If you know that a user is a dealer and they fail to disclose and attacks other users because they make a point against their interest, do you expose the user?
I know of a gentleman here that continuously posts and goes after people and does not disclose who he is.
Having perused all available documentation pertaining to this forum, it would appear that there are NO disclosure requirements incumbent upon contributing parties.
but i believe there are many folks here who will not, do not do this
and it’s fine for us in the know - the emperor’s have no clothes: but an awful lot of people out there often aren’t aware that they are actually participating in an advertorial..
Ted is open about his company affiliations only when it suits, and of late has been carrying out a lot of what submariners refer to as ’silent running’
Evidence of his behaviour (including that which relates to the OP’s allegations) has recently been removed, as mentioned in the previous post.
wrt MC and Townshend, one wonders whether a major factor determining his appointment to that position was his capacity to act as an online ‘influencer’ ?
not a problem as long as he makes his commercial interests clear before making any ‘influencing’ statements on public forums or publishing reviews in the public domain.
Lately, I've given up on it due to the effort it takes and I don't want to have the mods spend all their time on something so small a matter, so sometimes I post what I did, above. The offenders know it and as a result, those in the thread can appreciate it.
so you see something, make an assumption, and in your role as judge, jury and moral guardian of the the’’Gon decide to chastise and publicly ‘out’ someone whom you believe has offended your fine upstanding moral code.
@nonoiseright after my post requesting a desist, you post
Amazing how some posts get deleted and others stay up. Nothing's going to change around here as long as there are thin skinned people who like to speak their mind but censor others.
All the best,
Nonoise
then you post
I've had posts reinstated by contacting the mods to have them take a good look at the posts and how they fit it with the context of the thread and not differ with others. Lately, I've given up on it due to the effort it takes and I don't want to have the mods spend all their time on something so small a matter, so sometimes I post what I did, above. The offenders know it and as a result, those in the thread can appreciate it.
I took that as referring to the previous post - me the offender. If it wasn’t and I got my knickers in a knot I sincerely apologise.
No communication has been made by me with moderators in an attempt to censor any post made on this thread. If posts have been removed this has been done so by the author or at the behest of another party.
the allegations of censorship on my behalf are both baseless and malicious. A request was made to desist. Period.
Ted wanted to cover his tracks, and as thread OP he got to decide if they were permanently deleted.
One thread I remember was really funny - he got on the bandwagon about simplifying systems, when the 4th poster remarked that it was all a bit much coming from somebody who owned a company that sold nothing but tweaks. Needless to say that was the last post - thread closed.
Ted has demonstrated time and again that he will say or do anything to promote his business interests. The truth is just another commodity which is to be traded in the market place.
Ultimately, his life will reflect the values he espouses.
Ivor was a little on the assertive side for the suggestions you proposed
trolley and a hockey mask, perhaps.
had a thing going about digital watches impacting sound quality, and got really pissed off in a demo once when a guy behind him secretly removed a jacket to reveal an armful of watches that he failed to detect
You would be better off educating the folks here by explaining how you developed the products you sell and how they can help improve the sound of the reader’s systems.
not really - on his website all he does is demonstrate that he hasn’t got a friggin’ clue what ‘quantum tunnelling’ actually is, but that magic Q word sells stuff..
associating bad pseudo-science with subjectivism only weakens its stance. If your cables sound good, they sound good, no need for fairy tales..
As for the lies about me taking down my threads, this is false as I have proven with the links above.
so you leaned on the mods just like I alleged - same outcome, makes no difference Ted.
YOU REMOVED THE POSTS, using a third party instead of an iPhone.
And we all know why.
At no time was I pushing my products, but rather, making it obvious the fallacies inherent in the objectivist approach.
This is total BS, and the advertorial platforms disguised as threads you removed contained evidence of you doing exactly that, hence. you scurrying to the mods to get them nuked once this thread started gaining momentum,
Pathetic Ted, pathetic. It’s people like you who give subjectivists a really bad rap and make us an easy target for objectivist propaganda. We don’t need people like you out there putting profit before ethics. Get you cash machine off our bandwagon..
A lot of what engineers have labeled as "distortion" is actually rich, full sound.
@jmkrajnik They are usually correct on that matter- ’full, rich sound’ is often caused by a 2nd harmonic, and that is the tonality that the ear assigns to it.
Most amps made today are not high end amps so that number is probably pretty close!
The distortion signature is the ’sonic signature’ of any amplifier. If the amp sounds ’thin and dry’, its likely because the 2nd and 3rd harmonics are suppressed, allowing the higher ordered harmonics to be unmasked, IOW audible to the ear; this despite an otherwise very low THD.
Distortion is inescapable. Whether the designer recognizes the significance of that fact is a different matter. The ear uses the higher ordered harmonic to sense sound pressure, and so its keenly sensitive to them as well- and this is also inescapable and also often ignored- witness the last 60 years of bright and harsh solid state amps.
Since distortion is a fact of life, the pragmatic designer will design a circuit which makes the least objectionable distortions- and that will be the 2nd and 3rd harmonics, which is why tube amps often sound smoother and more detailed (in a way that I don’t yet understand, somehow the 2nd and 3rd harmonics assist the ear in winnowing out detail, quite unlike the higher orders) than 99% of all amps out there.
The obvious implication is, if you want a solid state amp or if you want an amp that is significantly lower distortion but is still musically involving, the amp will have to have a distortion signature similar to a tube amplifier while at the same time being considerable lower overall. This means that the lower ordered harmonics will still have to predominate, allowing the higher ordered harmonics to be masked.
IF the amp has a distortion signature of this type it won’t matter if its tube or solid state. This stuff does show up in measurements and you can be completely objective about it- if you cause your hand to move to take the measurements in the first place and you have the test equipment to do so. This sort of stuff rarely shows on the spec sheets!
Alternatively if the test equipment is lacking (for example you can measure the THD but you can’t show the various harmonics) the listening is a less accurate method of ascertaining if the design is working.
Here are two things a successful design will need to sound musical:
1) the distortion signature will be consistent from 20Hz to at least 15KHz. If there is insufficient gain bandwidth product to support the needed feedback to conform to this requirement, then no feedback will be used.
To be clear there is nothing wrong with feedback provided enough of it is present (>35dB at all frequencies). The problem with feedback is you need a lot of it and that means you have to have a lot of gain bandwidth product to support it. Most amp designs in the last 60 years simply don’t have enough of either so they sound bright and harsh.
Put another way, in the bass region most solid state amps have plenty of feedback and so play bass rather well. But when you get to 7-10KHz things are different- the feedback is vastly reduced since the gain bandwidth product won’t support it- and so distortion goes up. You can verify this by graphing distortion vs frequency and its plain to see. Most amp manufacturers avoid publishing this sort of thing...
Feedback will by its very nature bifurcate (double) frequencies due to non-linearities at the feedback node. Thus an amp with feedback will have harmonic and inharmonic information (also due to IMD caused by the feedback node) as its noise floor (this is not new information; Norman Crowhurst was writing about this 60 years ago). IF you can apply enough feedback to the design without introducing stability issues (oscillation) then the design can clean up this bit in the process and its all good.
2) the distortion signature will be benign as I’ve already described.
To be sure there are no successful amps out there for which there was no objective testing. They simply don’t exist. There are successful amps out there for which the testing was quite minimal. But there is always some bench testing.
You can see from my comments above that this is all knowable. Whether one has the intention to know it is a vastly different matter! Since 99% of amps are built to make money it follows that the extra attempt to make the amp sound like music (per the distortion characteristics I outlined) will not be taken.
If that intention is there, cost will not be much of a variable. Intention is what drives high end- not cost. So instead of being built to make money, an amp can also be built to sound like music.
Astroturf, I noticed you don’t have a picture of your stereo, why am I not surprised? And your 25 years as an electrical engineer, does not disapprove the fact it’s clear as day to hear the effect of digital cables, and other things you fail to grasp. High End audio is subjective at the end of the day
if you choose to ignore the allegations of the OP and condone the conduct of Mr Denney, which he has attempted to obliterate from history, so be it.
There is a lot about Mr Denney’s conduct that gives subjectivism a very bad rap and makes it an an easy target for critique: deceit dishonesty and lies do not provide for a sound philosophical foundation and make it very difficult for others who may have a subjectivist viewpoint to gain credibility.
The post by @atmasphereis most informative, and in my opinion was far too valuable to leave locked away.
The second post merely confirms what Denney denies in this thread - that he got personal with the OP.
no, not at all, I am not an admin and have no special powers, I think you are entirely correct. Only the OP or admin can remove them. I think the latest deletion goes some way towards confirming your suspicions.’Gon is very much a commercial enterprise.
You can only delete you own posts and threads. You can make a complaint to the administrators and request that a post other than your own be removed, and from the evidence @Ted has provided you can request that a complete thread be removed.
By OP I meant original poster of the post, not poster of the thread, I think that is where the confusion arose.
you ain’t seen thumper’s wayback machine…….everything Ted even thought about…fully able to re-post like it was never nuked. Once you put something up on the internet it’s NEVER gone..
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
