Re: Amazing FREE Audio Tweak No. 2! For Advanced Audiophiles Only - INSTANT SILENCER!


Fella wrote:

soundhaspriority@xxxxxxxxx wrote:



In trying to emulate one of my thread titles, he's too stupid to
realize that I already did "Tweak no. 2". But nevertheless, he's not
too stupid to fool both YOU, GEORGE MIDDIUS, FELLA and BRO??@FLASH.NET,
and maybe some more people that will come along after I post this msg.
Doesn't take much to fool people around here, does it? LOL! I would
think that with all the forgeries you've been on the receiving end
of, you'd have learned from experience.

Who said I was fooled sound old chum you? I just did a little word play
as in "wasn't it so that *sound* *had* *priority* DUH! and this tweak
of yours results in no sound from our media" kind of gobbledygook like
that. It's kind of reverse sarcasm where you pretend to be completely
taken in.

What, that? Yeah, I knew all that. Just playing RAO politics, you know,
nothing personal. I don't make the rules, I just follow them.

It doesn't really flabbergast the hell out of anyone but it's
usenet, we're here to blow some steam, no?

No. I read the charter of this newsgroup, and it doesn't state "The
purpose of rec.audio.opinion is to blow off some steam". The reason
Usenet was invented was to promote discussion and further our knowledge
of various topics. That is realistically impossible to do on this
group, because everyone is too busy blowing off some steam. I don't
know if you or anyone still realizes this, but the newsgroup actually
has a theme; the theme is audio. The purpose of being here is to
discuss audio. It may seem obvious, because the word "audio" is in the
newsgroup title, but in fact, there are far more posts that are no more
than personal character attacks, than there are post on audio. I
didn't make it that way, that's the way it was when I got here. And
I actually didn't come here to "blow off steam", I came to discuss
audio. But everyone here has shown me in grandiose fashion, that this
is obviously not the place to do it. Anyway, I don't really have much
"steam" to blow off, I'm a pretty well balanced guy, and happy with
my life. And my audio system. If I only wanted flame wars, I'd be on
alt.flame. And frankly, those guys are a lot better. I find that
compared to some of the other groups I've taken on, all the flamers
here are rank amateurs.


But frankly I see no function or form whatsoever in someone doing a
forgery number on you since any forged tweak in your name can't possibly
be sillier then the tweaks you seriously put forth here in all sincerity.


Good point!


Of course *it is* possible that you would be doing the old trick in the
book forging the forgery, ip spoofing, etc.

Now why would I need to go to all that trouble to fool people about me,
when they are doing such a good job of that themselves?


The thing is the more I am convinced of your sincerity the more sorry I
feel for you, the way you twist yourself into all kinds of fits and
tantrums when you get the reactions you should expect to get to your
"tweaks".

I don't agree with your "fits and tantrums" assessment, but the
hysterical minds of RAO members seem to dictate that reactions always
have to be exaggerated by at least 10,000 fold before it becomes a
fact. But you left the question open as to why I should expect to get
such hostile reactions of mockery, derision, scorn and ridicule from
everyone. Who's fault is it that the tweaks don't seem logical to
you or others, according to your conventional views? Is it my fault?
The inventor's? And if you or the self-professed so-called
"scientists" here want to dismiss everything that seems "silly" to you,
as people have been doing throughout the history of this group, how the
hell are we ever supposed to embrace new concepts and ideas, and
progress in our understanding of the world? I feel sorry for most
everyone here, who share this kind of mentality. And I have a reason to
feel sorry, every time that I sit down and listen to my audio system.
Which probably sounds better than that of most of my critics. Because I
know a lot of things about truth that they don't, about the world we
live in that they don't, and I know that they could enjoy the same or
better sound from their audio, were they not prisoners of their fear
and logic. The more adverse and hostile reactions that I get to the
unconventional ideas that I support, the more I go in the opposite
direction to convention.


The way I see it, if *any* of the tweaks you posted would have
even a remote chance of actually doing something, anyhting!! to the
perceived sound at all (placebo aside) then it must mean that you are
light years ahead of the rest of the world of audio science, cognitive
science, newtonian physics, quantum mechanics, string theorists, you
name it, you are light years ahead...

Precisely. (Almost). That's what I intended to show. That if any of
the tweaks (except for the speaker grounding) have any discernible
effect on the sound, by -anyone-, then I've shown that there are
phenomena occuring that affect our perception of sound, which are
completely outside of Newtonian principles; including having a direct
effect on the signal path. I think its as easy as pie to demonstrate
this, since I know of so many ways within the realm of alternative
audio concepts. But at the same time, quite difficult, because there is
so much hostility from the mass majority to learning new things, and
accepting the possibility of new ideas in our understanding of science,
our biology, and the world we live in. This fear and hostility, as you
might imagine, can impair someone's judgement on hearing changes even
if they do try the tweaks.

Nevertheless, its not impossible. I read a thread in another discussion
forum (headwize.org), where someone had brought up the subject of the
silver foils, that Belt puts out. In order to hold it up to ridicule.
Everyone there was like everyone here: ALL ignorant pigs. Not a single
person, to my recollection, defended the idea that the foils are or
might be valid. Then one of the more brilliant ignorant pigs got the
bright idea one day to actually try one of the foils, and report back
to his mates. (They are strips of specially treated foil that you stick
on CDs and such, to improve your sound). He swore up and down that he
would really raise a ruckus if the thing was bogus, as he assumed it
was. Unfortunately, it wasn't. After applying it to his CDs, he
begrudgingly reported that he did believe hearing an improvement with
the foils in place, and a degradation when removed. Naturally, he was
then made the object of ridicule by the rest of the ignorant pigs,
instead of just the foils.

I don't know about "light years", but my colleagues estimate we are
15-20 years ahead of the audio community. My estimate, after my
experiences on this group, got pushed up to "at least 40-50 years
ahead". But you're trying to discredit them by going too far in your
presumption that there aren't any known principles behind the ideas.
They don't operate on Newtonian principles, we know that much. But
I'm not "light years ahead of the rest of the world of audio
science", because there are thousands of audiophiles like me that have
tried these concepts and products within this niche of alternative
audio, heard differences, appreciated what they heard, and are ardent
believers of these concepts. Furthermore, it isn't ahead of quantum
mechanics, much of it appears to adhere to principles of quantum
mechanics (and biology, as it relates). But we have to remember that QM
is a relatively new science, and not much is known in this area. It's
going to take a long time before things like morphic resonance can be
measured (laser interferometry is one possible suggestion), but if so,
why follow the sheep until that time, you could be dead by then?



It means that you must have the
key to some higher form of wisdom way beyond the reach of us ordinary
mortals.

How beyond the reach of ordinary mortals is amazon.com? You can start
by ordering John Gribbin's "Schroedingers Cat" and Dr. Rupert
Sheldrake's "The Presence of the Past", if you have a pressing need
to understand the elegant wisdom behind what you call "sillyness".


Now wouldn't such wisdom bring with it some form of maturity, some cool,
distant, sophisticated way of interaction with your fellow humans, some
sort of god-like, or prophet-like quality?

Yeah, I tried the Jesus angle. Doesn't work. And not just because
I'm a buddhist at heart. I can be a cool cat, if I wanted. I think I
tried that here at the very beginning. I mean I could just send
"thought waves" out into the ether, that vaguely insinuate I hold some
superior knowledge to my opponent, which they are not intellectually
mature enough to understand, and hope that maybe in a few years,
they'll come to understand it. But as we know, such forms of subtlety
don't work on backyard swine. This group is like the WWF of audio.
You basically have to bash people on the head with a metal folding
chair, before you can have a hope of getting your message across. So
when stationed in Philiswine, I have to speak "Philiswinese", to make
myself understood, don't I. Besides which, there's a lot of fun in
calling people "ignorants" and "idiots", when that's exactly what
they're behaving like. Note that I don't call people who really
can't help the fact that they're dumb, names like that. Only those
who deserve to be beaten with the "club of truth". Then there's
always the fact that I don't believe in Gods and prophets, don't
consider myself either in any way, and don't have any particular
craving to put myself above anyone. If I did, I would not have tried to
share what I know about audio, I would have kept it all to myself.

If you *at least* had a less
conflict oriented stance (if you would at least less resemble a bitter
chihuahua) I would have eventually tried a tweak or two from your
repertoire.

Again, you people seem oblivious to the fact that the conficts didn't
come from me. I was treated disrespectfully from the moment I first
posted, and in no time, attacked. I was often much less hostile in my
responses than those of my would-be attackers. I still think I am. But
that aside, whether it comes from a bitter chihuahua or not, how does
that stop anyone from trying the tweaks, if they simply want to improve
their sound? I said right from the beginning, they are not for
everyone, but for "advanced" people. Besides the audiophile
implications, that also implies they are for people who are smart
enough to go past prejudices and biases, and peek behind the curtain.
NO audio device, if it is to be judged fairly, should ever be solely
judged on the person who created it or the theory behind it. And
that's basically the point I'm trying to make in my humble little
attempts to expand people's minds.


Let's see, the L shape for instance. Why the f.ck not? Just
draw an L shape on some cd's.

I know, sounds simple enough, right? That's just what I thought. At
the beginning.... That was before one of you threatened to sue me
simply for me having implied that he tried the L-shape. Everyone else
didn't ever bother to try it, even though it takes 30 seconds to do.
Which is a hell of a lot less time than it takes for those same people
to write attack messages to me. So there's a lot more resistance to
such simple ideas, than you're aware of.


But your silly reactions to the legitimate
reactions of people to your silly tweaks just reinforces the sillyness
of your silly tweaks into a singularity of sillyness that it would be
insult to anyones intelligence, even nyob's, for instance, to actually
even *consider* executing one of your tweaks.

But that's okay too. Any reaction that I get, is always the correct
reaction that I am looking for. As I said, I don't get a royalty
every time someone tries my free tweak, and I'm not trying to change
the lives of people I really don't care about. But what you have to
understand is that there isn't just one global perspective on life in
the world. To me, its the reactions that I am getting that are "silly".
Because they are completely dismissive reactions to phenomena that
people know nothing about and have never experimented with, and never
even made serious inquiries with me to try to learn more. And at this
point in the hostilities, I'm -much- less willing than I was at the
beginning, to seriously respond to those inquiries, because I saw how
productive that was with Mr. Morein, for one example. Keep in mind that
the very first response that I received to my very first post was a
dismissive reaction. I didn't even have a chance to react, before I
was dismissed as a troll, or a freak.

So my reactions at having my intelligence insulted in such a great
variety of ways, and my character misrepresented in as many ways, are
actually quite legitimate. Much more legitimate than people reacting to
my serious posts or tweaks with ridicule, derision, mockery and
insincere joke tweaks. Obviously, I don't feel it would be an insult
to anyone's intelligence to try any of the tweaks, because you have
to have intelligence for it to be insulted. And if you decided you
won't take 30 seconds to cut a piece of paper or the corners off your
clothing labels when it may (or may not) improve your sound, simply
because you don't trust or like the audiophile that suggested it,
I'm sorry but you can't lay claim to having much of an intellect.
Education maybe, intelligence, hardly. After all, most of my tweaks
weren't invented by me, and aren't simply being endorsed by me.
Many people do such things, and things FAR more "silly" than what
I've mentioned here.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Q. Does anyone have anything but LIES to say here?
    ... necessary for conventional audio products. ... Wouldn't go back to speakers for quids. ... Headphones provide a sound I could never afford from speakers. ... possibilities here and in most other tweaks. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: And they shall know us by the trail of dead.
    ... Besides his tattered old copy of the debating tricks bible, Arny ... In the wacky world of high end audio the answer seems obvious: ... wasted trying to knock the tweaks down, ... even harder, but for different reasons. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: Tip for OPEN MINDED Audiophiles
    ... tweaks or audio, because you seem to know very little about either. ... a "professional tweaker". ... and improved the sound. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: Tip for OPEN MINDED Audiophiles
    ... tweaks or audio, because you seem to know very little about either. ... a "professional tweaker". ... and improved the sound. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • And they shall know us by the trail of dead.
    ... paper device had on their perception of sound, as I knew it to be. ... fact that your audio systems are right now putting out far more ... "My" tweaks don't change the signal of course, ... patterns that surround objects in our environment and even link objects ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)