Talk but not walk?

glupson wrote,

My case, point by point.

1. Actual disassembling of the amplifier was so simple that it left no room for error. Cover off and out of the room (I actually did that on purpose).

2. I used the fist around the screwdriver. Otherwise, I am not the best for the finest fine motor work, but this required nothing of that kind.

>>>>Did you disconnect any cables or power cord before removing the cover?

3. The whole point is that even the lousiest system can reveal differences. That is why tweaking is done, I think, and old Sherwood receivers and similar items used. Mine is nothing spectacular, but it works in general. It shows differences when a piece is changed.

>>>>>>I’ll be the judge of that. Your opinion is kinda irrelevant. Works in general is not what we call ready for Prime Time. We are throwing your results out.

4. Everything seemed to be working as expected. No hum, buzz, nothing unusual.

>>>>>>Well, working as YOU expected. See the problem?

5. I doubt that, although it is of course possible. I hear all the frequencies with a small dip in acuity at 14000 or 15000 Hz (I forgot which one it was about two months ago) and have no hair over the ears.

>>>>>Of course hearing as a skill has very little to do with frequency response. Especially a self appointed anti audiophile. This is obviously your first rodeo. It’s not mine. 🤠

6. That one is hard to measure, but I, in fact, wanted to hear the difference. If anything, I was more biased towards confirming than rejecting the hypothesis. Aside of that, there was another pair of ears (much younger and completely unbiased, practically not even being aware of this thread) that also could not hear any difference. I have left that fact out until now to be one to one level comparison.

>>>>>Whatver.

7. The day was beautiful.

Points 8 and 9 are impossible to evaluate for an ordinary person. Tuneland experts and me included. We have to assume that those were equal at the time of testing. Next stop Bora Bora. Everything sounds better when the floor is of volcanic origin. Much better than maple.

>>>>>Keep a log. Solar flare and sunspot activity is undated daily on:

https://www.spaceweatherlive.com/en/solar-activity

Obviously folks would rather sweep this issue under the carpet.

quick summary: pretend all the variables don’t exist. Then demand your negative results count as much as positive results.

@jf47t

Of course it doesn’t. The can of worms that keep getting opened on this thread are from the trolls making claims that their questions don’t get answered.

Ok, that’s your spin.
Now try on for the moment putting it the honest way:
In this thread Michael Green has made claims about how altering certain features of a piece of gear changes the sound, and some people have asked reasonable questions about those claims which Michael Green has not answered.

Really, just try even saying that out loud. Being able to speak the truth is good for the soul.
Instead, you continue to imply that those of us noting Michael’s evasions are "trolls," where in fact, we are simply reporting the fact Michael hasn’t answered the questions.  A fact you can't show to be wrong, so you continually resort to name calling.

What is it that you have against basic decency and honesty? Why can’t you just admit the questions I asked of Michael - e.g. on what technical basis do capacitors change the sound signal when untied and are there measurements to verify this? - have not been answered by Michael?
They are simple, obvious, basic questions any "engineer" making a technical claim, or anyone familiar with empirical science, would expect to be asked and would have an answer for. Imagine an engineer in a professional engineering society makes the claim that untying capacitors alter the sound signal. He can absolutely expect, as sure as day follows night, to be asked questions like "what is the technical basis for that claim, what technical parameters change, and what measurements support this claim?"
The fact that Michael Green refuses to answer these simple, logical, normal empirical questions - not "demands" as you need to characterize them - speaks volumes about his insecurity in the face of such questions. The fact Michael may have ever measured anything before - e.g. resonant qualities of X material, or taking room measurements after placing room treatments - does NOT justify every claim he makes. So pointing to some other incident of Michael measuring something does not answer the specific questions about, say, the capacitor tweak he claimed in this thread.

On your...sorry...Michael’s...thin-skinned account that my asking such questions is what a troll would do, then engineering and scientific community would be comprised of "trolls" because they...gasp...."demand" answers to these types of questions.

Let’s try an empirical prediction:
If this post is answered by jf47t, we can expect something along the lines of "Michael, The Great Empiricist, answers those questions ALL THE TIME!"
Yet we can predict he will not, in fact, answer the questions I’ve asked.

Nothing evil is going on here from the other side. Just simple, normal questions like "can you give more information in support of that claim?"But jj47t/Michael Green have painted "themselves" into a corner from the start by first calling out people asking such questions as "fakers" and "talkers" and trolls, Trolls, TROLLS! (I’ve never seen such liberal use of that epithet!). So now they can’t answer these questions in an honest way such as "I don’t have such measurements, but here is why I think the claim has a basis in reality..." because that would be to answer to trolls...Trolls...TROLLS!!!!!!!
This really is the strangest performance I’ve ever seen from a manufacturer.

Uh, demands for proof and demands for measurements are the tools of the obstreperous and irascible troll. Whether trolls think of themselves as trolls is a philosophical question which is worthy of a thread all by itself. Of course, trolls portray themselves as honest law abiding skeptics, devil’s advocates or a friendly helpers just trying to provide positive criticism. Trying to rid the world of scammers, hoaxsters, charlatans, purveyors of the paranormal, Quantum shysters and evil doers. Protectors of the realms of decency, Science, and religion. Kind of the George Bushes of the audio world, if you will. On a campaign, a crusade, to exterminate anyone who looks cross-eyed at them. 🏰

OMG...definitely not the professor from Gilligan's Island...can you imagine?  They probably would have eaten this one.