436 posts / 0 new
Last post
Andrew Everard's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 5 days ago
Joined: 30/05/2007 - 12:34
Posts: 28837
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. :wall:

Covenanter wrote:
Ad hominem comments should be beneath you.

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

professorhat's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 28/12/2007 - 11:34
Posts: 11034
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!

 

The owls are not what they seem...

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 21 hours ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 22993
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.

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
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!

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
RE: more 'snake oil'

professorhat 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).

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!

 

To be fair, I didn't start this thread, and my views seem to be held by many others that have contributed to it. The last thread I did start got me banned - even though I was 100% correct in that digital cables do not differ - I was banned for trolling  :read:

idc has provided us with his knowledge here on this thread and in many others - knowledge that once got him banned too - and knowledge that your good self and many other WHF forumites appear to disagree with.

So another thread querying one of WHFs BQ features, more uncomfortable questions, more accusations, more denial, and more of the same blame game.

If it wasn't me it would be all somebody elses fault eh?

Palease....

CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 25 min ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12113
RE: more 'snake oil'

Covenanter wrote:

I agree with that and indeed you are one of the people I always read and take notice of although I disagree with most things you say lol.

Chris

That's as it should be......and how I know I'm probably right! Blum 3

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 13 hours 25 min ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12113
RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

 - I was banned for trolling  :read:

 

....or even Leprechauning! :shifty:

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

SteveR750's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 20 hours ago
Joined: 11/03/2005 - 23:46
Posts: 3080
RE: more 'snake oil'

Biggerboat wrote:

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Self parody? (not necessarily aimed at you personally) - remember, no one is forced to accept the magazine's view, or even buy it!

 

BenLaw's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 21/11/2010 - 20:21
Posts: 6326
RE: more 'snake oil'

The_Lhc wrote:

andyjm wrote:
'Manchester biphase mark encoding'

I think I went to school with him. I mean we called him Bi Manc Mark but it must be the same bloke...

 

:grin:

 

Encoding is a pretty unusual surname, I'm not surprised he didn't use it. 

SteveR750's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 20 hours ago
Joined: 11/03/2005 - 23:46
Posts: 3080
RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

professorhat 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).

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!

 

To be fair, I didn't start this thread, and my views seem to be held by many others that have contributed to it. The last thread I did start got me banned - even though I was 100% correct in that digital cables do not differ - I was banned for trolling  :read:

idc has provided us with his knowledge here on this thread and in many others - knowledge that once got him banned too - and knowledge that your good self and many other WHF forumites appear to disagree with.

So another thread querying one of WHFs BQ features, more uncomfortable questions, more accusations, more denial, and more of the same blame game.

If it wasn't me it would be all somebody elses fault eh?

Palease....

 

Max, how many more systems have you been through whilst away? The last I read you had some dynaudio DM2/7 with Marantz kit?

BenLaw's picture
Offline
Last seen: 22 hours 18 min ago
Joined: 21/11/2010 - 20:21
Posts: 6326
RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

professorhat 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).

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!

 

To be fair, I didn't start this thread, and my views seem to be held by many others that have contributed to it. The last thread I did start got me banned - even though I was 100% correct in that digital cables do not differ - I was banned for trolling  :read:

idc has provided us with his knowledge here on this thread and in many others - knowledge that once got him banned too - and knowledge that your good self and many other WHF forumites appear to disagree with.

So another thread querying one of WHFs BQ features, more uncomfortable questions, more accusations, more denial, and more of the same blame game.

If it wasn't me it would be all somebody elses fault eh?

Palease....

 

Fact is (I'm afraid to say) this forum has been a pretty chilled place over the last few months, generally polite and accommodating and with a fair bit of humour. Then we get a thread like this. 

 

You'll always get cable (etc) threads on any hifi forum, the reason it all gets heated is because people try and make it about the mag. Fine, use articles on the mag as a jumping off point, whether one agrees or disagrees with them. But the mag is what it is, no individual or small number of individuals on this forum is going to change that. So why keep  :wall: to your own detriment, that of other forum users, and the wider reading public. Life's too short, boycott the mag and the forum if you detest it so much, but please leave the rest of us to our gentle enjoyment of a pastime. 

 

(Comment not directed solely at max.)

idc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: 02/01/2008 - 15:36
Posts: 7765
RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

...... But, it's one thing not conducting them, and it's quite another conducting their own, non ABX blind tests, that consistently offer counter evidence to the results of blind ABX tests that others have conducted.

Why allow the placebo effect (that is obviously going to come into play in these big question feautures), to indicate performance benefits from things that proper ABX testing have concluded have no benefits?

No blind ABX tests? Who can blame them.. But is it ethical to counter such tests in this way? Thus helping to sell snake oil in a contrived way!!

 

 

WHF is not a science magazine, it is a review magazine. I think the earlier discussion about Breitling watches was very good at showing other manufacturers will use 'snake oil' to sell. Quite frankly fs someone really does believe the marketing hype that Breitling has quartz that is more accurate than other quartz, then caveat emptor to them! To settle the debate about what is allowed with marketing we would need to go to the ASA to get a ruling, such as the one with cars that disallowed the use of speed in adverts.

idc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: 02/01/2008 - 15:36
Posts: 7765
RE: more 'snake oil' RE: more 'snake oil'

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.  :grin:

Chris

 

 

Again, WHF is a review magazine about sound and image. That means it is subjective. But if you subjectively watch 20 TVs or listen to 20 headphones, you will find some that are just plain bad, some are brilliant and the vast majority are subjectively in the middle. Read enough reviews and you start to see if you agree with the reviewer or not.

 

For example, my main passion now is motorbiking. Motor Cycle News (MCN) is the largest circulation motorbike publication. I now know that most of its journalists we brough up on racer bikes and love track days. They can be quite down on cruiser and adventure bikes, though the latter is now so fashionable they are being more favourable to them, or they would alienate many readers. If I see MCN give a bike a 2 star review, I find it is often the bike for me as they hate what I like. Indeed I bought a bike which has a 2 star review and it is great. But MCN also provide valuable details on spec, weight mpg in an easy to read way. WHF do that as well. The combination of the two I am sure is what makes them both the biggest of their type.

 

Covenanter, you seem to arguing that there is no place for the review industry as a whole. But by doing that you risk throwing the baby out with the bath water.

 

Anonymous
Anonymous's picture
RE: more 'snake oil'
idc's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 1 month ago
Joined: 02/01/2008 - 15:36
Posts: 7765
RE: more 'snake oil'

Dynamight wrote:

........

 

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...

 

Thanks for the complement Dynamight. However......... Smile

 

Why do people buy stuff? Anything, doesn't matter what from soap powder to ornaments to trousers to interconnects? A huge amount of study goes into customer research which results in big decisions about branding, where a product goes on a supermarket shelf to tuning an exhaust to make a more growling noise. Here are some examples of such decisions regarding sound.

 

 - A study of contextual influences on sound quality evaluation
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/d … 6/art00005

"Product sound quality judgments are based on perception of both acoustical characteristics and various non-acoustical factors. This paper focuses on how non-acoustical, contextual, factors might impact sound quality evaluation. Three different experiments showed that a positive or negative attitude towards the product (induced by priming tasks, mood, or reading about others' opinions) systematically influenced how sounds were perceived. Moreover, temporary influences such as mood interacted with more stable individual differences such as noise sensitivity. These findings suggest that product sound quality evaluation is variant across people, and that both research and industry need to consider contextual factors to fully understand how the concept of quality is constructed."

  - A study into developments in sound quality evaluation
http://intellagence.eu.com/acoustics200 … /572-0.pdf

which studies all sorts of sounds including car doors shutting and snoring!  It states "the image of brand names or audio-visual interactions can significantly influence sound quality judgements"

  - A study of country of origin and brand and their influences.

http://www.wu.ac.at/werbung/download/pu … 97cems.pdf
It finds that identical CDPs were rated differently for sound quality depending on their supposed country of origin. (See page 43 of the report).

  - Sennheiser's annual report of 2010 has some interesting articles about the affect taste has on sound. Here is a description of a study by Heriot Watt University where volunteers tasted wine to different types of music and then described the taste. It was affected by the music.
http://www.sennheiser-annualreport.com/ … _ears.html

 

To go back to toasters, why would any consumer product review magazine, from Which? to The Gadget Show do an ABX blind test of toast? Would people think you were mad and you would be a bit of a laughing stock for doing something like that? If I remember correctly The Gadget Show did have a celebrety baker in to to a sighted taste test on the toast as part of the review. But that just amounted to did it toast evenly and crisply.  So is it not the case that people buy toasters based on size, brand, looks and a whole host of other reasons? I think it is and all reviews do is to pick out the ones that are clearly rubbish and then subjectively rate the rest with the benefit of having a whole load of then available at the same time.

 

 

Pages

Log in or register to post comments