Do you believe in Magic?

hi geoffkait:

why do tou feel you have to justify your products ? just put them out there, and let people buy or not buy them.

no explanations are needed.

i think your mistake is to be defensive

you would be better off saying nothing.

Actually, if you can read and comprehend plain English, it happened exactly the way Bryon said. He went through 6 of the so called "explanations" of your products. I haven't had that good of a laugh in some time. This is coming from someone that believes in cables, tweeks, etc. and has a strong background in science.

Csmgolf, if you don't mind too much I'm going to quote you from a thread discussing cables on Agon last year. I couldn't have said it better myself.

"...listen for yourself. That is the only way. Assuming that we know how to measure everything that the human hearing mechanism can distinguish is incredibly arrogant. Fortunately, at one time, someone proved that the world is not flat. All of the scientists and people who knew beyond any doubt otherwise, thought him a fool for holding such beliefs without ever investigating themselves. Again, listen for yourself. It can be done with little to no investment other than time and an open mind."

03-15-12: Cbw723
Bryon, I agree with one of your earlier comments: they should just say “we don’t know why it works, but it does.” And then offer a money back guarantee.

That is my feeling also. To me it is a turnoff when an explanation is presented that I know to be techno-gibberish.

Concerning the broader issues that are being argued/discussed, IMO the bottom line is as I stated early in this thread:

01-22-12: Almarg
Each issue and each tweak should be considered on an individual basis, and broad latitude should be allowed for the possibility that subtle and counter-intuitive phenomena may be at play. But that latitude should remain WITHIN FINITE BOUNDS OF PLAUSIBILITY!!

As a fellow audiophile said in a thread here some years ago, one doesn't have to jump out of an airplane at 10,000 feet without a parachute in order to determine that it's not a good idea. Some things are sufficiently implausible that they can be discounted "a priori".

Regards,
-- Al

03-16-12: Csmgolf
Actually, if you can read and comprehend plain English, it happened exactly the way Bryon said. He went through 6 of the so called "explanations" of your products.

Thank you for that, Csmgolf. Geoff's "recollection" of events is distorted. Maybe he can invent a Machina Dynamica device to reduce that kind of distortion... "Codename Reality" ?

03-16-12: Geoffkait
In your own words you were being confrontational and I responded.

Those are not my own words, Geoff. When I used the word 'confrontation,' here is what I said...

03-14-12: Bryoncunningham
[My last post] was a request to explain why it is you fail to provide substantive information about the products you design and sell, unlike several other well regarded manufacturers who contribute to A'gon. You may experience that as an attack. I would call it a confrontation.

That is a far cry from calling myself "confrontational," which of course would imply that the problem lies within me. And I confronted you only AFTER you ignored my repeated attempts to engage you in a substantive conversation. Your attempt to invert the sequence of events, turning the effect into the cause, will not persuade anyone, since if you haven't noticed, the whole thing is written down.

You used veiled insults and innuendo, and continue to do so.

I would not call my insults veiled, but I'm happy you see them that way. Again, I would invite you to examine my posting history. You will see that I don't make a habit of insulting people. On the contrary, I make an effort to treat people with respect. As a result, I have had MANY perfectly courteous conversations with other A'gon members, including those with whom I disagree.

I fully acknowledge that I have not treated you with respect. If we assume for the moment that my characterization of myself is accurate, and I do generally treat people with respect, then why haven't I treated you that way? Because, Geoff, in this thread, YOU did not treat other people with respect. Again, your comments were both provocative and obscure. That happens to be a combination that irritates me, having spent years in the company of "literary intellectuals," many of whom fit that description. IME, the intellectuals who relied on provocative obscurity were invariably concealing intense insecurity about their own ideas with their cryptic conversational style, in the hope that colleagues would confuse the Obscure for the Profound.

For years I thought you could win over such people with calm, rational, open discourse. That is sometimes true. But when repeated efforts to reasonably engage a person are met with more provocative obscurity, you are left with two choices: ignore them or confront them. I sometimes choose the one, sometimes the other. Obviously I chose to confront you, and now I'm afraid your obscurantism and other foibles have been dragged into the light of day. Don't be disheartened, though... There will always be those who confuse the Obscure with the Profound, and that ensures a steady stream of customers.

It's also worth noting that my irritation with obscurantism isn't merely academic. Obscurantism may be harmless in the audio world, but it isn't harmless in the real world. In the real world, obscurantism thrives in the form of political propaganda and economic deception. If you need an illustration of this, look no further than the recent financial crisis. The world was brought to the brink of economic oblivion by the actions of people armed with Multifactor Derivatives, Collateralized Debt Obligations, Credit Default Swaps, and a host of other financial instruments designed with one thing in mind: Obscurantism.

Obscurantism is used to control what people think, or more to the point, what people DON'T think. That was Orwell's great insight in 1984, that obscurantism makes certain ways of thinking impossible, and that effect can be used to any end whatsoever. As he predicted, in industrialized nations of instant communication, obscurantism is a weapon. It may be THE weapon.

Returning to the world of audio...

What was that term you used, close minded?.....hmmmmm.

Does it not strike you as strange that you are the only person on this thread who has said this, and that at least 4 other posters have said the EXACT OPPOSITE? You are sadly out of touch with the people around you, Geoff.

Time to start designing "Codename Reality"

Bryon