Brave man, McGowan...

Why, are you afraid I will point out the lack of details in his post, no mention of if or how many times they swapped back and forth the cables to validate the change, that I will suggest the P20 wasn't doing its job or perhaps that the P20 has some fundamental issues exacerbated by load cables, that I will predict this "experiment" will never be repeated in a forum/method that allows us common folk to validate the results, or that I will point out that I don't actually mention power cables in my posts, but do mention heavy feeds from your breaker panel .... or all of the above?

More likely I wouldn't have posted at all in this thread, but since you felt the need, for whatever reason to bring up my name ....

dill949 posts11-09-2019 10:16pmLet's hope atdavid doesn't find this thread ...    😎

Yes, pretty much you said you have the maturity of a 12 year old.

dill950 posts11-10-2019 12:57pm- Let's hope atdavid doesn't find this thread ...    😎

- Enough said ....

The first official "Technical/Engineering" university was in Czechoslovakia and predates anything in Germany by a few generations and it is likely that future German ones modelled after the Czech one. Specific Military engineering academies with formalized curriculum opened as early as the late 1600’s in France. Prior to that formalized engineering concepts were taught to military "engineers" and architects (which lead to civil engineering). The word engineer dates back to the middle ages. Facts do matter.

I actually do talk to people at my local physics departments. Universities often can provide access to advanced test equipment at reasonable rates, and they are more than happy to participate in joint industry research to keep a grad student busy if it does not distract from their primary research. While the bleeding edge theoretical physics gets the media glory, much of the work is in more mundane areas. I am also fortunate to have the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in my backyard and often attend their public lectures as well as at the University of Toronto.

Almost invariably, what is at discussion is what happens at the smallest scales, the largest scales, or at the very extremes of speed, and how robust current models are for "regular" problems similar to how Newtonian mechanics is extremely accurate except when dealing with objects approaching the atomic scale, or very high speeds. Anything in audio would be a "regular" problem. To suggest that unknowns in the current models and understandings of physics are responsible for perceived sonic differences in some products amounts to "special pleading", especially when there is no evidence that any of these products illustrate properties not explained within the framework of standard models.

As well, conceptually, scientific "theories" are very robust and don’t equate to casual use of the word "theory". They have been rigourously developed and extensively tested, and the only thing often preventing them from being "fact" is the extreme rigour of proving they are correct in all cases. Those "theories" are responsible for all our fancy gadgets, the satellites in space, and any number of things more complex and rigourous than audiophilia.
p.s. see #3: https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/

To understand how science works.. and not attack everyone with ’facts’. As facts are for engineering and this is exploration, the realm of science, which has no facts, only theory. The word fact is a common misconception of the nature of reality and has no place in science. (go ask the entire professorial staff at any university physics department)

Some say that the first person we need to change is ourselves.

teo_audio1,258 posts11-27-2019 9:47am

We’ve really got to try and get past these ’kill all whom I disagree with in order to achieve MY peace’ undercurrents of projections that are masquerading as solutions --- that run rampant in humanity.

You clearly have no interest in learning from me, and what speakers I have would only tell you my personal preference, not what you like, so almost meaningless, but you keep fishing. Let me know if your line breaks or your hook gets snagged.  And ... whatever speakers I have, is meaningless to any of the discussions I have participated in or the comments I have posted.  Similarly, what or who I consult too has little meaning.

You can either refute/argue with the content of my statements or you can't. Who I am, what I am, what equipment I own, is totally meaningless. However, if you are so curious, I think if you go through all my posts, there may be some hints about my room. Caution though, as has been told to me, I make a lot of posts  :-)

Teo,

Your statements about "engineering" say more about you, than about engineering. You seem to have this deep seated hatred for the field. I suspect this has less to do with engineering, and more to do with engineers being the most likely people to call you out when you post things that are not supportable or factual. That is not because they are "linear" thinkers, but because they are capable of non-linear thinking which allows them to pull together diverse knowledge and apply it to new situations, real or imagined.

And contrary to your claims that this forum is "intertwined with exploration", that "exploration" is often akin, to use your analogy, to "finding the new world", and "proving the earth isn’t flat", when the rest of us have already moved on to trying to reach the stars. The lack of "questioning" or even a desire of basic understanding illustrated by a small but vocal group certainly illustrates my point.

And contrary to all your claims, science never says "trust me", but encourages deep understanding, verifiable experiments and measurements. It is not engineering that provides a basis for refuting the claims, of say, you and your cables, but science in general. Science would never simply accept your claims. Science would insist on proof, proof via measurement. Yet, you have no proof of any of your claims do you? If you did, you would gladly publish that proof. Don’t blame engineering for your lack of proof, blame scientific method for insisting on it.


p.s.  No, not all others, but perhaps a loud minority. On the other hand, many appreciate that people like me are willing to call our questionable claims, and not just cower when attacked, usually incessantly.

and you hit this mark and walk this dogmatic projecting walk all the time, incessantly so...to the point of notable nausea for all others...

And see, here is thyname, clearly illustrating my posts.

1) I never call something "snake oil". I state, very clearly, why I think a claim is false and where appropriate will expand (even offering verifiable information or links to things supporting my claims).

2) The rest of your post is nothing but both a "call to authority", a "strawman" and an "ad hominem".  As opposed to addressing what I say, you attempt to attack me, claim to win an argument by stating something irrelevant, and attempt to claim authority because you have spent a fair amount of money on equipment (that you have placed into a far from ideal room).

thyname OP490 posts11-28-2019 11:05amAtdavid Ethan: But you never teach anything! You just slam whatever anyone else posts as snake oil. You refuse to even post your current setup, for some stupid “insurance” excuses.

So let’s get started, first thing first: what speakers do you have? I am eager to learn from the “pros”

Teo,

You put a lot of words down on paper, but alas, can’t back most of it up. You equate civil engineering and basic electrical engineering to all engineering disciplines, which shows a lack of your knowledge, not a lack of creativity on the part of engineers.


The few studies that have looked at intelligence versus course of study have put Electrical Engineers near the top of the list, far above general sciences, and matched only by those in the sciences at the university faculty level on average. There is also a correlation between higher intelligence and creativity, so your generalization that engineers, most of those in the audio industry being electrical engineers, not being creative in their approach and being "linear minded" has no basis in fact.


Very few of those who have a background in electrical engineering work on "life critical" things restricted by the bounds of "regulations", such as electrical power systems. Most work in unbounded rolls as problem solvers. If you think the average person with a "science" degree uses more creativity and non-linear thinking in their roles, you don’t have any evidence to support it. There is a reason why those with educational backgrounds in engineering are many of the most prolific inventors.

Teo_audio,

And one last point w.r.t. "out of my depth". If I am out of my depth, then why do you, and others attack --- Me ---, not the things I say, but --- Me ---.  If the things I said and say were so clearly wrong, you would clearly and concisely address the things I say that are wrong. You don't though. You attack me.

Teo_Audio


Actually you do attack engineering all the time. You seem to do it in most posts. Faraday was born in 1791. It was not uncommon for someone not to have a formal education at that time. What relevance does that have?  He spent most of his life performing Formal scientific work, that he published for review by his peers. He used formal scientific methods, he made measurements. He did not simply makes claims and say "trust me".

Reading your posts, the point of them appears to be egoistic. Critically they lack substance most of the time, so other than to support your ego, why do you make them?

This is an interesting "claim" below. If I am "out of my depth", then why are people like you unable to specifically point out where my statements are wrong and use anything but "you are wrong" when doing it, never backing it up with anything meeting a respectable standard of "information" or "proof".  One of the few who argued with relevant information curiously enough, at the time grouped me in with thyname, uberwalz, etc.   

You are out of your depth in many areas, and you can’t see it... or refuse to see it.

Who cares how many posts I make. It is my time. I can choose how I make use of it. Given the lack of anything useful in many of your posts, why do you post at all?   What service do you think you perform here by arguing with me, while not providing any evidence to support the claims of your products?

thyname,

If you spent time in threads that were not just tweaks, you would know that I don’t just say "don’t do that". But again, and --- Y O U ---- still do not understand this. Either address what I post, or don’t, but I am not going to entertain attacks on me, or meaningless attempted calls to authority, or straw-mans.

And you specifically I have no interest in dealing with, just like I had 0 interest in dealing with you on FB. You creep me out.

If you were not so lazy and narrow in your reading on here, you would know (and should know) that I have views that are both contrary to and agree with the divisive sides on here.