Have your say & ask the experts!

more 'snake oil'

431 replies [Last post]
Dynamight's picture
Offline
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 39
RE: more 'snake oil'

professorhat wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

But, that was soon remedied when your good self went on a little WHF shopping trip for a new BDP  Smile, when if I recall correctly (and my apologies in advance if I'm wrong), you demoed three players in three different shops on three different TVs before declaring that the PQ of the Marantz was much better. I know you're a very clever chap, but surely your memory isn't that good

At least he demoed them and made up his own mind, rather than just buying something somebody else told them was good.

I'm also fairly sure the prof's trip was before the BQ in question, but hey...

It was defo after the BQ, the following edition or the one after that I think.

Damn you and your argument-countering facts...

Curses, he was right. I guess the confusion on my part comes from the fact that we actually did that Savvy Shopper article before the BQ article was released (clearly we had to have done, in order to get it in the magazine for the following issue). The reason I remember this is I remember being surprised at the result (given my own experiences just a few weeks before!).

Dynamight wrote:

when if I recall correctly (and my apologies in advance if I'm wrong), you demoed three players in three different shops on three different TVs before declaring that the PQ of the Marantz was much better. I know you're a very clever chap, but surely your memory isn't that good

Yes, but I wasn't attempting to compare each player in each shop with each other - that would be ridiculous clearly (since as you say, each one was using a different TV for a start). I always had my existing Blu-ray player as a reference in each shop. So each new player was compared with my existing player side by side. In this way, I could make comparisons on the new player with my old player and then decide if the improvement was worth it from this.

The other part of this is, it was my decision to go looking at Blu-ray players, not WHFs. They didn't ring me up, ask me to look at a few players and in the heat of the moment I got carried away and purchased the Marantz! I'd wanted to upgrade for a while - applied for the Savvy Shopper and I was chosen mostly because I was local so neither of us would have far to travel. It was only after the initial phone call to see if I was interested in doing it that I made it clear I wanted to look at Blu-ray players (and this was all before that BQ article came out). WHF set up the auditions and documented the day, but it was my decision and mine alone (and yes, I did pay for the player!).

But I'm not sure why I'm writing this, since it's not going to change Max's mind. And also the fact that idc has really said everything that needs to be said on this subject from my point of view:

idc wrote:

To ask WHF to a blind tests is bit like asking Toaster Magazine to do one. You would get a result that would confuse and perplex and put people off buying that magazine. That is because we buy all our hifi kit and toasters sighted and listen to and make toast sighted. So is not the case that sighted reviews are the most accurate for the real world audiophile and toast aficionado?

 

Fair enough, perhaps my thinking that the timing and content of your Savvy Shopper was down to an agenda was wrong. But the problem is, whilst WHF continue to conduct the BQ in the manner that they do, testing many products that no competitors find differences between - which science backs up, people will be highly suspicious of their motives, and threads just like this will keep popping up, along with the same, uncomfortable questions.

 

idc has made some brilliant posts but the one you've quoted is wrong, IMO. Blind ABX tests wouldn't confuse anybody, in fact quite the opposite is true, people would be made aware of products that are pointless, like expensive digital cables, NAS drives, speaker cables, etc, and wouldn't feel the need to waste money on expensive versions of them.

But, blind ABX testing of these products would be a ridiculous idea from WHFs point of view, I'm sure nobody here needs an explanation why! So it'll never happen, simple as!

What should also never happen though, IMO, is WHF continually using expensive versions of products that have no scientific validity, as part of these BQs, as IMO the participants - while no doubt having a fun day out - are only there to lend credence to what really is indirect marketing of these expensive products. It isn't necessary and is insulting to their readership, IMO...

Dynamight's picture
Offline
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 39
RE: more 'snake oil'

John Duncan wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

But, that was soon remedied when your good self went on a little WHF shopping trip for a new BDP  Smile, when if I recall correctly (and my apologies in advance if I'm wrong), you demoed three players in three different shops on three different TVs before declaring that the PQ of the Marantz was much better. I know you're a very clever chap, but surely your memory isn't that good

At least he demoed them and made up his own mind, rather than just buying something somebody else told them was good.

I'm also fairly sure the prof's trip was before the BQ in question, but hey...

It was defo after the BQ, the following edition or the one after that I think.

Damn you and your argument-countering facts...

  Smile

DandyCobalt's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Oct 2010
Posts: 1447
RE: more 'snake oil'

Jeez, please put this thread out of its misery!!!! A metaphorical bullet to the head will be fine, and appreciated by many other forum readers

__________________

Pioneer tv + LX85, Sony HW15 Proj, Cyrus DAC XP+/Mono X300/CDXTSE2/PSXRx2, Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Baby Grands and Maestro centre, B&W CM1 surrounds /PV1D (9.1), CA BD751, Virgin TiVo, Inspire Rega t/t, Benz Glider MC, EAR 834P phono amp; Slee Novo Headphone Amp.TQ Black.

Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 2360
RE: more 'snake oil'

Understood Dandy. However, we don't need to read threads which annoy us or in which we have no interest.

Cheers

__________________

Mordaunt Short Mezzo System C - 8,5,1,9.Yamaha V2065. SonyS570. Panasonic TX-P42G20B., Sky HD 1TB. Garrard 86SB. PF30. Wii. WDTV Live. Harmony One. STAX300. QED cabling. Galaxy Tab 10.1

System Photos - http://s1051.photobucket.com/user/robinkidderminster/library/?sort=3&page=1

 Base trap Project -  http://www.whathifi.com/forum/home-cinema/corner-base-trap-completed-project?page=1

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Jan 2008
Posts: 22559
RE: more 'snake oil'

Max, have you read the BQ article in question?

__________________

Cambridge Audio StreamMagic 6  |  751BD  |  651A  |  Diamond 9.1 | Minx Xi | Sonos Play:3

Moderator. mail: john.duncan.whf at the mail of g dot com

The_Lhc's picture
Offline
Joined: 16 Oct 2008
Posts: 12590
RE: more 'snake oil'

John Duncan wrote:
Max,

Have you let him back on again? Mind you the direction this thread is already headed it won't be long before he's banned for potentially libellous comments anyway.

daveh75's picture
Offline
Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 8216
RE: more 'snake oil'

daveh75 wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

Dynamight wrote:

But, that was soon remedied when your good self went on a little WHF shopping trip for a new BDP  Smile, when if I recall correctly (and my apologies in advance if I'm wrong), you demoed three players in three different shops on three different TVs before declaring that the PQ of the Marantz was much better. I know you're a very clever chap, but surely your memory isn't that good 

At least he demoed them and made up his own mind, rather than just buying something somebody else told them was good.

I'm also fairly sure the prof's trip was before the BQ in question, but hey...

It was defo after the BQ, the following edition or the one after that I think.

 

Those in glass houses...

 

I don't know how you've got the front to still post on here, especially when you seem to be insinuating some kind of agenga.

Given your past antics!

__________________

 

 

Covenanter's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Posts: 964
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

Andrew Everard wrote:

Covenanter wrote:
Sorry Andrew but that's BS!

Firstly there is no connection between the amount of time spent doing something and the ability to do it.  For example I could spend all year training at a running track and at the end of it I'd still take me ages to do 100m if I didn't have a heart attack first.  If your "experts" are so great they would be willing to undertake double blind testing of their opinions and we know they aren't dont we!   

Secondly, of course they are interested in preserving the hype!  If the true situation is that there is no material difference between most of the kit then nobody would buy the magazine would they?  They have an obvious and self-evident reason for making us all believe we should spend lots of money on hifi kit. 

Thirdly, they are just journalists!  A good parallel is the Top Gear team.  Nobody with a brain cell would buy a car on the basis of the Top Gear recommendations, they reject cars on the basis that the boot is big enough to hold golf clubs.   The only difference is that the Top Gear guys are amusing.  excellent!

Chris

Given your continued attacks on the magazine, based on what you clearly feel you know (but which is in fact completely erroneous), there's little point in continuing this discussion.

And please stop dismissing everything with which you don't agree as 'BS': the repeated use of the term is dull, unimaginative and rather sad.

Andrew

I agree there is little point in the debate but from my point of view that's because you won't argue things on an objective basis.  Oh well!

Chris

PS Ad hominem comments should be beneath you.

SteveR750's picture
Offline
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 3096
RE: more 'snake oil'

The_Lhc wrote:

John Duncan wrote:
Max,

Have you let him back on again? Mind you the direction this thread is already headed it won't be long before he's banned for potentially libellous comments anyway.

 

Ahh, it all makes sense now.....the name gives it away.

__________________

JRiver MC17 -> Cambridge Audio DACmagic+ -> Roksan Caspian M2 -> ProAc D18 

chebby's picture
Online
Joined: 2 Jun 2008
Posts: 15342
RE: more 'snake oil'

So a (multiple) banned member can pop in under any old alias and discuss hi-fi with everyone as if nothing had ever happened. (Including a moderator who knows full well which banned member it is and even addresses him as such).

__________________

Marantz M-CR603 • Rega R3 loudspeakers • AirPlay • Apple iPad Mini • Apple iPhone 5 • Apple iMac • Apple AirPort Extreme 802.11N • Humax HDR-Fox T2 • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390

Biggerboat's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 61
RE: more 'snake oil'

I'd like to see a TV sitcom based around the partners of Hi-fi & TV freaks called HEADWAGS (High End Audio & Digital Wives & Girlfriends).

Jokes based on jitter, cable quality, top and bottom end, not to mention the density of blacks - well, in the right hands I feel this could be comedy gold.

Of course, you wouldn't want to be too populist, so it would only be viewable and listenable if you had the right setup.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Everard's picture
Offline
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 29118
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

Covenanter wrote:
I agree there is little point in the debate but from my point of view that's because you won't argue things on an objective basis.  Oh well!

All I can do is report what we do, and how we do it; if you choose to place your own interpretations on why we do things in a particular way, then that's really up to you. banging head against wall

Covenanter wrote:
Ad hominem comments should be beneath you.

Nope, not a clue – but then my pseudo-rhetoric is a bit rusty. Wink

__________________

Audio Editor, Gramophone

professorhat's picture
Offline
Joined: 28 Dec 2007
Posts: 11011
RE: more 'snake oil'

chebby wrote:

So a (multiple) banned member can pop in under any old alias and discuss hi-fi with everyone as if nothing had ever happened. (Including a moderator who knows full well which banned member it is and even addresses him as such).

He confirmed it back on page 9 of this thread. To be honest, this thread was all going pretty well when most people were ignoring his comments (including myself) and listening to idc - come back idc, come back!

 

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Joined: 8 Jan 2008
Posts: 22559
RE: more 'snake oil'

chebby wrote:

So a (multiple) banned member can pop in under any old alias and discuss hi-fi with everyone as if nothing had ever happened. (Including a moderator who knows full well which banned member it is and even addresses him as such).

If you want to stay up till 3am banning multiple user addresses and shutting down access from all of Ireland to prevent him from signing up, you are very welcome to apply to be a moderator.

__________________

Cambridge Audio StreamMagic 6  |  751BD  |  651A  |  Diamond 9.1 | Minx Xi | Sonos Play:3

Moderator. mail: john.duncan.whf at the mail of g dot com

Biggerboat's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 61
RE: more 'snake oil'

John Duncan wrote:

chebby wrote:

So a (multiple) banned member can pop in under any old alias and discuss hi-fi with everyone as if nothing had ever happened. (Including a moderator who knows full well which banned member it is and even addresses him as such).

If you want to stay up till 3am banning multiple user addresses and shutting down access from all of Ireland to prevent him from signing up, you are very welcome to apply to be a moderator.

 

Thats the plot of the first episode of HEADWAGS sorted then - cheers!