A suffiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
|
I will not accept if nominated and will not serve if elected.
|
It's not the current. It's the voltage.
|
The manual says the unit must be connected via the IEC connector. Let's see, why do they have an IEC connector? Hmmmmm....
Faint hearts neer won fair maiden. Besides rules are meant to be broken in this hobby, dear readers.
|
jazzonthehudson
As mentioned above, fuses impart a big signature. Again, it is trial and error. IME I find Audio Horizon’s Platinum Reference better than the SR Black, which is already very, very good. Furutech has great fuses as "entry level" ones but they wouldn’t combine well with fast systems.
As you can see from my other comments, I tried full looms (Audience, HiDiamond, High Fidelity Cables, just to name the last iterations) but never settled long on one brand. Through ever-tweaking - not just power but room correction and isolation/resonance control I am pretty close to "there"."
Damage control! Damage control! That's the second aftermarket fuse that's been judged better than the SR Black fuse, the other being the Audio Magic Beeswax. Can this be happening?!
"I am pretty close to "there."
That begs the question, how do you know when you are actually "there"? |
Stalker alert! It's time for the Jitter show. Is that the best you could come up with, Jitter? You're slipping.
|
Peter,
Your personal attacks notwithstanding, what you are saying actually makes no sense. You haven’t done the tests so how can you possibly know in advance what the results are? Duh! How can I tell when your lying? When your mouth moves.
|
pbnaudio
Geoff,
Because this would actually be a controlled test and if there is any repeatability this will clearly manifest it self. If the claim is to have any credibility then repeatability is a must. I know that something structured and with logic is not something you normally subscribe to - take your Teleportation tweak, Clever little clock, Aquarium Rocks in small plastic bags etc. you catch y drift I’m sure.
Think of it this way - one complete system connected to just one outlet that can be immediately replaced with another outlet without powering down the system, if any difference is produced by the outlet it will be obvious to anyone listening.
Gee whiz, Peter, you make it sound like you actually did the test. But you failed to deliver after many promises. That’s the only thing that’s obvious. Who cares about all your theories and obvious angst? You have no cred on the street.
|
pbnaudio
Heres the Jig again, lets see ion we can get this done - and Geoff if your as smart as you proclaim to be write the program for the PLC :-)
Oh, I can write the program. But as I already suggested, why make things so unnecessarily complicated and difficult?
|
pbnaudio
As mentioned in a post above I did start a test per say of AC outlets some years ago, just never finished it, all missing is a program for the Allen Bradley PICO controller PLC. The idea is that a complete system will be hardwired to this jig which features 8 different outlets including the ones you mention a few others and a elcheapo Homedepot one at $0.54 The inlet to the Jig will be hardwired directly to our electrical panel.
Whoa! Hey, I remember that outlet test. First it was, "things are a little hectic so the test will be next week." Then, it was like, "Uh, I’m still gathering outlets for the test." All very apologetic like. How time flies, seems like yesterday. 😀
PS It's really not difficult. You listen to them. It's not rocket science.
|
Wow, they’re coming in droves now. Who left the floodgates open?
So, let’s briefly summarize the naysayers’ position.
1. No one can hear the difference even if there is one.
2. Break-in disobeys the laws of physics. Just like directionality.
3. The argument surrounding break-in is like religion. One assumes that is supposed to be an actual argument against break-in being real. I guess that means God is not real either.
4. It’s all psychological. Expectation bias, placebo effect, self-fulfilling prophecy. Take your pick.
5. Nobody can keep track of the sound of his system for 200 hours or 400 hours or whatever because there are too many variables. So nobody can PROVE break-in is real.
The next thing you know one of these guys will try to hit one out of the park by declaring controlled blind tests would easily show break-in is not real and must be psychological.
|
It’s not like religion at all. The naysayers here don’t have any real arguments. They only call names. That’s the level of their argument. They whinny and bray. At least in religion there are two sides, somewhat on a level playing field, each with coherent arguments. Unlike in this discussion.
|
I suspect you’ll find his source is the little voice in his head.
|
wylmars OP
Yes, BAL was the language we all used at the start of my career. It is a very thrifty language in its’ use of memory. It required coding discipline, unlike today’s bloated high-level languages.
Ah yes, Art Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey and his very clever twist on the HAL moniker (i.e., H (i) A (b) L (m). I was sort like one of those primates throwing clubs ... more age dating!
Actually, Kubrick disputed the HAL-IBM connection theory and said HAL was simply the acronym for Heuristic and Algorithmic Language. If he had wished to attribute IBM somehow why didn’t he just name the devious computer something someone other than a cryptologist could discern. Something like say MBI-9000.
I started my career at age 16, using one of those clunky Friden desk calculators to crunch Lorenz transformation equations at Army Map Service. During lunchtime of course. 😀
|
I've determined you must be older than dirt.
|
I was trained in assembly language and Algol and in using computers with higher mathematics as well as statistical thermo. I worked for a while for the 1st PhD in Computer Science from U. Illinois Urbana who helped design the advanced computer in early 60s there used as the model for HAL-9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey.
|
geoffkait - Yes ... the greatest technology company, for which there wouldn’t be the technology companies listed ... all but one ... the one that started the computer technology and all the users and enablers of those enterprises listed. I’ll just leave it at that.
Whoa! The one that started the computer technology?! And all the users and enablers of those entries listed?! I’m intrigued. If you understand machine language you're one up on me.
😀
|
Whoa! What?! The world’s greatest technology company? What company could that be? Hmmm.....GE? IBM? RCA? Microsuoft? Apple? Hughes? Lockheed? Rockwell? Boeing? Motorola? Sony? Honeywell? Northrop Grumman? Samsung?
|
Does anyone know any Little Moron jokes?
|
