So, your actual rebuttal is comparing your inept cable supervisor diagnostic story to what? Are you kidding me?
Pick any industry and I can promise you, in many situations, Joe Schmo may have more knowledge about a particual technology than a so-called supervisor. What do you know about being a service technician anyway. I've been doing it for 37 years, in a wide spectrum of electronics. Mistakes get made, or new equipment comes out, and we're not given adequate time or training to learn everything, or for the special test equipment to diagnose said equipment. In that 37 years, and I'm sure fellow tech readers can attest to, there's good ones, and not so good, or just lazy types showing up for a paycheck.
What does this have to do with anyone proving what they claim to hear? Which month's magazine article did RH or JA address this fuse issue will measureable results? These are payed magazine reviewers, correct? And why isn't this debate about science? By that, I can only assume your limited understanding is more along the lines of magic since you lack any plauseable technical explanation? Merely claiming that you hear something, is not evidence that something is audible for various psychological, sociological, and well-understood unreliability of human hearing. And THAT has been discussed to no end except "audiophiles" unwillingness to accept that fact. Back up YOUR claims my friend!
Pick any industry and I can promise you, in many situations, Joe Schmo may have more knowledge about a particual technology than a so-called supervisor. What do you know about being a service technician anyway. I've been doing it for 37 years, in a wide spectrum of electronics. Mistakes get made, or new equipment comes out, and we're not given adequate time or training to learn everything, or for the special test equipment to diagnose said equipment. In that 37 years, and I'm sure fellow tech readers can attest to, there's good ones, and not so good, or just lazy types showing up for a paycheck.
What does this have to do with anyone proving what they claim to hear? Which month's magazine article did RH or JA address this fuse issue will measureable results? These are payed magazine reviewers, correct? And why isn't this debate about science? By that, I can only assume your limited understanding is more along the lines of magic since you lack any plauseable technical explanation? Merely claiming that you hear something, is not evidence that something is audible for various psychological, sociological, and well-understood unreliability of human hearing. And THAT has been discussed to no end except "audiophiles" unwillingness to accept that fact. Back up YOUR claims my friend!