I think you need to include silent running audio in this discussion. Changed my system for the better. Quieter backgrounds, much greater imaging specificity and solidity. Cant vouch for CMas on HRS and SRA. Highly recommended.
Marketing BS aside, anyone sonically compare these 2 brands? Anyone understand the engineering claims?
Or are people who are buying these operating purely on faith?
In high-end audio, it's pretty difficult to set the marketing BS aside. What's the latest BS slogan several companies employed lately, "the evolution of a revolution" or some such crap as that? With slogans like these, could it be the industry is running out of hyperbola?
To answer your question, in my opinion people are buying such products pretty much on faith alone. Yes, I pretty much understand the engineering claims and I don't agree with them. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest such designs are manufactured on little more than faith.
That's just plain insulting stehno. Just go to market and prove yourself already.
Know three people who preferred Shun Mooks to SRA they already owned. One bought many Shun Mook diamond resonators to add to his SRA rack. I compared only in one system
To answer your question, in my opinion people are buying such products pretty much on faith alone. Yes, I pretty much understand the engineering claims and I don't agree with them. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest such designs are manufactured on little more than faith.
In high-end audio, it's pretty difficult to set the marketing BS aside. What's the latest BS slogan several companies employed lately, "the evolution of a revolution" or some such crap as that? With slogans like these, could it be the industry is running out of hyperbola?
To answer your question, in my opinion people are buying such products pretty much on faith alone. Yes, I pretty much understand the engineering claims and I don't agree with them. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest such designs are manufactured on little more than faith.
I would say the manufacturers and their buyers thats who. You've been slamming left and right for a while now. In the meantime, you've opted to keep your secret sauce for yourself, which is fine if you at least made your stuff available. In effect you're saying "Everybody sucks but me and the guys that got my racks and/or heard them and wrote in their praises". Where's the benefit in that to the population outside your subset?
Perhaps that’s because you beat them all to it several years ago by claiming: “No other product, or innovation or any combination thereof can come even remotely close to the performance of even a humble playback system using (my rack).”
And yet you ask us to believe your non-commercially available rack outperforms everything else based on… objective data? Independent testing? It’s easy to have faith in something or someone where credibility engenders placement of faith in the first place. Without credibility, faith - irrespective of whether it's a mustard seed or a mountain - provides no reward, just perpetual, hollow disappointment.
Be well, stehno.
853guy
I've asked no such thing, silly goose. Although I hope a few might question the status quo, I'm not that dumb to think I can convince anybody of anything over the internet. That effort is reserved for the paper tigers. And contrary to what you may believe, real performance can only be demonstrated in-person.
BTW, I’m curious. How does "going to market" prove one’s self?
Hello stehno,
Me personally? Very interested in “real (…) in-person” performance.
But in the cases of the manufacturers mentioned in this thread - of which your company is not one - all of them have a distribution model allowing real-world comparative listening tests, aside from any marketing hype or pseudo-scientific rhetoric they may or may not peddle. You? Just some self-inflated claims that you seem unwilling to take responsibility for, despite slamming the specifically-mentioned manufacturers claims for “BS slogan (…) crap”(1), almost as if you were oblivious to the fact that of all of the claims made, yours are vying for first place in terms of unsubstantiated hyperbola.
Why? Because questioning the status quo is one thing(2), making claims that cannot be substantiated outside of the rhetoric of the one making them is another.
I have no interest in insulting anyone. Only a desire to be in a position to evaluate any claim made by any manufacturer based on the merits of its real-world performance alone, and if not, then at least by a degree of objective evaluation. I can do both/and for the manufacturer’s products discussed in this thread. I can do neither/nor for yours. So that leaves me with… BS slogan crap you seem to struggle to own as the only thing you bring to this discussion.
So now we’re back to faith. I can have faith in the above companies because my “faith” can be tested by real-world evaluation. Even if they do not measure up to my expectations, at the very least they've provided a platform in which my expectations can be evaluated relative to my level of faith. You? Still just a guy on the internet who invented a time-machine that can transport us to new dimensions of reality (“twice the performance”)(3), except that at the moment, it’s still in the R&D stage. Of course.
Look, I get your predicament. On the one hand, you genuinely believe your have something unique that stands to offer a bona-fide sonic benefit to the consumer via techniques, potentially, no one else is exploiting. On the other, you’re aware of your past mistakes in approaching the market, and are not willing to invest the capital required to allow anyone outside of yourself to validate your claims.(4)
More straw man arguments.
Do you see my predicament? One the one hand, it’s entirely possible your hyperbolic claims are equivalent to their respective real-world performance gains. On the other, I can’t evaluate any of your product’s real-world performance gains.
More straw man arguments.
So if you’re willing to celebrate when some of us question claims made when intellectual honesty and scientifically robust credibility are at stake, is there any less reason for us to ask for something beyond mere rhetoric in the evaluation of yours? At the moment, your credibility is only as good as your words, and based on those and those alone - because we have nothing else aside from them - they come across as nothing more than the “BS slogan (…) crap” you seem so keen to point out in others with skin in the game. You? You have none.
Perhaps you it best when you said “If something isn't what it's portrayed to be, why should anybody consider it an insult if another tries to shed some light on that?”(5)
Right now, the only one portraying something that can’t be substantiated is the something you claim to have made, and the light’s shining on you.
More straw man arguments.
Enjoy your weekend,
853guy
(1) Your words, post #4.
(2) Great! Love the idea of challenging the status quo. Oh, I can’t evaluate the efficacy of the alternative that claims to do so? Back to he said/she said.
More straw man arguments.
(3) Your words, post #11.
(4) Outside of your system. In other words, come and hear my system. Well, the efficacy of any rack I may consider needs to be done within the context of (a portion of) my system. Can’t do that? Well, shucks, back to the status quo.
More straw man arguments.
(5) Post #11.
Uh-huh. Let’s see about that.
You seem to enjoy using starw man arguments to try to make your points. For example.
1. I’ve not owned a company for maybe 5 years now. You already know this but you play ignorant
2. Self-inflated claims is another. Especially since I’ve not made any here. But then again, they are only self-inflated if they are untrue. And since you’ve already been exposed to many of the claims others made about my technology when it was more toward its infancy, it would seem if anybody is making self-inflated unsubstantiated claims, it’s you.
3. Unwilling to take responsibility for any claims I’ve made? This is just nonsensical.
4. Oblivious to the fact that all claims I’ve made are unsubstantiated hyperbola? This is a fact, eh? Where’s your proof? I can prove my claims. Can you?
More straw man arguments. For example.
1. I exist as do my designs but again you play ignorant.
2. I was in the marketplace for a time and you know this but you play ignorant. Where were you?
3. Moreover, you’re already well aware from previous threads you’ve poked me that essentially everybody (not many) who experienced my primary designs or even my accessories that I licensed to another component mfg’er claimed their experiences were “the best kept secret in high-end audio” or similar claims.
More straw man arguments. For example.
1. You imply that you actually have an interest in comparing marketplace racking systems but I’m restraining you from making objective evaluations. I suspect this is nonsense.
2. The only time you ever reach out to me is your attempt to condemn any statements I make as you seem to follow me around this forum from time to time with that one purpose in mind. These are considered at least by me as intentional insults.
3. Again I’m no longer a mfg’er and you know this but again you play ignorant.
4. You imply only a current manufacturer is able to demonstrate a product’s performance. More nonsense.
5. You claim you cannot perform an objective evaluation. More nonsense.
6. BS slogan crap I struggle to own? More nonsense. Especially since you cannot substantiate or prove anything you say whereas I can.
7. You know I have enough feedback from my dusty website that should substantiate most any claim I make. Much of the more significant feedback that can be traced to other forums. More nonsense.
In contrast to your straw man arguments:
1. I and my designs still exist and in a real world application, a rather humble but extremely well-thought-out playback system that should easily outperform any system of your choosing.
2. I have several designs in my possession collecting dust that I could make available to any interested party. Moreover, if you had a squirrelly configuration and needed a custom design, well, for the right price I might be willing to provide you a custom design.
3. I have feedback on my dusty website going back 12 years or more. You know this but play ignorant yet again.
In other words, I don’t recall ever rejecting your inquiry about an in-person demonstration or to borrow a loaner.
I also will be hosting an event tentatively on June 3 for a group of audiophiles entitled “Building on the Right Foundation” demonstrating the results of superior forms of AC mgmt as well as superior forms of vibration mgmt. It’s kind of a continued series of events. Several years ago, the subtitle of one such event was “Redbook CD – Perfect? Sound Forever”. demonstrating for the attendees that the lowly Redbook CD contains far more music info than the industry ever knew and that this lowly rated format that high-end audio has been trying to destroy for the past 17 years is more than sufficient for all aspects of the music industry, including the high-end sector. This time around, the subtitle is “ The End is Closer Than Its Ever Been".
Got any plans for June 3rd? Consider yourself invited? But if you do consider accepting my invitation, this is probably as a good time as any to be intellectually honest with yourself about whether or not you possess any interpretive listening skills better than a dog or child, otherwise it would be a waste of your time.
You very interested in real in-person performance? Based on all the above, along with your never asking even me a single question about real performance I’d venture either there’s no legitimacy to your statements or you have zero imagination to make that happen. In fact, given your many attempted slams against me here and elsewhere, I’d even go so far as to speculate you’ve not the foggiest what real performance is and you really don’t care. Maybe I’m wrong but I see no evidence to the contrary.
More straw man arguments? Besides playing the intellectual honesty card routinely you now play a scientifically robust credibility at stake card, a phrase I’d guess you don’t even understand. You’re sounding more and more like Amir or one of the many other pseudo science types.
I see you’re quite fond of using straw man arguments to substantiate your intentions. It’s not uncommon for somebody with ulterior motives, such as yourself, to employ a strategic straw man argument here or there, but an over-abundance of straw man arguments really does little but make one look foolish as it exposes their real intentions. But it seems you follow me around here trying to make it seem as though I’m talking outta’ my ass. Yet, it seems clear to me that you're doing exactly that and at perhaps every turn.
But then again, who knows? Maybe I misread you and you you really are shopping for a racking system because you really are interested in real world, intellectually honest, scientifically robust, in-person performance and if so I apologize if I've been restraining you in your quest and I appreciate your frustration as you’ve obviously been kept in the dark way too long.
So shoot me a pm and let’s make this happen. At the very least, consider yourself invited to the June 3rd event or even another date for an in-person demonstration.
I’ll be waiting for your pm.
This has be going on for a while and it is not only in this thread. ad hominem is becoming more and more prevalent here and stehno is one of the regular perpetrator. he or she is far from the only one. Some, rather than debate the posts have taken a somewhat amusing stance of attacking the poster with alarming regularity. It is time that the WBF takes a step in righting this.
This reminds me somehow to the 80's Infiniti commercials, only with more vitriol .. the full car was never showed only a glance of it ... We know now how much better than anything Infiniti cars managed to be ...
Hello Frantz,
I appreciate your concerns. In being part of the forum, my preference is always for candid, robust discussion in which intellectual honesty is a fundamental foundation. Where it's lacking, I feel I have a valid position from which to ask for it. If you do not, then that's certainly your right. We can either have a membership who critique one another's attempts at communicating with a degree of intellectual honesty, or leave it up to the moderators to constantly police us as if we were children. My preference, as stated, is for the former.
Be well.
853guy
Hello Frantz,
I appreciate your concerns. In being part of the forum, my preference is always for candid, robust discussion in which intellectual honesty is a fundamental foundation. Where it's lacking, I feel I have a valid position from which to ask for it. If you do not, then that's certainly your right. We can either have a membership who critique one another's attempts at communicating with a degree of intellectual honesty, or leave it up to the moderators to constantly police us as if we were children. My preference, as stated, is for the former.
Be well.
853guy
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |