Clever Little Clock - high-end audio insanity?

Audioari1: Sorry, but you'll pardon me if I have to assume you define "certain level of seriousness" the same way you defined "plausible" above. But, I do have to hand it to you -- only somebody capable of granting credulity in this matter could possibly read through this thread and then write your last sentence...LOL ;^)

Zaikesman, I am sorry, but I didn't understand anything you just said.

Hi Audioari1, I think Zaikesman is stating that your request to keep a level of seriousness & maintain credibility has been somewhat undermined by your last statement of keeping wise-ass comments to a minimum. I'm not really sure myself if your dead serious in regards to your posts or just trying to be humorous? Which is it? It's no big deal but I was trying hard to read into your posts which path you have taken. If I have misread Zaiksman, I'm sure he will correct me as well.

I really just want people to take two photos, one of them when they were young and another one that is current, and then put them both in the freezer. Then do some listening evaluation to determine if there was a sonic difference.

I believe that when something appears to be completely ridiculous, it is still important to remain open minded to test it, especially when the test is free. Remember when Consumer Reports claimed that Cervin Vega were the best speakers in the world and when Stereo Review wrote about how all interconnects sound the same?

I do admit that it is a ridiculous notion to think that keeping photographs in the freezer can change the sound quality of a system. But why not give it a try anyway?

Arggg...no worse killjoy than having to explain one's wise-ass comments, but you seem like a nice guy Audioari1. I'm just undecided about how sincere you are, because I assume your posts are totally on the level, which makes me question whether your threadhead was really a troll.

Regardless, you asked for it, you got it: Above you said you found the manufacturer's explanations "plausible". Then you equated this mysterious principle with the photos-in-the-freezer experiment, which you correctly described as seeming "ridiculous", "crazy" and "silly" -- not exactly synonyms of "plausible". Ergo, when you call for "seriousness", who knows?, you might actually be calling for jollity and snarkiness.

Anyway, I'm dead serious in my message, I'm just choosing not to write that way because the subject doesn't deserve it, and besides this way is more fun. In addition (oh the tedium, but we're almost done), you fail to notice that it's a little late in the day and therefore unintentionally funny to call for "wise-ass comments" to be kept to a "minimum" when they already comprise at least half the thread -- my inference being that this is evidence of someone having their head in the sand with rose-colored glasses on (to mix a metaphor and leave a participle dangling all at once), and not coincidentally that's exactly what's required to give any credence to frauds like the CLC and the nonsense "behind" it to begin with. Hope that helped...