Hilarious! I know you're broke (and well you should be, you poor dirty dog, he didn't say) so I will fly you out, put you up, give you some money for food, pay your Uber, even pay your shipping to send your test gear. All you have to do is let me make an absolute fool of yourself, prove Synergistic is for real, and record for all posterity on video you begging to lick my sneakers and me saying, nah, not worthy.
Good call out and offer with confidence and courage, thus anticipating and eliminating a lot of excuses to make it more possible.
Taking on the challenge will help to prove and settle some things, maybe. Not taking on the offer for what appears to be a ("put up or shut up") challenge, will be telling. Great advertising will result for the winner.
UAC United Audio Challenge, Round #1, ding-ding. Here comes the triangle choke!
Could turn this into a Pay-per-View thing. Get the Norwegians involved and have them produce a "slow TV" event where it all happens in real time, 24/7, from the time Gene steps out of his home until he returns.
Great way for Ted to handle this though. And given that Ted deals in product for the "initiated", and Gene's audience is far from being "initiated", to Gene's audience, Ted's product is an easy thing to call BS on. Ted produces product that is very much at the cutting edge of audio gear, so people have an easy time doubting its merit.
Would love to hear Gene say "$hiit, it works..."
I am going to direct this thread to my own purposes. I could care less about the video and argument with Gene.
As I have written two articles at Dagogo.com in regard to tweaks and methods that purportedly cause significant change to audio systems, such as break in, isolation, etc. I am publicly requesting of Synergistic Research and Ted Denny product to conduct informal testing/comparisons of the company's tweak products.
I invite Ted Denny and Synergistic to send me representative tweaks that are claimed to be efficacious. I will put them to the test using my informal methods, and will write up an article to appear at Dagogo.com. I should be able to have other listeners present during the testing, and can report on their perceptions as well.
i.e. place said tweaks on only one side of the system/room.
I suggest that I be sent a complement of the following:
XOT Carbon HFT
HFT acoustic treatments
I will place ALL of these on one side of the room/system and compare. One might think that if there is efficacy to such tweaks/products, then there should be an enormous shift, an unlistenable change to the system. I will determine if that is so. I have built and tuned hundreds of systems, and have a room with the sonic attributes of a mastering studio, so if there is a change, I will hear it.
If the system sounds as before, and does not exhibit profound, easily discernible changes, such as balance, tonality, center image shifting, perception of LF weaker/stronger on one side, etc. then the tweaks fail my Law of Efficacy.
If such things manifest themselves, then I am wrong, and would have to judge the benefit of said tweaks as having potential to pass my Law of Efficacy. I would publicly admit my error in judgment of the products.
I am willing to use myself as a willing participant in self-assessment and assessment of tweaks I have not used. I believe my methods to judge efficacy are strong, and would clearly lead to a dependable result - without cameras, flights, high res recordings, etc.
Of course, anyone with proper knowledge can test tweaks this way. I will educate as to the process.
So, is Ted Denny and SR going to send me their tweaks products, or not?
At RMAF several years ago Ted personally did a demo of the bowls on the wooden trellis, whatever it is called. The demo failed my Law of Efficacy miserably, and I told him so. I said the cables were interesting to me, and I would like to discuss a review. Ted said that the tweaks and cables were a set and would not be reviewed separately. I declined.
I am not interested now in reviewing SR cables. I wish to independently assess SR tweaks, ancillary items. If SR responds that these require the SR cables, then I will consider the tweaks to be nothing more than gimmicks.
I've been wonder if or how long it would take for a response to this guy.
I'm sure a $12M a year company can afford to invite Amir from ASR as well.
I would love to hear how condescending and dismissive they would talk, face to face, the way they do on video, but after actually listening with their ears not their machines.
Then send them both home with Synergistic Research t-shirts....
steakster, I do not wish to be terse with you. A review of some facts is pertinent, since you raised the topic of TEO cables. I wish to add some needed context in response to your criticism.
It seems you tried one type of the TEO ICs. The community will note that I never recommend demo of cables in isolation, i.e. for mixing in systems. It is a poor way to assess cables. I always recommend the proper method of assessment of cables is in entire sets - precisely as I reviewed the TEO cables. (If they would have a power cord, that, too would have been in the review). The fact that you did not get good results with them does not surprise me, given that you seem to not have used them as the manufacturer recommended, in a set, and that there can be quite a bit of variance in outcomes and preferences between systems.
In fact, it is quite easy to get far less than ideal results when mixing cables. It is not difficult for me at all to make a system sound as you describe by mixing cables, and I know the sonic properties of the ones in my possession so well that I can select the actual cable prior to achieve the sonic properties. So, the fact that a more diffuse and tubey sound resulted is not surprising to me.
Further, it seems you tried them in one system. I build many rigs with much gear, which obviously gives a much larger frame of reference to discuss the cables. I also worked over time with several TEO ICs, which do carry different sonic properties within their design parameters' limitations. I recommended the TEO cables because they can be used to set up beautiful systems. Use of the interconnects in isolation would not have the nearly capacity to reveal what he line of cables can do, and your use of a portion of them in one rig is not equatable to my use of the set of them in many systems.
Your comment has given me the opportunity to once again point out how the vast majority of audiophiles, and even many reviewers, do not use superior methods in establishing and evaluating systems. :)
Did you just use the word "terse"?
Trying to understand.
So, you are saying that the Teo cables need to be used throughout, as a system per the manufacturers recommendation.
Ted, recommends that his risers be used in conjunction with his cables - i.e. a system. And yet you do not accept that as a valid approach?
Synergy is kind of everything.
Its even in the companies name - Synergistic Research :)
Not trying to defend SR in particular, but I am trying to understand your methodology and how it applies to your redirection of the thread.
perki, my point was that you have not conducted a proper assessment, and do not have a global understanding of cables, if you have not used them as a set, and you have far less understanding of what they do if you have used them in only one rig, with one set of gear. I explained how variances in equipment and preferences affect results, and how I an intentionally make such things happen by mixing particular cables.
Tweaks are different; they either work or do not. Of course SR would promote them to be used with their cables as a purported improvement. that is not surprising. Is the claim made by SR that these only work with their cables? If so, then I would like to see that claim. I do not think that claim is being made; I believe they sell cable risers, footers, etc. to everyone.
If SR sells their tweak products to people who do not own SR cables, then they do not abide hard line with the idea that synergy is everything. Also, IF the products work, they may theoretically work in a superior fashion with other products. Simply because they were designed to work with SR products in no way means they could not yield superior results with other products - if they are efficacious. If the claim is that these tweak products must be used only with SR cables, then I question why they would be sold to others with different cables, and would question whether they are outright gimmicks. Of course, a nifty way to sell these products is to suggest that synergy will only occur if used with SR cables.
My question then would be, quantify synergy. Demonstrate the variances with your product in use of the tweaks as superior to use with other cables. By demonstrate, I mean show me with measurements. My comparison/testing is simply a pass fail, which can be done as I propose. If SR's argument is about "synergy", then I require evidence that the result is actually superior to use of the tweaks with other cables. A higher standard of proof is required for a claim of "synergy" versus operability.
I am interested in actual demonstrations/informal testing/comparisons of not only SR's tweaks, but ALL tweaks. I am not out to prove or disprove one company's products, but an entire class of products. I seek methods that actually work and are advantageous in system building, and I use products to show which work and which do not (or do so little as to be a waste of time and money).
I did not request fuses for a couple reasons; 1. I already vetted fuses in comparison/informal testing with other brands - and they passed the Law of Efficacy, and 2. I now have as reference the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifiers (pair; at times I use up to 8 channels of amplification with certain speakers; a new speaker on its way to me at the end of the month will accommodate six channels, and the Legacy Audio Whisper DSW Clarity Edition and Legacy EXTREME XD Subwoofers require 8 channels). The i.V4 Ultra review is finished and submitted for editing and technical proofing. It should appear in the not too distant future.
The i.V4 Ultra is a class D design - the community will want to keep their eyes open for that review! It's a momentous design and I make some bold predictions associated with it. The amp does not use traditional fuses, but has protective circuitry that resets, so fuses are no longer a necessary bother. I could test SR fuses in the Kinki Studio EX-M1+ Integrated Amp.
You guys are horrible , I thought you guys ate cheese and crackers all day listening to whisper pop, you guys are bloodthirsty, Gene is a bit of a doosh maybe a barbarous relic , I always thought he was at least trying to be genuine , trying to take some of the guesswork out and Help people out , need guys like this don't we? Off with his Head!!!! Put up or shut up Gene. Were coming to foreclose on your new Audioholics Perverted Tech House of ill repute! Im off to the audioholics site to voice my opinion, I want to see some sport and eat cheese and crackers.
Unless I'm mistaken, I have not commented on the performance on any given specific cable, or system of cables? Nor have I made any claim to having a global understanding of cables. I was merely asking for clarification as to why the entire signal path requires a singular cable manufacturers product in order to be able to ascertain its efficacy. And why a systemic approach is required in one instance and not in an other. And I think you said that Ted wanted the two reviewed as a "system"? He is the manufacturer, is he not?
I am very much enjoying your opportunistic and over the top self promotion.
Quite a segue from a discussion around a video where a manufacturer calls out a, not sure what to call Gene, oh right, a reviewer! A segue to where you are promoting a, wait for it, review of gear that is completely unrelated and irrelevant to the topic at hand. As an aside, didn't Krell have protective circuitry on there KSAs series amps back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, amps were powered by their own dedicated nuclear plant and cooled with by a nearby waterfall?
The comments on this challenge on their forum are exactly as one would expect...
For the most part, I don’t think this is going to change anyone’s mind about anything......
When entrenched, the human psyche, when under pressure, tends to become more entrenched. It’s a ’bite down harder’ kinda thing, a ’more tenacity required’ kind of function of the overall design.
Every now and then some folks do change their minds about things, but in their own way, in private ways and spaces, out of sight, in a good frame of mind ..where thinking clearly is possible....not in any environment where public face is involved.
Where as soon as public face is involved ...egos are involved... and then positions in the given monkey clan are at threat... as such considerations are notably built out of clan position aspects.
Individuals can be fine. They can get past the bodily created and carried issues. Groups? Groups...are a monkey mess, for the most part. Intelligent people in idiot groupings. Happens all the time.
The saddest things of all is if someone or some company creates a near perfect item or piece or whatever, an amp or a speaker or a cable or a DAC or cartridge or what have you...
..there is nowhere for it to go, to fit, to belong.
As everything extant is generally lopsided to some degree. These things do not exist in isolation, and they have to work with other pieces or components.
Then we add in the individual hearing part that is connected to all of this. How complex and individually driven, individually designed or built in the mind. How individual hearing is. Then the part about it being connected to general neural complexity or capacity of the given mind. So the variants (comparable to intelligence curves/plots) available in hearing... amount to some 7.6 billion variants.
Then the added point that we don’t really know all there is to know about humans, or hearing, or air pressure conversions to electrical signals, or measuring electrical signals with respect to what is important in audio and so on. All these subjects are still being explored and change in their fundamentals and available data to analyze, almost by the day.
Stone does not exist, it can't be written in stone, nothing is written in stone... as dogma/stone is the science and human advancement killer (dogma makes it go circular and dead), even though it (dogma) is a part of the experience of life, part of the irremovable rose colored glasses of human mind conscious thought, the mental intake and projection. Especially when in groups. Dogma is for societal constructs and has no place in science. Science is change, it is the buddhist walk down the road, the steps taken, the journey.
This (whole envelope of issues and scenarios in situ) is a recipe for disaster when it comes to agreement among clans or camps.
How I love shootouts at high noon! But alas they never seem to happen, or they happen but somehow wilt into something far less than spurs and sixguns. Teo_audio nailed it.
I will say - it appears there’s quite a lot of nastiness coming from both of these guys (Ted and Gene), and they seem to be bringing it on themselves.
And - anybody who thinks machine measurements are the only factors in acoustics and psychoacoustics fails to understand that in addition to the system itself and the measuring tools, there are at least five senses, a brain, and a consciousness involved.
Below is an interesting quote. I don’t quote this or cite this paper to say it’s proof or the last word on sound perception. I’m just offering it as one of many papers that point to human perception as a major factor in what we hear, beyond technically measured factors.
“This paper approaches auditory analysis from the standpoint of sound production. It argues that although air vibration produces sound, sound is not air vibration; and that exploitation of features of air vibration can hardly (if ever) lead to accurate understanding of the principle of the auditory mechanism in speech or music perception.”https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Body-Image-Theory-of-Sound%3A-An-Ecological-to-%23-Essien/...
Audioholics membership and participation will go up and synergistic sales will inch up.
It’s just one of those human things.
"I don’t care what they say about me, as long as they say about me."
There have been some studies done recently where the results seemed to illustrate that limited rewards cause the highest levels of energetic involvement/engagement, in people. That tenacity thing again. In all of it’s complex origins and outward expressions.
(The studies were partially tied to gaming on line, large player groups. Where something akin to the least rewards were tied to the highest levels of player participation. That dang monkey on the Serengeti plains keeps running the underlying biological carrier system)