2. misc-audio
  3. 152293-121242

What is wrong with audiophiles?

Something that has happened countless times happened again last night. Ordinary people over for a party listening to some music easily hear things audiophiles argue endlessly don't even exist. Oh, its worse even than that- they not only easily hear but are stunned and amazed at what they hear. Its absolutely clearly obvious this is not anything they ever were expecting, not anything they can explain- and also is not anything they can deny. Because its so freaking obvious! Happens every time. Then I come on here and read one after another not only saying its impossible, but actually ridiculing people for the audacity of reporting on the existence of reality.

What is wrong with audiophiles?

Okay, concrete examples. Easy demos done last night. Cable Elevators, little ceramic insulators, raise cables off the floor. There's four holding each speaker cable up off the floor. Removed them one by one while playing music. Then replaced them. Music playing the whole time. First one came out, instant the cable goes on the floor the guy in the sweet spot says, "OH! WTF!?!?!"

Yeah. Just one. One by one, sound stage just collapses. Put em back, image depth returns.

Another one? Okay.

Element CTS cables have Active Shielding, another easy demo. Unplug, plug back in. Only takes a few seconds. Tuning bullets. Same thing. These are all very easy to demo while the music is playing without interruption. This kills like I don' know how many birds with one stone. Auditory memory? Zero. Change happens real time. Double blind? What could be more double blind than you don't know? Because nobody, not me, not the listener, not one single person in the room, knows exactly when to expect to hear a change- or what change to expect, or even if there would be any change to hear at all. Heck, even I have never sat there while someone did this so even I did not know it was possible to hear just one, or that the change would happen not when the Cable Elevator was removed but when the cable went down on the floor.

We're talking real experience here people. No armchair theorizing. What real people really hear in real time playing real music in a real room.

I could go on. People who get the point will get the point. People who ridicule- ALWAYS without ever bothering to try and hear for themselves!- will continue to hate and argue.

What is wrong with audiophiles?

Something almost all audiophiles insist on, its like Dogma 101, you absolutely always must play the same "revealing" track over and over again. Well, I never do this. Used to. Realized pretty quickly though just how boring it is. Ask yourself, which is easier to concentrate on- something new and interesting? Or something repetitive and boring? You know the answer. Its silly even to argue. Every single person in my experience hears just fine without boring them to tears playing the same thing over and over again. Only audiophiles subject themselves to such counterproductive tedium.

What is wrong with audiophiles????
128x128millercarbon
atdavid
736 posts
 
Below is what Geoff Kait claims about himself. However, the University of Virginia says Geoff graduated with a Batchelor’s degree in 1967 from the School of Engineering and Applied Science (what they call engineering schools) in Aerospace. That is most definitely NOT a degree in Theoretical Physics.

His quantum chips ... aren’t "chips" i.e. intelligent chips you would think of, but I am sure there is a very creative explanation for them.

When you start out with gross lies, it pretty much makes everything you say suspect. It seems to be a common problem in certainly audiophile circles.


geoffkait,


I have a degree in theoretical physics (fluid dynamics and propulsion) from the University of Virginia, actually now that I think about it I accumulated the most credits ever recorded by an undergraduate, 203. I was selected to present my undergraduate thesis to the AIAA national conference on a design of a low thrust rocket engine for interplanetary space travel using highly magnetized metal crystal bombarded by highly accelerated Xenon ions. I designed the FAA’s first satellite system twenty five years ago. i wrote the definitive explanation for how the intelligent chip works quantum mechanically ten years ago and have been designing quantum chips for many years. However, I can certainly understand how English majors would be rubbed the wrong way.

Cheers,

geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

September 28, 2014 - 7:34am


geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
What a moron! My curriculum in aerospace engineering was theoretical propulsion and fluid dynamics. That’s theoretical physics. My courses included statistical thermodynamics, nuclear engineering and indeterminate structures. I was in the first class of Aerospace Engineers at the beginning of the race to the moon 🌝 
atdavid
736 posts
 
Geoff,
Keep fooling yourself. There are many educated people on these forums. They know, that a Batchelor’s degree in Aerospace Engineering, is Not a degree in theoretical physics. Engineering ... is not theoretical physics. It is not even experimental physics. You keep digging that hole Geoff. When you hit bottom, you let us know.

Speaking of morons, stop treating others on this forum like they are and have no clue what an undergrad aerospace degree would look like. You literally claimed you have a degree in theoretical physics. That was a whopper and you should be ashamed.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Are you stupid or something? I’m serious. I’m an aerospace engineer. I’m an aerodynamicist. I’m a theoretical physicist. I’m a quantum mechanical engineer, too. 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
I do know a guy who has a degree in theoretical physics. He does deal with (potato) chips quite often.
More to discover