what we who don't have degrees do.

All the best,
Nonoise

Calling these characters "audiophile morons" is totally wrong.

The correct term is #measurementmorons (LOL!!)

Because every second person on any audio forum likes to talk about science and measurements.
But how many people here have any education in electronics, physics and psychoanalytic?
Most of they didn’t study out of these disciplines.
Unlike most of people here, I have BSc in electronics. But I don’t have enough knowledge to enplane most process in audio scientifically.

alexberger

... 99% of audiophiles who try to use these kind of theories don’t have any of required knowledge.

To what "theories" do you refer? What knowledge is "required?"

Given your insistence on applying science, I have to ask: How did you arrive at your "99%" calculation?

And given your distaste for audiophile "morons" and "fanatics," will you please tell us what you hope your claims will accomplish here?

Sorry for a harsh word "morons". Because that I put it in quotes!

Anyway, IMHO to make a real serious measuring analysis in audio you
have to have a deep knowledge not just in electronics but in psychoanalytic.
But 99% of audiophiles who try to use these kind of theories don’t have any of required knowledge.

I like hominy and grits.   

jetter

Forgetting science versus the human ear discussions ...

I don't mean to blame you, but that's part of the problem. There is no genuine "science versus the human ear discussion," because there is no conflict between science and what we hear. The two are inherently linked. That sometimes it's difficult to account for what we hear is not an indicator of any conflict, other than that invented for purposes of debate.

Real scientists probe for real answers.

Forgetting science versus the human ear discussions, keeping it simple, I would be surprised if simply removing and reinserting the same cables could cause this difference in sound.  I would think some other variable has changed.

Perhaps the word " morons" was a bit too much...I dont like also ad hominem attack...I like to discuss opinions not insulting anybody...I say that to distance myself  to the use of the word "morons"... 

alexberger

There is a big difference between real scientists and "moron audiophiles" that fanatically believe in their "scientific theories".

Logical fallacy, ad hominem attack times two. Not only do you call those audiophiles with whom you disagree morons, you also label them as fanatics.

Perhaps the difference between audiophiles and those you call "real scientists" is that the audiophiles tend to report their experiences, while those like you engage in illogic and insult.

For scientists if an experiment disproves theory, they conclude the something is wrong in the theory.

If so, that’s a poor scientist. "An experiment" can neither prove nor disprove any theory. It’s just one experiment. For the results to have any scientific validity, the experiment must then be replicated by others, and the results shared and assessed.

I have to wonder why you’re here if you think we’re morons.

alexberger

I will go in the same way as you, some walk their illusory and not very humble walks with sometimes vast amount of knowledge, but poor scientific judgement, too much faith and trust in apparatus and available theories and way less in their too human error prone ears... Technical science is useful and necessary, but in their faillible way, even subject to errors, the ears are more important than all dogmas or even facts, because we listen with the ears and it is the ultimate fact that superseded the other facts in importance...

Musical bliss can be and must be produce for sure by a good technical embedding of the audio system, but at the end, the way to increase it more, is not always linked to actual technical known, proved facts...More than that, what is the audible truth for one is anathema for another sometimes... Too much variable to makes rules without many exceptions here...I dont even speak about the many possible personal choices...

Musical bliss is first an individual experience before being or beginning to be a scientific fact, if it is ever....

There is a big difference between real scientists and "moron audiophiles" that fanatically believe in their "scientific theories".
For scientists if an experiment disproves theory, they conclude the something is wrong in the theory. 
And for "moron audiophiles" everything is exactly opposite. If an experiment (and the experiment in audio it is listening test) disproves theory, they don't believe to their ears. 
I listened a number of systems of such "moron audiophiles" and saw how this  believe in their "scientific theories" leaded them to horrible results!

The scientific answer to these questions, about the known efficacy and acts committed to gain discernible results... the questions about them... have recently been conclusively answered in the world of reporting on cutting edge physics.

When that goes public enough (this is research and is valuable re product design and so on--so it will not be revealed as to where this data and reporting was found), the naysayers , those ’beat everyone up’ misanthropes...will simply hop onto an attack bandwagon (gangs of roving attack illiterates) on the next thing they are failing to understand.

Expect it like the Spanish inquisition.

the naysayers will poutily say.. "who’s your source on that?" 

And the answer will be akin to "Los Alamos National Laboratory’, or ’the "The Planck institute of Germany", or "MIT", or.....(you get the idea).

But, you see, the noted effect was real for 20-30-40 years before that particular institute comes along and explained the science and physics behind the given noted effect. Time apparently exists but we still can’t get any functional labels on it, they all slide off. Yet everyone here accepts the existence of time.

Just like all the others noted effects that might remain afterward, or came before. Just like reality and 3-d time space has in it, all day long, since the beginnings of time.

That some institute frames the thing today does not mean it did not exist beforehand. Science's explanation is not the arbiter of reality it is just an attempt at framing an explanation. Nothing more. an explanation that is ready to change or be dismissed at any moment. Science. Mutable. By design. Correctly so.

This is one of the core problems of dogmatic minds, with said minds trying to express themselves through higher learning. They fail to understand that science does not work like that. That science is not dogma and reality existed before science and reality exists outside of science. Science is not at fault, some of the dogmatic minds that try to wave a sword around in it's name - are at fault.

nonoise5,235 posts01-07-2020 8:35pmAll of this reminds me of a cartoon that The Audio Critic had where the audiophile was behind his stereo, holding some cables, and yelling at his family, "Who the hell cleaned back here?", or something like that.

Very funny! Sounds like me. Thanks

All of this reminds me of a cartoon that The Audio Critic had where the audiophile was behind his stereo, holding some cables, and yelling at his family, "Who the hell cleaned back here?", or something like that.

It was meant to ridicule folk like us but it turns out that it was quite prescient, but not in the way it was intended.

All the best,
Nonoise

This definitely sheds some light on problems I've had with this new room. Once a few cables were moved and sound deteriorated I thought if I moved speakers and in turn moving speaker wire closer to front wall bass would come back but that wasnt the case. I would walk away and come back next day and system was still lacking. So I flipped around some power cords. I even went to the extent of pulling out some different tubes to fix things. Viscous cycle. So if moving cables does affect sound all I was doing was prolonging having the system leveling out and not improving things. What an eye opener.

Big Amen and well said @rodman99999!