Interconnects and non-believers

Teo,

Your response turned on attributing this argument to me:

It simply means that you can't hear it..

and thinking that others could not hear it...

You made that up.

Simply, made up the move from "I didn't hear it" to projecting the conclusion "therefore others could not hear it."

Because I argued no such thing. I'd never make such a ludicrous argument as "I didn't hear it, therefore no one has ever heard it and the phenomenon in question isn't real."

Which is why I've been quite careful NOT to make such an argument. (And you skipped every caveat, such as that I started out saying speaker break in seems to have some plausibility to me).

So...when you can settle down, read what I'm actually writing and properly represent it or respond to it without strawmannirg my position...then maybe we can have a fruitful discussion.

For instance, can you actually point to anything I've written or argued that is B.S.?  I'm not saying I haven't written anything that isn't mistaken, but strawmaning someone isn't a way to move things forward.

elizabeth,

The amazing thing I find is some folks think their wisecracks and insults, or carefully constructed arguments...

Elizabeth, is this comment directed at my posts?

Can you show me where I’ve been insulting people? And if you investigate the thread to find examples, please pay attention to the posts directed at me. You may well find some insults coming from that direction.

For instance, it seems here you are implying writing such as mine to be "drivel." How magnanimous do you think that is on your part? Do you not care that maybe I’m writing about things I care about?

...make a dent in anyone’s beliefs.

First of all: whats the matter with simply representing one’s OWN beliefs, and why we hold them?

Again, here is the imbalance I keep pointing out. Anyone can write as much as they want how their new cables obviously made a difference and/or include appeals to technical claims for one cable over another, and make all the claims they want about why "obviously cables sound different!"

But if I or someone else explain why we are being cautious about such conclusions, well then we are cast variously as dogmatic, proselytizing, evangelical, impinging on people’s "freedom to enjoy" and even ...gasp...being Machiavellian (that was a particularly fun histrionic characterization on Teo’s part).

So anyone has a right to express their views and why they hold them, don’t you agree? The question is: why do you seem to not blink an eye when one view is constantly put forth (cable differences) but bristle so much when another view is expressed and defended against challenging questions? Isn’t this very thread title and OP a call out challenge to people who may be more skeptical?

Further, how would it be wrong, in either case, to wish to present good reasons for a position? And if someone finds those reasons convincing, if it changes their mind...what’s the harm? What’s so wrong with having things you believe challenged?

On EITHER side. They do not. All the written drivel has not changed one person’s notions.

That’s a common theme, but it’s not true.

Sure, in any typical discussion or debate, someone’s view is rarely changed in real time, especially between the people arguing one side vs another.

But over time people certainly can change views. I was more of the mind that everything might make a difference when I got heavily into high end audio - and felt I heard all sorts of differences (audio cables, AC cables, isolation feet, etc).   But observing interesting debates on the subjects got me challenging my own assumptions. It also spurred me to try blind testing on my own. It was extremely enlightening and has informed some of my skepticism ever since.  I’ve seen numerous audiophiles say the same about their journey. (Though fewer of them tend to hang out on a place like Audiogon).

Further, not everyone is dogmatically stuck in one camp or another. Many of these discussions can be viewed by people who haven’t made up their mind, and seeing different viewpoints defended can influence their own point of view, either in the short or long term.

But, again, before you characterize other people’s writing as "drivel" and implicate them as being insulting, I’d ask you to consider how you just wrote...and look at many of the posts directed at me (some of which have been removed, though...)

Cheers.


(BTW, I never feel insulted by anyone, whether they mean to insult me or not. What would be the point? They can either explain where I’m wrong, or they can fall to insults or mischaracterizations).

Which evil evil post would that be as I do not honestly see any.

Some differences of opinion sure but nothing much more than that.

It's freedom of speech and we are all adults here....I hope anyway.