In Reply to: Re: A not very responsive answer. posted by Pat D on April 3, 2007 at 19:16:19:
>>I have asked whether IC works! I haven't asked how it works. <<PatD wrote to PR: "My CDP plays CDs, my amplifier amplifies the line level signals input, my speakers transduce the amplifier signal into sound waves. What does the Intelligent Chip do?"
In every English-speaking country I've been in, that would normally qualify as "How does it work?" So how exactly are you interpreting that as meaning "Does it work or doesn't it?"?
>>I am not interested in speculations as to how it works until it has been established that it does work. <<Same here.
>>As far as I know, that has not been done.<<I haven't even been reading this forum that long, and I've already read at least a half dozen names here who've claimed the IC chip works.
>>You would have to tell me what you mean by "empirical evidence," because as far as I know, all we have are anecdotes from users, which are totally unreliable except for showing that some people perceive it works. I don't consider Ken Kessler much of an authority: I see no evidence that he used a reliable methodology. Auditory perception overdetects, as jj put it.<<If by chance that's some oblique reference to jj the curmudgeon, the at&t guy, you would probably be able to build a better sounding hifi system on the advice of a ficus tree. But what I don't get is, why do you even speak of "authorities" that you need to listen to, to tell you whether something produces improved sound or not? Do you not trust your own ears that you have to trust the ears of an authority figure?
>>There has been a controlled DBT, though, but it achieved a null result. Hardly surprising.<<But of course. Audio DBTs being a worthless waste of time, they will always come up with worthless results.
>>>PR
"At one time, ALL of your audio equipment was unproven science."<<<>>Complete nonsense. I'm quite sure my components reflect a lot of applied science.<<
Yes, go on, I'm listening.
>>The point about the components in my system having basic and easily demonstrable audio functions was simply to compare with the IC (or that silly little clock), among others, which apparently don't. <<How do you know that if you didn't test it?
>>Whether the equipment comes from Circuit City or Singers is irrelevant to the point being made. I suppose if I stuck the IC on the inside of the speaker grilles in front of the tweeters it would have an audible effect . . .<<Think -outside- the box you're confining yourself to for a change. You might eventually come to learn that today there are audible effects in audio that are induced by means other than the signal path or acoustic sound waves. If you really want to understand something, don't start off making presumptions about it.
>>Your remarks implying my system is of poor quality are an argumentem ad hominem, and a failed one at that. My system components are listed in Inmate Systems on this site.<<I'm sorry, but you missed my point. I was trying to tell you, what's the difference between you and the Circuit City consumer to whom an audio system is just an appliance, like a microwave oven? I find both of your approaches to audio impossible to differentiate. So are you an audiophile or not? I'm assuming you are, if you're on this forum. If you are, are you interested in improving your sound or do you think you have attained perfection? Again, I'm assuming you are, if you're on this forum. But yet despite all the evidence I've given you that the IC appears to be worthy of investigation, including evidence of blind tests conducted by a well known and highly skeptical journalist, despite the fact that it costs next to nothing and takes little time or effort to investigate, you still don't seem to think it or anything like it is worthy of investigation. Which once again conflicts with the spirit of audiophilism, as compared to garden-variety mass-market consumerism.
>>For the price of an Intelligent Chip, I could buy a CD or two--which would have an audible effect!<<
How do you know that if you didn't test it?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: A not very responsive answer. - Posy Rorer 20:15:53 04/04/07 (4)
- Re: A not very responsive answer. - Pat D 21:27:39 04/04/07 (3)
- Re: A not very responsive answer. - Posy Rorer 10:08:42 04/05/07 (2)
- Research and development is fine, but why should I as a consumer bother with unproven products? - Pat D 13:10:58 04/05/07 (1)
- That's not very responsive, Pat. - Posy Rorer 17:28:45 04/06/07 (1)