Harmonic Resolution vs. Critical Mass RACKS? Sonic and Engineering Differences?

caesar

Active Member
May 31, 2010
2,933
0
36
#1
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?
 

kleinbje

New Member
Dec 21, 2012
151
0
0
CT
#2
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.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
8,857
46
48
London
#3
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.
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
 

stehno

New Member
Jul 5, 2014
545
0
0
Salem, OR
#4
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.
 

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,994
8
38
Manila, Philippines
#5
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.
 

stehno

New Member
Jul 5, 2014
545
0
0
Salem, OR
#6
That's just plain insulting stehno. Just go to market and prove yourself already.
Insulting to whom?

Obviously, the OP thinks something may be awry, otherwise he wouldn’t have posted his question. If per chance somebody knew or thought they knew something to be true or false, since when is it an insult to speak truthfully when asked? Or do you prefer that those whose opinions differ from your own remain silent?

BTW, I’m curious. How does "going to market" prove one’s self?
 

kleinbje

New Member
Dec 21, 2012
151
0
0
CT
#7
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
That is system tuning. Very different. These companies don't tune vibrations, they eliminate them either by dissipation as heat usually or by draining them away. In the case of SRA the designer used to work for Govt designing cloaking mechanisms for submarines, thus expertise in electronic noise reduction and vibration reduction. I believe HRS has similar credentials. I don't see much marketing hype at all from SRA, but I'm not big attendee of audioshows. It is a core part of my system and I have no desire to change it out. Well worth its exorbitant cost. I was very nervous it was snake oil as you cant really try a 300# rack in your home.
 

Elberoth

Member Sponsor
Dec 16, 2012
1,860
17
38
Poland
#8
Does the SRA still exist ?
 

JackD201

[WBF Founding Member]
Apr 21, 2010
10,994
8
38
Manila, Philippines
#9
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?
 

853guy

Active Member
Aug 14, 2013
1,161
0
36
#10
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?
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).”

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.
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
 

stehno

New Member
Jul 5, 2014
545
0
0
Salem, OR
#11
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?
I don't get it, Jack. 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? For example. If somebody reported that GMO foods are clearly unhealthy for consumption, who would you suspect might be insulted, if any?

Believe it or not, I've been rather reserved about potentially "slamming" manufacturers and especially buyers as I suspect I could have a field day in some of these threads. In fact, in my response above I deliberately omitted any details as to why it seems every vibration controlling mfg'er is all over the map because that would come across as insulting and arrogant and to be frank, I doubt anybody really cares much except to hear and do the same ol' same ol' and nobody wants their boat rocked. BTW, it was not I but Peter who opened that recent thread as he seemed interested to hear more about my unique approach to superior and extreme forms of vibration mgmt. It's not my fault dust starts flying when everybody and their brother instantly become vibration controlling experts and tries to slam me. But I've been at this for 15 years off and on and I know what I've got and I know what I'm doing - I think. And when the many insults are directed at me, (like 853guy below though he seems pretty tame today), especially by the pseudo sience types with tin ears, well, I'm not just gonna play dead.

My deliberately avoiding the tweaks and vibration sections of the forums for the most part should substantiate my reservations about slamming others. But it can be rather difficult to remain silent all the time especially when there's so much potential confusion and apparent contradictions by vibration "experts" including mfg'er's designs, their executions, and especially in their words.

The "secret sauce" as you put it is no secret although I may hold a thing or two back. I went to market back in 2010 when my technology was still much closer to its infancy and even though my design's performance even then was never an issue my marketing skills apparently were. To be honest, I misjudged a number of things about the industry. Maybe someday I'll give it another go. Since then I’ve continued my R&D efforts part time and perhaps doubled the performance potential my current version though at the moment I’ve no intention of dropping another dime toward that effort.

Nevertheless, whether in or out of the market, there are still absolute truths to defend and there’s still the dismal performance of every last playback system. As such, it's not always easy to sit idly by while some absurd claims are made about what constitutes proper or superior forms of vibration mgmt with seemingly apparent contradictions flying in all directions by mfg'ers, industry professionals, real science types, and enthusiasts alike.
 

stehno

New Member
Jul 5, 2014
545
0
0
Salem, OR
#12
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.
 

853guy

Active Member
Aug 14, 2013
1,161
0
36
#13
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.
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)

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.

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.

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.

(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.

(5) Post #11.
 
Mar 24, 2017
64
0
6
#14
BTW, I’m curious. How does "going to market" prove one’s self?
Because it allows people to compare your products against the others and determine if there is any substance to your wild claims. No one is taking your self serving words on their face, nor should they.

If you were sincere you wouldn't be commenting on anything until you can justify yourself, which you currently can't.

This is all basic stuff. At this point it doesn't sound you learned any lessons from your earlier failed efforts.
 

stehno

New Member
Jul 5, 2014
545
0
0
Salem, OR
#15
Hello stehno,

Me personally? Very interested in “real (…) in-person” performance.
Uh-huh. Let’s see about that.

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.
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?

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.
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.

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.
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.

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.
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.

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.
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.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,469
0
0
#16
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 ...:rolleyes:
 

853guy

Active Member
Aug 14, 2013
1,161
0
36
#17
Uh-huh. Let’s see about that.

You seem to enjoy using starw man arguments to try to make your points. For example.
Hello stehno,

Let me try and address as many of your points as possible since you took the time to write them, even inasmuch as I'm aware I think they are unlikely to profit either of us.

1. I’ve not owned a company for maybe 5 years now. You already know this but you play ignorant
Wasn’t aware of that. Please forgive me for assuming your company was a going concern. When you said you “Since then I’ve continued my R&D efforts part time” (Post #11), and given your LinkedIn page says “Dynamic Contrasts, LLC, August 2003 – Present (13 years 10 months) Manufacturer of racking systems, speaker stands, and mechanical conduits that incorporate quite possibly the most extreme forms of proper vibration management available for private or commercial use…”, I formed a conclusion based on the information available to me, but obviously that information is incorrect. Please accept my apologies. (Italics mine.)

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.
“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).” Did you say this?

3. Unwilling to take responsibility for any claims I’ve made? This is just nonsensical.
Do you stand by the above quote?

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?
No I can’t. The question is, given your claim is that no other product, innovation or combination thereof can approach the performance of your racks, are you willing to, in a real-world comparison to all other products, innovations and combinations thereof?

More straw man arguments. For example.

1. I exist as do my designs but again you play ignorant.
I don’t know how to respond to this, sorry.

2. I was in the marketplace for a time and you know this but you play ignorant. Where were you?
Watching cautiously from the sidelines as AE picked up your product and then ever since used products almost exclusively from SRA.

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.
Anecdotes. There’s a utility value to them, but they’re defined by their limits. Did ten or a hundred or a thousand people say they were “the best kept secret in high-end audio”? Perhaps they did. Is this any different than the tens or hundreds or thousands of people who say the same things about SRA, CMS or HRS? Is there something about your anecdotes that makes them any more credible than those coming from any other manufacturer?


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.
They would be subjectively perceptual, evaluated solely by listening to components playing music through them. And yes, by not having a distributor for your products (and by not being a company manufacturing anything), I am limited in performing a real world performance evaluation.

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.
I’m sorry you feel that way. If you like, I can simply ignore your attempts to jump into other manufacturer’s threads of which yours in omitted and discredit them nevertheless, but given you can’t “sit idly by while some absurd claims are made about what constitutes proper or superior forms of vibration mgmt with seemingly apparent contradictions flying in all directions by mfg'ers, industry professionals, real science types, and enthusiasts alike…”, is there any reason for us not to, or are you above the same critique when it comes to "absurd" claims?

3. Again I’m no longer a mfg’er and you know this but again you play ignorant.
Again, not according to your LinkedIn status. My apologies for believing something I read on the internet.

4. You imply only a current manufacturer is able to demonstrate a product’s performance. More nonsense.
You don’t have a distributor network, a current product, not an active company, is that right? Not sure how to respond here.

5. You claim you cannot perform an objective evaluation. More nonsense.
I cannot, no. Only a subjectively perceptual one. However, I do know a little about the systemic, algorithmic and methodological testing that SRA, CMS and HRS do that is objectively evaluated. That they manage to propagate that information without denigrating their competition is worth something to me, but perhaps not to you.

6. BS slogan crap I struggle to own? More nonsense. Especially since you cannot substantiate or prove anything you say whereas I can.
If you’ve not already, can you please tell me whether you still stand behind the statement on your home page quoted verbatim above. Thanks.

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.
Anecdotes. Again, useful, but no more useful to me than the thousands of other anecdotes gathered from other manufacturers websites and/or forum chatter.

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.
When I see AE pick up a component, tout its subjective performance, and then see no further mention of it, it makes me wonder whether it should be the type of product I should investigate, given that any investigation may not be worth my time, effort and money with so few examples existing in the real-world. With no dealer network, no distributor, and no continuing way of knowing what level of support I may be given in the future, that in itself is a risk too far for me, though I appreciate for others, it may not be.

But the main reason I haven’t reached out to you? Your attitude as manifest here displays an arrogance that I personally find problematic, especially as directed toward the above-mentioned manufacturers of this thread. In this industry, personal interaction is inevitable, especially when dealing with smaller, more specialised manufacturers. Perhaps your product is everything you say it is. The fact that you claim so, while denigrating the others mentioned in this thread is simply something I consider to undermine any desire to take you at your word, though again, there may be others whose thirst for performance at any cost may not dissuade them from doing so. Perhaps unfortunately, I am not one of them.

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.
So given that in your experience few-to-many don’t have the foggiest what real performance is, why invite me/us to your event? How would I evaluate whether or not I possess any “interpretative listening skills better than a child or a dog” since all I can bring is my perception, bound as I am to always only ever interpret things through it, since I have no other way of making sense of reality? By taking an ABX test before I come? Reading up on Olive and Toole? Agreeing with you about everything you claim and declaring it “the best kept secret in all of hi-fi”?

If the bar to accept your invitation is to prove I have listening skills the equal of yours, you may as well join Amir in whatever thread he posts in next issuing challenges to any who critique his thinking via ABX tests he’s already “passed”. The conceit is, if I hear what you hear, then you get to hold onto your existing world-view and can make the assumption I have “interpretative listening skills” and understand what “real performance” is. If I don’t, then you get to dismiss me as having skills deficient such that I cannot appreciate how good your product is. As far as holding onto your existing world-view as Amir is wont to do, that seems pretty convenient, right?

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.
Sorry you see it that way. Given the irony of celebrating the critique of Amir’s intellectual (dis)honesty when it suited your world-view but need to call it into question now that I’m critiquing yours, I’ll refrain from repeating what I’ve already written, since I’ve said it as clearly and concisely as I can.

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.
Stehno, unfortunately, I’ve exhausted my interest in continuing beyond this point (as I'm sure I have, everyone else's). I’ve tried to articulate my thoughts on your attempts to jump into other manufacturer’s threads and discredit their products, and I think I’ve said more than enough here.

The “straw man” thing…? Again, my attempts to pursue a discussion with you on intellectual honesty were very deliberately centred around your words. I was only quoting you, and specifically, what’s on your site. If your perspective is that I’ve inflated those beyond what was intended then I can only apologise for misreading your snide attempts at discrediting other manufacturers for “BS slogan (…) crap” in light of your own claims as something other than what you intended.

If indeed I am guilty of straw man arguments, again, I find it curious these objections were not raised in the critique of Amir’s intellectual honesty, but you choose to use them here in defence of yours. I’m not in a position to evaluate why you’ve been so selective in doing so, other than I can only guess it suits the existing narrative you’ve written of yourself. I won’t speculate beyond that.

That you see me as someone with “ulterior motives” is again, curious, given A) you have a product to defend - irrespective of current availability - and have done so in a thread specifically targeting other manufacturers; and B) you never questioned them when I was engaging Amir, but conveniently bring them up when questioning you. As a private citizen with no vested interest in the design, manufacturing, distribution or selling of audio equipment, wanting to obtain the best possible performance relative to my perception and financial means, and participating in this forum both to gather information toward possible future purchases and exercise my right to write whatever the hell I want, I’m not sure I have any motive other than the one I hope is explicitly clear: Conversations in which intellectual honesty is a shared currency.

I’ve questioned yours, and you’re now questioning mine. The difference between you and me is that I’ve made no claims about performance about anything outside the finitude of my perspective, because I will always be bound by it, and its finitude. Given your “physical and mental limitations are infinite” and mine are not, I’m not sure a discussion on the issue of intellectual honesty is even possible, as it seems to be proving here.

I won’t be sending you a PM. And no, I won’t be auditioning your system. Consider this exchange a bridge burnt in which my once passing interest in your design is a pile of ashes in which the designer chose to double-down on his bias, accuse the messenger of hidden agendas, set a self-serving challenge in questioning the listener’s ability to discern differences, and refuse to acknowledge these things in light of denigrating other manufacturer's products.

Good luck, stehno. The world needs innovative solutions, and I’m grateful there are many others from manufacturers whose conduct is unlike yours.

853guy
 

853guy

Active Member
Aug 14, 2013
1,161
0
36
#18
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 ...:rolleyes:
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
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
8,857
46
48
London
#19
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
Frantz does keep us intellectually honest on analog/digital and class D, though when he says trio's bass horns are cones I do think moderators should police his intake
 

steve williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
#20
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

It is the preference of the admin staff as well. You are all adults and unless something so egregious is posted by a member that prompts action the admin team feels that adults should possess social skills that allow for situations such as these to run their course without random but always predictable posts such as the one posted by Frantz and IMO appropriately addressed here by 853guy
 

About us

  • Founded in 2010 What's Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing