Do we believe in Machina Dynamics?

Freemand has said it well.

Freemand: I agree with your analysis. In the end, what ultimately matters is what the individual listener perceives. If, after putting an alarm clock in your room or having tones played over your phone or drinking a few glasses of Wild Irish Rose, you believe that your system sounds better, then it obviously was worth it to you. I don't think anyone disputes yours or Norm's or anyone else's experience (putting aside the obvious bias that arises when someone like Norm takes freebies, failes to disclose it, and then asserts publicly that they work).

Your analysis does not, however, address the issue of whether those "tweaks" have even a remote chance of helping others. If the point of this forum is to share experiences that may help others, it is important to separate tweaks that have no apparent explanation (which, more likely than not, induce a placebo effect that likely is not repeatable acrosss the population or even for an individual over time) and those that have some basis in rationale, scientific explanations (which are vastly more likely to have a similar effects on others' experiences).

Otherwise, Norm's anecodates about how little pebbles have changed his life are just that: cute, personal anecdotes that contribute nothing to the general understanding and improvement of the forum members' experiences.

Freemand +++ Why does a $2000 dollar power cord make any difference in improving the sound +++

A power cable can filter out RFI and EMI out of the power source, which results in a cleaner B+ voltage on the rails. That leads to better sound reproduction. Simple no?

+++ Science would seem to tell me that the power cord wont help +++

No, your lack of understanding of science tells you PC won’t help. The assumption that others share your lack of understanding is erroneous.

+++ Everyone has the right to let their ears determine and not some scientific method. +++

It’s a free country and you have the right to do whatever you want (if legal that is). However, that does not eliminate the possibility of placebo effect nor does it diminish the fact that every tweak that actually works has a perfectly plausible scientific reason for doing so.

+++ I would trust my ears then some science geeks with a white lab coats and pocket protectors. +++

Fortunately, I have enough understanding to know when said geeks with pocket protectors are frauds. I know a phone call cannot improve sound and I don’t need to spend $75 dollars to find out.

Regards
Paul

This isn't about science or faith. It's about the gray area of plausibility.

If the latest tweak/craze involved wrapping up some dog s**t in aluminum foil and depositing it on top of your CD player, would you do it? I'd bet not, because it would cross the plausiblity threshold of nearly any sane person. Some would demand a bit of insight, and rightfully so. That is what is being alluded to as 'science' here. They (myself included) want some evidence that the claimed process, product or ritual is possible. Just a simple, plausible explanation, even sans conclusive proof. When that information is not forthcoming, most become suspicious. Again, rightfully so. Unfortunately Norm, MD products seem to set off the bulls**t detectors of many on this site, and the threshold of plausibility is breeched. Of course, it doesn't make them(us) right.

Having an open mind, or 'faith,' is the other side of this coin. Everyone has a certain amount of it, in various things. It is only interrupted by the same threshold of plausibility. How much confidence are you willing to invest in a tangible or conceptual thing without supporting evidence? If you hear an audible difference in your system, better or worse, brought forth by any kind of product, that doesn't make the difference real, nor the believer right.

The argument then lies not among two opposing sides afterall, because we all invest a certain amount of faith and demand a certain amount of evidence in our daily lives. It's a sliding scale that rests at a unique point for every individual.

P.S. I do find something wrong with being vindictive and petty in defending the indefensible. Neither side of this argument is 100% correct...