I may be wrong, but much to do about nothing seems to have generated when Sean interjected his post which, intended or not, suggested that the philosophy and/or design concept of Grand Prix racks was "scientific" as opposed to the "gimmickry and marketing" of "audiophile approved" racks. Since this thread dealt with Sistrum, there is no other way to interpret Sean's comments except to conclude that he felt that Sistrum racks lack scientific basis and are only audiophile approved, as if this were some kind of negative trait.
Though I've looked at the Grand Prix website before, I went there expecting to see something new in the way of specific technical data or scientific support for their products. Sadly, all I found was a mildly interesting definition of terms with a "white paper" link that was still under construction. I'm at a loss as to what technical data currently exists at the website that in any way supports any claim that they have to offer.
Since I found nothing there to support their position or of the specific test parameters that were referred to in the text, I have nothing tangible to offer on their claims. They may have supporting data - shake table test specs, duration periods, impulse amplitude, or XYZ parameters, but I found nothing.
In contrast, I have experienced Sistrum products in a controlled environment, my home. I've done listening evaluations that support the positive attributes that others have mentioned. I find the basic scientific premise behind Sistrum to be in agreement with my sonic experience.
I'm sure that Sean didn't intend for this thread to be sidetracked over inferences and suppositions. Barring any technical or experiential data suggesting otherwise, I'm at a bit of loss as to why he felt inclined to post as he did. However, I think he has made it clear that he has no personal experience to suggest that Sistrum's claims are untenable.
The most disturbing aspect so far has been the comments suggesting that personal experience is somehow too subjective to trust in any evaluation. This is audio, folks! Audio is subjective! Electronics can be objective within the limitations of the tests and test equipment that are available to date. However, the sonic "quality", perceived by the human ear, is the final test. To suggest otherwise is simply foolishness. If a comparison is not performed "side by side" so to speak, giving each item the best possibility to exhibit its sonic strengths (whether this may take hours or days or weeks), then how else is a comparison to be performed?
Preconceived ideas about a product can be useful I suppose. However, rarely do they benefit our sonic evaluations. We each look for certain aspects or attributes of a component to help with narrowing our focus to a manageable few for consideration.
Obviously, the specific triggers of interest can and will vary from person to person. It all depends on the "open mindedness" of the individual if he or she is able to set aside biases and give a product a fair evaluation before passing judgement.
Will one person's experience be true for all others? Of course, it won't. However, as more people come to share the same or similar experience and the experience level of the individuals of the group is considered, a greater measure of value may be assigned to the personal experiences as related to a particular product.
With this in mind, those on this thread who have experience with the Sistrum products and considering the level of the audiophile experience supporting such claims, I feel very safe in recommending the Sistrum products to those who might be in the market for racks and stands. Just one man's opinion.
Though I've looked at the Grand Prix website before, I went there expecting to see something new in the way of specific technical data or scientific support for their products. Sadly, all I found was a mildly interesting definition of terms with a "white paper" link that was still under construction. I'm at a loss as to what technical data currently exists at the website that in any way supports any claim that they have to offer.
Since I found nothing there to support their position or of the specific test parameters that were referred to in the text, I have nothing tangible to offer on their claims. They may have supporting data - shake table test specs, duration periods, impulse amplitude, or XYZ parameters, but I found nothing.
In contrast, I have experienced Sistrum products in a controlled environment, my home. I've done listening evaluations that support the positive attributes that others have mentioned. I find the basic scientific premise behind Sistrum to be in agreement with my sonic experience.
I'm sure that Sean didn't intend for this thread to be sidetracked over inferences and suppositions. Barring any technical or experiential data suggesting otherwise, I'm at a bit of loss as to why he felt inclined to post as he did. However, I think he has made it clear that he has no personal experience to suggest that Sistrum's claims are untenable.
The most disturbing aspect so far has been the comments suggesting that personal experience is somehow too subjective to trust in any evaluation. This is audio, folks! Audio is subjective! Electronics can be objective within the limitations of the tests and test equipment that are available to date. However, the sonic "quality", perceived by the human ear, is the final test. To suggest otherwise is simply foolishness. If a comparison is not performed "side by side" so to speak, giving each item the best possibility to exhibit its sonic strengths (whether this may take hours or days or weeks), then how else is a comparison to be performed?
Preconceived ideas about a product can be useful I suppose. However, rarely do they benefit our sonic evaluations. We each look for certain aspects or attributes of a component to help with narrowing our focus to a manageable few for consideration.
Obviously, the specific triggers of interest can and will vary from person to person. It all depends on the "open mindedness" of the individual if he or she is able to set aside biases and give a product a fair evaluation before passing judgement.
Will one person's experience be true for all others? Of course, it won't. However, as more people come to share the same or similar experience and the experience level of the individuals of the group is considered, a greater measure of value may be assigned to the personal experiences as related to a particular product.
With this in mind, those on this thread who have experience with the Sistrum products and considering the level of the audiophile experience supporting such claims, I feel very safe in recommending the Sistrum products to those who might be in the market for racks and stands. Just one man's opinion.