PDA

View Full Version : Peter Belt / PWB headphones



Filterlab
10-01-2009, 11:50
A friend of mine has a pair of PWB headphones in his loft and he knows very little about them. I've furnished him with some information on the company but my knowledge is limited in the vintage area. He's obtaining the model number and model information for me this weekend but in the meantime does anyone know a lot about him / these?

Spectral Morn
10-01-2009, 12:33
Hi Filterlab

If you think the debates now about cables, mains conditioners etc generates war on the Forums Mr Belt did the same back in the 80's in shops, on the letters pages of magazines etc. He was one of the first well known after market adjusters, in the UK. He discovered that certain things done to kit would benefit the sound. There is a term used on Forums for this kind of thing (FOO). Hi-fi answers, Hi-fi News, Audiophile etc brought knowledge of PB to us and even gave bits of his accessories to the public free to try. The problem with PB's stuff is it well, kind of stretches credibility to breaking point. He had little bits of triangular foil that you stuck to CD's, Speakers, mains plugs etc. Grey coloured Spiral tube for putting on cables etc. Cutting notches into mains plugs (i'll give him that one but the effect came from cleaning the plug not the silly cuts you filed into the plug). He also first suggested the placement of screw head slots to be all aligned in mains plugs. He also had bits of wire looped that you would attach to your speakers. I know people who having been at his demos have said that they thought he was a hypnotist. As this all happened back when I was first getting into audio, I must admit to trying some of his stuff(the bits given away by the Mags), but I could never hear a difference,(except with the mains plug notches). Not having tried much of his stuff I can't say in all honesty that none of it works but, as I said earlier it does stretch credibility to breaking point and beyond.;)

King of FOO, perhaps but it was fun, none the less. If it was FOO, PB must have had a right good laugh at all who tried it and raved about it, and the lengths some Audiophiles would go to. A joke perhaps at our expense.:doh::mental: But it is funny.

I think I might have some of it still kicking around. If I do I will take some photos and put them with this post. I would assume that he treated the Headphones with his accessories.

Peter Belt Spiral Tube on Audio Note of Japan ANV Interconnect

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PeterBeltFOILandSPIRALTUBE001.jpg

Another view of above

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PeterBeltFOILandSPIRALTUBE003.jpg

Peter Belt Magic Foil on CD ( Triangle near center hole)

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PeterBeltFOILandSPIRALTUBE004.jpg

The CD dates this to about 1987. As the bits do no harm, do nothing IMHO, I left them on.

Regards D S D L----- Neil

Mike
10-01-2009, 14:07
Don't forget he also advocated folding up one corner of any curtains, and placing a piece of plain paper in any books in the area. It had to be plain paper though, not the stuff with lines on it.

:nocomment:

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 14:14
Sounds like a nutter to me!

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 14:15
What possible difference would putting a piece of paper in a book make?! Surely a book already consists of many sheets of paper. :confused:

Mike
10-01-2009, 14:23
What possible difference would putting a piece of paper in a book make?! Surely a book already consists of many sheets of paper. :confused:

Apparently all books are made from an even number of 'sheets'. This is (according to PWB) a 'bad thing'. Adding an extra sheet means the book will contain an odd number. Which is a 'good thing'.

It's the same with the curtains, folding one corner changes them from having four corners to having five. Simple really!

Odd numbers = Good.

Go figure!!!! :lol:

Haselsh1
10-01-2009, 14:25
PWB's headphones were sold as electrostatic but were actually electret. They connected directly to the speaker terminals of your amplifier via some hefty cable but did not have a mains source connection. Rather like electrostatic headphones though they did have an energiser box with a couple of transformers in it. I bought a pair in the late seventies/early eighties with the cheaper and smaller energiser unit and they were, as I recall, remarkably good. There were various permutations available from a budget energiser to a premium energiser and then a version that would drive more than one headset.

Much later, PWB starting producing his very eclectic and controversy laden products regarding electric fields and forces. At the time I remember putting together a group of hi-fi nuts to test out his graphite foils. These were little squares of black foil which were trimmed with scissors to a certain shape and stuck to the inside/centre of a CD in the direction of rotation. We used the then rather popular Cambridge Audio CD2 CD player as our reference. Every one of us there noticed a difference in sound quality with the foils attached using a very wide range of musical source from Staus Quo through to Aaron Copland. Of course this took place around twenty two years ago and so it would be difficult to get those people together again to write a summary but I do remember it.

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 14:26
...Simple really!

Odd numbers = Good.

Go figure!!!! :lol:

I wish I could, however my mind only deals with logic whilst I'm awake. It's only when I'm asleep that absurdity prevails, and I'm not lucky enough to have lucidly controllable dreams.

Haselsh1
10-01-2009, 14:32
In fact for those that may be interested, at that time, my system was: Logic DM101/Syrinx PU2 Gold/Lentek Entre One cartridge: Naim NAC42/SNAPS/NAP110: QLN Mk One's: Cambridge Audio CD2. Christ, that brings back some memories.

Spectral Morn
10-01-2009, 14:43
I did indeed have some of his accessories still on cables and a CD. See photos above (Honest they were free with Magazines )I forgot about the ideas PB had about curtains and books. It really does sound like Mile High, Ocean Going, Gold Plated FOO.

It was a bit of fun back in the 80's, but when I think about it, this sort of thing really does do harm to the hobby. I wonder how many gave up or ran away thinking we are even bigger nuts than many of us are all ready,:lolsign:.

Haselsh1, I take my hat of to you and your audio mates, I could hear no differences at all. :scratch:

Was PB the King Of FOO ? (I mean real madness) And those who tried it by paying for it, well were they just :mental: ?

Regards D S D L---- Neil :)

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 14:44
PWB's headphones were sold as electrostatic but were actually electret. They connected directly to the speaker terminals of your amplifier via some hefty cable but did not have a mains source connection. Rather like electrostatic headphones though they did have an energiser box with a couple of transformers in it. I bought a pair in the late seventies/early eighties with the cheaper and smaller energiser unit and they were, as I recall, remarkably good. There were various permutations available from a budget energiser to a premium energiser and then a version that would drive more than one headset.


Thanks for that, I've read that the headphones were very good quality and were highly revered in the late 70s. From what I've scraped out of the internet so far PWB did a pair of headphones that were essentially Stax drive units with the transformer box itself made by, or certainly labelled as, PWB. This combination was priced at £33 in 1979 so by no means budget stuff, it also beat several other pairs of well established headphones in a review that I read (although the magazine title was not present on the clipping). Seems like PWB was on the right wavelength initially and then fell into the snake oil pit.

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 16:15
It really does sound like Mile High, Ocean Going, Gold Plated FOO.

Now that's what I call a descriptive phrase! :lol:

DSJR
10-01-2009, 16:21
I could write a book about my findings about the "Peter Belt effect." he had a willing disciple in Jimmy Hughes and Jimmy was a very good friend of mine at the time and I owe him a lot, not least the LP12 training I had at his hands and the fact that he has a HUMUNGOUS record and CD collection, all of which was played and various aspects memorized. At Jimmy's place, I could hear all manner of illogical things and, spookily, some audible things were done without me knowing what he was doing (moving bottles of "holy" water in and out of his fuse-box for instance........). I'd then go home and try some things and not be able to detect one jot of difference. Every visit, I had my specs "polarised" and had a drink of his polarised water before listening commenced ;)

Back to the headphones. We sold loads of them in the seventies and I regarded the electrostatic ones as not quite as good as decent Stax models but a heck of a lot cheaper.

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 16:38
Interesting stuff Dave, it comes as no surprise that Jimmy was a disciple of Peter, he has some interesting ideas on tweaking and I have read (and occasionally chuckled at) the mini publications that occasionally accompany Hi-Fi Choice. A lot of his suggestions make sense, a few though have echoes of complete nutballness! :)

Ali Tait
10-01-2009, 20:26
Wasn't one of his tweaks that you had to take a photo of yourself and put it in the freezer?

Filterlab
10-01-2009, 21:37
Wasn't one of his tweaks that you had to take a photo of yourself and put it in the freezer?

I can't even begin to imagine how that could possibly influence anything sound wise, but from what I read here I wouldn't put it past him. :)

DSJR
10-01-2009, 23:08
I knew about freezing one's CD's, but a photo? It'd blow up the freezer before it did anything for me LOL!

Beechwoods
10-01-2009, 23:21
I like that. Very 'Dorian Grey'.

chris@panteg
11-01-2009, 19:54
OMG this reminds of Paul Benson and his monthly ramblings in hifi review i think he drove M/steward to despair with his pwb lunacy

oscarboyy
11-01-2009, 23:04
Gentlemen,
Hello, I am David Chmura the chap who happened to open this old can of worms when I happened across a dusty old pair of "PWB Moving Coil MC." phones in my loft and mentioned them to Rob.
Having read all of the replys to Robs posting I feel I should say sorry for having stirred your memories of days (some darker) when we were all ready to listen and try just about anything to reach that Holy Grail.
One chap who saw my listing on eBay suggested they were a model used in a BBC studio and was very well versed to all things Dynamic, electrostatic, Isodynamic etc.
I hope who ever ends up with them will fill me in with the rest of the mystery.
Its an honour to be allowed into your company and thank you Rob for all your help.
David

Marco
11-01-2009, 23:31
At Jimmy's place, I could hear all manner of illogical things and, spookily, some audible things were done without me knowing what he was doing (moving bottles of "holy" water in and out of his fuse-box for instance........). I'd then go home and try some things and not be able to detect one jot of difference. Every visit, I had my specs "polarised" and had a drink of his polarised water before listening commenced ;)


Bloody hell, and I thought I was 'out there' with Phase 17 Mana under my system!

Sorry, Dave, but that's just OCD loony-tune material! :lol:

Marco.

Filterlab
12-01-2009, 08:54
Gentlemen,
Hello, I am David Chmura the chap who happened to open this old can of worms when I happened across a dusty old pair of "PWB Moving Coil MC." phones in my loft and mentioned them to Rob.
Having read all of the replys to Robs posting I feel I should say sorry for having stirred your memories of days (some darker) when we were all ready to listen and try just about anything to reach that Holy Grail.
One chap who saw my listing on eBay suggested they were a model used in a BBC studio and was very well versed to all things Dynamic, electrostatic, Isodynamic etc.
I hope who ever ends up with them will fill me in with the rest of the mystery.
Its an honour to be allowed into your company and thank you Rob for all your help.
David

Hi David!

You're more than welcome mate, and don't worry about having stirred up the snake oil hornets nest (if that makes sense), there's nothing audiophiles like more than a good natter about some of the loonier side of hi-fi!

:)

You may post a link to your auction in the Private Exhibitions area if you wish.

oscarboyy
08-03-2009, 22:47
Rob
Just thought I would let you know that I sold the PWB headphones to a chap who thinks and I quote " these phones may not be susceptable to high frequency outputs from generators and spark quench switches for coils. He needs something to listen to particular hums and pitch variations within a faraday cage".
All that for £50. what can I say.
Yet to fit the Shure V15 to my SME as unable to bend down low enough and long enough till the new hip settles down.
Have just bought 2 quad CDs that will play on my cinema sound from a guy in the States one by the Temptations and one by Marvin Gaye, could be interesting.
Catch up soon. David

Chris
11-03-2009, 09:56
I remember having my specs "syringed a la Peter belt" by Martin Colloms if I remember rightly using an empty syringe which supposedly gave out a flow of negative ions at a show - must have been a Penta, I suppose. At the same he demonstrated the advantages of biwiring. Must have been suggestion, of course, but the effect was amazing - all the dross disappeared and everything sounded crystal clear.
We were all young once.

Soundhaspriority
11-10-2009, 18:31
If you think the debates now about cables, mains conditioners etc generates war on the Forums Mr Belt did the same back in the 80's in shops, on the letters pages of magazines etc. He was one of the first well known after market adjusters, in the UK. He discovered that certain things done to kit would benefit the sound. There is a term used on Forums for this kind of thing (FOO). Hi-fi answers, Hi-fi News, Audiophile etc brought knowledge of PB to us and even gave bits of his accessories to the public free to try. The problem with PB's stuff is it well, kind of stretches credibility to breaking point. He had little bits of triangular foil that you stuck to CD's, Speakers, mains plugs etc. Grey coloured Spiral tube for putting on cables etc. Cutting notches into mains plugs (i'll give him that one but the effect came from cleaning the plug not the silly cuts you filed into the plug).

How do you know the effect came from cleaning the plug? I used to cut those notches 20 years ago, to good effect. I never cleaned the plug. You are making incorrect assumptions about the mechanism for this tweak. And there's nothing "silly" about those cuts; they have a rhyme and a reason.


He also first suggested the placement of screw head slots to be all aligned in mains plugs. He also had bits of wire looped that you would attach to your speakers. I know people who having been at his demos have said that they thought he was a hypnotist.

Uh-huh. And apparently on the weekends, he secretly fights crime under a hidden identity. At one of Peter's demos, all had heard the improvements he created, but said they were gone when he left the room. Proving that people aren't always rational, despite thinking otherwise. Even when they hear changes brought about by "impossible things", they prefer to wish them away with irrational judgements - rather than have a closer study of those "impossible things". I'm sure there is at least someone on this forum who has heard the effects of a Peter Belt device. But then wished it away as "fanciful beliefs", the result of the ubiquitous "placebo effect", and has since filed the experience away under the category of "the impetuousness of youth". It's entirely their right to walk a narrow path in life.

I just want to note for the record, that some of the "PWB witnesses" of the UK audio scene in the 80's have a greater sense of scientific curiousity than that, and are not restrained by an innate fear of learning new things that don't follow conventions they were taught in grammar school. One notable difference between us and the many who have denounced Peter's products on prejudice, without proper experience of them, is that we are knowledgable about the fact that placebos don't last for 25 years. Some of us even work in the scientific research and medical fields, and have direct experience with placebo trials. So Peter Belt's products have indeed proved the test of time.


Not having tried much of his stuff I can't say in all honesty that none of it works but, as I said earlier it does stretch credibility to breaking point and beyond.

So who's fault is that? The researcher or the naysayer?


King of FOO, perhaps but it was fun, none the less. If it was FOO, PB must have had a right good laugh at all who tried it and raved about it, and the lengths some Audiophiles would go to. A joke perhaps at our expense. But it is funny.

I don't see anything "funny" about it myself, nor have I ever. Peter Belt is a serious engineer in the UK, has contributed greatly to the advancement of audio, and is as honest a man as you will find. I'm quite certain there isn't anything "funny" about any of it for him either. Many who tried those free tweaks included in the mags did hear differences. In fact, many of them are STILL hearing differences 20 years later, from purchasing his latest products. For those that didn't hear anything, there could be many reasons for that. Not everybody can hear differences in cd players or cables. Some can't even tell when you've changed their speakers. So does that mean it's all "FOO"?? Is the pursuit of quality audio just a joke for us to laugh at, because the "truth" is, everything sounds the same and always did?


It was a bit of fun back in the 80's, but when I think about it, this sort of thing really does do harm to the hobby. I wonder how many gave up or ran away thinking we are even bigger nuts than many of us are all ready,.

No, it's the contrary. "This sort of thing" of dismissing advances in our hobby is what does real harm to the hobby, and prevents it from progressing in new ways. More importantly, it prevents us from really hearing what our systems our capable of. I have never understood this old argument about how how advanced products or ideas do harm to the hobby. Frankly, as a true and serious audiophile, I could not --possibly-- care less what outsiders think of me or my hobby. I gues I must be a minority in this "community", that I care more about how my music sounds than what non-audiophiles think of me. If we take this misguided belief to its logical conclusion, then we should all be using iPod docks and forget about the pursuit of quality audio. Because surely that will help non-audiophiles relate to us better.

PWB is not the "extreme end of this hobby", as many are trained to believe. There is no "extreme end" of our hobby. There are only different approaches to the same end (quality sound), and different degrees of advancement in those approaches (wrt Newtonian convention). The concern should not be what non-audiophiles, who are very far removed indeed from understanding the more advanced ideas in audio, think of us. If they will deprive themselves of good sound because they are afraid of what some of those products look like, then I don't want them in our hobby. Their hearing is probably shot anyway from sticking buds in their ears all day long, and the music they listen to would probably not benefit from being well reproduced. They would probably come to hate it, if it were. So the real concern here should be: as audiophiles, are we limiting ourselves by our beliefs? Many skeptics who when they finally hear what it is they've been decrying as "FOO" for so many years, come to learn just that.



Was PB the King Of FOO ? (I mean real madness) And those who tried it by paying for it, well were they just ?

No. And you might want to update your newsfeed: http://www.belt.demon.co.uk There is no "was" about Peter Belt. He never stopped researching and producing new products that utilize the revolutionary phenomenon he discovered in the 80's. He has made hundreds of products since then, based on it. Some of which have been positively reviewed by some online magazines.

The "Kings of Foo", or "real madness", comes from those with narrow world views, who limit their knowledge and experience to whatever is 'safe' for them and whatever is known to them; whatever they can easily digest, intellectually speaking. Those stuck in the past, in so many ways. Every once in a while, a scientist or researcher comes along who is too far ahead of the curve, with theories too advanced for the masses, who dictate what will and won't become "mainstream"; accepted by all. And he is summarily dismissed and shunned as a "madman", or a "charlatan" and run out of town on a rail. Despite the fact that his findings could actually help people and advance knowledge of our world. The "real madness" then, is to restrain real progress by way of real prejudice. There's your "FOO", sir. :smoking:

Regards,


Shippy.

Beechwoods
11-10-2009, 18:57
Excellent first post, Shippy! Welcome to The Art Of Sound. When you get the chance, it would be great if you could post up something of your own system and what you like, in the Welcome forum. See it as 'setting out your stall' :)

Peter Belt definitely polarises opinion, and it's interesting to hear from such a firm advocate of his methods and products. Aside from the 'mains plug notches' tweak, have you tried any of them first hand?

It's certainly good to hear he's still going!

aquapiranha
11-10-2009, 19:25
Be careful chaps. On another forum a year or so ago this ridiculous belt character came up. Lo and behold, a newly joined forum member appeared to defend his idiotic bull#### to the death. each post was long, meandering and used multiple quotes from other posters. I can see where this is going, and it will end in tears.

Personally, I see the word 'quantum' on anything to do with hifi, and I sigh. Anyone who can make a living out of selling £200 crocodile clips to disillusioned audiophiles should hang his head in shame IMO.

Alex_UK
11-10-2009, 19:50
Not sure why this thread is suddenly brought back from the dead by Shippy, (probably a google search brought you here?) but interesting to read nonetheless. I won't comment - I have no experience of the man or his tweaks, but I do have a question that I have wanted to ask for ages - what does "FOO" actually stand for? (If you can repeat it!?)

aquapiranha
11-10-2009, 19:57
Foo means anything without scientific proof or reasoning. You could say for example that the difference between cables is foo. I think it comes from WW2 when fighter pilots called UFO's Foo Fighters, but I could be wrong!

http://www.unmuseum.org/foo.htm

Beechwoods
11-10-2009, 20:11
Quite possibly more than you ever wanted to know about Foo... :)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3092.txt

DSJR
11-10-2009, 20:25
It was when Jimmy told me that PB reached out of his window and "polarised the moon" that I began to have serious doubts as to JMH's sanity...

Sorry, I was eighteen once and took in almost every new thing I was shown. Only later did I start to question the more outlandish things and yes, I still have CD's with green and black pen marks round the edges, others with bits of foil stuck on them and some magic safety pins with assorted washers and nuts on them hidden away somewhere.

One of the best "upgrades" I made to my Meridian 207 CD player/preamp when I had one was to make up some "shorting" phono-plugs with the wire some centimetres long and with a reef-knot in the middle. I used to routinely tie a reef knot in all our mains leads too. The shorting plugs plugged in to unused inputs on the Meridian did seem to improve things a tiny bit.

Alex_UK
11-10-2009, 20:41
Quite possibly more than you ever wanted to know about Foo... :)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3092.txt

Thanks Nick, (I think!) - I was aware of "FUBAR" (FOOBAR) but didn't realise the connection. Best quote on that link...
"Many smoke but foo men chew" :lol:

Soundhaspriority
11-10-2009, 23:07
[quote]Excellent first post, Shippy! Welcome to The Art Of Sound. When you get the chance, it would be great if you could post up something of your own system and what you like, in the Welcome forum. See it as 'setting out your stall'

Peter Belt definitely polarises opinion, and it's interesting to hear from such a firm advocate of his methods and products. Aside from the 'mains plug notches' tweak, have you tried any of them first hand?

It's certainly good to hear he's still going!

Thanks, Beechwoods. To answer Alex, I did indeed come across the forum on a Google search. I was actually searching on Google images to see if I could find a photo of Peter Belt, to see what he looks like. Came up empty, but this thread popped up. And since it was filled with the usual misinformation I often see regarding Peter and his products, and since he isn't on the net to defend himself, and since the last post here wasn't that long ago (compare to some other threads here that have been revived), I felt it my duty to respond; and perhaps have at least a balanced outlook on the issue. Because otherwise, other Google searchers who may come across this thread, and who know little to nothing about PWB, will have no option but to blindly assume whatever disdainful tripe is said about him, with no counterpoint. Just because someone fits your stereotype of what you believe them to be, is no rational reason to condemn them.

I have tried many of Peter's tweaks first hand. In fact, I have a website that offers many of his tweaks for free, including some of my own, based on his principles (aka "Beltism"). One of which includes my version of the mains plug notch tweak (I couldn't remember how many notches or how they were supposed to go, neither could anyone IIRC, so I experimented with different configurations, and published the best method I could come up with at the time). The thing most people don't know about that tweak, as I discovered myself only recently, is that it improves the sound of a passive plug, very nearly as much as one connected to the mains supply. IOW, its mechanism has nothing to do with 'cleaning the plug', as one forumer here suggested, or the physical flow of electrons. Now how many people back in the 80's even experimented enough to discover that for themselves? I also found other "tweaks" about mains plugs that affect the sound in our environment, that even Peter Belt doesn't know about.

It's an undiscovered world, so the field is wide open. Not only is he still going and still developing unique new products, amazingly enough, but there are people like me experimenting with his principles, discovering new things, new professional audio reviewers discovering these products, and manufacturers using his princples on new products of their own. But so long as it remains an alternative science, and is viewed with the kind of hostile skepticism (if I can even call it "skepticism"..) as seen on audio chat boards, the benefits to be had with this unconventional approach will remain among a small, albeit avant garde, minority of the audiophile community. (Itself a small minority of the consumer audio market).

Soundhaspriority
11-10-2009, 23:10
It was when Jimmy told me that PB reached out of his window and "polarised the moon" that I began to have serious doubts as to JMH's sanity...

Not sure what this would have to do with Hughes sanity. I understand that Hughes has helped a lot of readers improve their sound with tweaks. So I guess "insanity", however it may be defined, is pretty beneficial to sound, then.


Sorry, I was eighteen once and took in almost every new thing I was shown. Only later did I start to question the more outlandish things and yes, I still have CD's with green and black pen marks round the edges, others with bits of foil stuck on them and some magic safety pins with assorted washers and nuts on them hidden away somewhere.

Apart from questioning them, did you listen to them without prejudice? I was 18 once too, except I'm as open minded now as I was then. But I didn't have the same listening skills then that I do now. So, without adequate listening skills, if I held a bias against these "outlandish" things, putting the two together, it would be no surprise if I couldn't hear any effect from them. Particularly since they rarely change the sound on a single basis, as much as a major component upgrade might. Fortunately, I experimented with ALL of the items you just mentioned, some years later, when I had acquired adequate listening skills; that could help me identify the nature of the changes they effected. As such, I am able to repeatedly identify the changes brought about by all those objects/ideas you mention (and no, there is nothing "magic" about the treated safety pins - and they are one of the only things that can improve live concert hall sound for the critical listener).

In the role of an audio consumer, as opposed to a researcher, it has never been my concern why something helps to improve sound (in whatever way it might); only that it does, and that it does so in a way that brings more music out of the sound (not as easy as it sounds). IOW, I've never allowed ideology (one way or the other) dictate the "art of my sound". When it comes to my audio, I am not influenced in the slightest by reviews, marketing, audio forum peers, hifi authorities, spec sheets, blind tests, James Randi, or the supremely silly idea that anything that is "scientific" and "factual" is already known and on record. Or if there is any chance that something that hasn't passed the validation of scientific scrutiny is legit, then its mechanism must make perfect "sense" to me, before I can ever hope to believe in it for myself. Maybe that's why I have had more success in vastly improving the sound of both my systems, and those of every other that I have used those "outlandish things" on. Those very things you have tucked away somewhere, as a reminder of the folly of your youth.


One of the best "upgrades" I made to my Meridian 207 CD player/preamp when I had one was to make up some "shorting" phono-plugs with the wire some centimetres long and with a reef-knot in the middle. I used to routinely tie a reef knot in all our mains leads too. The shorting plugs plugged in to unused inputs on the Meridian did seem to improve things a tiny bit.

Even so, did you ever ask yourself "why"? Why would a reef knot help? Did you ever try the shorting plugs on passive devices, not connected to your stereo? Because it'll yield the same improvement. So will the notches on AC plugs. I understand that many since the introduction of PWB's new principles wrote them off, even when they thought there might be something to it. The unconventional is too uncomfortable for many to deal with, because it means dealing with the scary unknown. So in all cases, people who had come into contact with and then rejected or abandoned the PWB tweaks, did so without ever taking the time and trouble to understand the phenomenon. Yet those same listeners pretend to champion science, when there is nothing "scientific" about having such dismissive attitudes to new ideas. That's the difference between them and Belt. Trying to go further in understanding how we are affected by sound is what caused Peter to veer course from his conventional training, and arrive at this new approach in audio.

When Tiefenbrun said that speakers were a problem in a listening room, because they were acting as passive radiators, and he introduced his single dem principle (which all Linn dealers had to follow), Peter Belt took the time and trouble to try to understand what Ivor was on about. Was it really the passive speakers that were the problem, moving in sympathy to the active ones? Or something else? When Peter removed each component of the loudspeaker and the sound of the active one had not degraded, until the magnet in the basket was removed, he discovered Ivor was on the right track, but wrong about the principle behind the phenomenon. It is the magnets themselves that are the problem. It is why that you can remove anything in your listening room that contains magnets (including video and audio tapes), and expect the sound to improve.

aquapiranha
12-10-2009, 05:36
You are 'soundhaspriority' and I claim my £5..


http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=27155&highlight=peter+belt


I am out of this one chaps. you simply cannot argue with deluded nut-jobs.

:doh:

Marco
12-10-2009, 08:05
Hi Shippy,

Welcome to AoS :)

What's your (proper) first name and where are you from? As we're a community of real people here, and not merely a 'faceless' message board, we like to know a little about each other.

Have you created a thread in the Welcome area yet introducing yourself and your system? If not, please pop in there when you get a chance.

Cheers and enjoy! :cool:

Marco.

Haselsh1
12-10-2009, 08:24
You cynical bunch of buggers...!!! This is funny though.

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 09:15
I spent half-an hour or so on Peter Belt's website this morning. This quote certainly looks interesting, but I am not sure what the improvements are supposed to be - power? economy? comfort? Maybe I could also get a flux capacitor - anyone got a spare? Not sure about putting a safety pin through my leather seats though - would leaving this tweak out make the rest of them pointless?

Motor Car treatments.

With the above packs (the Beginners Pack and the Intermediate Pack), you will have enough devices on hand to extend treatments to your car. The automobile is your own mini environment. You will have the general purpose Rainbow Foil and Cream-Electret, the Red 'x' Pen for signing your name or initials and for writing your own beneficial morphic messages.

The 12 mm diameter Spiratube is suitable not only for treating the water and central heating pipes in the home but a small section should be attached around the metal bars of the accelerator pedal and around any exposed metal supports under the car seats. If the metal supports under the car seats are too thick to treat with the 12 mm Spiratube or have an unusual shape (as in the case of our own car), then we would recommend attaching strips of any of the Foils to anywhere suitable on the metal supports.
The CCU Ring Tie on a safety pin can be experimented with by fastening it into the upholstery of the car seat.
All the various Foils can be used to treat the sound system of the car in exactly the same way you would use them in your home

Taken from http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/product/bpaip.html

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 10:23
Here's an account of my (limited) experience with the PWB products.
I read all the articles (mostly, but not exclusively written by Jimmy Hughes) in Hi-Fi Answers when they were published. I found it all a little strange & unbelievable, but was glad of the opportunity to try it out for myself when the little foils came free with one copy. I heard no difference at the time when I placed one on the labels of several LP's – I didn't own a CD player & wasn't interested in owning one at the time but the articles suggested the foils would work equally well on records as CD's. I say I heard no difference, but as I didn't have duplicate copies of any records I couldn't exactly conduct a particularly scientifically rigorous experiment – it was a case of only having one opportunity to tell whether there was a change to the sound (i.e. during the first play after the placing of the foil on the label).
Then there was an article which described things that could be done without the need for using any of the exotically priced products. This detailed the scoring of mains plugs, shorting plugs & the tying of knots in cables. I tried these out & thought I heard something with some of them, but couldn't really say it gave night and day improvements. I do remember moving a spare set of speakers and the TV out of the room & not noticing a thing while I was doing it (well, I wouldn't, would I? – being in a different room) but my wife said that, as I passed the threshold of the room each time I carried something out she noticed a difference – she described it as speeding up the tempo of the tune. Perhaps as a result of auto-suggestion, when I sat down & had a proper listen, I had to agree there was a slightly more refined sense of clarity & sense of rhythm. Whether PWB or Ivor's theory was right, I don't know – but there was an effect.
The next article detailing the free stuff talked about attaching knotted cables to water pipes & suchlike. JHM spoke of keeping the room tidy, making sure there were odd numbers of books, CD's & records on each shelf, placing a piece of paper under one leg of each chair & table in the room (to make it three legged) & the paper in the book trick. I don't think I tried too many of these techniques. There was also a tale of having one CD case that was treated & (I think) an improvement could apparently be had depending on whether it was one way up or the other, or sticking out from the others on the shelf.
Next thing I know, Paul Benson was writing in Hi-Fi Review about his conversion to the Belt cause – a Damascene journey of discovery. I only read this magazine because it used to make me laugh out loud at the ridiculous statements made in support of the 'approved and anointed' kit to the detriment of all else – In reality, I used to throw each magazine across the room in frustration at least once! Anyway, I remember thinking that Benson was perhaps one of the least likely people on the planet to be a convert to PWB's way of thinking.
I spent a long time in the PWB room at one of the shows. I don't know how many treatments were demonstrated to me during that time (there were a lot though, some of them demonstated a couple of times). After each treatment was conducted, PWB asked for a show of hands as to who had detected a change in sound.

The audience changed throughout the time I was there, so I don't think there were stooges (or if there were, then there can't have been that many of them).
Sometimes we were told that a change was to be made & none occurred.
When a genuine change was made there were always a number of people who raised their hands.
When no change was made a very few people sometimes raised their hands.
People who raised their hands were not always the same people.
The 'Yes people' only twice outnumbered the 'No people', but on many occasions it was approximately 50:50.
Many people walked out muttering less than neighbourly sentiments, but they were usually those that didn't actually listen to the demo for long.
Paul Benson was perched on a table at the side of the room and was obviously using the Linn dealer tactic of nodding his head & tapping his feet at the appropriate times. He also nodded his head vigorously & was the first person to raise his hand every time we were expected to hear a change.


Did I hear any changes to the sound?
Well, yes, I did hear some but not many. However, those that I did hear were always for the better.

What's my assessment?
Well, actually, I still don't know what to think. I never paid any cash for the products & put it all down as an interesting diversion.

HFN did some articles & experiments that I seem to remember were fairly inconclusive.

I don't dismiss it as rubbish, though & I don't think I'm deluded, or that it was a con-trick. That day at the show, I heard enough changes & saw enough people who said they heard a difference to make me believe that something was going on. I'm a strong believer in the incompleteness of science – just because we don't understand something, can't measure it or can't fit it into our current definition of scientific knowledge doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We should welcome challenges to our scientific thinking. If such challenges were never to happen then science would never have been advanced – ever.

Marco
12-10-2009, 10:31
You are 'soundhaspriority' and I claim my £5..


http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=27155&highlight=peter+belt


I am out of this one chaps. you simply cannot argue with deluded nut-jobs.

:doh:

Hi Steve,

Interesting. Do you know what he was banned for on pfm?

Regardless though, he isn't banned here, so let's find out what he's about before we possibly jump to the wrong conclusions :)

Marco.

P.S We'll need to arrange another visit for you so you can hear the Tannoys (and the Croft) now they've been fully modified :cool:

Marco
12-10-2009, 10:34
I'm a strong believer in the incompleteness of science – just because we don't understand something, can't measure it or can't fit it into our current definition of scientific knowledge doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We should welcome challenges to our scientific thinking. If such challenges were never to happen then science would never have been advanced – ever.


Hear, hear - give that man an award!! :)

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 10:39
Just tellin' it like it is, mate!!

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 13:15
I'm fairly certain that I am not qualified to talk on this subject as I have never heard of this chap and I'm only loosly aware of some of these techniques (plug notches rings a bell). My veiw on this is that I'm fairly certain that anything one might do in a list ing room might make a difference... Moving a sofa 3mm away from a wall could mean that some screw is no longer reacting in some way with some bit of equipment (I have no idea how but I wouldn't rule it out) if this chap hears the differences these things make then good on him, if it makes him happy spending his time investigating these things then fine. Weather or not these things a practicle for everyone is another matter! I know I could make my hifi better by having smaller sofas and the room laid out differently. I could probably make monumental differences to the sound by organising my cables better. I don't question weather this stuff works or doesn't... I have no idea! I would seriously question someone who would be OCD enough to put extra sheets of paper in all books or folding up corners of curtains. The question for me is not if it works ... But are these minor changes really worth all the effort and the hastle they must cause? For me, no, I'd rather have a slightly crapper sounding hifi and enjoy listening to it than worrying that my little bits of foil arnt quite in the right place/orientation/whatever.

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 13:37
I'm fairly certain that I am not qualified to talk on this subject as I have never heard of this chap and I'm only loosly aware of some of these techniques (plug notches rings a bell). My veiw on this is that I'm fairly certain that anything one might do in a list ing room might make a difference... Moving a sofa 3mm away from a wall could mean that some screw is no longer reacting in some way with some bit of equipment (I have no idea how but I wouldn't rule it out) if this chap hears the differences these things make then good on him, if it makes him happy spending his time investigating these things then fine. Weather or not these things a practicle for everyone is another matter! I know I could make my hifi better by having smaller sofas and the room laid out differently. I could probably make monumental differences to the sound by organising my cables better. I don't question weather this stuff works or doesn't... I have no idea! I would seriously question someone who would be OCD enough to put extra sheets of paper in all books or folding up corners of curtains. The question for me is not if it works ... But are these minor changes really worth all the effort and the hastle they must cause? For me, no, I'd rather have a slightly crapper sounding hifi and enjoy listening to it than worrying that my little bits of foil arnt quite in the right place/orientation/whatever.

Hear, hear - give that man an award!! :)

(Is there an echo in here?!)

Barry
12-10-2009, 14:56
.................

When Tiefenbrun said that speakers were a problem in a listening room, because they were acting as passive radiators, and he introduced his single dem principle (which all Linn dealers had to follow), Peter Belt took the time and trouble to try to understand what Ivor was on about. Was it really the passive speakers that were the problem, moving in sympathy to the active ones? Or something else? When Peter removed each component of the loudspeaker and the sound of the active one had not degraded, until the magnet in the basket was removed, he discovered Ivor was on the right track, but wrong about the principle behind the phenomenon. It is the magnets themselves that are the problem. It is why that you can remove anything in your listening room that contains magnets (including video and audio tapes), and expect the sound to improve.

Does this include the magnets in pickup cartridges? What about the magnets in the speakers themselves - should everyone use electrostatic loudspeakers?

What does Peter Belt have to say about consulting the horoscope, or reading the I Ching? How about reversing the direction of rugs in the listening room or removing light bulbs from their sockets and reinserting them the other way round? Does the system sound better if you are wearing odd socks?

Have you ever reversed any of the Belt inspired changes that you have made and noticed a change (presumably for the worse)?

Just curious...........

Themis
12-10-2009, 15:46
In my opinion, such "theories" take advantage of the too many variables taken into account to define what is "better" in audio listening.

So, they simply keep on introducing additional arbitrary variables, in an attempt to abort any rational thought that could be used to find an organized explanation of what could possibly be a personal view of "better" or "worse". Philosophically, it is a bottom-leveling process of human thought.
Such processes flourish on the ground of the absence of scientific consensus, and they disappear as soon as one is established.

I'm truly amazed, I didn't know it still existed...

DSJR
12-10-2009, 16:50
Sorry, speaker cones do vibrate in sympathy with other speakers playing in the room and it really matters not if the magnets are there at all - how do you think (in extreme cases) ABR drivers work???? The unused speaker cone acts like a microphone at some frequencies and this is EASILY measured and heard by anyone who's ever connected a drive unit (or Coles 4001 tweeter) to a microphone input and recorded it. I believe professional room treatments work by tuned flapping diaphragms resonating to cancel out certain bass modes in a controlled way in a room.

I still personably believe that much of what we hear has been researched by science and back in the days when "your" favourite equipment was designed and made, the designers/engineers were all white coated, post WW2 engineers who knew a thing or two about what they were doing. same goes for the reviewers of the 60's and early 70's.

All this Peter Belt "stuff" means nothing if the system sounds cr@p to start with. Jimmy began turning his Impulse speakers to the back wall mid point between them and the noises thus emanating from them bore no resemblance at all to a live jazz gig nearby at the Barbican we went to at one of my visits. Jimmy just couldn't see it at the time.. I went home, played a CD by the jazz group playing that day and whacked the volume up a bit to near-realistic levels and was very happy indeed.....

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 17:00
this sort of thing really suprises me too... i wasnt aware of it until today but have been mulling it over more since my privious post.
to expand on what barry says.. surely using electrostatics is the only option.. beond that surly you would need to remove the hifi its self from the room for best effect.
maybe wazoo chris has the best layout of all of us, after all he has a separate room for his system.
what about just switching the light off in the room... that would surely effect the energys in the room more than the amout of pages in a book. does all this stuff take into account feng shui which is surely a more widely recognised way of leveling energys in a room.
should i concidor cutting one of my own legs off or at least only wereing one shoe?

i can, and do, accept fring science and medicine more than the average person but some of these tecniques seem to be polishing the door knob before painting the house (hope that makes sence as an analogy)

Cotlake
12-10-2009, 19:08
I'm with you Shippy, at least I will be if I can share some of that 'shit' you're smoking........must be gooooooooood :eyebrows:

Soundhaspriority
12-10-2009, 19:45
This detailed the scoring of mains plugs, shorting plugs & the tying of knots in cables. I tried these out & thought I heard something with some of them, but couldn't really say it gave night and day improvements

They aren't meant to. The products are meant to be more effective, the free ideas are meant to demonstrate the concept the products are based on is sound and real. So with that in mind, did you ever wonder why shorting plugs, tying particular knots in cable would ever affect your sound, regardless of how much you perceived it doing so?


I do remember moving a spare set of speakers and the TV out of the room & not noticing a thing while I was doing it (well, I wouldn't, would I? – being in a different room) but my wife said that, as I passed the threshold of the room each time I carried something out she noticed a difference – she described it as speeding up the tempo of the tune. Perhaps as a result of auto-suggestion, when I sat down & had a proper listen, I had to agree there was a slightly more refined sense of clarity & sense of rhythm.

Both items contain magnets. And the TV... probably contains a lot more than that, to muck up the sound. Back when I first experimented with this and took my video tapes out of the room, I was knocked back on my heels. Nothing "slight" about it for me.


Whether PWB or Ivor's theory was right, I don't know – but there was an effect.

If you have good listening skills and a scientific curiousity to match, then this question is easily answered.


JHM spoke of keeping the room tidy, making sure there were odd numbers of books, CD's & records on each shelf, placing a piece of paper under one leg of each chair & table in the room (to make it three legged) & the paper in the book trick. I don't think I tried too many of these techniques. There was also a tale of having one CD case that was treated & (I think) an improvement could apparently be had depending on whether it was one way up or the other, or sticking out from the others on the shelf.

Well I'm certainly not going to count the number of CD's and records I have on the shelves every time, if that's what it takes. But yes, there is a method to that "madness" as well. There is a peculiar odd/even rule in this phenomenon. Books/CD's, well that's only one aspect of it. To the keen listener, it presents itself much like a phase problem would. If it matters to you whether your speakers are in phase/out of phase, then paying attention to details like this might matter to you as well.

BTW, thanks for digging up the old Belt tweaks you've heard of, from the 80's. Please don't be shy at all in sharing these! While I'm familiar with most of them, I haven't heard of all of them, and I am always very keen on hearing about and trying his ideas from that period. I think I will share one of my own homegrown in the tweaks section, in "case" there is any interest.


There was also a tale of having one CD case that was treated & (I think) an improvement could apparently be had depending on whether it was one way up or the other, or sticking out from the others on the shelf.

Not familiar with the particular tweak you're referring to, but again, this would have to do with symmetry, and the odd/even rule I mentioned. This could all be looked at as tweaking "polarities", which Peter discovered very early on, could have a large influence on our perception of sound. There are many experiments I have conducted, which has shown that it has. It sounds odd and daft, but only to people who know nothing about it, and have no experience researching it.


Anyway, I remember thinking that Benson was perhaps one of the least likely people on the planet to be a convert to PWB's way of thinking.

So did I, when I first heard of the guy. He was as skeptical as you at first; and cantakerous enough that he would have thrown the magazine across the room along with you. It took him a while in fact, to finally identify what has become known as the Belt effect; that particular change in one's perception of sound, that has nothing to do with either autosuggestion or the audio signal. Ever since then, he remained a practitioner and advocate of Beltism. So Paul being the last person one would think of as a Beltist, should say that there is something really going on here, that a lot of people are 'afraid' (to use my term) to find out. And would rather take the easy road out and dismiss it all as "charlatanism" or "madness" or "autosuggestion" or "hypnosis" or "effective marketing" or some such silly nonsense.


Many people walked out muttering less than neighbourly sentiments, but they were usually those that didn't actually listen to the demo for long.

Thanks for the accounting of your demo; this was tres interesting. This part exemplifies one good reason why the products never caught on as much as they should have: the inherent hostility people have toward the idea that they actually do something; such that they won't even give them their proper due, and whatever time they do give the products, they give it with extreme prejudice aforethought. I experienced this prejudice and hostility myself when I once tried to demonstrate one of their products at a hifi show. At the end of the short dem done at a quiet volume, the dealer put aside his beer and looked at me with glaring eyes and he was like "See??!! (I TOLD YOU this wouldn't work!!)". Talk about your self-fulfilling prophecies...


We should welcome challenges to our scientific thinking.

Thank you. Because there are obviously some people who welcome this with threats, bitterness, irrational angry tirades and tears. Thank you for making a point I often find myself having to make; that science would never advance if it were never challenged. What I could never quite understand is why some people who felt they might have heard something from the Beltian concepts or products, or thought they did, or witnessed demos of people who did, never gave it a second thought thereafter. Never wondering if there was something mysterious going on in the human perception of sound that the science books never taught us about. If outsiders think audiophiles are a crazy lot, I say they're not crazy enough!

Marco
12-10-2009, 19:57
Shippy,

May I direct you to my earlier post:


Hi Shippy,

Welcome to AoS :)

What's your (proper) first name and where are you from? As we're a community of real people here, and not merely a 'faceless' message board, we like to know a little about each other.

Have you created a thread in the Welcome area yet introducing yourself and your system? If not, please pop in there when you get a chance.

Cheers and enjoy!

Marco.


Please attend to this A.S.A.P - thanks!

Marco.

Soundhaspriority
12-10-2009, 20:05
I spent half-an hour or so on Peter Belt's website this morning. This quote certainly looks interesting, but I am not sure what the improvements are supposed to be - power? economy? comfort? Maybe I could also get a flux capacitor - anyone got a spare? Not sure about putting a safety pin through my leather seats though - would leaving this tweak out make the rest of them pointless?

No, hardly. The pin isn't anything special that the rest of the products wouldn't work without, it just wouldn't sound as good without it. I don't see why anyone would have to leave it out though, even if they have a leather clad Rolls in the driveway. I'm sure the upholstered floor mats could be used, or anything fabric like. Probably best just to attach the pin to the label of your clothing. This way, sound improves whilst in the car, sound improves whilst out of the car.

It should be noted that Beltists have the best sounding car stereos, and this is why. There is almost nothing conventional audiophiles can do to tweak their car systems, apart from intrusive cable upgrades. I love treating a car, because it's a self-contained environment; much easier than treating a house, with all the problems that a house would have (in the Beltist sense). After treating my wife's car, her friends remarked about how well it sounded, and wanted to get the same stereo system. I had to explain that it wouldn't help to obtain the same components, as they were nothing special in and of themselves. Next thing I knew, I was being asked to "treat" one car after another! These sessions take time, even if like me you know what you're doing, not to mention the expense of the products. But I was dutifully bound to, so I did. Needless to say, everyone who's car I treated was telling me about how each time they play one of their favourite mp3's or CD's, they're hearing new aspects of the music they never did before.

Not one ever inquired what the hell this was about though, or how I was able to accomplish this without touching the car stereo itself, or its cabling. So not much scientific curiousity there. But then, they weren't "audiophiles", so I guess I shouldn't expect them to. (sarcasm off).

Marco
12-10-2009, 20:08
Shippy,

I should point out to you that ignoring me is not an option. Please attend to your thread in the Welcome area before posting any more material here. I won't ask again ;)

Marco.

Beechwoods
12-10-2009, 20:13
Go on, Shippy. I'm enjoying your posts here so do the right thing and check in at the front door!

Soundhaspriority
12-10-2009, 20:14
Does this include the magnets in pickup cartridges? What about the magnets in the speakers themselves - should everyone use electrostatic loudspeakers?

No, there's no need to be nuts about it. I have always said the best system is no system, because so many objects and materials can be detrimental to our perception of sound. But so is the absence of the components that create the sound. Magnets are a particular problem, but you only need deal with the ones you can deal with, and leave the others alone. Actually, I'm not sure but Belt may have since devised something that might negate the negative effects of magnets in the listening area. I think they are the "Magnadiscs", but again, not sure.

The thing about "the art of sound" is, you don't really know what you're missing, until you hear it. Meaning, you can't understand what the "Beltist" effects are of ordinary objects in the environment (magnets, pvc, styrofoam, etc), until you are able to hear the differences in sound without their influence. That's when they might become more important.


What does Peter Belt have to say about consulting the horoscope, or reading the I Ching?

I'm sure I don't know. It never occurred to me that this is something that should concern me. Why should it concern you? If you want an educated guess, I'd say "nothing". I am quite certain he does not follow horoscopes or I-Ching or even Feng Shui. Neither do I, if it matters.


How about reversing the direction of rugs in the listening room or removing light bulbs from their sockets and reinserting them the other way round? Does the system sound better if you are wearing odd socks?

I think I tried the socks thing once, never found a difference. Even if there is, I can off the top of my head think of a hundred Belt tweaks that will be more effective than odd socks. I did however with the crossed legs thing, but I don't normally pay attention to that during listening tests. Never tried reversing rugs in the listening room (is that a Belt tweak or did you make it up?), or reinserting light bulbs the other way round (not even sure what you mean by that, since the thread only goes one way). I have however "treated" light bulbs by applying PWB liquid or cream to the socket. And yes, it did very much have an effect on my sound, but interestingly, the effect kind of switches on and off with the light. Probably the reason I have thus far stayed away mostly from light bulbs.


Have you ever reversed any of the belt inspired changes that you have made and noticed a change (presumably for the worse)?

All the time. Some people new to the concepts notice a change -only- when the item is removed from the environement, or otherwise reversed. I sometimes notice changes for the better, without knowing what has changed. e.g. I noticed the other day, the sound off my computer speakers was tremendously good. I was getting bass notes and lines I had never heard before, and just bags and bags of roominess in the soundstage presentation; new details. This was on music I was -very- familiar with, because I always listened to it. But for the life of me, I could not think what brought this about, as I had not done any tweaks, Beltist or otherwise, in a long time. A few days later (and yes, the high rez sound was still present), it occurred to me why this happened. I brought in the safety pin. (I have one of the so-called "magic safety pins" from PWB, known as the CCU Brown Tie, which I had brought back with me from on the road. When storing my items, without thinking, I stuck it back in the normal place I usually keep it, which was the most effective spot I could find at the time).

I usually find the change is greater upon my first listen (it is the time the working memory is most sensitive). It retains perhaps 95% of its influence thereafter.

Marco
12-10-2009, 20:18
Shippy,

If you don't start listening to me I will remove your posting rights forthwith. I don't take kindly to being rudely ignored!!

Normally, I'm rather less insistant with this request, but I suspect that you're not quite who you appear to be and may have something to hide.

So..... One more post on here before creating your Welcome thread and your posting rights will be temporarily removed until you comply with my request.

Do I make myself clear?

Marco.

SteveW
12-10-2009, 20:21
What Fun.
Go on Shippy...just sign in.

Cotlake
12-10-2009, 20:27
He might do, but needs to roll another one first.....be patient :smoking:

DSJR
12-10-2009, 20:28
NOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo :no: :sofa:

Marco
12-10-2009, 20:28
He might do, but needs to roll another one first.....be patient :smoking:


:lolsign:

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 20:42
i have to say it is all very fasinating, i mean this in the best possible way, its like reading about scientology. i dont buy it personally, but i could easily see how someone might... if they were that way inclined

shippy; i havent said anything else anyone else hasnt and as such you have answerd all my comments in answering other peoples comments. can i ask something direclty though...

is this like a final step after you know you have got everything else right?

what i mean by that is do you have the following things in place:

best possible mains supply to your hifi?

do you have all of your cables layed out in a way you belive best for them not influencing each other in a negative way?

do you use equipment that you know complys to some of the rules you talk of... eg useing nva kit that contains no screws in the case and is cased in plastic to avoid the metals influencing the sound (would that help in your world)

do you use any room balancing equipment? bass traps? (is that what i mean? i have only just found out about that sort of thing myself...)

do you have a listening room that contains no other nagative influences ie only the bare esentials?

how do you know what the bare esentials are?

do you use equipment to understand the respose of your room to the sound?

to me i would have thought all of these would come first... if you have them in place then doing these final tweaks ... if you hear a difference .... i see no fault in! but doing them before the above seems, like i said before, like polishing the door nob before painting the house!

Macca
12-10-2009, 20:47
I don't want to continue this nonsense (actually I do!:lol:) but I have a couple of Hi-Fi reviews from 1990 - I found them clearing out a spare room a couple of years ago and I still have them somwhere... I re-read them at the time and marvelled again at the Belt stuff - at the time I thought - how can it possibly do anything? - Twenty years on - I can only think the same.

IMHO it is auto-suggestion - nothing more. If you currently do not accept that people are susceptible to auto-suggestion I would suggest going to see a good stage hypnotist before re-affirming that belief.


Martin

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 20:51
I don't want to continue this nonsense (actually I do!:lol:) but I have a couple of Hi-Fi reviews from 1990 - I found them clearing out a spare room a couple of years ago and I still have them somwhere... I re-read them at the time and marvelled again at the Belt stuff - at the time I thought - how can it possibly do anything? - Twenty years on - I can only think the same.

IMHO it is auto-suggestion - nothing more. If you currently do not accept that people are susceptible to auto-suggestion I would suggest going to see a good stage hypnotist before re-affirming that belief.


Martin

i think i agree, but as long as hes not hurting anyone then why not ... as my previous comments state though it would seem daft to do the out there things before the tried and tested

its like if you hae cancer... your pretty much best off getting some tryed and tested medical help... but i would hae no issue with someone if they wanted to explor the more out there types of healing... after all... they do work on some people!!!

Themis
12-10-2009, 20:55
Best tweak : a glass of Laphroaig...
Is it auto-suggestion ? I wonder. :)

Barry
12-10-2009, 20:57
Best tweak : a glass of Laphroaig...
Is it auto-suggestion ? I wonder. :)

Works for me!

Regards

aquapiranha
12-10-2009, 20:58
the point is though Hamish is this belt character is making money out of it...

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/product/images/clip.jpg

the small crocodile clip above is yours for just £500 of your earth pounds.

Another view here..

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=45245236&blogId=83164077

SteveW
12-10-2009, 20:59
don't knock it till you've tried it, as a very wrinkly faced old quarry manager I knew 20 years ago used to say.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 20:59
Best tweak : a glass of Laphroaig...
Is it auto-suggestion ? I wonder. :)

i have said this before... there is def something about red wine or whiskey for making hifi sound better

that and the :smoking:

Themis
12-10-2009, 21:02
i have said this before... there is def something about red wine or whiskey for making hifi sound better

that and the :smoking:
;)

Beechwoods
12-10-2009, 21:08
Slightly more on-topic I'm pretty much convinced that sources with VU meters as opposed to LED bar-meters or no meters at all are imbued with a perception of greater dynamics and impact... to be honest, whether the affect is wholly imagined is neither here nor there; it enhances my enjoyment and that is why I listen to music :)

Macca
12-10-2009, 21:10
the point is though Hamish is this belt character is making money out of it...

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/product/images/clip.jpg

the small crocodile clip above is yours for just £500 of your earth pounds.

Another view here..

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=45245236&blogId=83164077

And good luck to him, I say!:lol:

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 21:13
Hamish - go & change your socks immediately. Three on one foot & five on the other!
Shippy, I'm one of those people who heard something interesting but didn't find it interesting enough to pursue & certainly not enough to spend any money on it. I never even kept the free experiments in place.

Regarding your comment on loudspeaker cones I think you may be mistaken if you think a passive cone can have no effect - as Dave says. Magnets in the room? - I don't know but let me tell you about a time I was in a pub having a drink with some friends. There was a musician playing in the corner of the room - he was doing bad cover versions of bad songs & my friends and I were making all sorts of less than complimentary remarks about both his ability & his choice of material. We thought we were being discrete by keeping our voices down & sometimes even covering our mouths while we spoke so that the other people in the pub couldn't hear what we said. The musician came over to us during a break between sets & we bought him a drink and had a brief discussion about his guitar. We were then taken aback as he proceeded to recount our 'private' conversation word for word. He explained that we were sitting close to his loudspeaker & he could hear what we were saying because it was acting as a microphone - His mike was acting as a small speaker............and it was a fair cop!!

Part of the problem I saw with PWB is the language he used: talk of rainbow foils & electret cream or whatever is going to make some people walk away ...and quickly.

Plenty of people have bought the claims made by Shun Mook & Ringmat & they're not so different.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 21:16
there is always going to be people who use the near unexplainable/unexplainable to make money.. i see no issue with this as long as they firmly belive they are right and are not ripping people off! if there is a tiny bit of them that even suspects that they are ripping people off or taking advantage of other peoples good will then i should hope that some day they will realise the errors of their ways and stop!

Themis
12-10-2009, 21:18
Slightly more on-topic I'm pretty much convinced that sources with VU meters as opposed to LED bar-meters or no meters at all are imbued with a perception of greater dynamics and impact... to be honest, whether the affect is wholly imagined is neither here nor there; it enhances my enjoyment and that is why I listen to music :)
Well, as far as I am concerned, this is something I totally agree with : any enjoyment enhancement is a clear -and objective- benefit.
What can be objected, is when someone insists on the fact that his own -personal- enhancements are valid (and should be valid) for everybody. And that the ones who don't agree are negativists: I feel somehow insulted.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 21:20
Hamish - go & change your socks immediately. Three on one foot & five on the other!
i dont need to ... i have a bit of scar tissue on the one toe from an ingrowing toenail i had when i was a kid... its like an extra toe... im plenty uneven enough because of that :)

Barry
12-10-2009, 21:21
No, there's no need to be nuts about it. I have always said the best system is no system, because so many objects and materials can be detrimental to our perception of sound. But so is the absence of the components that create the sound. Magnets are a particular problem, but you only need deal with the ones you can deal with, and leave the others alone. Actually, I'm not sure but Belt may have since devised something that might negate the negative effects of magnets in the listening area. I think they are the "Magnadiscs", but again, not sure. Why be selective - from what you say all magnets are bad.

The thing about "the art of sound" is, you don't really know what you're missing, until you hear it. Meaning, you can't understand what the "Beltist" effects are of ordinary objects in the environment (magnets, pvc, styrofoam, etc), until you are able to hear the differences in sound without their influence. That's when they might become more important. So your listening room is completely empty; what do you sit on or are you supposed to sit 'yoga' fashion? What about the presence of other listeners? Do they have to human? What about pets that might stray in?



I'm sure I don't know. It never occurred to me that this is something that should concern me. Why should it concern you? If you want an educated guess, I'd say "nothing". I am quite certain he does not follow horoscopes or I-Ching or even Feng Shui. Neither do I, if it matters.



I think I tried the socks thing once, never found a difference. Even if there is, I can off the top of my head think of a hundred Belt tweaks that will be more effective than odd socks. I did however with the crossed legs thing, but I don't normally pay attention to that during listening tests. Never tried reversing rugs in the listening room (is that a Belt tweak or did you make it up?) Yes I did - I can't believe that you actually tried odd socks!, or reinserting light bulbs the other way round (not even sure what you mean by that, since the thread only goes one way) In the UK, the light sockets are a bayonet design; you can plug in the light bulb either way. I have however "treated" light bulbs by applying PWB liquid or cream to the socket. And yes, it did very much have an effect on my sound, but interestingly, the effect kind of switches on and off with the light. Probably the reason I have thus far stayed away mostly from light bulbs. So sometimes you hear a difference and other times not?



All the time. Some people new to the concepts notice a change -only- when the item is removed from the environement, or otherwise reversed. I sometimes notice changes for the better, without knowing what has changed. e.g. I noticed the other day, the sound off my computer speakers was tremendously good. I was getting bass notes and lines I had never heard before, and just bags and bags of roominess in the soundstage presentation; new details. This was on music I was -very- familiar with, because I always listened to it. But for the life of me, I could not think what brought this about, as I had not done any tweaks, Beltist or otherwise, in a long time. A few days later (and yes, the high rez sound was still present), it occurred to me why this happened. I brought in the safety pin. (I have one of the so-called "magic safety pins" from PWB, known as the CCU Brown Tie, which I had brought back with me from on the road. When storing my items, without thinking, I stuck it back in the normal place I usually keep it, which was the most effective spot I could find at the time). What is the tie made from - silk or a man made fibre?

I usually find the change is greater upon my first listen (it is the time the working memory is most sensitive Disagree; if the change is a genuine improvement it will remain so. ). It retains perhaps 95% of its influence thereafter.

Regards

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 21:22
Well, as far as I am concerned, this is something I totally agree with : any enjoyment enhancement is a clear -and objective- benefit.
What can be objected, is when someone insists on the fact that his own -personal- enhancements are valid (and should be valid) for everybody. And that the ones who don't agree are negativists: I feel somehow insulted.

i agree

as a side note i am about to change all the leds on my techie for purple ones... :)

Cotlake
12-10-2009, 22:01
there is always going to be people who use the near unexplainable/unexplainable to make money.. i see no issue with this as long as they firmly belive they are right and are not ripping people off! if there is a tiny bit of them that even suspects that they are ripping people off or taking advantage of other peoples good will then i should hope that some day they will realise the errors of their ways and stop!

That is exactly the point. The likelihood is Peter Belt and his disciples (Shippy) are so entrenched in the nonsence that they seriously cannot relate to reality. They've become completely out of touch. PB continues to market his wares just as a travelling quack did in the wild west America over 100 years ago or more locally in the streets of London in Victorian times. The problem is they actually believe their own deception, but is that not the characteristic of all lyers? They become so convinced by their own deception that they can see no wrong or deception in what they say. In consequence, PB has probably made a very fat living off 'grail chasers' over the last 20 or so years. If you explore and disregard his free offerings, his stuff certainly isn't cheap. Personally I see it as a total deception but recognise that there may be no actual deceptive intent. PB and his disciples are so brain washed, they have absolutely no idea what reality is!

Soundhaspriority
12-10-2009, 22:05
I'm fairly certain that I am not qualified to talk on this subject as I have never heard of this chap and I'm only loosly aware of some of these techniques (plug notches rings a bell). My veiw on this is that I'm fairly certain that anything one might do in a list ing room might make a difference... Moving a sofa 3mm away from a wall could mean that some screw is no longer reacting in some way with some bit of equipment (I have no idea how but I wouldn't rule it out) if this chap hears the differences these things make then good on him, if it makes him happy spending his time investigating these things then fine. Weather or not these things a practicle for everyone is another matter! I know I could make my hifi better by having smaller sofas and the room laid out differently. I could probably make monumental differences to the sound by organising my cables better. I don't question weather this stuff works or doesn't... I have no idea! I would seriously question someone who would be OCD enough to put extra sheets of paper in all books or folding up corners of curtains. The question for me is not if it works ... But are these minor changes really worth all the effort and the hastle they must cause? For me, no, I'd rather have a slightly crapper sounding hifi and enjoy listening to it than worrying that my little bits of foil arnt quite in the right place/orientation/whatever.

You're more right than you think, anything you do in a room could make a difference. What most are not aware of is, what you do in -another- room could also make a difference to the sound in your listening room.

In your mind, the changes are small, so the differences could only be small. You may be right, and how small or large any differences are always depends on the listener and their hearing acuity. But... ever stop to consider what happens if there are a great -many- of those arguably "small" changes in a single room, let alone your entire residence? To give an example, when I removed 3 videotapes from my room, I could hear a difference, an improvement. But when I removed all such tapes, dozens, it was night and day difference for me. Yet it took a minute to do. I could probably have a look round your room and find many things that might be affecting your sound in a detrimental way, and fix them in 15 minutes.

So does 15 minutes to improve the environment with the idea of increasing your listening pleasure thereafter, denote a mental disorder now? What's the point of buying expensive audio if you're only getting 25% of its performance? I don't find it a lot of "effort and hassle" to stick an "inside foil" on a battery. But that one foil can create more than a "minor change" for most listeners. It's about 15 minutes to use up the length of it, and there's nothing "slight" about it if you do. The free tweaks you're referring to are only "proof of concept" tweaks and yes, in your case, might not be worth the effort. But seeing that the commercial products in general are more effective in general, I'd say they're practical for everyone who cares about having a musical sound. I have never put "extra sheets" in all my books, because I simply have much more effective and quicker things I can do to bring about a greater change.

My interest in the tweaks are more about my interest in the revolutionary but little understood science behind this phenomenon they call "Beltism". But if I was lazy and just wanted better sound in a flash, I would just use any of the PWB products I have, as directed. Had I never done so, I would realize the sound I had been missing before. Generally, as with all audio, the greater the cost of the item, the more effective the changes it will produce. There's apparently no law that says you have to re-do any of it on a daily basis.

Marco
12-10-2009, 22:26
Hi Paul,

Thank you very much for complying with my earlier request, and in some detail, too! :respect:

It wasn't so diffucult, was it? ;)

I hope you enjoy contributing to our community and wish you lots of fun in the process.

Marco.

P.S That's some serious shit you're smokin', man! :peace:

Cotlake
12-10-2009, 22:26
Shippy, you're simply living in the total bollocks dimension. What absolute nonsense you spout. Furthermore it is clear you'll try and prey on any potentially vulnerable punter as with your last post to Hamish. I don't doubt you are a beleiver but you are also into evangelism of your (and PB's) false art.

It's all total rubbish per se. You need to shut up! Your input here is not helpful.........Please go away!

aquapiranha
12-10-2009, 22:35
the revolutionary but little understood science behind this phenomenon they call "Beltism".

Come again? Revolutionary? little understood? SCIENCE? please, we are all relatively intelligent people here, we do not need to be spoon fed this rubbish.

Show us the PROOF of this science of which you speak, this phenomenon.

And please refrain fron using the term 'beltism' as naming this shamanism attempts to lend it credence, and give it an acceptable face. If it was so good why are there are only two people I have ever come across banging on about it? you and this so called scientist mr belt who for reasons known only to him never appears on forums to defend his so called science, but leaves it up to you, the only other disciple I have come across to defend the indefensible?


Apologies to other forum members reading this, but I just cannot allow this drivel to go unchallenged. I have a personal dislike for charlatans and con men in all their guises, and this belt person is cut from the same cloth as fraudsters in my book. NONE of this crap can be proved to even exist let alone work, and I won't stand by and let it carry on sorry guys.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 22:35
You're more right than you think, anything you do in a room could make a difference. What most are not aware of is, what you do in -another- room could also make a difference to the sound in your listening room.

In your mind, the changes are small, so the differences could only be small. You may be right, and how small or large any differences are always depends on the listener and their hearing acuity. But... ever stop to consider what happens if there are a great -many- of those arguably "small" changes in a single room, let alone your entire residence? To give an example, when I removed 3 videotapes from my room, I could hear a difference, an improvement. But when I removed all such tapes, dozens, it was night and day difference for me. Yet it took a minute to do. I could probably have a look round your room and find many things that might be affecting your sound in a detrimental way, and fix them in 15 minutes.

So does 15 minutes to improve the environment with the idea of increasing your listening pleasure thereafter, denote a mental disorder now? What's the point of buying expensive audio if you're only getting 25% of its performance? I don't find it a lot of "effort and hassle" to stick an "inside foil" on a battery. But that one foil can create more than a "minor change" for most listeners. It's about 15 minutes to use up the length of it, and there's nothing "slight" about it if you do. The free tweaks you're referring to are only "proof of concept" tweaks and yes, in your case, might not be worth the effort. But seeing that the commercial products in general are more effective in general, I'd say they're practical for everyone who cares about having a musical sound. I have never put "extra sheets" in all my books, because I simply have much more effective and quicker things I can do to bring about a greater change.

My interest in the tweaks are more about my interest in the revolutionary but little understood science behind this phenomenon they call "Beltism". But if I was lazy and just wanted better sound in a flash, I would just use any of the PWB products I have, as directed. Had I never done so, I would realize the sound I had been missing before. Generally, as with all audio, the greater the cost of the item, the more effective the changes it will produce. There's apparently no law that says you have to re-do any of it on a daily basis.

im sorry to say, but after reading your web site i am even less inclined to belive what you say. please belive me when i say if it works for you im happy for you! maybe your ears are just better than mine, or maybe you have bought into a pseudo science (and im more inclided to bleive this is a pseudo science), either way if it makes you happy go for it...its just not for me
i know full well i could get more out of my system but the most major changes could only be made by removing major peices of furniture from my very small english lounge. i get confused enough when makeing tweaks ... doing my a-b comparisons i often find it hard to know which i prefer ... espesially when it comes to the more slight ones (my record weight is a good example) i dont need to confuse matters by doing things like drinking "north polarised water".
maybe with a bit of dedication of time i could make it work for me... but i def think this is somthing based on a belife in it not something acually happening!
have you ever questioned it in that way your self? do you understand the comments pertaining to "quantum clips" or whatever? would you ever be willing to accept that it works because you want it to work?

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 22:38
Shippy, you're simply living in the total bollocks dimension. What absolute nonsense you spout. Furthermore it is clear you'll try and prey on any potentially vulnerable punter as with your last post to Hamish. I don't doubt you are a beleiver but you are also into evangelism of your (and PB's) false art.

It's all total rubbish per se. You need to shut up! Your input here is not helpful.........Please go away!

No, please stay, I need the laughter! I'm off to dig out "Medicine Show" by Big Audio Dynamite, been a while, and I think there is an odd number of LPs on that shelf, so it should sound fantastic to boot!

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 22:41
Shippy, you're simply living in the total bollocks dimension. What absolute nonsense you spout. Furthermore it is clear you'll try and prey on any potentially vulnerable punter as with your last post to Hamish. I don't doubt you are a beleiver but you are also into evangelism of your (and PB's) false art.

It's all total rubbish per se. You need to shut up! Your input here is not helpful.........Please go away!

i object to the term "vulnerable punter" in sentance in referance to me :lolsign:
im big enough to look after my self :)

Marco
12-10-2009, 22:46
I thought that you were only a harmless wee dafty? :ner:

;)

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 22:47
i object to the term "vulnerable punter" in sentance in referance to me :lolsign:
im big enough to look after my self :)

..........and if you don't back off, he'll slash yer with his mutant clawfoot!!

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 22:49
I just looked up the lyrics to "Medicine Show - Big Audio Dynamite" (love the BADs - this track in particular) - didn't realise how apt it was - sorry Shippy, not trying to "chase you out of town" but worth sharing...

Covered wagon medicine show
Take you to the place where the healing flows
Weak in spirit we got the juice
Wont save your soul it`ll shine your shoes
Treated king to kangaroo
Santa Fe to Timbuktu
Don`t be fooled by imitation
This is the stuff that cured a nation
We took the tube and the high plains too
Never stopped long just passing through
A drop of the laughter of the maids of France
Makes a hopeless cripple dance

It was really vile weather
When we got to tarred and feathered
You could hear the six guns sound
As they chased us out of town

In India we`re all the rave
Discovered that its great as aftershave
Dropped in the sea just off Japan
Swapped 20 bottles for an aqua-walkman
Immunity from ridicule
Improves your brains if you`re a fool
And I read in the Middle East
They traded some for a hostage release
Now if you`re bald it`ll give you hair
If you got straight trousers it`ll give you flares
Feeling up you`ll get depressed
Out of style here`s a brand new dress

It was really vile weather
When we got to tarred and feathered
You could hear the six guns sound
As they chased us out of town

The stuff we sell is just the best
Passing all consumer test
Days of heaven nights of sin
Voodoo stick and sharks fin
When all around you seems like hell
Just one sip will make you well
Multipurpose in a jar
If you ain`t ill it`ll fix your car
In days of yore for all bad feelings
Washing socks and stripping ceilings
Nowadays its used medicinally
For all known human malady

It was really vile weather
When we got to tarred and feathered
You could hear the six guns sound
As they chased us out of town

Guaranteed don`t you know
Money back?
You`ll get a no!
It`s the one and only medicine show

Soundhaspriority
12-10-2009, 22:50
Why be selective - from what you say all magnets are bad.

No, it's not as simple as that. (Nothing ever is!) I use magnets to improve sound myself, even while noting the detrimental effect they have in my listening room, so it depends on how they are used, and other factors. Most items in the environment are "bad", in that they bear energy patterns that affect our senses; magnets particularly so, for some reason. The whole purpose of ALL products Belt has put out since 25 years now, is to change those energy patterns to ones benign to us. This reduces tension (a tension only read subconsciously), which increases hearing acuity, and other senses. Many aspects of our nature operate on the subconscious, but not being aware of them, doesn't mean they're not there. In this case, it's probably better to just chuck the magnet if you can, but if you can't, the second best thing is to try to change its effect on the people in your environment.


So your listening room is completely empty; what do you sit on or are you supposed to sit 'yoga' fashion? What about the presence of other listeners? Do they have to human? What about pets that might stray in?

No, I think you're confusing me with Neo in "the Matrix". A lot of thing will change the sound in small ways, yes, but you can't worry about that. Especially if you don't notice it. The room doesn't need to be empty, the worst offenders just need a little "tweaking". I think you'd be surprised if you could hear the concept in action, rather than trying to understand it by reading.


Yes I did - I can't believe that you actually tried odd socks!

Absolutely. If the idea genuinely comes from Mr. Belt, then I have long since learned there's something real behind it. This idea was on the front cover of an audio magazine in the 80's, Hi-Fi Answers I believe. Trust me, I have tried ideas that would be a lot odder to you than odd socks, all of which do change the sound. Oddly enough, the odd socks did nothing for me. I suspected your rug tweak wasn't genuine, because turning it around shouldn't do anything. Turning it over might, however. And no, I didn't try that. Since you're not up to trying odd things, if you have an audio stand with removable shelves, why don't you try flipping the shelves and seeing if that doesn't change the sound. I remember when I talked about flipping the glass platter on my Rega 3, talking about how the sound was never right until I did that, and people on one of these forums thought I was bonkers. Yet the more bonkers I get, the better my sound gets. Oddly enough.


So sometimes you hear a difference and other times not?

No, that's not what I was saying. I'm saying the improvement switches off when the light is turned off. I can't have my sound changing everytime someone turns on the light switch; whether good or bad. I need consistency, because I do a lot of testing and need to try to eliminate variables.


What is the tie made from - silk or a man made fibre?

Not that kind of a "tie". The CCU Brown Tie refers to a brown plastic tie attached to a safety pin; both of which are treated, so not comparable to their stock counterparts. The item is sold generally for use at live concerts, where you would normally not have any other way to improve your sound.


Disagree; if the change is a genuine improvement it will remain so.

These are different kind of changes than you are accustomed to dealing with. But it is always a genuine improvement, I never said it doesn't remain. I've had products from years ago that I have removed, and the sound degrades just like the ones freshly applied. Our sound changes to some degree, all the time. A million things can cause these changes, so one doesn't have to do anything (but wait) for that to happen. Some are more aware of this than others, but that's okay too. If one is not aware, it at least doesn't affect them consciously. Even though I have intimate knowledge of my sound on a daily basis, I don't go scrambling every time I notice changes either. I can still enjoy the music. :gig:

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 22:51
I thought that you were only a harmless wee dafty? :ner:

;)

Marco.

me??? piss of mate im effing hard as nails me ....

.....

yeah harmless and wee are about spot on ... as for dafty ... well i might not know everything about the old hifi hobby (and the whole spelling thing.....) but overall you can cram "dafty" up your bum.... i resent that! ;) :lolsign:

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 22:54
Oh please stop, I think a little bit of wee came out!:D

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 22:54
..........and if you don't back off, he'll slash yer with his mutant clawfoot!!

you wanna see a picture of it?

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 22:56
NO! I'm already wetting myself, puking too I can do without! ;)

Marco
12-10-2009, 23:00
Oh please stop, I think a little bit of wee came out!:D

Apparently DSJR has shares in 'Tena for men' and can thus obtain a notable discount on their new 'body fit' super absorbent range with Velcro fasteners.

Would you like me to pass your details onto him, pee-wee boy? :)

Marco.

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 23:01
Yet the more bonkers I get, the better my sound gets. Oddly enough.


.... is all this just a piss take?? im not just sceptical... im now sceptical that this isnt just a wind up...

have you ever worn a tin foil hat... maybe a magnet hat .... oh my god ... have you tried these
http://www.magnetictherapy.co.uk/scp/MAGNETIC_JEWELLERY/MAGNETIC_RINGS.html?gclid=CImYhqTOuJ0CFZ1h4wodZ159 kQ

... sorry if this isnt a wind up what i have just said is a bit harsh for me...but be honest have i caught you out?

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 23:05
you wanna see a picture of it?

Maybe Shippy's got some Charged Rainbow foil ointment in a tube tied with a round turn & two half hitches that'll make it all better for you.

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 23:07
their new 'body fit' super absorbent range with Velcro fasteners.

Would you like me to pass your details onto him, pee-wee boy? :)


These days, if incontinence pants don't have shamanic safety pins, stardust silver foil or "morphic messages" (written in the magic red pen, obviously!) then they're no good to me, but thanks for the offer! :lol:

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 23:08
:gig: http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww282/hamish_gill/f46c3ee7.jpg :gig::gig::gig:
hahahahahaaaa i made you look at my wierd toe

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 23:20
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It looks just like your avatar!!!!!!!!

Alex_UK
12-10-2009, 23:21
i dont need to ... i have a bit of scar tissue on the one toe from an ingrowing toenail i had when i was a kid... its like an extra toe... im plenty uneven enough because of that :)

Now I'm plenty uneven because of SEEING that - you, Hamish, Sir, are the spawn of the devil's trumpet! Apply some Cream-Electret without delay!

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 23:24
no!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It looks just like your avatar!!!!!!!!

......................only naked

The Grand Wazoo
12-10-2009, 23:24
Did you steal it's camera to take that photo?!!!!

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 23:24
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It looks just like your avatar!!!!!!!!

:lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign:

it actually really does doesn't it!!

A-EFFING-MAY-EFFING-ZING

The Vinyl Adventure
12-10-2009, 23:27
......................only naked

lordy lordy lordy... im so tempted to make a new avatar ..........

:lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign:

twelvebears
13-10-2009, 09:19
Shippy, you're simply living in the total bollocks dimension. What absolute nonsense you spout. Furthermore it is clear you'll try and prey on any potentially vulnerable punter as with your last post to Hamish. I don't doubt you are a beleiver but you are also into evangelism of your (and PB's) false art.

It's all total rubbish per se. You need to shut up! Your input here is not helpful.........Please go away!

While I also personally believe that Paul is too firmly in the swivel-eyed-loony camp for me, I think this is a bit OTT.

Paul is completely entitled to his own views, no-one is being forced to accept them, and Hamish has already drawn his own conclusions without being sucked into some Moonie-like HiFi community.

I don't see Paul preying on anyone (he's not selling anything), and apart from the (for me) bonkers theories, I thought his website was well written. In fact, I'd say Paul has an engaging and amusing way with words and I'd be happy to see him contribute more here on AOS. Although perhaps we could make it on less controvercial subjects like musical discussions and actual equipment.

DanJennings
13-10-2009, 09:22
lordy lordy lordy... im so tempted to make a new avatar ..........

:lolsign: :lolsign: :lolsign:

This thread, apart from containing a lot of incredibly amusing nonsense.... has disturbed me, by bringing back some awful memories....

I remember when that toe turned completely black and when I met Hamish down the pub he was wearing only one shoe because it had swollen to the size of a tennis ball.

It also smelt like rotting flesh and bleached his black socks white. Nice

The Vinyl Adventure
13-10-2009, 10:18
This thread, apart from containing a lot of incredibly amusing nonsense.... has disturbed me, by bringing back some awful memories....

I remember when that toe turned completely black and when I met Hamish down the pub he was wearing only one shoe because it had swollen to the size of a tennis ball.

It also smelt like rotting flesh and bleached his black socks white. Nice

Yep, it was certainly quite the unpleasant apendige

The Vinyl Adventure
13-10-2009, 10:25
While I also personally believe that Paul is too firmly in the swivel-eyed-loony camp for me, I think this is a bit OTT.

Paul is completely entitled to his own views, no-one is being forced to accept them, and Hamish has already drawn his own conclusions without being sucked into some Moonie-like HiFi community.

I don't see Paul preying on anyone (he's not selling anything), and apart from the (for me) bonkers theories, I thought his website was well written. In fact, I'd say Paul has an engaging and amusing way with words and I'd be happy to see him contribute more here on AOS. Although perhaps we could make it on less controvercial subjects like musical discussions and actual equipment.

I tend to agree with all this! He has certainly been one of the most memorable new posters! And although I can see the issue with premoting this pwb guy.. If you read his site he is only really premoting doing the free (really crazy) stuff!
That's why I thought it might be a wind up for a bit last night.... Although in the cold light of day I can once again see he does buy into it!
As I have said in direct posts to our new forum freind .. If it makes him happy then why not! I'm also still hoping for a response from him as to weather he thinks there is a possibility if it jus works because he wants it to. I am genuinly interested!!

The Grand Wazoo
13-10-2009, 12:05
On the subject of travelling quacks & Victorian con-men:


Quote - PB continues to market his wares just as a travelling quack did in the wild west America over 100 years ago or more locally in the streets of London in Victorian times.

This still goes on in the name of God.
I'll explain: A few years back, I was in Arizona on a family holiday. It was a Sunday morning & we were going to spend the day hiking around the top of the Mogollon Rim.

http://pics4.city-data.com/cpicc/cfiles14363.jpg

I was waiting for the rest of the family to get their stuff together, hiking boots tied up, all that stuff, so being bored, I started flicking around the TV channels looking for something interesting. Needless to say I didn't find much in the way of intellectual stimulation, but I was astounded to see a so-called 'Man of God' performing miracles upon his congregation. He was slinging a bit of water around the place & the sick were being cured of cancer, the blind were seeing & the crippled were walking again – don't worry though, there was always a pair of guys behind the cured ones to catch them when they fainted from the shock of their wondrous good fortune.

Truly amazing! What a sight to see!

Because this was televised, of course, not everyone could be there in person to benefit from the bountiful talents of the good preacher. Luckily for everyone with the good fortune to tune in that particular morning to replenish their diminished spiritual batteries he gave us all the opportunity to receive, free of charge, our very own vial of this incredible liquid that he'd been chucking about with wild abandon.

He described all the things that we could do with it -
Take a swig & cure yourself of cancer!!
Put some drops on your wallet & you'll be rich within days!!
The list went on.....

So next up, one of his blessed helpers gave us the details of how to go about getting our 'Miracle Water'. We got addresses, phone numbers, web-sites & with every other breath we were told that the Good Lord had told the preacher that the water should be free (he probably met him at the well to tell him – I don't think they've got a reliable broadband connection 'Up There' yet).

Anyway, the preacher obviously had a little bit of entrepreneurial spirit in him & he had found a way not to anger his God by charging for the waterand still pay for the repairs to the church roof (& I'm convinced this is really what he was using the money for). Not only that, but it kept him legal & away from the Chapel of Alcatraz.
The water was free but the instructions were $25.

Frank Zappa once said "Tax the Churches - Tax the …… out of the Churches"
I'm not religious, but I didn't really agree with him.
.........now I understand.

Jason P
13-10-2009, 12:27
I'd say Paul has an engaging and amusing way with words and I'd be happy to see him contribute more here on AOS.

I agree. Years of amateur research in to alternative (I prefer complementary) medicine and it's efficacy, and by association it's mechanisms for working, has given me an open mind to some fairly 'out there' concepts. PWBs ideas have some resonance with the ideas inherent in many eastern philosophies which have a far less mechanistic cause/effect outlook at their core, and as such whilst I find them somewhat implausible and I think much may be down to a 'placebo' effect I won't ignorantly write them off as nonsense, merely because they don't fit in to a western reductionist paradigm.

Skepticism is healthy and I consider myself to be one, but I think many people mistake cynicism for it to their detriment. A true skeptic is willing to alter their belief in light of experience, and this is an attitude that is as necessary in the world of hi-fi as anywhere else; witness the dogged way some hang on to the idea that interconnects play no part in the digital domain, safe in the knowledge that 'it's only 1s and 0s' so the cable makes no difference.

AOS is a broad church; I for one welcome Paul's contributions and would prefer those that don't want to contribute to the thread in a respectful way simply ignore it. No-one is trying to sell anything, we're all adults that can make our own minds up. Healthy debate is great, taking the p**s less acceptable IMHO.

Just my 2p.

Jason

The Grand Wazoo
13-10-2009, 12:30
Paul,
A few comments & questions about things you have said so far & then a suggestion for everyone who's interested in making some sense out of all of this.


Quote (me) - Anyway, I remember thinking that Benson was perhaps one of the least likely people on the planet to be a convert to PWB's way of thinking.


Quote (you) - So did I, when I first heard of the guy. He was as skeptical as you at first; and cantakerous enough that he would have thrown the magazine across the room along with you. It took him a while in fact, to finally identify what has become known as the Belt effect; that particular change in one's perception of sound, that has nothing to do with either autosuggestion or the audio signal. Ever since then, he remained a practitioner and advocate of Beltism. So Paul being the last person one would think of as a Beltist, should say that there is something really going on here, that a lot of people are 'afraid' (to use my term) to find out. And would rather take the easy road out and dismiss it all as "charlatanism" or "madness" or "autosuggestion" or "hypnosis" or "effective marketing" or some such silly nonsense.

The trouble with your theory about this is that when he was writing about conventional hi-fi I already thought most of what he wrote was …….so I didn't exactly have much faith in his credibility as a writer or as an authority on audio gear (hence my slinging the magazine across the room- I was doing that long before Belt was ever mentioned).



Quote (you) - I have however "treated" light bulbs by applying PWB liquid or cream to the socket. And yes, it did very much have an effect on my sound, but interestingly, the effect kind of switches on and off with the light. Probably the reason I have thus far stayed away mostly from light bulbs.

If the alternative means that you're going to spend your spare time applying liquids to mains electrical contacts, my friend, I would suggest, that yes, staying away from light bulbs would be helpful to your continued health & well being – it may also save the guys with the wailing sirens and long ladders at your local Fire Department from paying you an unscheduled visit!

The Plug Notch Tweak

Quote (you) - How do you know the effect came from cleaning the plug? I used to cut those notches 20 years ago, to good effect. I never cleaned the plug. You are making incorrect assumptions about the mechanism for this tweak. And there's nothing "silly" about those cuts; they have a rhyme and a reason.

Would you care to explain both the rhyme and the reason? Perhaps if you describe the technique clearly and then tell us all your assessment of what is happening (the theory that's being propounded) and exactly what it does to the sound we might better understand your approach



Quote (you) - ……..there are people like me experimenting with his principles, discovering new things, new professional audio reviewers discovering these products, and manufacturers using his princples on new products of their own.

Could you provide us with details of these professional audio reviews?
Could you let us know which manufacturers are using which techniques and on what equipment?


Quote (you)The whole purpose of ALL products Belt has put out since 25 years now, is to change those energy patterns to ones benign to us. This reduces tension (a tension only read subconsciously), which increases hearing acuity, and other senses. Many aspects of our nature operate on the subconscious, but not being aware of them, doesn't mean they're not there.
So can you tell us how PWB discovered how to identify the position & nature of these 'energy patterns'? How does he know these 'sub-conscious tensions' exist? If they're sub-conscious – how is he aware of them when everyone else is not?

Does my line of questioning help you to begin to see what I mean about the language used by PWB not helping his (or your) case? Maybe if he stuck some of his mojo-trinkets into a tangible hi-fi component, so that it could give understandable and coherent results in a conventional sense (i.e. Item A sounds better than Item B because it does x, y & z) he would enjoy a little more credibility – he might even make a little more money that way.



Here's a suggestion to try to find some way through the problem that hardly anyone who doesn't or won't believe Paul has tried any of this stuff.

Dave said:
One of the best "upgrades" I made to my Meridian 207 CD player/preamp when I had one was to make up some "shorting" phono-plugs with the wire some centimetres long and with a reef-knot in the middle. I used to routinely tie a reef knot in all our mains leads too.

Given that someone other than Paul has suggested that these two things made him change his way of doing things, (even if he was an impetuous youth) and that both of these are very simple to implement and reverse, why don't we try an experiment ourselves?

Everyone who has a notion to be involved, and can honestly say that they're willing to enter into this with an open mind should give it a go.

Dave & Paul should agree between them the methods & we can try it for ourselves & report back.

How about it?

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 12:54
Dave & Paul should agree between them the methods & we can try it for ourselves & report back.

How about it?

We've got nothing to lose, have we - and potentially a lot to gain, of course? I'm up for it!

Marco
13-10-2009, 14:27
Without meaning to be unkind, I'd say that the only thing we've got to lose, Alex, is a valuable few hours off of our lives attempting to find logic where none really exists, dissecting the ravings of an obvious fanatic.


It took him a while in fact, to finally identify what has become known as the Belt effect; that particular change in one's perception of sound, that has nothing to do with either autosuggestion or the audio signal. Ever since then, he remained a practitioner and advocate of Beltism. So Paul being the last person one would think of as a Beltist...


It seems appropriate at this point to point out that the word "belter" is Scottish vernacular for a chap who hasn't got a terribly tight grip on reality. Ahem...

As you were ;)

Marco.

The Grand Wazoo
13-10-2009, 14:40
Without meaning to be too unkind, I'd say the only thing we've got to lose, Alex, is a valuable few hours off of our lives attempting to find logic where none exists, dissecting the ravings of an obvious fanatic.


You obviously weren't in the Scouts, Marco (or the Boy's Brigade, maybe given your Scots childhood?).
How long does it take to tie a reef knot in a cable & then untie it? (Clue: Left over right & under, right over left & under - no Granny's allowed!)
You'll be listening to your system anyway.

twelvebears
13-10-2009, 14:41
What is it they say again? 'Don't mock the afflicted'? ;)

I think there are many who would say all audiophiles are afflicted in one way or another. Well most of my mates seem to think so....

Look at it this way, at least most of the stuff Paul (shippy) is advocating is either free or pretty damn cheap, whereas I spend wads of cash having a man make boxes out of rock....

Themis
13-10-2009, 14:46
I think, I'll stick to my (Aristotelian) culture and -at most- observe your experiments. ;)

Marco
13-10-2009, 14:58
You obviously weren't in the Scouts, Marco (or the Boy's Brigade, maybe given your Scots childhood?).
How long does it take to tie a reef knot in a cable & then untie it? (Clue: Left over right & under, right over left & under - no Granny's allowed!)
You'll be listening to your system anyway.

Hi Chris,

Sorry, mate, that's way too cryptic for me! :confused:

Care to unravel (no pun intended) the mystery of 'whit yer on aboot', for my simple mind? :)

Marco.

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 15:01
in the Scouts

Has anyone tried a woggle around their interconnects, I wonder? ;)

Jason P
13-10-2009, 15:02
So, with reference to my earlier post I'll just run some other quotes by the forum.

...we would like to provide our members with a place where they feel that they can be themselves and express their views on hi-fi, music, and any other permitted subject, without peer pressure, one-upmanship, and a feeling of having to conform to some accepted ‘norm’.

We would gladly use science automatically as the benchmark to judge all things hi-fi if we felt that it provided all the answers necessary. It would certainly be much easier having an 'undisputable reference' as one's basis for judgement. But it's the grey areas that bother us.

Quite clearly, science currently can't provide all the answers in audio, certainly as far as measuring how equipment and its associated ancillaries treats music signals and ascertaining how humans process recorded musical information via our ears and brain. Therefore grey areas exist because we are not robots; when listening to music our brains aren't programmed to respond in a specific way to known audio measurement parameters - the fact is, we do not listen to music in the way scientific apparatus measures sound.

If such apparatus could measure how we as humans listen to and appreciate music then measurements would be truly meaningful and embraced wholeheartedly by music enthusiasts and audiophiles alike. That is why audio/music enthusiasts like those on AOS will always trust their ears more than any scientific measurements, because what can currently be measured just doesn't tell the whole story.

Until the day comes when measurements unequivocally provide all the answers, we will happily continue using our discerning ears which for us are infinitely more accurate and reliable in ascertaining what really matters in hi-fi (and subsequently in our enjoyment of music), especially in those all-important grey areas... It's often the small details or 'grey areas' that make the most significant difference and thus are ultimately of most significance!

I've added my emphasis on the above.

Now that's a long quote but taken directly from the post in the 'Ethos' section of the forum. I can't help feeling that it is at odds with Marco's last post and more than a few of the previous ones...

Without meaning to be too unkind, I'd say that the only thing we've got to lose, Alex, is a valuable few hours off of our lives attempting to find logic where none exists, dissecting the ravings of an obvious lunatic.

What is it they say again? 'Don't mock the afflicted'?

Are we a broad church or not, or does the ethos only apply in certain cases?

Jason

Haselsh1
13-10-2009, 15:09
Best tweak : a glass of Laphroaig...
Is it auto-suggestion ? I wonder. :)


Oh joy... a very large glass if you please...???

The Grand Wazoo
13-10-2009, 15:14
Hi Chris,

Sorry, mate, that's way too cryptic for me! :confused:

Can to unravel (no pun intended) the mystery of 'whit yer on aboot', for my simple mind? :)

Marco.

It's instructions on how to tie a reef knot, mate.

http://www.2ndbrooklands.org.uk/KNOTS/reef_knot.jpg

Watch my lips: If you need a 'valuable few hours of your life' to tie one of those in a cable (which is what I'm suggesting) then you can't have been a Scout

The Vinyl Adventure
13-10-2009, 15:14
Hi Chris,

Sorry, mate, that's way too cryptic for me! :confused:

Can to unravel (no pun intended) the mystery of 'whit yer on aboot', for my simple mind? :)

Marco.

that's how you tie a reff knot
a granny not is an otherwise unnamed tangle of a knot
behind my hifi there are many of them!

Haselsh1
13-10-2009, 15:15
Come again? Revolutionary? little understood? SCIENCE? please, we are all relatively intelligent people here, we do not need to be spoon fed this rubbish.

Show us the PROOF of this science of which you speak, this phenomenon.



Come on now...! Proof...! How many of us believe in Christianity for which there isn't a shred of proof...??? There maybe evidence but, just like with PWB, there isn't a single ounce of proof.

Themis
13-10-2009, 15:15
Sorry, Jason, but I don't see any contradiction between the 'ethos' passages and Marco's position...:scratch:
Could you please kindly explain where do you see one ?

The Vinyl Adventure
13-10-2009, 15:17
There should be easy enough ways to prove or disprove some of these theory's I hope we haven't scared Paul off! I haven't seen him comment seen the picture of my toe

Marco
13-10-2009, 15:27
LOL - gotcha now, Chris! Excuse my denseness. I'm trying to juggle doing some invoices, whilst dipping in and out of the forum... :)

And no, I was never a Boy Scout - too much of a naughty wee b*stard for that! ;)

Marco.

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 15:28
There should be easy enough ways to prove or disprove some of these theory's I hope we haven't scared Paul off! I haven't seen him comment seen the picture of my toe

That's because he's still in the bog, retching! :lol:

Jason P
13-10-2009, 15:42
Sorry, Jason, but I don't see any contradiction between the 'ethos' passages and Marco's position...:scratch:
Could you please kindly explain where do you see one ?

Simple. I don't think saying PWB is a raving loony, and by inference tarring Paul with the same brush, as being in line with my understanding of the ethos of this site.

...we would like to provide our members with a place where they feel that they can be themselves and express their views on hi-fi, music, and any other permitted subject, without peer pressure, one-upmanship, and a feeling of having to conform to some accepted ‘norm’.

You, Marco or anyone may think it bolleaux but I'll defend Pauls right to expound on his beliefs and I'd like to think that AOS is the place to do that without people taking the pish or subtly belittling his standpoint.

For me it raises intriguing possibilities of the subjective experience of listening to music and how our own mental and physical state changes that. I'd like to think that it is a valid viewpoint and interest to take; I'd also like to feel that raising it will not bring down cries of 'NUTTER!' from the assembled masses. That often peer-driven response occurs all too readily when people show an interest in less mainstream ideas.

Jason

The Vinyl Adventure
13-10-2009, 15:51
Simple. I don't think saying PWB is a raving loony, and by inference tarring Paul with the same brush, as being in line with my understanding of the ethos of this site.

...we would like to provide our members with a place where they feel that they can be themselves and express their views on hi-fi, music, and any other permitted subject, without peer pressure, one-upmanship, and a feeling of having to conform to some accepted ‘norm’.

You, Marco or anyone may think it bolleaux but I'll defend Pauls right to expound on his beliefs and I'd like to think that AOS is the place to do that without people taking the pish or subtly belittling his standpoint.

For me it raises intriguing possibilities of the subjective experience of listening to music and how our own mental and physical state changes that. I'd like to think that it is a valid viewpoint and interest to take; I'd also like to feel that raising it will not bring down cries of 'NUTTER!' from the assembled masses. That often peer-driven response occurs all too readily when people show an interest in less mainstream ideas.

Jason

I agree with this to a point... In my view;
calling him a nutter is fine, I don't mind being called a nutter for my views.
calling him stupid is bad!
I also defend my right to mock, provided he knows it is in jest... He apears to have a sence of humer and hasn't taken offence... I would always apologise if he did take offence to anything I said! There has to remain a lighthearted element to all this!
There is no need to be bluntly rude!
I think it should also be unanimously accepted that it works for him... Else we are just saying he is a liar!
...
I, like chris, have posted some questions that will provide more insight into this I hope

Marco
13-10-2009, 15:52
Hi Jason,

I agree. I should point out that my previous postings should be read very much as 'tongue-in-cheek'. Sorry for the confusion. I'll edit them a bit so that it reads more that way... :)

{Now done}. My apologies.

Marco.

Haselsh1
13-10-2009, 15:52
Jason P, I couldn't agree more. The next thing you know is that Shippy will be nailed to a cross for talking heresy...!

The Grand Wazoo
13-10-2009, 15:56
I'd agree with you Jason, hence my attempt to get the thing back on track with the suggestion of a low hassle experiment that anyone can try.
It's just like any other theory (cables touching walls anyone?) if you try it & don't like it you've learnt something. If you do get an improvement out of it & are worried that you'll be ridiculed too, then just don't tell anyone about it.

Gotta be worth a go guys!

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 16:07
Jason P, I couldn't agree more. The next thing you know is that Shippy will be nailed to a cross for talking heresy...!

Now, where did I put that hammer....?

Really though while I can accept that some people are entitled to their views, however far fetched, the thing that annoys me is that this new age science stuff always comes with a sting in it's tail. In this case it is the fact that mr belt continues to peddle products that have no rational, scientific, proven basis for their claims. Now, if he were to publish say an ingredients list for his 'cream electret' for example (if he has I have not seen it) and this could then be replicated and any effects observed and recorded under controlled conditions, then perhaps he would be cut a little more slack. As it is, I myself could start proclaiming that wearing a red bow tie while putting one foot in a pan of salted water while listening will greatly increase your appreciation of the music and no-one could deny that I was telling the truth could they? (and no I have not tried it, before anyone asks).

What I am saying essentially is that this kind of thing is no different to say, homeopathy in my book - ie, it has absolutely not a single shred of basis in scientific fact, yet the desperate and easily led will proclaim it as the gospel truth no matter what they hear to the contrary.

So, while he is entitled to an OPINION - that is what it is, an OPINION, so am I !!

Carry on...


:peace:

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 16:11
Also make sure you are keeping tabs on Paul's (Shippy) Welcome thread - "Greetings, Earthlings" - http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4181 - Paul is online now, so I suspect a response is imminent - meanwhile I'm trying to find my old red bow tie, thanks for the tip Steve!

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 16:13
Alex, did I forget to mention that I sell them? only £300 each for the cryogenic ones. And don't forget, the salt container must be upside down while it is the listening room at all times - this is vital.

Cheers

Haselsh1
13-10-2009, 16:16
Now, where did I put that hammer....?

Really though while I can accept that some people are entitled to their views, however far fetched, the thing that annoys me is that this new age science stuff always comes with a sting in it's tail. In this case it is the fact that mr belt continues to peddle products that have no rational, scientific, proven basis for their claims. Now, if he were to publish say an ingredients list for his 'cream electret' for example (if he has I have not seen it) and this could then be replicated and any effects observed and recorded under controlled conditions, then perhaps he would be cut a little more slack. As it is, I myself could start proclaiming that wearing a red bow tie while putting one foot in a pan of salted water while listening will greatly increase your appreciation of the music and no-one could deny that I was telling the truth could they? (and no I have not tried it, before anyone asks).

What I am saying essentially is that this kind of thing is no different to say, homeopathy in my book - ie, it has absolutely not a single shred of basis in scientific fact, yet the desperate and easily led will proclaim it as the gospel truth no matter what they hear to the contrary.

So, while he is entitled to an OPINION - that is what it is, an OPINION, so am I !!

Carry on...


:peace:


Along with Christians who also continue to peddle a shedload of absolute drivel and then claim that the Bible is proof...! A stupid little novel is no proof of anything just as with PWB, there simply is no proof...!!! Get a life.

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 16:21
Along with Christians who also continue to peddle a shedload of absolute drivel and then claim that the Bible is proof...! A stupid little novel is no proof of anything just as with PWB, there simply is no proof...!!! Get a life.

Well you got me there, as I am not religious in the slightest, do you think such belief patterns makes you more open to suggestion on bad science or not?


I really don't care to get into anything to do with religion as it is a very personal thing for many people, (and it's discussion is I believe against the AUP) but what I am saying is that this belt bloke is making money out of something with no basis in the real world, and that to me is fraud.

:confused:

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 16:34
It's clearly an emotive subject, whatever your belief - 112 posts in less than 2 days on this thread alone - clearly polarizes opinion... Similarly, Rob Sinden (was it?) on his DSP room treatments provoked similar responses... Would be interesting to hear Rob's thoughts on some of the Belt "treatments" but I doubt he reads anything other than his own promotional thread...

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 16:52
It's clearly an emotive subject, whatever your belief - 112 posts in less than 2 days on this thread alone - clearly polarizes opinion... Similarly, Rob Sinden (was it?) on his DSP room treatments provoked similar responses... Would be interesting to hear Rob's thoughts on some of the Belt "treatments" but I doubt he reads anything other than his own promotional thread...

Very emotive, and I really didn't set out to upset anyone, so I hope Shaun can accept my apologies if I have upset him in some way.

There are just some things that don't sit right with me, and this has been one since I first heard about it 20 years ago.

Joe
13-10-2009, 17:05
I really don't care to get into anything to do with religion as it is a very personal thing for many people, (and it's discussion is I believe against the AUP)

I have been assured by the forum owner that there is nothing in the AUP that bars discussing religion (which is just as well, given the religious belief that some have in certain hifi products).

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 17:07
All the same, that is one place I am not willing to go! I thought it was against the AUP, sorry I was wrong.

And you are right about some peoples almost blind faith in certain hifi products..

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 17:14
I don't think Shaun is upset, but equally, religion is not somewhere we should strive to push this discussion, with the exception that "Beltism" is quasi-religious in that it requires you to suspend scientific belief and make a leap of faith into the unexplainable. (Which is the catch, it can neither be proved, nor disproved.)

Joe
13-10-2009, 17:16
I don't think Shaun is upset, but equally, religion is not somewhere we should strive to push this discussion, with the exception that "Beltism" is quasi-religious in that it requires you to suspend scientific belief and make a leap of faith into the unexplainable. (Which is the catch, it can neither be proved, nor disproved.)

But given the subjective bent of this forum, isn't that true of most of what we discuss?

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 17:23
Not to the same extent, Joe, IMHO - most of the discussions have some logical foundation - but to suggest that the colour of the insulation on cables (for example) makes them sound different is to me a much bigger leap of faith than (for instance) filling the bearing void on a Technics turntable with bees wax - both sound fanciful, but there is no logical reason why the colour of the outside of a cable would change the sound - whilst I can correlate logically that the wax in the void might dampen some reasonance or other. When we start making sure there are only odd numbers of CDs on a shelf, or odd number of pages in a book, it's another massive leap IMHO.

Jason P
13-10-2009, 17:38
What I am saying essentially is that this kind of thing is no different to say, homeopathy in my book - ie, it has absolutely not a single shred of basis in scientific fact, yet the desperate and easily led will proclaim it as the gospel truth no matter what they hear to the contrary.


Now, we're getting to the heart of the problem. I was at a livery this weekend where very expensive racehorses were kept. One was being treated by a homeopath. When I asked about why this was (and I asked as someone interested in homeopathy) the reply was 'because it works'. Not in the 'I'm a believer' sense but in the empirical, we've had good results and it's repeatable sense. They wouldn't pay good money for it - and often , animals are very receptive to 'alternative' treatments because they know no different. They don't come to the treatment with a skeptical or doubting stance.

Now, most studies that negate the efficacy of homeopathic medicine have connections with Big Pharma companies and/or the medical 'establishment', both of whom have an awful lot to lose in the face of treatments that are non-invasive, non-toxic and effective - oh, and cannot make billions in profit for said companies. There are studies that have shown that homeopathy works, in that it produces statistically significant changes for the better in people who have had the treatment. The media coverage of these cases is scant at best.

So again, we're dealing with an orthodoxy (and I use that in the religious sense too; many cling on to science, or should I say the unquestioning belief that all we know is all we know as if it were a religion) that cannot broach questions and paradigms that push boundaries. Hell, it took the Vatican 400 years to say sorry to Galileo...

Jason

Soundhaspriority
13-10-2009, 17:55
Sorry, speaker cones do vibrate in sympathy with other speakers playing in the room and it really matters not if the magnets are there at all - how do you think (in extreme cases) ABR drivers work???? The unused speaker cone acts like a microphone at some frequencies and this is EASILY measured and heard by anyone who's ever connected a drive unit (or Coles 4001 tweeter) to a microphone input and recorded it. I believe professional room treatments work by tuned flapping diaphragms resonating to cancel out certain bass modes in a controlled way in a room.

I was not saying speaker cones don't vibrate in sympathy with other speakers playing. Everything vibrates in sympathy, not just the loudspeakers (and not just in sympathy - hence the reason you can put footers under an amp with headphones on, and expect a change in sound). I -was- saying that's a false premise for the problem Ivor observed. This is pretty easy to test, as I mentioned in an earlier response. The question to test is: Q. What will have more influence on the sound of a room? A passive speaker in the corner, or the same speaker without the magnet?

Have you ever tried removing magnets and objects containing them (ie. tapes) in your room, before stating it matters not? I'm not saying you -will- hear a difference, I can't predict that. But I have, numerous times.



I still personably believe that much of what we hear has been researched by science and back in the days when "your" favourite equipment was designed and made, the designers/engineers were all white coated, post WW2 engineers who knew a thing or two about what they were doing. same goes for the reviewers of the 60's and early 70's.

Peter Belt -is- a white-coated post WW2 engineer who knew a thing or two about what he was doing. In fact, he was also a radio engineer during the war, and developed state of the art loudspeakers, headphones, headphones and mic technology in the 60's, 70's. Once he realized that using the phenomenon he discovered in the 80's, he could produce the kind of sound from loudspeakers that he was always trying to acheive with his conventional designs, he never went back to the conventional. At no small expense, really, because if its just about making money, you can make a hell of a lot more producing conventional audio equipment. The kind of thing that 99.9% of audio consumers buy, you know.

Remember back in the 60's & 70's, the idea that cables could affect the sound was either non-existent, or quite controversial. Just to show you how much society progresses in 3 decades, the damn question is STILL controversial, in the audiophile community.


All this Peter Belt "stuff" means nothing if the system sounds cr@p to start with.

I -almost- sort of kind of agree with that statement. The bit of truth therein relates to the fact that if you have crap to begin with, you won't go as far with Belting the environment as you would with better kit. Same with conventional tweaking. That said however, even if you start with crap, it does not mean "nothing". I tested this theory once by Belting the crappiest thing I could possibly find. For this test, it was necessary to find a small "Candle" brand bookshelf speaker from the 70's, in the garbage (for those not familiar with the "Candle" brand, it's the speaker you buy when you just can't afford £5 speakers). I then ripped the 5" full range driver out of it, connected the leads to it, and treated the basket. And yes, I heard the improvement on the driver alone, playing at a full 1 watt or such. As usual, less hash.


Jimmy began turning his Impulse speakers to the back wall mid point between them and the noises thus emanating from them bore no resemblance at all to a live jazz gig nearby at the Barbican we went to at one of my visits. Jimmy just couldn't see it at the time.. I went home, played a CD by the jazz group playing that day and whacked the volume up a bit to near-realistic levels and was very happy indeed.....

I always heard he had an excellent sounding system, so maybe he just went astray at one point. Believe it or not, I've done some pretty weird things too during the years, to my loudspeakers, in the interest of experimentation. Like sticking a 3 foot pipe out of the front port (how's THAT for WAF factor??). I know that some Beltists remove the wadding from their loudspeakers, because of the negative influence the material has on our senses, and those that do prefer the sound without it. I tried that and decided that no, it's there for a good reason. That said, it really does improve some aspects of the sound, but "balance" is not one of them.

Soundhaspriority
13-10-2009, 20:45
this sort of thing really suprises me too... i wasnt aware of it until today but have been mulling it over more since my privious post. to expand on what barry says.. surely using electrostatics is the only option.. beond that surly you would need to remove the hifi its self from the room for best effect. maybe wazoo chris has the best layout of all of us, after all he has a separate room for his system. what about just switching the light off in the room... that would surely effect the energys in the room more than the amout of pages in a book. does all this stuff take into account feng shui which is surely a more widely recognised way of leveling energys in a room. should i concidor cutting one of my own legs off or at least only wereing one shoe?i can, and do, accept fring science and medicine more than the average person but some of these tecniques seem to be polishing the door knob before painting the house (hope that makes sence as an analogy)

Look, the techniques are not supposed to appeal to one's prejudices of what can and can't affect our perception of sound; they're only supposed to improve your perception of sound. If they could do so without appealing to common preconceptions and prejudices that people have about nature and science, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Depending on the technique or product tested, they -may- require patience and listening skill in ample amount (though not necessarily, I have tested them on non-audiophillies as well). But once, or if, you do get beyond your prejudices and witness the effect, then the rest of it starts to make a lot more sense, in a lot less time. Once you have experienced one sound lift after another using this process, you'll stop worrying about the paint, and you're only going to want to be polishing knobs from thereon in. Ok, I don't want to get Greg too excited, so I'll stop right there.

I'm sure I've addressed this, but you don't need to go electrostatic because of the (Beltian) influence of magnets in dynamic loudspeakers. The interesting thing about Beltism is, the more adverse an object has to our senses, the better the sound you can obtain when you do treat the object with a Belt-type device. So most, if not all components of a loudspeaker can be successfully treated. When it is, you might find it interesting that removing the treated loudspeaker from the room now degrades the quality of your sound.

As for lights, yes, I do believe that turning off the light can perceptibly improve the sound to a degree; regardless of the psychological effect of not having to focus your viewing senses so much (giving your ears a bit less competition), regardless of whether the light bulb has been Belted or not. But so can other things that are never considered by non-Beltists; such as the connection of telephone - internet lines, or other devices connected to the power grid; even those not in the same room. As to whether lights affect sound more than sticking a paper in a book... I don't know; perhaps. I've never really bothered with the paper in the book thing, as there are more effective tweaks.

Beltism has nothing to do with Feng Shui; at least not officially. But I think the link may be of interest; as Feng Shui is said to tap into what the Chinese call "chi" (and what other cultures know by a different name; ie. orgon energy). For all I know, the energy fields observed under Beltism may be part of what other cultures and studies have observed as a "universal life force". Or not; it's debatable. But when you start down this road of dialogue, it just raises more prejudices, particularly in Western cultures, that it's all puppyswill. If I had a dime for every time Beltism was compared with New Age practices....



have to say it is all very fasinating, i mean this in the best possible way, its like reading about scientology. i dont buy it personally, but i could easily see how someone might... if they were that way inclined

I don't buy Scientology either, and I don't see how Beltism is like Scientology at all. Scientology is more likely to get you killed without a trace, than it is to improve the sound of your hifi kit. You simply raise another common misconception that many skeptics share: confusing Beltism with a cult. Because it makes it easier to dismiss it all when you view it that way.


is this like a final step after you know you have got everything else right?

what i mean by that is do you have the following things in place:

best possible mains supply to your hifi?

You should know, in my solely personal opinion, I consider the practice suitable for what I term more "advanced audiophiles". Hence the name for my website. The term implies that you already have attended to your cabling for example, you have already dealt with the mains supply best you could within your means, you certainly took the time to position your speakers correctly, and they are not situated on cardboard boxes. I don't expect the bloke at Tesco's buying a Sharp carrousel mini component system as his sole source of music reproduction, to think about buying Belt tweaks, for example. Not that it would hurt, but caring about quality sound is obviously not a large priority for him.

That said, some of the things you mention as "getting things right" go way beyond what I consider the basics. I agree you need to take care of the basics but after that, it becomes more personal what you "need" to take care of. Yes, I know about cable interference and sensitivity to resonance and RFI and try to keep them suspended and uncoiled, yes I use room treatments within reason (ie. don't care for bass traps, as for one thing they are fugly and mess with the decor), yes I agree that metal influences the sound, but I don't agree that this is only relevant to "my world", but in "the world". And no, I don't have an "NVA kit". That's just one in a long list of things I don't have that could improve my sound, believe it or not.

I'm sure I have considered many non-Beltist tweaks in my setup that you haven't in yours, and you may have done other things to your setup that I haven't either thought of, or gotten around to. My point is, you can't do "everything", as you put it. Especially since there is a lot more to "everything" (even if we're NOT including the Belt domain), than you imply in your response. Once you get the basics dealt with, the rest becomes what you want to focus on. It makes no sense to say "Well I should do this CONVENTIONAL thing, before I explore the UNCONVENTIONAL possibilities from the crazy fringe audiophile corner". Rather, it makes sense to do what will be more EFFECTIVE, in significant musical terms, to your musical pleasure. This is not a theory for me, this too is part of my experience in life. I have treated many friends audio systems with Belt concepts or products; all have responded teriffically to the treatments (both the systems, and their owners). This despite the fact that they had NO plastic screws with NVA kits! Their cabling was horribly disorganized and not even suspended by a coffee cup! Do you want to hear how many bass traps they had installed?? ZERO!! Yup. Magine that. Not even an egg carton. What were the stands like, you ask? What stands? They often had no stands. And the sophisticated instruments I used to check their room sound? No more than my God-given ears. Yet despite all these imperfections, I can produce a glorious sound out of their non-audio brand boxes, that would (and did) shame many so-called audiophile systems. So that's why I tend to focus my time more on Belting the environment; the rest is amateur hour.

Speaking of environment, there is no such thing as a listening room that "contains no other negative influences", any more than there is such a thing as a perfectly sounding hifi system. The very gear that makes up your hifi kit is filled with such negative influences. Just remove the casing of your gear from the room if you can; you might get an idea of what I'm talking about. You don't have to go nuts with this; just remove the things you can in the room, and treat the things you don't. And keep the room tidy! For that too can have a negative influence on perception of sound. A properly treated object is often a better influence than the absence of that object. So no, I don't want to live in a Matrix-like clean room; I like the fact that I have objects, because it affords a lot of potential for improving my sound. It's the reason that I keep a collection of dead batteries, inoperative cellphones and faulty CD-R's. To others, this is garbage. To me? It's the path to audio nirvana.



there is always going to be people who use the near unexplainable/unexplainable to make money.. i see no issue with this as long as they firmly belive they are right and are not ripping people off! if there is a tiny bit of them that even suspects that they are ripping people off or taking advantage of other peoples good will then i should hope that some day they will realise the errors of their ways and stop!

This is just daft. As I'm sure you know, PWB's products have been around for about a quarter of a century, and have had customers for about that long. If you think educated people can be ripped off like this for 25 years with products that continue to provide them AND their friends with sonic improvements for that long, then what exactly is the difference between being "ripped off" and NOT being "ripped off" by such products? Try to think on that one.

And PLEASE try to keep in mind that all the products have a money back guarantee, and none were ever returned.


im sorry to say, but after reading your web site i am even less inclined to belive what you say. please belive me when i say if it works for you im happy for you! maybe your ears are just better than mine, or maybe you have bought into a pseudo science (and im more inclided to bleive this is a pseudo science), either way if it makes you happy go for it...its just not for me

So tell me, which of the tweaks did you actually and carefully TRY, before you rushed to this conclusion? Doesn't sound like you've tried any of them. Know that I am never trying to get anyone to "believe" me, that is not the intention of my site. I don't think any of this sounds very credible, especially to those who are quite comfortable within the confines of what they know, thankyouverymuch. They say "seeing is believing"? Well in this case, "hearing is believing". Only that will get you to get it, and realize it isn't pseudoscience at all. My listening skills probably are better, but the problem is, if audiophiles do not instill a sense of curiousity in themselves about how sound can change, or what the differences are between one product and another, they don't get the experience necessary to acquire listening skills. Which allow them to appreciate what others can't. It's no wonder so many focus just on getting larger loudspeakers. There's a lot more nuances in audio, and I don't know where you are with this. But if you can differences in budget cables, I'm guessing you can probably hear most of the tweaks I've put on offer. Less so if you don't actually attempt to, however.


i know full well i could get more out of my system but the most major changes could only be made by removing major peices of furniture from my very small english lounge. i get confused enough when makeing tweaks ... doing my a-b comparisons i often find it hard to know which i prefer ... espesially when it comes to the more slight ones (my record weight is a good example) i dont need to confuse matters by doing things like drinking "north polarised water".

You're probably right. You need more experience with a-b testing, to understand where changes come about and what they might mean to you. You remind me of me about 23 years ago. I used to change my equipment a LOT, all the time really, because although all the hifi dealers in town knew me by name, I could never pin down what I prefer. They might say "See the difference in the singer's voice, there?", but I had a hard time hearing what they were talking about. I knew I wanted something more "musical", but my problem was, I didn't know what "musical" really was. I used to tape record my a-b comparisons, and that helped. Being able to hear both within seconds of each other, helped me learn what the differences are. Now I no longer need to, and now those differences can be far more significant. I wrote a "How to Listen" article on the site to help with that. I maintain that whether you wish to test conventional or unconventional differences, it can't hurt to do more comparisons in audio. You can learn a lot in the process.


maybe with a bit of dedication of time i could make it work for me... but i def think this is somthing based on a belife in it not something acually happening! have you ever questioned it in that way your self? do you understand the comments pertaining to "quantum clips" or whatever? would you ever be willing to accept that it works because you want it to work?

It's "normal" to think that Beltists are just following a "belief system". But don't forget to turn it around on yourself. Because you're following a belief system as well. You too are a "true believer" (in the idea that anything that sounds this ludicrous can't possibly be). The difference is, my belief system yields a far better sounding system, pound for pound. What I mean by that is I'm sure that in a few minutes of tweaking your residence, I could do a lot more than the record clamp is doing for you.

To answer your question, I've never actually read the ad copy on the Quantum clip, but having looked at it... well, I can certainly understand your concern! Sounds like horsewhiffle, doesn't it? Yes, that's a problem with all the products, if you ask me. To the uninitiated, it sounds perilously close to dungslop. If not spot on dungslop. I think even to the initiated, it can be a trial to sort through. But the uninitiated have the worst time, and when trying to analyze the copy, always end up misunderstanding things. I think this is because it is really only meant for those who are already PWB customers and understand the basic concepts. That said, I can probably sort through at least 80% of the copy, to understand what Peter Belt means, if I really had to. (Please don't make me do that....). Ok, I'll try to translate some of the general bits.

"manipulating certain inanimate material into a condition that mimics the quantum state of our living senses. "

I'm not entirely sure whether the word "quantum" should be in there myself, but I don't see any difference if I take it out. In which case, I would say this is referring to the manipulation of (invisible, yes) energy fields on objects in the environment (aka "inanimate material"), so that their state (or condition), is more "compatible" with our senses. Simplifying it even further, this means the clip changes the energy patterns in such a way as to relax inherent tensions on the senses, thus improving their ability to resolve. This, as I understand it, is what ALL PWB products are designed to do. The clip however, is unique, as a product (hence it is considered the flagship product). Pretty much all other products are applied to an object, and in some way or other, they change the object's pattern. Once the product is applied, it is usually not reapplied. The Quantum clip doesn't permanently apply to anything, only temporarily. In doing so, it transfers its own pattern to the object it is temporarily attached to. So it can never be used up.

I understand the clip in a far different way than you do, because I have actually used such a clip extensively. So the theories behind it mean nothing to me; this is only ever something of great concern (to the point of obsession) with Peter Belt naysayers.
You know, the usual "Ooooh look at what he has thought up for the gullible fools of audio world!". "Quantum my quantum smelling arse, blimey!" In other words, the clip doesn't work for me because I donated my intellect to Scientology and so am sold on the theories in the ad copy you read. The clip works, and works brilliantly - because it works. There is a lot of thought put into it that is impossible to see by skeptics looking at it from the outside. It is in fact the single most effective PWB product I know of. With this one product, you CAN transform the sound of your system, and not only, but that of others. Particularly if you know what to clip. So the price is actually a bargain. Frankly, I don't know how they can sell it so cheap.... :eyebrows:

And no, I won't accept that it works because I "want it to work". That's another common flash reaction, and the fact is, you would have to know a lot more about me than you do, before you could hope to presume that about me. And about placebos. If you can point me to a placebo as involved as this, that lasts for 25 years, I think that the JAMA would be very interested in your research. By the way, you never asked me if I have done any blind trials on this stuff, before asking me if I was willing to accept that it only works because I want it to!


.... is all this just a piss take?? im not just sceptical... im now sceptical that this isnt just a wind up...

have you ever worn a tin foil hat... maybe a magnet hat .... oh my god ... have you tried these
http://www.magnetictherapy.co.uk/scp...FZ1h4wodZ159kQ

... sorry if this isnt a wind up what i have just said is a bit harsh for me...but be honest have i caught you out?

Oh lordy..... if I had a dime for every time someone told me some variation of what you just said; "piss take" etc., and that I must be "winding them up", and another dime for every time someone made another (unoriginal) reference to me being a "tin foil hat wearer", and every time I received yet another link to a tin foil hat wearing site, or some other new agey reference (Scientology, unicorns, sun yung moon, David Icke, etc etc), well... I could solve the world's economic crisis and have enough money left over to buy the UK. (Although I don't think I would include Australia).

Think for just a minute here.... why do you think professional audio reviewers would risk their careers, if not their jobs, as numerous of them have, for speaking out on behalf of what they heard when they dared to publish a review of Peter Belt's products, if this was all a ruse, just to entertain folks on chat forums? Why don't you ask Jimmy Hughes how advocating Peter Belt's products and concepts has helped his career, if you really believe yourself here?! If you get a black eye after asking, don't say I didn't warn you!:lol:

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 20:56
Get this belt character on here to defend this crap himself. I want to speak to the organ grinder, not the monkey.

Oh, and again, please stop usng the term 'beltism' as there is no such religion, belief system cult or even branch of science named such - it is your fabrication, much like everything on his website is a fabrication. You are soundhaspriority aren't you? go on, admit it. Do you constantly search the web to pounce whenever you hear his name? are you on the payroll? Oh, and JH lost it years ago, his credibility and his marbles, and no I don't care how many bloody records he has it still does not make him a guru. He is and always has been a crank and a fool.


Here we go, knew I had seen it somewhere...

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.audio.opinion/2006-04/msg01628.html

Well SHP or should I say SHipPy?

Cotlake
13-10-2009, 21:55
Good, I'm not alone here. Well done Steve and well said. Yep, total crank and his disciples are also cranked. Nothing more to be said. For those who really want to hunt the hi-fi holy grail, you can spend your time much better elsewhere. Of course this grail does not exist but at least you have the option of looking for it using logical paths!

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 22:00
Thanks Greg. This guy appears WHENEVER this belt charlatan is named on the net. I have seen it happen a few times over the last few years. The thing that seals his identity for me is that his name here 'shippy' is an acronym for soundhaspriority, his past favoured identity. He is a shill, pure and simple. He has had numerous run ins on countless forums as can be seen by googling. Any further proof of his past identity can be found in the link to PFM in one of my earlier posts, where you can see the exact same posting style and attitudes. HTH

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 22:04
How many New Yorkers shop at Tesco, know what a Grammar School is, or who David Icke is? Isn't colour color and "ised" "ized" in the US? Would be interesting to see an IP trace, Admins?

And my favourite "free tweak" so far from your website -

The Time Machine Technique

This one’s more of an advanced introduction to Beltism, so really not for absolute beginners, in my opinion. But it’s certainly easy enough to carry out, it’s just getting past the concept that’s going to be difficult for first-timers. What’s the trick? Advance your digital clock by 99 minutes. Why? Well that’s obvious. In a future time, bad things haven’t happened yet.http://www3.sympatico.ca/stilyagi/aa/smiley.gif


I can’t recall exactly what my experiences were when I tested this one out, it’s been a good while. I remember improved sound, and then it got lost… so for the moment, until I get around to trying it again, my jury is still deciding. No reason for you to wait though, you can decide for yourself today, if it does or doesn’t have an effect on your sound.

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 22:08
You just couldn't make this stuff up. Well, obviously he did, or was it H G Wells?

I bow to his superior imagination.

I see you have been doing some checking too Alex? nice one.

Just has a look at your gallery Alex, and I am sure you have the same colour paint as me!

http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb256/aquapiranha/Sachiko/CIMG2980.jpg?t=1255472017

http://i653.photobucket.com/albums/uu259/Alex_Steel1969/hifi/IMG_1599.jpg

the light is different but it looks like it to me...Crown Indulgence Armagnac? or am i completely off?

Soundhaspriority
13-10-2009, 22:53
Hamish - go & change your socks immediately. Three on one foot & five on the other!
Shippy, I'm one of those people who heard something interesting but didn't find it interesting enough to pursue & certainly not enough to spend any money on it. I never even kept the free experiments in place.

A shame because, ever consider that in the perhaps 20 years you first heard their effect, that if you were to have pursued it, you would well have found that there is a lot more to it than you were exposed to? There have been at least a hundred products developed in that time, and they get better with time, as Peter learned more about what is more effective. WIth the products, or even concepts, used extensively, it becomes -very- interesting. It can not only transform the sound of an entire system, but in ways not possible with conventional upgrades. The key there is to do it in industrial quantities. There are so many things that can be done, this isn't really difficult. But if you just stop at the freebies in the magazines, I can understand why you might not find it interesting enough to pursue. Just read some of the messages on PWB's newsgroup if you want an idea of what their customers who have pursued it since 20 years, are experiencing with their sound.


Regarding your comment on loudspeaker cones I think you may be mistaken if you think a passive cone can have no effect - as Dave says.

I replied with further comments stating that I was misstated; I never actually said that.


Part of the problem I saw with PWB is the language he used: talk of rainbow foils & electret cream or whatever is going to make some people walk away ...and quickly.

I know. And some others, instead of just walking away, create stupid MYSPACE pages about the Quantum Clip, showing how backward-minded ignorant they are, because by leading the pubic on misguided strawman arguments concerning the ad copy, they think they have proven something by publishing incomplete emails from May. (For the record, I have long been aware of that twit's anti-PWB rant; it was originally on his website, so it is not news to me). For the record, Pt. 2: It is an insult to science and the scientifically literate to simply post a picture of the clip and call it BS without having even attempted to test it, as though simply stating as much makes it a proven fact.

So just try to look at the other side for a change. Let's assume everything I am saying here about Peter and his products is absolutely TRUE, RIGHT and ON THE MONEY. Which means he did in fact discover a REVOLUTIONARY phenomenon some twenty five years ago. It's a kind of "force" of some sort, one that affects only human senses, but one that can't be seen, smelled or measured (far as I know). It can only be heard subjectively, and even then, you may have to have keen hearing to perceive it, depending on the particular application you are testing. Moreover, it is a force that is affected by some very strange laws, that seem to have no relation to each other, but are unified by this force. Like odd numbers of pages in a book being more beneficial, or light switch screws that are aligned to earth being beneficial, or freezing photographs, or certain colours being more beneficial than other colours. Even if one of these things might be true, how can all these impossible ideas be in any way related? Assume they are.

Assume this is an IMPORTANT DISCOVERY, but one that the official annals of Western science does not recognize. Assume that you, as the audio researcher who discovered this phenomenon, are able to use it to modify the perception of sound within a residence, to a degree more significant than a typical component upgrade. Now you have to figure out what in the hell this force is, and how it comes about. Because you have already figured out that "I don't know how it works but buy it anyway" makes for bad ad copy. In your research, you have observed how one thing connects to another, and you're smart enough to have eliminated some prior theories, like EMI fields. You end up surmising that part of it can be explained by going all the way back to the origin of the species. Now that doesn't make for much more credible ad copy than "I don't know how it works but buy it anyway". How many audio products from your competitors are based on the origin of the species?? But what are you supposed to say? Should you LIE, and make up something that sounds more believable? Or, if you are honest Leeds man, do you simply tell the truth as best as you can conceive of it, and try to go with that?

Now remember, you're an audio engineer. So before you can even think to find a suitable (if not credible) explanation for them, you have to try to find a way to bring your new found ideas to market. Since you are dealing with invisible energy fields that can be manipulated, you toil long hours and days creating objects that manipulate the fields to acheive desirable qualities, in ways that are predictable and you hope, will likely work as advertised for most customers (trust me, not as easy as it sounds). The problem is, the objects (products) who's energy fields you have manipulated to work on specific other objects in specific ways, take the form of ordinary, inexpensive, commonly available objects. Why? Because they happen to be what is required for the patterns that will work. For example, sheets of laser etched foil. They contain prisms, which have a particular pattern, and that is essential to the pattern you need to create. Except laser etched foil can also be found at the dollar store for... wait for it: a dollar. ( dunno, do you have "pound stores" in GB?).

Now your modern customer of today is pretty savvy, yes? He's going to look at your laser etched foil product that costs a hundred times more than a dollar, then he's going to look at the one at the dollar store. And believe you me, his skeptical eyes are NOT going to see a whit of difference. And then he's going to look at you and say "Are you out of your f****in' mind??!". "Charlatan!!!". 9 times out of 10, he will produce this mindless knee-jerk reaction WITHOUT ever giving your products a single listen. If he does give your products a listen, guess what? Chances are, he is probably going to run what could only be described as a "vengeance test". That means, he will have so much pre-determined contempt for you for insulting his (presumed) intelligence with your daft, ridiculously priced products that he already "knows" couldn't possibly have any effect on his sound, and he will feel so silly, if not ashamed, at the very idea of giving such bizarre products any of his precious time (with so much of it needed for arguing against products like yours on the internet), that your product would practically have to strangle him, before he would admit that he was wrong all this time, and that you were right. Working against you, is the fact that the improvements in sound your products produce is not typically the type of change that is expected from most comparable audio tweaks, and those listening for a specific kind of change (ie. changes in frequency) may entirely miss the changes they are in fact hearing, especially if they are expecting major changes in their sound or if they have no prior experience with your products. With that, expect those who were relatively ambivalent toward your products, to now have an active hatred against them and everything they think you stand for. Know that they are as unlikely to give you a second chance, or even glance, as the audio magazines who banished your products from their pages, under threat from the majors.

Also, remember that on the surface, the very nature of your product is offensive to so many sensibilities, that it automatically creates a "battle" of ideology within the potential customer. One in which in case you haven't figured it out already, you must win. If you are to survive with this new direction you have adopted for your company. On top of that, deal with the fact that your potential customer is already prejudiced against products like yours, because he is insecure about the fact that non-audiophiles look at such products and laugh at his kind, for even being seen anywhere near such ludicrous practices. What, did you actually think you would win a Nobel prize for your revolutionary discovery that advances what we know about the fundamental nature of our senses, and the origin of our species? Well, sorry. Put that out of mind. That already went to President Obama for... I dunno... being black in the right place at the right time, I guess. You should just consider yourself lucky that you haven't been stabbed yet by one of these wacko pathological skeptics that have a completely irrational hatred over their misguided perceptions of people like you that they consider "charlatans preying on potentially vulnerable punters" (editor's note: this is not an oblique reference to Aquapirhana OR Greg. I swear.).

But even though you're an honest man with human emotions, try not to take it personally. Because yer gonna get a LOT of that, you will. Since your OTHER products are destined to be no more credible than the foil. For example, you found a way to get a good energy pattern on to plastic ties, and did a lot of research to find out which objects it can benefit, and which colour combinations yield the greatest results on which types of objects. You even devised a different plastic tie that would compliment the patterns found on fabric objects, and so you thought of a clever device whereby you permanently install such a tie on a safety pin, and this would allow the audiophile to improve their sound at a live concert. Exciting invention, isn't it?!! Hey, don't break out the bubbly just yet. Because guess what? Plastic ties that look exactly like yours sell at the dollar store for... can you guess? One dollar. For 50 of them. Of course, you COULD try to compete with the dollar store, you could. Forget about the months of research it took you to develop the methods that would change those energy fields on the plastic ties, or the benefits that your ties bring about, which the dollar store ties can't. You're going to have to compete with the dollar store, if you're going to get it past Mr. and Mrs. Q. Savvy Consumer. I assure you, selling your ties at $1, you will go out of business before you can think of a name for your product.

Oh, and it doesn't stop there, no. You also invented a BRILLIANT way to fix a benign energy pattern onto an emulsified cream, one that would be compatible with almost any object. And even more brilliant, only a sparse amount is needed, so it could be used to change the energy patterns on many objects before it is used more. But it is not cheap to produce, nor is the research behind it free either, so you would have to sell it at a reasonable price, unless you are simply against the very capitalistic notion of actually making a profit on your blood, sweat and tears (no, that doesn't go into the product). There's some bad news, however, you might not want to hear. It is that your product sounds insane, since no one in history has ever produced a cream that claims to improve audio sound, and if that weren't enough, there really is nothing to distinguish it from a product that sells at... guess where? Yes, your greatest competitor in the eyes of an ignorant public: the ubiquitous dollar store.

So what do you do? Do you try to develop products that produce benign energy patterns that will create truly musical changes in something like GOLD, so that you can justify charging serious prices for them? Never mind the fact that this will make your products 10 times more expensive, what if GOLD simply is not amenable to the patterns you need to create? What if even a DIAMOND can not produce a pattern as beneficial as something like an innocuous CROCODILE CLIP can, when properly treated?

Q. Seriously, (assuming you're still awake!), I ask YOU this question: How would YOU try to market these products and concepts, if you discovered it, and the conditions are exactly as I described above?



Plenty of people have bought the claims made by Shun Mook & Ringmat & they're not so different.

You're bringing back memories of me making a DIY Ringmat some 20 years ago. And yes, you're right - the Shun Mook and Ringmat products are no different than PWB's. In that, ALL of them work to improve your sound. FWIW, I am under no mistaken impression that my DIY Ringmat would be as good as the original Ringmat. This is just another "proof of concept" thing for me. I wanted to see what the fuss was about, so being unable to buy one in my country, I made one. I think it was the best mat I had heard of at the time. As for the Shun Mook stabilizers, they are said to reduce EMI. Last I heard of, EMI is something recognized by mmost audio engineers, so it shouldn't be that controversial. But this is audio on the internet, so what the hell isn't? I'm sure you can find plenty of customers and reviewers who do say that they have heard the effect of the Mooks. And 100 times more naysayers who have never tried it, who brush it off as so much "goatspottle".

Soundhaspriority
13-10-2009, 23:03
I don't want to continue this nonsense (actually I do!:lol:) but I have a couple of Hi-Fi reviews from 1990 - I found them clearing out a spare room a couple of years ago and I still have them somwhere... I re-read them at the time and marvelled again at the Belt stuff - at the time I thought - how can it possibly do anything? - Twenty years on - I can only think the same.

IMHO it is auto-suggestion - nothing more. If you currently do not accept that people are susceptible to auto-suggestion I would suggest going to see a good stage hypnotist before re-affirming that belief.


Martin

Care to share your experiences with the actual products in those 20 years, that led you to this conclusion? BTW, I have actually gone before a couple of stage hypnotists. None were able to even come close to hypnotizing (at one point, I pretended it was working, clucking like a McChicken, then slapped the hypnotist in the head with my glove. He's the one who ended up with egg on his face!). I was told I am not hypnotizable.

It's not that "auto suggestion" is a myth. People can fall susceptible to auto suggestion. But this isn't one of those "auto suggestion" things. I know you're only speaking out of prejudice, not knowledge on the subject. If you knew how many blind tests were done on PWB concepts over the years that suggested otherwise, you might not be so quick to dismiss it as auto suggestion. Keep in mind that almost everyone who has adopted the products and practices has initially thought "How can it possibly do anything?". The difference is, they made serious attempts to answer the question, instead of simply asking it, and answering it with but another thought. Consider too that for some, like reviewer Paul Benson, it took quite a few tries before he realized it wasn't autosuggestion, effective marketing, or any of that.


Slightly more on-topic I'm pretty much convinced that sources with VU meters as opposed to LED bar-meters or no meters at all are imbued with a perception of greater dynamics and impact... to be honest, whether the affect is wholly imagined is neither here nor there; it enhances my enjoyment and that is why I listen to music :)

I used to pull the LED's out of my gear over 12 years ago. It always improved the sound. Actually, all displays muck up the sound. If you can kill them, the better to do it IMO. And I agree that it doesn't really matter if what you believe you hear is real or imagined. So long as it remains consistently heard, to the music lover, it's the very same thing.

aquapiranha
13-10-2009, 23:05
Q. Seriously, (assuming you're still awake!), I ask YOU this question: How would YOU try to market these products and concepts, if you discovered it, and the conditions are exactly as I described above?






A. Pay a shill like yourself to trawl the web and force it down peoples throats?

Alex_UK
13-10-2009, 23:35
You just couldn't make this stuff up. Well, obviously he did, or was it H G Wells?

I bow to his superior imagination.

I see you have been doing some checking too Alex? nice one.

Just has a look at your gallery Alex, and I am sure you have the same colour paint as me!

the light is different but it looks like it to me...Crown Indulgence Armagnac? or am i completely off?

Gosh, you could be right Steve, I would need to check the color(!) on the tin, but it does look very similar (99% sure it is Crown as we have a Crown decorating center(!) only 1/4 mile away.)

One thing's for sure, it didn't come from the PWB range, (£300 a litre) and I claim no sonic benefit from painting the walls in 3 different colors!

Soundhaspriority
14-10-2009, 00:26
I'm with you Shippy, at least I will be if I can share some of that 'shit' you're smoking........must be gooooooooood

It is good. Good for sound. Check my introductory post in the Welcome section. You'll find my website there. Plenty of free tweaks to go around, and hopefully before long, you'll get it.


For those who really want to hunt the hi-fi holy grail, you can spend your time much better elsewhere. Of course this grail does not exist but at least you have the option of looking for it using logical paths!

What rational advice! Yes! Indeed! Let's just ignore ALL scientific advancements from here on until the end of time, if they do not automatically follow from what has already been discovered! If it is not logical to us in theoretical terms, then let us not spend a moment further trying to establish whether the argument is sound! We shall agree to arrogantly dismiss it without a further moment's consideration, even if it costs nothing to test, and minutes to do! If we can not understand the phenomeon in 3 word sound bites, let us spend no further effort trying to. Instead, let us attack it with mocking contempt, and call it quackery! Let us remain rigid in our thinking, and steadfast in our ignorance! Following in the tradition of all bone-headed pseudoscientists that held back true scientific acheivements down throughout history, and as the reigning champions of the status quo orthodoxy in our community, it is our sworn duty, Mr. Lister! (Sorry, I mean Mr. Greg! )

Huzzah and harrumph!


Signed,

Mr. Neejerk J. Thinx2liddle


Shippy, you're simply living in the total bollocks dimension.

Is that the British equivalent of the The Twilight Zone? Because I like that show. Look, you can say anything you want about Belt. But don't be dissin' Rod Serling. He's the man.


What absolute nonsense you spout. Furthermore it is clear you'll try and prey on any potentially vulnerable punter as with your last post to Hamish.

:lol: I don't know what a "potentially vulnerable punter" is, but I know one thing: you're hilarious! I'll have you know that I am also an amateur armchair psychiatrist and heart surgeon. So feel confident in sharing your deepest fears with me, knowing that you're dealing with a quasi-professional. Let's begin with the most painful bits: what's hurting you the most here? Are you afraid that my words, coming from several thousand miles away as they are, are going to turn your dear friend Hamish into a walking zombie, and that I will steal his soul forever, and you will lose a once great friend? Are you afraid that he will end up penniless, and steal your kit in order to pay for his latest PWB fix? Like all the other PWB cult zombies?

Because I'll be honest with you Greg, since you seem like such a smart, emotionally stable, well balanced individual and straight-up kind o' guy. That is EXACTLY my intention. To turn the entire UK into a walking zombie cult of human robots, hell bent on helping us take over the world using PWB tweaks. One foil at a time. In fact, I'm afraid it is already too late for your friend Hamish. Notice the glassy look he now has in his eyes? Well, guess who's next, chump! Don't think you can escape my clutches because your will is strong. I can break your will as easily as I break this twig.... (?) Well, okay, as easily as I break this -smaller- twig (snap). See? You're no match for my superior intellect, stupid stupid earthling. By the way, please don't tell anyone else here of my plans to take over the place. That would ruin everything. So, keep it on the downlow bro', 'kay? Thanks. Knew I could trust you.

By the way, do you think you can try to produce a more intelligent and coherent argument than "what absolute nonsense you spout"? It is in fact spouting nothing but the automatic gainsay of your opponent that could more accurately be described as "absolute nonsense". Why don't we start with what products have you tried, that you are basing your complaints upon? What did you test, how did you test them. (Please note that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that you would have already tried PWB's products, before so angrily denouncing them, and me at the same time, for merely daring to stand behind them).


I don't doubt you are a beleiver but you are also into evangelism of your (and PB's) false art.

Your anger remains unfocused, and unclear. Are you the chap who held a starvation protest outside of Peter Belt's house?
Again, what exactly are you protesting against here? Free speech? Or art? Capitalism perhaps? Audio? Religion? I doubt you even know yourself. And also, would you be okay if I told you to shut up about any beliefs you may spout about audio, or that your experiences with audio product "x" are "false", and everything the company makes is a scam?


It's all total rubbish per se. You need to shut up! Your input here is not helpful.........Please go away!

LOL! So much for reasoned debate and welcoming challenges to the status quo! Your insistence on quashing views you oppose is duly noted, Greg. Remember, I can control you with my thoughts just as easily as I can Hamish. So be a nice boy, or else... you'll end up souless and penniless, living in a refrigerator box and talking to trees.

Soundhaspriority
14-10-2009, 06:27
Paul,
A few comments & questions about things you have said so far & then a suggestion for everyone who's interested in making some sense out of all of this.

The trouble with your theory about this is that when he was writing about conventional hi-fi I already thought most of what he wrote was …….so I didn't exactly have much faith in his credibility as a writer or as an authority on audio gear (hence my slinging the magazine across the room- I was doing that long before Belt was ever mentioned).

Given that EVERY time some audio journalist writes positively about Peter Belt's products, the reviewer is soundly clipped about the ears by every single Belt cynic, skeptic and naysayer going, and EVERY time an article trashes Belt's products it is cheered by those same naysayers, and used like a Bible to "inform" people who don't know who Belt is, I sincerely doubt that if -any- audio journalist who was personally "pre-approved" by you would write positively about Belt's products, this would convert you to them. This is why I have to laugh at pure nutters like Greg here, who think I'm some sort of shaman witch doctor, and can hypnotize people into becoming PWB zombies, or some rubbish like that. If you ask me, him, Aquapiranha and two seals, and you've got a pretty good circus going. (I'll volunteer as the ringmaster!).

But seriously, let's look at the facts for a second: Greg Weaver was a well respected audio journalist for the online audio mag, SoundStage! That is until he positively reviewed the SR foils and freeze process, from PWB. After that, he was sent more angry emails and comments by nutters like (insertnamehere) than you would find in the Michigan Militia. I think he goes to the bathroom with a personal bodyguard now. So let's assume you would say the very same about Peter Turner, Jimmy Hughes, Dave Clark, and everone else who dared give Peter Belt products a positive review.

(footnote: My comments about Paul Benson were actually about Peter Turner. I had confused the two journalists. Benson was not, to my immediate knowledge, a particularly cantankerous skeptic before becoming a convert. I recall that he DID however offer to go personally to people's houses to demonstrate the PWB products on his coin, after experiencing the Belt effect. How many audio products do YOU know that inspire that kind of enthusiasm among professional audio reviewers? Sure as hell ain't anything in YOUR system!).



If the alternative means that you're going to spend your spare time applying liquids to mains electrical contacts, my friend, I would suggest, that yes, staying away from light bulbs would be helpful to your continued health & well being – it may also save the guys with the wailing sirens and long ladders at your local Fire Department from paying you an unscheduled visit!

Then I guess now is probably not the time to tell you that I also smear treated tap water all over the components in my DVD player. Making sure I get it good and well into the transformer windings, before plugging the device in a few seconds later. So far, I haven't heard the sirens, after doing the electronics, or the bulbs. Could you tell me what they sound like, in case I have to listen for them? Is it like a "waooo waooo" kind of sound, or more like a "ding dong" kind of sound? 'Cos I think I heard both, one time. Then right after, some madman tried to get in my door with a large pickaxe, screaming for "everyone to get out of there!!". But I'm smart, I didn't let him in. I remembered that my mommy told me never to let in axe murderers.


Would you care to explain both the rhyme and the reason? Perhaps if you describe the technique clearly and then tell us all your assessment of what is happening (the theory that's being propounded) and exactly what it does to the sound we might better understand your approach

Do you at all realize that it would take less time to actually DO the tweak than for me to try to explain it to you? Moreover, you have a much better chance of understanding it, as with all PWB tweaks, if you try them, than if you try to understand them through the filter of prejudices you are going to naturally have to this. The technique is described on my website, with pictures, so I think its pretty clear. The basic theory is as related to all of the PWB products IMO, and the basic change in sound is as related to all products as well; but every application and product is different, within that general parameter. So they operate on their own theories, and have their own particular sound, within the family. IF you are able to perceive changes from the notch tweak, and I never know so that could be a big IF, you might find the sound a bit less harsh, smoother, more fluid, rhythmic, more natural, more engaging, easier to follow, etc. It's not an easy tweak to A-B, for obvious reasons (try to make a single notch at a time and don't cut yourself!). But if you are able to hear the changes, then you try the same on a PASSIVE plug, that isn't plugged in. Only then might you understand there's far more to this than you could ever hope to realize.


Could you provide us with details of these professional audio reviews?

Most of the recent ones are right on the PWB homepage.


Could you let us know which manufacturers are using which techniques and on what equipment?

Ever heard of the Clever Little Clock or cryogenic cables?


So can you tell us how PWB discovered how to identify the position & nature of these 'energy patterns'?

Position - just like I did. Listening. Observing. Listening some more. Observing some more. Ad infinitum. Patterns identify themselves in consistent ways.

Nature - that came later, as theories SLOWLY developed. As with any research, audio or otherwise, it's a process of intelligent reasoning and elimination of extraneous factors. I gave one example with Ivor Tiefenbrun's speaker theory. Let me try to give another. CD Stoplight came along to offer another controversial product, called the "CD Stoplight Laser Pen" or some such, popularly known as the "silly green CD pen". Their theory was that it dealt with stray laser radiation that could affect the EC circuits, making the player work harder than it has to, and produce less accurate data than it should. As you may have heard, the pen was scoffed at by much of the community as a hoax. A number of misguided but well meaning idiots, took it upon themselves to "prove" the pen was snake oil, and thus save the world from gullible tweak freaks. So they read the data bitstream, did bit for bit copies and checksum analysis.... all of that good debunking stuff well meaning skeptics are so good at. And they declared all green CD pens a snake oil hoax, and urged everyone to save their money. Most people in the larger cult (let's call it the "cult of orthodoxy"), believed the debunkers because they were the supposed good guys, who had no motive except to save the world from charlatans. This product was also thought to be a "folly from the 80's", because the debunkers simply succeeded in preventing audiophiles from improving their sound via this method, by way of wrongful prejudice.

But just one problem with that. The much maligned genius engineer that is Peter Belt, as usual, went further than anyone else in the world, in asking the question: "What exactly is going on here?", of the CD pen. As a matter of fact, he probably invented that idea as well, because he already had his OWN treated markers, long before the green pen was well known. And they weren't even green. (He found other colours were better). Anyway, by researching it further, he found the coloured markers worked on LP edges, as much as they did the Philips compact cassette. Hence the logical conclusion that this phenomenon had nothing in fact to do with "stray laser light" BS. It is simply another part of the scientific hypothesis collectively known as "Beltism" (a phenomenon which has existed since the beginning of time; not just since the 80's). Which is to say, it is not the laser reacting to the colour on the edge of a CD or LP or cassette. It is us.


How does he know these 'sub-conscious tensions' exist? If they're sub-conscious – how is he aware of them when everyone else is not?

You seem to forget --- he is an audio engineer and researcher by training, and has spent over 25 years studying the phenomenon. That alone should explain how he is aware of what most are not. If you have not researched the phenomenon or even have any serious amount of hands-on experience with it, then it can only be a mystery to you (or a scam, depending on your degree of cynicsm, I suppose). He goes all the way back to the smoking vents and the human species BEFORE senses developed, to try to explain what is going on, in the Beltist environment we ALL live under, in our daily, modern lives. So much of that is speculation, as it has not received a grant award for official scrutiny - but intelligent speculation, in that it eventually all fit in with what was being discovered via empirical, observational research. I can't say I know the particular steps that led him to connect what was happening with the energy fields, to the hypothesis of reducing tensions, so I won't try to speak on his behalf. But I do know he's right about that. For two reasons.

One (and remember, this is merely my take on it): If senses sharpen as you introduce particular energy patterns into particular objects in the environment, that suggests they are being hampered in the first place. By what else, but unconscious tension? More direct to that, what of those objects in the environment? The observations show particular and predictable "social patterns" to the energy fields not simply on objects in the environment, but common areas in our environment. For example, entrance and exit doors, as well as gas and water pipes that enter and exit a building, exhibit a particularly strong energy field, that can be particularly responsive to certain applications, and produce a more desirable increase in sensory reception. So do hidden areas, not immediately visible to us. And then there are the specific morphic messages, in which he no doubt learned a lot about how we react to our environment, on a subconscious level. So those are but three examples in the larger context of many, that strongly suggests we are still on the lookout for predators, as we must have been in our earliest stages of infancy (as a species, not as individuals).

Two: If you had a hard time with One, you're going to have an even harder time with this example. I am experienced enough with Beltism, and perhaps have a unique self-awareness, that there have been many times that I can actually feel the reduction in tension, when I have succeeded at creating a good application of a Belt tweak or product. No, it is not autosuggestion, as I didn't know it was happening at first. But you are obviously free to believe what you want. Anyhow, using these physical and barely conscious signals, I can predict whether the Belt tweak I applied is going to be a good and satisfactory one, or not. Before I have ever listened to the music. The predictions are right every time. Try doing THAT with a conventional tweak. I'm certainly not able to!


Does my line of questioning help you to begin to see what I mean about the language used by PWB not helping his (or your) case?

I can see it hasn't occurred to you that the thought you are expressing has already ran through my mind years before it ever occurred in yours. So of course, I agree here. PWB is aware that their concepts are not easy to grasp by newcomers to them. But if they're too simple, people like you would still never believe them, because you wouldn't at all be able to see how one thing follows another. And you wouldn't be able to understand how one product differs from another, either; in its concept, in its development, and in the problems it was thoughtfully designed to address. You'd think it was all the same crap that all did the same thing (nothing), but at different degrees of outrageousness in their asking price. As I'm sure you do anyway. So why don't you answer my (lengthy!) message, where I give an example of you being Peter Belt, and I ask you for examples of what could be done to get your concepts and products across to those who think you are nothing but a theiving con man (when you are anything but).


Maybe if he stuck some of his mojo-trinkets into a tangible hi-fi component, so that it could give understandable and coherent results in a conventional sense (i.e. Item A sounds better than Item B because it does x, y & z) he would enjoy a little more credibility – he might even make a little more money that way.

Trust me, I'm still way ahead of you here. I already suggested that years ago. The answer is no doubt a lot more complicated than either you or I can accurately speculate upon. I suppose going the conventional component route there's a lot more overhead, a lot more competition, a lot more investment risk perhaps and greater chances of defaulting on a bank loan... where does it end, really. All I know is that for whatever reasons, it does not look like PB is going back to using the conventional route, which never quite yielded the kind of results he could get using the unconventional approach anyway. But they reserve the right to retain "Electronics" in the name, if they wish to produce such items again.

Even so, the so-called "mojo trinkets" would not enjoy more popularity necessarily, if they are mentioned as part of the component design. What are you going to say, much of the expense in this new loudspeaker is due to the presence of a "special" safety pin? That sounds impressive to the average buyer how exactly? PWB has, instead, created products for use by other audio companies, to use on THEIR products. It is obviously their choice if they wish to advertise the fact. And no, I don't know which companies use the products, and I imagine I would probably have to kill you if I told you. So you wouldn't know for very long anyway.



Here's a suggestion to try to find some way through the problem that hardly anyone who doesn't or won't believe Paul has tried any of this stuff.

Given that someone other than Paul has suggested that these two things made him change his way of doing things, (even if he was an impetuous youth) and that both of these are very simple to implement and reverse, why don't we try an experiment ourselves?

Everyone who has a notion to be involved, and can honestly say that they're willing to enter into this with an open mind should give it a go.

Dave & Paul should agree between them the methods & we can try it for ourselves & report back.

How about it?

Again, I hate to say it, but I'm already ahead of you on that one as well, mate! I have created a very easy to implement Belt-inspired tweak, a couple of days ago, just for the Art of Sound. But I'm out of town right now, so I don't have access to the original instructions. I will be in very soon, no doubt Wednesday, and plan to upload the file to the tweaks section. I'm guessing (hoping?) it alone will be more effective than a reef knot or a plug notch, but I haven't compared. For the moment, I can only guarantee that you haven't tried this one yet!

Soundhaspriority
14-10-2009, 06:32
I agree. Years of amateur research in to alternative (I prefer complementary) medicine and it's efficacy, and by association it's mechanisms for working, has given me an open mind to some fairly 'out there' concepts. PWBs ideas have some resonance with the ideas inherent in many eastern philosophies which have a far less mechanistic cause/effect outlook at their core, and as such whilst I find them somewhat implausible and I think much may be down to a 'placebo' effect I won't ignorantly write them off as nonsense, merely because they don't fit in to a western reductionist paradigm.

Skepticism is healthy and I consider myself to be one, but I think many people mistake cynicism for it to their detriment. A true skeptic is willing to alter their belief in light of experience, and this is an attitude that is as necessary in the world of hi-fi as anywhere else; witness the dogged way some hang on to the idea that interconnects play no part in the digital domain, safe in the knowledge that 'it's only 1s and 0s' so the cable makes no difference.

AOS is a broad church; I for one welcome Paul's contributions and would prefer those that don't want to contribute to the thread in a respectful way simply ignore it. No-one is trying to sell anything, we're all adults that can make our own minds up. Healthy debate is great, taking the p**s less acceptable IMHO.

Just my 2p.

Jason

Thanks for the intelligent, reasoned response, Jason. So rarely seen, I'm not quite sure how to deal with that! I'm so used to the usual knee-jerk hair-tearing irrational, angry rant type of response whenever I "try" (emphasis on "try") to discuss alternative audio ideas and products, that I need to get my bearings.... I think it's a fairly apt comparison when you say alternative medicine is "complimentary", as Belt products and concepts are "complimentary" to conventional concepts. Indeed, they would be all but worthless without conventional (read: uncontroversial) concepts and products. Yet people almost view this as an "either-or" thing; as in you either believe in one or the other. To them its all out war between the two; to me, well my Belt products and my conventional products get along quite nicely with each other.

With me, it was the exact opposite. I was never a believer in alternative medicine, or any of that New Age stuff. I'm still not, but experiencing the Belt phenomenon and researching Beltist science as I have, has taught me what most here have (sadly) yet to understand (and likely never will): that we are arrogant to think we know everything about how the universe (and whatever's in it) works. And we shoot ourselves in the foot, and hop along crippled the rest of the way, by that very Western-style arrogance. But "stupid is as stupid does" as Forrest Gump likes to say. Anyway, once I realized that there really was this energy field that could not be seen (geez, and I would hate to have to explain what cosmic rays are and how they work to the likes of Aquapiranha, Greg and like-minded knee-jerk reactionaries), I found I was more "receptive" to other alternative sciences. Because if this was true, and it was, then I might be continuing to limit myself intellectually, if I made mindless dismissals of other ideas that seemed fantastic, and to not make any sense. At least according to known logic.

So I took closer looks at alternative fields of science like biogeometry, morphogenetic fields, radionics, polarity therapies, etc. Now that doesn't mean I lose my ability to think critically, as so many here are deathly afraid of with this stuff. Nor do I believe what I read, simply because I read it. I am in fact far --more-- in control of my mind, than most of the reductionists screaming absolutely ridiculous things like "Charlatan!" and "Potential Brainwasher!" at me. (Who ironically, think I'm crazy, while I think they're the ones who sound like stark raving lunatics to me!). The reason for this is simply because, I think for myself. I don't let my peers or authority figures tell me what to believe. Whereas OTOH, most naysayers of alternative audio (and other alternative science or medicines) are merely following a script. Hence the reason they all seem to say the exact same things to me all the time. The script limits what they are to believe. "I've never tried that so I can't say" is generally not in the script. "You people make me sick!" however (or a variation thereof), is one of the lines I expect to hear. They react in ways they are programmed to, and expecting most to go a little further and think a little harder and challenge themselves... well that's generally more than can be expected, isn't it. But ironically, they think that those who would follow alternative paths are the ones belonging to a cult. I see those of independent spirit, and independent mind, about the only ones who do NOT belong to a cult!

But none of this is the fault of science. Which again, is another bit of twisted irony, you realize. Because to condemn the kind of evidence that Betism has shown us for over a quarter of a century, without even dipping your mutated toe in the water to make a serious effort to try to find out what it may be about, this is not science, nor is it even true skepticism, as you rightly noted. Science, and the true scientists I know, would be embarrassed to be represented by the sort of antics we have seen here; where people who have never even attempted to research and better understand the mechanism under dispute (as easy as this is to do these days), never even attempted to support any of their arguments against it, are writing it off as quackery, illusion, and deception or worse. Well let's just make it clear that THIS sort of behaviour is not the "pursuit of science". What we've seen from most respondents to the Belt issue (not all, fortunately), is the Luddite-like attacks against science. And yes, I am indeed saying that posting a picture of a clip-like device that sells for what you think is an inflated amount, and universally declaring it "complete and utter bullshit" simply because you "believe" it is, is an insult to scientific principles, and does no justice to science, nor to yourself, nor to our shared hobby.

Since Jean Hiraga, it took the idea of cables influencing the sound some 30 years to become accepted by mainstream audiophiles. And by crikey, there are enough pseudoscientific blockheads out there to form their own little cult, who still think pricey cables are the devil's work, couldn't possibly improve your sound, and are sold by charlatans to a pie-eyed cult of "wacko tweako audiophools". Many of whom in that cult are completely ignorant of the irony in screaming at me because MY "daft tweaks" are THEIR "cable tweaks"! High end audio. Hey, ya gotta love it! :)

Haselsh1
14-10-2009, 08:11
Well you got me there, as I am not religious in the slightest, do you think such belief patterns makes you more open to suggestion on bad science or not?


I really don't care to get into anything to do with religion as it is a very personal thing for many people, (and it's discussion is I believe against the AUP) but what I am saying is that this belt bloke is making money out of something with no basis in the real world, and that to me is fraud.

:confused:


So you're trying to tell me in the same breath that religion isn't fraud...? It certainly sounds like that is the case.

Haselsh1
14-10-2009, 08:14
Very emotive, and I really didn't set out to upset anyone, so I hope Shaun can accept my apologies if I have upset him in some way.

There are just some things that don't sit right with me, and this has been one since I first heard about it 20 years ago.


Aquapiranha, you did not upset me, I am merely drawing similarities with other subjects that most of us appear to tolerate and accept. I am not easily upset. Thank you anyway.

Haselsh1
14-10-2009, 08:21
To clarify; I do not and will never support PWB even though I used to own a pair of his headphones. I do however see the clarity in letting someone express their opinion. Yes I agree with the person who stated "It is an opinion". We are all of course entitled to our opinions and yes; we should expect that opinion to be shot down in flames. I do not believe in a God or the possible existance of Jesus. As with PWB and as already stated, there isn't a shred of proof for the existance of either of these beings. There is no scientific fact at all to support what PWB postulates but is it his fault that gullible people buy his products...? Is it his fault that he is making money out of people who actually believe his articles make a difference...? Who is actually at fault here...? The coachman or the horse...???

aquapiranha
14-10-2009, 08:32
Soundhaspriority.

you appear to be refusing to answer any of the comments I have posted re. your real identity. Also, you have not responded with regard to getting belt on here to defend these ludicrous claims as opposed to you doing it for him. I already know who you are, and that you have been on countless forums around the globe using the same MO to push these products on people. Kindly clarify your position or go away.

Thank you.

The Grand Wazoo
14-10-2009, 08:39
And by crikey, there are enough pseudoscientific blockheads out there to form their own little cult, who still think pricey cables are the devil's work, couldn't possibly improve your sound, and are sold by charlatans to a pie-eyed cult of "wacko tweako audiophools". Many of whom in that cult are completely ignorant of the irony in screaming at me because MY "daft tweaks" are THEIR "cable tweaks"! High end audio. Hey, ya gotta love it!
I don't think there are many here who think cables can't improve your sound, though there are many who think some of the pricing is the work of the devil, so trying to justify high prices for 'treated' everyday items like a spiral cable tidy or a safety pin is pretty hard to swallow.

I'm afraid that I'm now having a bit of trouble with all of this, Paul. I've tried really hard to treat your posts with a level-headed fairness an a certain amount of devil's advocacy.
Is your presence hear purely to talk about the Belt mojo-trinkets or will you be contributing to any other discussions? Perhaps you might like to sample some of the other wares on offer here - there's plenty of interest to a true audio enthusiast - especially one who says they are from the US but love old gear from the UK. I find it a little odd that you haven't so far taken that opportunity.

I'm starting to think that you should have called yourself 'Braces' when you signed on here.

The Grand Wazoo
14-10-2009, 08:42
Kindly clarify your posion or go away.


Hey Steve,
I think your spelling may be out a bit there - I think the 'i' comes before the 's'!

The Grand Wazoo
14-10-2009, 08:47
There is no scientific fact at all to support what PWB postulates but is it his fault that gullible people buy his products...? Is it his fault that he is making money out of people who actually believe his articles make a difference...?

I think PWB does believe what he hears & I think the people who buy his products think they are making their systems better - if that makes their lives better, then great - good for them.
Funny thing is though, I don't think he can be making that much money out of it.

aquapiranha
14-10-2009, 09:26
Hey Steve,
I think your spelling may be out a bit there - I think the 'i' comes before the 's'!

Haha well spotted! maybe I should have said poison?

Anyway I am sure he knows what I meant, I await his reply.

:scratch:

Alex_UK
14-10-2009, 09:56
I am also an amateur armchair psychiatrist and heart surgeon.My god, now I really am scared - how can you be an amateur armchair heart surgeon?! Is that allowed? I'm sure there are rules for that!

:chainsaw:

The Vinyl Adventure
14-10-2009, 16:36
:chainsaw:


i always wanted to use that emoticon

aquapiranha
14-10-2009, 21:31
Well folks I have done a little digging, and to say this soundhaspriority is shall we say prolific would be a huge understatement. Going back years I have found evidence of him polluting dozens of usenet groups and forums with his wild claims and blatant marketing. anyone who doubts this should google him themselves.

And, a little closer to home, I find this..

678


Note the word 'Banned' which I am sure he is used to seeing by now.

'Nutter' doesn't begin to cover this one.

Cotlake
14-10-2009, 21:48
Good one Steve,

I was going to respond specifically but in the end, because of the length of posts, I couldn't be bothered with it all. Having said that Shippy claimed to be supplying the shit I referred to so maybe he's a dealer. He can go to prison for that...lets hope so. It'll give us all a break don't you think :)

Could Shippy and all his aliases actually be P.Belt himself. It certainly would make sense considering his total exposition of the total 'Beltism' nonsense. Whatever, in these cases, they usually go away after a passage of time and in this case, I hope it is soonest.

aquapiranha
14-10-2009, 21:56
Yes you are right Greg, sooner or later he either gets banned or seems to lose interest and just disappears below the RADAR, I presume to go elsewhere and bother someone else. I do not believe however that he is mr belt himself, but another name keeps popping up - Robert Morein. Now, I can't make out if this is actually him or not, but the name keeps cropping up. the internet is a wonderful thing, a window on the world at your fingertips, unfortunately this means anyone's fingertips, including those with an agenda, or simply those who really should be locked away.

The Vinyl Adventure
14-10-2009, 23:53
I think it's a shame he didn't have anything else to say for him self ... He added a bit to the verity of opinion ... However out there!
It did get a bit long winded though eh... It becomes to time consuming to bother replying to his disatation-per-post comments! I guess going on like that works as a way to shut people up .... I wonder if he leaves with a feeling of victory because people lose interest in replying?

anthonyTD
15-10-2009, 11:00
we would like to remind you all that AOS is an open-minded forum and therefore open for any discussion including these ideas, but would like to add that such discusions/ideas do not necessarily reflect the views of the forum owner or management team.

Stratmangler
15-10-2009, 11:07
.... I wonder if he leaves with a feeling of victory because people lose interest in replying?

Probably.

Chris:)

SteveW
15-10-2009, 17:40
Don't know about losing interest in replying...I couldn't get through all the texts he writes. Is it me?
Keep thinking I'm drifting into 'senior' moments..
How can anyone type so much?? ...unless you are a brilliant touch typist as well...
mmmm..

REM
15-10-2009, 18:51
Steve

It aint just you mate, I can feel the will to live departing about 1/3rd the way through his posts but that, I think, is because you just know you're reading total drivel.
To maintain interest in posts as long as his you need to be a skilled writer and this guy is to literature what his hero is to natural science, draw your own conclusions.
:lolsign:

SteveW
15-10-2009, 20:02
Paul is not the only one I have difficulty in maintaining my concentration with...someone else has a similar writing style...

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ctc.html

Cotlake
15-10-2009, 20:46
we would like to remind you all that AOS is an open-minded forum and therefore open for any discussion including these ideas, but would like to add that such discusions/ideas do not necessarily reflect the views of the forum owner or management team.


Hmmm, there's no need to shout! I'm hoping that 'open minded' is not also 'blinded minded'! The membership seems to be complying with the open discussion expectation.

Not the views of the management eh? What will it take for you to exercise your powers and remove this charlatan? Of course, for the management it must be a dilemma. Shippy generates alot of activity yet, although you Mods won't say so, I expect like us you think he's spouting bollocks!

Come on, have some courage and dismiss him! He's been here long enough now. Most seem to be fed up with his elongated posts, which I now will not take time to read. The space he takes up is costing you money and he has absolutely no valuable contribution to make to AOS, it's membership or their sound systems. Please can we move on......should I start a poll on this?

Regards,

Greg

Beechwoods
15-10-2009, 20:51
Greg - I'd prefer not. If people don't like what Shippy has to say, ignore him. You can set your Control Panel to do this automatically if you're so inclined. I'd hate to think the precedence polls on individual members would set... and think of all the newbie posters who might already be wondering they might be similarly greeted by the townsfolk of AOS :)

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 06:45
Hmmm, there's no need to shout! I'm hoping that 'open minded' is not also 'blinded minded'! The membership seems to be complying with the open discussion expectation.

Not the views of the management eh? What will it take for you to exercise your powers and remove this charlatan? Of course, for the management it must be a dilemma. Shippy generates alot of activity yet, although you Mods won't say so, I expect like us you think he's spouting bollocks!

Come on, have some courage and dismiss him! He's been here long enough now. Most seem to be fed up with his elongated posts, which I now will not take time to read. The space he takes up is costing you money and he has absolutely no valuable contribution to make to AOS, it's membership or their sound systems. Please can we move on......should I start a poll on this?

Regards,

Greg

Frankly Greg, you ought to be ashamed to spout this fascistic position of yours if you had any sense of shame. And you're calling me a "charlatan" now?? You and your friend Angrypiranha have been dogging me from day one; you accusing me of being a drug dealer among other things, and wanting to see me in prison. I think you may have taken one hit too many on the crazy bong, myself. :mental: All I have seen you do is spout off as though your mouth and your mind are completely separate entities, and throughout all of your tirades, your insults, your accusations of me or the positions I support, you have never once proven anything you have said about me to be true. In fact, you have never even tried to prove any of your mad rubbish. You and Steve probably wouldn't know how to begin to substantiate your worthless opinions about me, and the positions I hold, with valid proof.

The space of my posts is costing too much money?! Wow, that's hilarious, that is. Like all of your worthless angry tirades against me are worth investing money in?! :lol: You think you and Angrypiranha are making a "valuable contribution to AOS" by continually posting content-free angry rants against me? How are you helping AOS members with their sound systems? I'm the only one in this thread who has even tried to, by posting a freetweak in the "Strokes of Genius" forum, the likes of which it has never seen. One that has an enormous potential to improve the sound systems of AOS members. I even worked on producing it especially for AOS members. It could be far more beneficial than a component upgrade, if used wisely. But the fact remains, you have not even tried that tweak or any PWB product. So you have zero credibility in yelling and crying to all and sundry about how upset (more like afraid!) the very ideas make you. Proving that you are the one who is "blinded minded". Do you actually think you're helping anyone, or their sound, by spending your every waking hour posting your mad diatribes?

You're the charlatan, Greg; everything you spout off on is total quackery and rubbish. You are threatened by audio concepts that disagree with yours, to the point where you want to not just censor but quash opposing views in the audio community. Think of how small-minded and petty one has to be, to be threatened by audio products that others adopt. I can only imagine what kind of a sorry life you and Steve must live, to be this obsessesed and upset with someone you've never met, simply because of the audio views he holds and the length of his posts! It's not my fault you lack the education, attention span or intellect to actually read anything longer than 2 lines, is it. And no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to keep posting attacks to me in this thread, are they? Moreover, you are telling the moderators that you are so upset by me, you want me banished. And yet stalker - troll that you are, you followed me into my own thread on a tweak I posted, like Angrypiranha, just to put up posts harassing me and attacking my character. So you have lost all credibility right there. Then you destroyed any chance of ever getting any credibility, after complaining like a cat in heat about my posts, while at the same time saying that you no longer read them! (And I believe that about as much as I believed your friend Angrypiranha, when he said he would leave this thread! We'll see if you are not lying about not reading my posts, after you are unable to refrain from talking smack about me, or responding to this one!). If anyone is "banned" it should be you. But don't worry, I won't bawl my eyes out and cry to every moderator within earshot to ban you because:

a) I'm not threatened by you as you are by me.
b) I'm sane
c) I have a life
d) I have free will. I don't get addicted to members on an audio forum
e) I do not believe in killing your opinions on audio, just because I know they are wrong.

Your idea of starting a poll to convince the management to ban minority opinions of audio products and concepts is one of the most pitiful things I have read on an audio forum. Let me tell you your views here do not put AOS in a good light at all. I'm aware that my beliefs in Beltism, though they are right, may be in the minority. But I trust that the majority of the membership are more rational, sensible, worldly and intelligent than you, and already know better not to ban someone for having minority views on audio. For one thing, I would not be the only member banned. Because while I am the only member with extensive experience with Peter Belt's products and concepts, I know that I am not the only member here who has witnessed the Belt effect. But hey, if you insist, and the mods agree, I will agree to be a party to your Poll of Intolerance under the following conditions: The question is whether I should be banned for sharing my unpopular opinions on Beltism, and no less than a two-thirds majority decides. If the vote doesn't pass two thirds, then the agreement would state that you are banned for life. I know how afraid of risk you are, by how insanely you react to challenges to your small world views; so that's what makes it interesting. ;) And seriously, if I were really banned from AOS by vote for merely holding unpopular opinions on audio, I think the story would make a great article for my website. Not to mention all the audio sites I am partnered with. ;)

Regards,


Paul.

Admins: sorry for getting personal with him, but I have been pretty patient ignoring his endless insulting attacks on my character in order to avoid a flame war. This latest meltdown of Greg's now calling for a banishment because he doesn't share my beliefs is a bit OTT, and something needed to be said. If he ever makes good on his threat to ignore me, and let's all watch how well he is able to refrain from stalking me, I won't feel any need to respond thusly again.

Beechwoods
16-10-2009, 06:51
Shippy - please. You will note I'd already responded to Greg. There's no point perpetuating an argument which has been put to bed.

Marco
16-10-2009, 07:22
Hi Shippy,

Have you told us what your system is yet - or have I missed that?

If not, spill the beans, as I'd like to know the type of equipment you use as a basis from which to evaluate these tweaks :)

You might not consider it important, but we do, so as they say, we're 'all ears'...

Marco.

P.S Oh and I should add that, just like the Welcome thread, this request isn't negotiable or avoidable ;)

The Grand Wazoo
16-10-2009, 07:41
Marco,
There was a list of gear at the bottom of Paul's Welcome post:
Speakers: Avalon Aspect
Amp: VTL (valve)
Source (analog): Clearaudio Performance
Source (digital): Roksan Kandy

...........and he likes both kinds of music - Country & Western................

Marco
16-10-2009, 07:46
Thanks, Chris - I'd missed that! :)

Paul,

Since we all appear to be 'maxed-out' now with regard to 'Beltism', could you please contribute to some of the many other discussions on the forum?

This will give your opinion more credibility amongst our members, and perhaps might even make them a little more inclined to try your tweaks in future.

Cheers!

Marco.

REM
16-10-2009, 08:20
...........and he likes both kinds of music - Country & Western................

Round these here parts we call that "Some Cnut from Preston":lolsign:

Steve Toy
16-10-2009, 15:46
No amount of hocus pocus Beltism is going to cure that mullet system of his!

Marco
16-10-2009, 16:49
Apparently he has a mullet on his nut, too.

Marco.

Cotlake
16-10-2009, 19:36
Right, thats it. I'm going to start a poll, 'Greg, a man of reason and credibility....Yes or No'. To give me a fighting chance in the 'Yes' section I've recruited Soundhaspriority (I won't call him Paul 'cause he might be Peter) as my campaign manager because he presents good judgement, rational arguement all backed up with scientific proof and he is a master of prose which he has ably demonstrated in his masterful, almost nepatistic and glowing character reference he has provided for me.

I'm much obliged, Sir! Such glowing recommendations from certain community members that I received in my previous occupation tended to display that I must have been doing something right all along. So your generous character witness makes me feel quite humble but nevertheless, very much appreciative. You are actually quite an angel with a heart of gold! Clearly, although now retired, I've not lost my touch. You have endorsed that for which I'm gushingly grateful.

Thereafter............

Probably the best way to deal with charlatans and other 'Bollock Spouters' on AOS and any other forum for that matter is to simply ignore them. If the sceptical membership (which I suspect is most here) just stop responding to his posts, surely, just like an ignored tantramic child, he'll eventually stop his noise and banging and settle into a bit of sobbing before falling asleep.

My suggestion is just that. Let's stop responding. In due course, he'll simply crawl away.

PS. My original poll suggestion was intended to be 'tongue in cheek'. I was just trying to make a point to the mods.

Beechwoods
16-10-2009, 19:52
:lol: Greg, someone actually took you up on your suggestion... Let's say no more... :)

Joe
16-10-2009, 21:22
Greg - I'd prefer not. If people don't like what Shippy has to say, ignore him. You can set your Control Panel to do this automatically if you're so inclined. I'd hate to think the precedence polls on individual members would set...

We could vote Marco out!

Marco
16-10-2009, 21:30
Aw, Joe, I thoughts ya loved me...

Marco.

Joe
16-10-2009, 21:35
Now don't start blubbing, it was only meant in jest.

Marco
16-10-2009, 21:39
{Blub...blub...blub}

Marco.

Joe
16-10-2009, 21:41
{Blub...blub...blub}

Marco.

It's no good calling out for Bub, he doesn't even post here.

Spectral Morn
16-10-2009, 23:35
It's no good calling out for Bub, he doesn't even post here.

Thank God for that.


Regards D S D L

Steve Toy
16-10-2009, 23:49
You can thank me not God.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 08:25
Hi Shippy,

Have you told us what your system is yet - or have I missed that?

If not, spill the beans, as I'd like to know the type of equipment you use as a basis from which to evaluate these tweaks :)

You might not consider it important, but we do, so as they say, we're 'all ears'...

Marco.

P.S Oh and I should add that, just like the Welcome thread, this request isn't negotiable or avoidable ;)

Yes, I did, in two threads. One was my welcome thread, first post, another was a classic gear thread, where I posted some of my older gear. But please don't make assumptions! Because what I test my tweaks on usually turns out to be anything but my hifi gear! Many reasons for that, including I am often away from home, including I am more inclined to tweak other people's system than worry about my own, including that it's just often not practical for me to use my hifi gear as my test system even when I am at home. Example, I might be walking from room to room looking for places to apply a treatment (tweak). Or maybe I am testing house wiring (ie. the way the wires are connected to a light switch will affect my sound). I need to be on the spot, so in those cases I will use an mp3 player to do the test. A lot of times I can't be bothered to turn on the full system, so I will use my computer speakers to do the test. It don't really matter, as long as I can repeat the test and get some consistency in the results.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 08:31
So if I may try to conclude things here, what have we learned in this thread? I'll tell you what I have observed. Nearly everyone has an opinion about Peter Belt (and me for advocating his products and ideas). That opinion is a strongly negative, often insulting one, 99.9% of the time. Even the administrators of this site weighed in on this, calling me an "obvious lunatic" (then an "obvious fanatic", then "complete nutjob") for supporting products and ideas that were not mainstream, and which have no obvious and known working mechanism. (Other than the usual, if not original, "autosuggestion" argument). I found it uproariously funny that at one point, the management even went out of their way to post a statement declaring that my opinions on Beltism do not reflect theirs. As though calling me an "obvious lunatic" were not enough to confirm that! :lol:

I suppose they wanted to be sure to signal to potential new members that these unpopular opinions on this much maligned practice in audio, were only being allowed (for now!) in the spirit of free exchange of speech, and should not taint the good reputation of AOS, as a forum of daft "Belties". I have no doubt in my mind that if advocating these controversial products and concepts that so threaten the status quo of our shared hobby by their very existence causes too much upset by too many delicate-minded members (who don't seem to have a sense of free will strong enough to avoid going into threads with controversial subjects that upset them), I would be banned for life without warning or hesitation. In fact, my banishment has been called for in this thread by at least two such emotionally-fragile members, for the banishable crime in the UK of "posting under the influence of Beltism". For the crime of supporting an opposing position in the face of the trashings that were being made against Peter Belt, and finally, for not "shutting up and going away". So they can continue to make baseless, irrational, ignorant statements against Belt, without any challenges from anyone in the world who might have opposing views to their anti-scientific Belt-bashing and blinkered ways of thinking.

Indeed, nearly everyone who has been trashing Peter Belt and calling him a charlatan and his customers "disciples of a cult of gullible brainwashed fools", has little to no knowledge of the subject (this was evident in all the erroneous assumptions being made), and are probably still dismissing his products and concepts on the ignorant idea that they can not possibly affect the signal! Further to that, they have never had extensive experience with his products or even ideas. Most have had none, it appears. Yet don't realize that it is the epitome of ignorant dogmatic skepticism to present such strong and conclusive opinions against an alternative science practiced for over a quarter century, when you have never made a serious effort to try to repeat the observations others have made. So this tells us that the adverse and often contemptuous reactions to me, Peter Belt and everyone else that does have knowledge and experience of Beltism, is one of non-thinking knee-jerk reactionism. The usual impedance to scientific progress, where if a technology is so far advanced it appears to be magic, it will be assumed to be "magic" by those who fail to understand it, and refuse to make any serious efforts to do so. Hence we see examples of people dismissing PWB's "CCU Brown Tie", as a "magic safety pin". An audio product I proudly own, love and use, but which they have never actually seen let alone tested.

Opponents to Beltism object to it on grounds that the Belt principles do not adhere to known scientific laws. Without realizing the irony in the fact that their reactionary approach smacks more of Luddism than it does of true scientific protocol! The usual excuse anti-Beltists make when asked why they refuse to make any serious efforts to explore this realm they have such loud disdain for, if only to personally find out whether they are right or not, is that they are too intellectually or physically lazy to do so. They simply don't have enough scientific curiousity to compel them to find out why everyone from Greg Weaver to Paul Benson to John Atkinson in the audio press have risked their reputations to report hearing the effects of devices that operate on Beltist principles (much to their surprise). So instead, my orthodox opponents respond by attacking the character and reputation of every single audio journalist who reported hearing differences.

Thus, to answer the usual cop-out from anti-Beltists that they don't have the "time" to investigate silly concepts that make no sense to them (but yet -can- somehow find the time to spend hours battling against it on a chat forum), I devised a simple tweak that anyone could understand and follow, and used common objects that everyone had or could obtain. It took 1-minute to set up. I posted it in "Strokes of Genius". It was intended to try and advance this controversial debate, and remove any excuse that it is "time" that prevents people from finding out whether their arrogant, conclusive statements about me or Peter Belt may be right. What can be observed from this however, is that most Belt-bashers simply do not want to know whether they are "right" or "wrong"; they prefer to just "believe" that they are right. It appears to be "safer" to not accept any challenges to your blinkered ways of thinking.

While I heartily applaud those who did, many took the time to declare they would not take the test, and sometimes, why they were refusing this brief experiment. My personal character has been attacked from thread to thread, far more than my arguments on behalf of Beltism. I'm not complaining about that, I'm just making a statement about it, and what it says about the difficulty of trying to have a serious discussion on the subject; when 98% of the responses are emotional faff, that don't even approach rational debate. I think that people at least believe that Beltists believe they are hearing what they claim to be hearing. Otherwise, they certainly would not be paying good money for products that they thought did nothing. However, it's been shown that no one here really understands what a placebo is (aka "autosuggestion"), or how it works. Because if they did, they would think beyond their prejudice and realize that placebos don't work for 25 years. If placebos could do that, pharmaceuticals would not have to do expensive R&D for "real drugs". And even if what I and my friends are experiencing when I Belt their environment could be a placebo, well after 20 years of hearing all kinds of different changes in sound, there is no difference between a placebo and real affects. Sound perceived is sound heard.

IMO, I think the reason for the heated controversy over Beltism can be summed up with this analogy: If I say that I like the sound of my Roksan CD player, and someone says they don't, and prefer their Exposure player, I may disagree but have no problem with that opinion. It's when they tell me that they don't just disagree with the sound of my CD player, rather, they believe I must be legally insane to believe it is even making a sound of its own. Particularly when they have no experience whatsoever with my CD player, and can't understand how CD players work. Nor do they want to, when offered the chance. They'll even go so far as to say they want me to stop debating the idea that my CD player produces its own sound, because they are bored hearing about it, and then conclude I must be a shill for Roksan if I continue to argue to the contrary on their conclusions about my CD player.
In this sense, PWB products for me are like any other audio product, and produce a characteristic sound like any other audio product. Regardless of whether you personally "approve" of them or not, the fact is that there are audiophiles who do favour them greatly and get a lot of enjoyment and use of these products. I feel that subjectivist audiophiles (of which I think most here are)should at least respect that the PWB products are just as valid as the ones they "believe in", and not choose to segregate and divide our community into even further and smaller divisions, as it has already been divided by the objectivist-subjectivist line.

If you want to try and create those divisions by arguing that "your" audio products that you choose to believe in at least have a well known basis in science, well... I suggest you try to educate yourself on the subject of electromagnetism some day. Even today, long after the publishing of Maxwell's equations, science does not understand every aspect behind the principles of magnetism.... and yet these are common components found in just about every loudspeaker and amp transformer in an audio skeptic's system! New developments came out since the introduction of the "perfect sound forever" CD player, that should have resolved the earlier ignorance of CD advocates, who continually stated (and some still do) the Redbook sound was accurate and more than enough, because the "science" proves this is so. Then a fellow named Ed Meitner came along and introduced a concept he discovered called "clock jitter" which also met with controversy but later, acceptance. More recently, a player was introduced that did away with the EC circuit, and showed that this too can negatively influence the sound. In my view, those who dismiss technologies out of hand because they don't understand the mechanism need to stop confusing "science" with the 10 commandments of God, and pretending they have any respect for science. Science is only a record of what is currently known and understood. Its records do not change easily, if the Peter Belt example is any indication. But it does and can change. That's called "progress". In bashing unconventional ideas in science, without any real experience with them or desire to have any meaningful experience with them, you are acting as the enemy of progress. :sofa:


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

- Arthur C. Clarke

Themis
17-10-2009, 09:09
Paul, your conclusions are false.
The reason is simple though: you are using too many arbitrary variables in your sentences' logical constructions.

Educated human beings have a natural mechanism of heuristic simplification which refuses to analyze sentences with a high percentage of false variables and false postulates. This mechanism is essential to the analysis/synthesis process, and this process is an essential part of educated humans.
This mechanism, invalidates huge parts of what you're writing.

I'm sorry to say, but you should try to discuss one point at a time, if you wish any discussion at all.
Otherwise, no discussion is possible, and I wonder what are you posting for.

Alex_UK
17-10-2009, 10:21
You repeatedly bang on in your posts about the tweak "only taking a minute" but that is purely creating the so called "device" - you then expect people to test and then re-try the testing process if that doesn't work, then try more "devices" - hours, not minutes, potentially, that rationally I am not investing my time in, as much out of principal as anything now, in the same way I may refuse to read the "Watchtower" because someone is trying to shove it down my throat.

This whole episode reminds me of a situation that ocurred at work a few years back. It all started with an email from a colleague asking for help collecting Walkers Crisp wrappers - a friend of a friend's daughter with severe disabilities needed a new electric wheelchair, and if we could collect the weight of the wheelchair in empty crisp packets, Walkers were prepared to buy the new wheelchair. Much crisp munching ensued, and soon boxes sprang up everywhere to put your packets in, staff's families where busy doing the same, we even roped-in clients, putting a report in our newsletter appealling for help. Of course, no one bothered to check with Walkers that this was in fact true, and when they did, it was of course a sick and cruel hoax, and has been going on in different incarnations for years. But, of course, the people who had become passionate about their crusade would refuse to believe they had been conned, and all sorts of nasty in-fighting ensued.

My point is, I believe the whole reason the sick hoaxer started the email trail was because he gets a kick out of people doing his bidding, wasting their time and energy on his whim, and causing massive disruption wherever people give the idea credence. Can anyone see a resemblance?

SteveW
17-10-2009, 17:50
Paul, your conclusions are false.
The reason is simple though: you are using too many arbitrary variables in your sentences' logical constructions.

Educated human beings have a natural mechanism of heuristic simplification which refuses to analyze sentences with a high percentage of false variables and false postulates. This mechanism is essential to the analysis/synthesis process, and this process is an essential part of educated humans.
This mechanism, invalidates huge parts of what you're writing.

I'm sorry to say, but you should try to discuss one point at a time, if you wish any discussion at all.
Otherwise, no discussion is possible, and I wonder what are you posting for.

Well Said !!!
Its not the message...its the bloody evangelical nature of the messenger that gives me the thousand yard stare.

REM
17-10-2009, 18:22
Well Said !!!
Its not the message...its the bloody evangelical nature of the messenger that gives me the thousand yard stare.

Indeed, has anyone else wondered if this 'Paul' is in fact one person or possibly a group of people?
I ask because the use of grammar varies so much between posts, at times he is incapable of forming sentences never mind constructing an argument. It could just be due to posting after consuming certain substances of course but you never know:scratch:.

Marco
20-10-2009, 19:20
I'm tempted to say that this whole thing smells of wee-wee...

Marco.

hifi_dave
20-10-2009, 22:38
Is it possible that some of those long, rambling posts were just cut and paste from elsewhere - just stock quotes, customised ?

The Vinyl Adventure
20-10-2009, 23:14
That had crossed my mind too

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 23:18
Just try copying a few choice phrases - stick 'em in Gurgle with exclamation marks around 'em & see what comes up.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:40
I'm tempted to say that this whole thing smells of wee-wee...

Marco.

Awww... mummy forget to change your diapers? :laugh:

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:42
Hi Paul,

As I've already asked you elsewhere, can you please start contributing to the many other discussions on the forum?

I have, a while ago. I even posted my old gear in the classic thread. Never got a response. Zip. Nada. The threads where I talked about Beltism however, no shortage of responses! I go where I'm needed, Marco!


And that doesn't mean your 'Greetings Earthling' thread, which is simply an extension of this one and the PB headphones thread in Past Masters!

No, it isn't. This one is about a tweak I offered. The PB headphone thread is about PWB - PB, and the Greetings thread was intended to be just that; greetings. What can I say, if the thread count is any indication, Peter Belt is a popular topic among the fora. That shows that this is what people want to talk about. And I can understand. This is the UK, and he's the most brilliant audio engineer the UK has ever produced.


Quite frankly we've had enough now of this 'Beltism' stuff.

That may be your feeling, but you are obviously not speaking for everybody, otherwise people obviously wouldn't be responding to these 3 threads covering Beltism. I have already stated that I can't spend all waking hours on this board, so like anyone here, I deal with the messages that interest me. Most of the time, that means only replying to messages people have written to me, that usually discuss something to do with Beltism. I was already told that wasn't a problem, and there is room for all views. And if someone has responded to me in whatever thread on this board, I should have a right to respond so long as I don't violate the ethos. Otherwise they should not have a right to respond to me. You are showing preferential treatment and violating basic principles of fairness in demanding that I do not respond to these threads while others can, even in order to answer them.

You should know: I basically divide audio into two categories: "Beltism", and "Newtonism". Arguably, all conventional principles of audio can be traced back to the discoveries of Sir Isaac Newton. While "Beltism", as it relates to audio (because it can relate to other fields), traces back to the discoveries of Peter W. Belt. Both relate to audio, but one deals with the signal, the other, the listener. So they are two halves of the same coin. I think Newtonist audio is boring, because it offers few new challenges to me. It's usuallly the same issues that I am overly familiar with, because I have explored them to death. Not to mention the same debates I have hashed and rehashed on forums. Hence I find Beltist audio more interesting, because there is so much I haven't explored, and continually learn about it. And moreover, most have not explored any of it; even though it is fully half of what improving the quality of your sound is about. So sometimes, I try to educate people on the subject, if I can. However, because I might be bored by Newtonist audio, I would never tell people that they should "shut up and go away" because they are boring me to death with their Newtonist blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda. I don't see why there isn't enough room on this audio forum for BOTH categories of audio?? If I don't want to go into threads discussing Newtonist audio, why should I be made to? And if others don't want to discuss Beltist audio, is anyone forcing them to go into threads that pursue that category of audio??

If only people who were interested in a particular thread would read or post to it, then we would have no problem. The problems come when people insist on posting to threads with views they disagree with to the point of sheer obsessive madness. If they were able to excercise their God-given free will, then it would ensure that only those in these threads would be fully interested in the thread's subject. I mean why do people even GO nuts like this urging others to put me on "ignore", when you just admitted that I am only sticking to 3 threads, 2 of which I started!

WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT THIS THAT MEMBERS CAN NOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO STAY OUT OF JUST 3 THREADS THAT I AM POSTING TO, IF IT UPSETS THEM SO MUCH TO HEAR ABOUT DIFFERENT VIEWS ON AUDIO!!!!

Obviously, this is really about censoring views in audio that challenge the status quo to the point of intellectual and emotional discomfort. So are we just supposed to have divisions of Newtonian-Only audio groups and Beltist-Only ones, like we now have Objectivist-Only and Subjecivist-Only chat sites? Is there really no room for two opposing views on audio to co-exist on one audio chat forum; or more than one view? And how does a fractured audio community help, when we are already a tiny minority of the audio consumer marketplace??

Find a way to have more tolerance for different views. A lot of the crying, whinging, shrieking and wild oscillations some people are going through could be entirely avoided if you the Administration would just agree to enforce your own ethos on members other than me! Which says that these views should be discussed *sensibly*. Out of the hundreds of posts put down on this subject since my arrival, very very very very very few of them even attempted to have a rational, sensible, calm debate with me in the PWB headphone thread on what Beltism is, and how it may be everything I say it is. I wanted that, but instead, the prevailing attitude was one of contemptuous dismissal by way of irrational prejudice, because of what the ideas sound like. All from people with very little to no research within this field of audio science.

You single me out and accuse me of "just being here to promote your beliefs in audio". Well guess what? *Everyone* is here to "promote" their beliefs in audio. Everyone is a "SHILL" for their beliefs, a SHILL for whatever products they use and enjoy. For most members, it happens to be their belief in Newtonian audio. (Which it might surprise you to know, I share). But you're singling me out because you obviously don't care for my beliefs. And despite my wanting to discuss my differences of opinions sensibly, you are now telling me you're sick of my views and God forbid, if I feel like mentioning someting I did in a conversation that happens to mention Beltism one day in some thread about amplifiers, well I can't talk about that because according to you, I am "promoting my Beltist beliefs" and you don't want to see those opinions any longer. In doing so, you are ---violating your own ethos--- and making up special rules for me. Something your ethos says you won't do, because you supposedly treat all fairly.


I have to tell you that if you're just here to promote your 'Beltist' beliefs, and offer nothing else to our community, your stay here will be a rather short one.

So it will be a short one. I expected to talk about other things in other threads, when people have lost interest in the threads I was interested in. I did not expect to continue in the PB headphones thread, and just posted my conclusions, the last thing I expected to post to it. As for this thread, well I don't know if you even read it, but there are a few people reporting they would like to try the experiment and will post results soon. So obviously there IS interest in the subject of this thread, and we are -mostly- getting along, save for the presence of Aquapiranha and Greg, who ONLY came into it to crap all over it, start a flame war, harass me and launch attacks against my character, so that I get banned for OTHERS becoming upset. The part of the ethos *you* wrote says no preferential treatment will be given. But instead of kicking THEM out of the thread, you come in here to kick ME out of my own thread! A thread that is discussing audio, a thread that is on topic and exactly what its forum was created for, and a thread that is harming no one and who's participants are obviously not coming into it because they are sick of hearing about "Beltism". I made it perfectly clear that's what my tweak is based on. Moreover, there is **nothing** in your ethos that accounts for you demanding that I leave this thread and post elsewhere, and even stop any more mention of Beltist audio. As a matter of fact, let me recite 1 of the 3 basic principles of the AOS Ethos:


Phronesis; Using wisdom and knowledge in a practical way.

This is -exactly- what I am trying to promote in this thread. Sharing my wisdom and knowledge so that others may benefit in a practical way.

This was YOUR contribution to our Ethos:


Marco:

Other than that, we would like to provide our members with a place where they feel that they can be themselves and express their views on hi-fi, music, and any other permitted subject, without peer pressure, one-upmanship, and a feeling of having to conform to some accepted ‘norm’. There are no cliques, hidden agendas, nor any preferential treatment given; and not only will our members themselves be treated with respect but also their opinions and observations, particularly those of people who may not have the same level of experience with hi-fi as others.

* This is all that I was trying to do, express my views on hifi; which I thought was a "permitted subject" on an audio forum. But now you're telling me some subjects on audio are not "permitted" any longer, and that I have to conform to some accepted ‘norm’ of views on hi-fi, ones shared by a majority of members?

* You go on to say "not only will our members themselves be treated with respect", yet I have been called a "complete nutjob" by one adminstrator, and a "obvious lunatic-obvious fanatic" by another adminnistrator. As if that wasn't enough to piss all over the ethos, yet another administrator arbitrarily decides to change my user name without discussing it with me in PM, based on some personal conspiracy theory of his about who he thinks I might have been in a past life on another discussion group. I am pretty much certain that I am the only member in the history of AOS who has had their user name changed on them; and no doubt the only current member here this has been done to. Even though there's **nothing** in the Ethos that says you must register under the same name you might have used before on some unrelated forum!!!

* "Their opinions and observations (will be treated with respect), particularly those of people who may not have the same level of experience with hi-fi as others." You are again violating your OWN part of the Ethos by -not- treating my opinions and observations with respect, in telling me I have to stop sharing them. Even though there are clearly people talking to me about them.


Finally:


Things we really like here:

Differences of opinion discussed sensibly.

This is all that I wanted to do. Discuss our differences of opinion -sensibly-. In no instance has anyone in the threads I have been in been reprimanded for NOT discussing their differences of opinion -sensibly-. They get to insult me, attack my character, accuse me of being a charlatan, a drug dealer, harass me, stalk me, troll me, tell me to shut up, and remain in the threads I am trying to discuss the differences of views in, simply to submit whinging fits about me. I guess this is yet another part of the ethos that simply does not apply to non-Belltists.

It's starting to feel like I'm on an audio board in North Korea here. I think that started with you telling me I HAVE to write a welcome post, and it HAS to contain certain personal information about myself and my stereo. I've never seen that on a forum this side of Communist China. I lot of my friends on forums don't like to talk about their gear for their own personal reasons, and there are even fewer who like to be forced to talk about their gear and the music they listen to by the management. Fewer still who like to do so under threat. What I first thought was a friendly suggestion that I should maybe get around to when I have the time, turns out to be something you are pumping out more and more furious posts to me about each hour of the day, threatening to wipe me off the face of this earth if I don't post a message listing my music and gear. How is that "friendly", do you figure? It's like a NK soldier sticking a bayonet up a kid's bum and shouting "Play!". "Smile more, dammit!". Furthermore, the member "Quad405" joins in Sept. 28, doesn't post a welcome message until Oct. 17, but he isn't hassled about it, because he even says he "forgot about the welcome forum". Maybe it's okay because he's a Quad lover? It isn't that I mind talking about those things, but I prefer to do so at my own pace, not by demand, and only -if- I feel secure in doing so. Particularly when members use the information about your system to insult your system later; as has already been done to me here in my short time.

So that feels a bit restrictive, but I get over it. Not for long because the next thing I know, "someone" decides to publish my location in all of my posts. Seems I don't have a choice about that either. Then, without warning again, I find I am "given" a new signature! In the latest assault on my identity, and the most egregious, I no longer have rights to my own user name! A user name the forum's administrator prefers is chosen for me!!!! I mean Jesus Tapdancing Christ Almighty! Is this still my account or what? Are my posts going to be rewrittten as well, to replace all the mentions of Peter Belt with Peter Sellers? Next time I log on, should I expect a new avatar of a picture of your Dear Leader on all my posts? After all that, all I could hope for is that at least I would be left to choose the content of my posts, so long as it remains about audio. BUT NO!!!! Now you're telling me I can't even choose THAT!! I can only talk about audio subjects you approve of, and don't personally get tired of reading, as you sit there reading all my posts!!

Ever occur to you that not everyone feels to publically display their names and locations for good reason? Is people shrieking and screaming and making all kinds of crazy lying accusations about me and declaring they want to see me in prison, all because I am simply supporting unpopular views on Beltism, a good enough reason? If not, I can come up with a better one. There have been unhinged nutters on the internet like "Aquapiranha", that DO NOT need to know personal information about me they can use to threaten me or my family. One nutjob felt "humiliated" for trying a tweak of mine posted on an audio chat group that didn't work for him (at first! until he applied it multiple times!). So like Steve here on AOS, this mental case is living out his pathetic little life where he has nothing better to do but wage a personal campaign of hatred toward someone he doesn't like on the net. Using this very information like my name and my city to search Google to obtain further information about me, he ends up calling up the teaching hospital where I work, trying to get me fired. Next he's harassing me at home, calling me at all hours of the night, until I have to get the authorities involved. Yet on this so called "friendly board where everyone is "friends"", not only are these sick malicious witch hunts from one member against another not crossing any line, not forbidden, at least not against me despite "witch hunts" being **mentioned** as forbidden in the ethos, they are -encouraged- by the admins themselves! How shameful is that I ask? Do I have to worry about your administrators now, calling me up at all hours, addressing me by this stupid name "soundhaspriority"? Funny how I'm the one always being called a "lunatic" as a dogmatic reaction to my beliefs, but it's most others here that are in fact acting like one!

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:48
Angrypiranha cried:

Sorry Dave. I can only work from the things I have read and been told.

I know. That is what your entire defense against Beltism is based on!

JH used his position on a hifi mag to promote his beliefs which is wrong IMO

Oh yes, of course. People certainly do not read audio journalists in subjective audio mags to hear about what they believe.
You are a total, drooling, slobbering idiot, do you know that?

( wrong when you are talking about this belt stuff)

Oh, now we get to the meat of the matter! Whenever audio journalists talk about subjects you are totally buck ignorant about but don't believe in, then they are "wrong" for talking about audio products you know nothing about and are in fact intellectually threatened by (by that, I don't mean to imply you are in posession of an intellect). It just goes from one stupid statement to an even stupider one with you, doesn't it?

and IMO he became an object of ridicule through his own fault.

Yes of course. So did Galileo, Giordani Bruno, Copernicus, Keppler and certainly Joseph Lister. I'm sure one of your ancestors was there helping to set up the guillotine for Antoine Lavoisier. Those like you who know nothing about history are doomed to repeat it.

I don't know what primary school you dropped out of Steve, but geez man, a -little- education in that cranium of yours is -really- not going to hurt as much as you think. Maybe you won't have such an irrational fear of "Belties" if you do come to realize how wildly ignorant you are. I suggest you start HERE: http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html

"When a true genius appears in this world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

- Jonathan Swift

------------------------------------
Stanford R. Ovshinsky (amorphous semiconductor devices)

Physicists "knew" that chips and transistors could only be made from expensive slices of ultra-pure single-crystal semiconductor. Ovshinsky's breakthrough invention of glasslike semiconductors was attacked by physicists and then ignored for more than a decade. (When evidence contradicts consensus belief, inspecting that evidence somehow becomes a waste of time.) Ovshinsky was bankrupt and destitute when finally the Japanese took interest and funded his work. The result: the new science of amorphous semiconductor physics, as well as inexpensive thin-film semiconductor technology (in particular the amorphous solar cell, photocopier components, and writeable CDROMS sold by Sharp Inc.) made millions for Japan rather than for the US.

George Zweig (quark theory)

Zweig published quark theory at CERN in 1964 (calling them 'aces'), but everyone knows that no particle can have 1/3 electric charge. Rather than receiving recognition, he encountered stiff barriers and was accused of being a charlatan.
------------------------------------


And as for the backward speaker thing.. welll, come on.

Let me make a wild guess. This is but one other thing you have never tested and know nothing about. Guess you know nothing about the Linn Isobarik either. I take it your role in the hifi shop was just to stand at the door and greet people, and later help put the items they bought in their bag. You've obviously learned nothing about hifi in 25 years. I've had arguments with hifi sales clerks like you, when telling them their speakers are phased incorrectly, and having them insist there is nothing wrong with the sound. But still, refusing to check the equipment. Until I insist it be done or I walk out of the dem. Then when they do, what do you know surpise surprise, the damn speakers are wired wrong. You, you probably don't even know what the hell "phase" is! :lol:

anyway, he is not the subject of this discussion, and as long as this bloody annoying idiot stays here I am going to take a week off from posting, I have had enough and seen it all before. Marco I will see you Friday.

Oh nice play for sympathy, melodrama queen! :violin: When does your next act start? I wanna make sure I don't miss the intro. :lol:

I am just tired of seeing threads overtaken by the bloody nutter.

"Threads"?? "Overtaken"? Wow, I can see your obsession with me is only exceeded by your delusion. I have only joined -one- thread that I did not start, that could even come close to being described as "overtaken". And I posted on topic in that thread. You however, have "overtaken" the two threads I DID initiate, as we see here, just to post your tired angry tirades against me!

I am guessing he will drift away or be pushed, but in the meantime I just can't be arsed.

Apparently you can since all you can do since I joined is whinge about me. I guess the word "pathetic" is another concept you're unfamiliar with! How about the term "intellectual coward", since that is exactly what you are, for trying to quash opinions you disagree with by way of being mates with the admin?

Some people simply should not be allowed near the internet.

You shouldn't be allowed near sharp implements.

I am very amused at the way he avoids my posts entirely, perhaps he thinks by not responding he will not draw attention to the truth? or perhaps he thinks I am a deluded 'naysayer' and therefore I do not warrant the effort? or maybe he does not want to admit the truth...

Somebody please prepare a straitjacket for Angrypiranha. He's gone off the deep end again obsessing about me to himself, and is going to start poking himself with a fork.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 04:55
As probably the main focus of accusation with regard to the 'witch hunt' that has taken place, I feel I must put down a little background information that some of you are obviously not aware of.

Is the story where you were kicked in the head by a mule as a child? Because I think we've heard that one already.


In the Late eighties I worked in a hifi shop for just under a couple of years. During that time, 'beltmania' was just about coming down from it's zenith, and many had begun to think they had been had. I did try a couple of these 'tweaks' and there was universally no change whatsoever to either the sound or the perception of it for the staff. Ok, so we had a go and it didn't work.

So that's it? That's the the ENTIRE reason for your irrational hatred against Peter Belt, and your obsessive agena of hatred towards me? You once tried two of the tweaks, and you already had a bias against it because it was so strong, it's still driving you to sick anger, hatred and obsessive fits of Googling, some 20 years later! Wow, that REALLY explains where you went off the deep end, doesn't it. Well, maybe not entirely. So you who knows squat about the devices and don't know how to install them correctly, tried just 2 tweaks. Which you don't name of course, so they're probably ideas you got out of Hifi Answers, because you're too cheap to actually buy any of PWB's products. I mean you didn't go to any length of trouble like, say, trying 10 at a time. 15 applications at a time. No, just the two, thank you. If that's not enough, then I will hate this product and anyone who defends it until I croak. Yeah, how very open minded an attitude; you're an inspiration of wisdom to us all, I'm sure. But Steve, don't stop there. Do keep on explaining your entire life story to everyone, on how you have become the sorry, angry, narrow minded troll-fish we see before us today.


Eventually the fuss died down, the reviewers stopped plugging it and with the exception of jimmy the muppet hughes, everyone gave up and forgot about it. Except JH. And soundhaspriority.

:lol: ROTFLMAO!! What a ridiculous lie. Yet another unproven lie about me that you pulled out of your bunghole. JH has since stoppped pursuing the practice so that leaves me. SO YOU ARE TELLING US THEN!!!: That for the next 25 years, PWB stayed in business making hundreds of tweaks since the time that you were too deaf to hear 2 of them, ALL ON MY BUSINESS!! Wow. That's pretty amazing. Yup, pretty rational and sane of you to claim that, Steve. And of course, I must also be responsible for all the articles in their newsletter these last 10 years, or the hundreds of posts on their forum (all of which I am talking to myself), and those online reviews of Belt devices are written by me, correct?, and of course, let's not forget the ultimate in your stupid groundless conjecture: I AM Peter Belt. Which two thirds of the idiots on this forum have come to believe, since they are now addressing me as both "Paul" AND "Peter". AND Soundhaspriority, let's not forget. Of course, you also claim I'm Robert Morein, LET'S NOT FORGET. As usual, not thinking very hard about any of this, are you? So anyway, now, the problem we are faced with is people have to address me as Paul, Peter, Soundhaspriority, AND Robert Morein. How the fuck is your friend Marco going to squeeze all of that on my user name title is what I want to know. :lol:

What can an intelligent person say to this kind of profound mass stupidity and mass self-delusion in a single setting, other than to quote my friend Stuart Goddard, who said it best:

"If evil be the food of genius, there aren't many demons around".


Now, fast forward to about three years ago, on another forum in a different decade. Everyone is going about their business when guess who arrives and does exactly what he has done on this forum.

Originally, in your first whining baby fit that you wrote against me, you said it was ONE year ago. So what is it, 3 years, 1 year, 13 years ago? Funny how facts change when you pull them out of your bum, isn't it? Speaking of "facts", uh, where the hell are they here?


ceaseless references to the master, endless pages of arguments for all those who dare to question that putting a sheet of paper under a chair leg will render your home a palace of peace and harmony, and make you hifi sound better to boot.

Uh, where's the tangible evidence that I'm that person? Let me guess: it comes in the form of your blind speculation again? Oh the writing style's are similar, so must be the same person? The content is similar, so must be the same person? The beliefs are similar, must be the same person? MO similar? Must be the same person? And of course, you said I'm the only one who still supports Belt's concepts, so that just proves you right, yes? Sorry junior, but ALL of that crap is HERESAY. And the chair leg tweak is on the company's website for all to see. You sound like a million other wacko Belt bashers with a similar MO, writing style, content and beliefs. So I could say the same thing about you, and trawl Google for posts that resemble yours, if I had no life like you. I am certainly not the only supporter of PWB, but you're entire case here is resting on your personal experience on forums! You haven't "heard" of any other forum members supporting PWB, just like you haven't "heard" of anything called morphogenetic fields, so whatever you are ignorant of, doesn't exist!

Let me know if you ever figure out what "proof and evidence" means, and bring it on. Until then, shut yer gob, maniac.


Ah, says I, I have seen all this before, and along with many many others questioned why we had to put up with this barrage of marketing spiel.

Yes, I'm sure any audio company would love to hire someone as effective at marketing as I am! God, are you ever a blind idiot.
You probably stand on street corners screaming at kids that the government is implanting chips in their brain. Maybe it's implanted one in yours, goofy. Better go and check! Get the tin foil hat out.

If I'm a "shill for Beltism" according to you, YOU are a shill for "Newtonism", for PROMOTING your Newtonian beliefs. So eat that for lunch, brainiac.

How nice to admit that all the UK audio forums you are on are intolerant about audio beliefs that differ from the norm. I wonder, is that because YOU and your mates are on them, or is that because you're saying all British are raging hateful bigots like you? I'd hate to think it's the latter.


(if you haven't visited his site yet, you should - and check the prices while you are there).

Nice. You have really showed your impartiality against me now! You have the judge totally convinced! The prices btw are quite a bargain compared to what you wasted on upgrading your kit .


Now, I have seen all this before, so it may have surprised some when I said 'go, and take your conjuring with you' without giving him time to explain himself.

When you apply this same Belt bigotry of yours against the next person who dares talk positively about Peter Belt on any forum you've infected, that you think is me, that's going to be hilarious! Poor sap is probably going to have his user name changed ten times before your mate bans him for life! :lol:

Now, I did this because I have seen first hand the grief caused on the other (and now it turns out dozens) forum,

What about thousands? Aren't you going to claim THOUSANDS of forums destroyed by little old Paul? Because I'll see your thousand and raise you 5 million. I say there have been 5 million people destroyed by your rantings, Steve Angrypiranha. AKA "Stewart Pinkerton"!!!! Where's my proof you ask? Well, it's in your bum. Along with your proof that there were "dozens" of forums I caused grief on. You see, on AOS, you don't need proof. You just need to make a hateful accusation and have your bigotry in the right place.

As for the grief Mr. Hypocrite, I know you certainly CAN'T be very worried about that. Since you are the one who has been causing all the grief with your endless flaming tirades and diatribes against me since I joined!!!! The only reason there hasn't been MORE grief, is simply because I ignored you all this time! I didn't ignore you because you are too much of a threat or a challenge to me, as you in your Pinky brain presumed. I could DECIMATE you, as I have shown in the very little effort I have made today, in your name. I can rape you with logic, I can slaughter you intellectually, I can pulverize you with proof, and in a battle of wits with me, well you have none. That's the only reason you never tried to debate me on Beltism. Because you already know I will make you look like an even bigger ignorant fool than you already make yourself out to be. The only reason I have done none of those things and mostly ignored you, is because we both know that there is a double standard here to moderation. You can get away with murder. Literally murdering my character. But of course, if I say "boo" to you, you will start crying, bawling and moaning to Marco or one of the other admins you are mates with, and insist that they ban me (you intellectual coward, you), or otherwise you will threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, and leave the forum until I am not tossed. So I've learned that apart from your irrational fear and hatred of new technologies that are too advanced for your peanut brain to handle, you're really kind of a girlie-man, aren't you?



and truth be told I did not want the same thing happening here which is why I have provided evidence of what happened to those that matter.

And of course, in true Kafkaesque manner, I was tried and accused of your inane conspiracy theories, and found guilty to where my user name was changed to someone I have NO affiliation with, without so much as a SHRED of that alleged "evidence" ever being presented. a

This dear readers, is a FIRST IN AUDIO CHAT FORUMS.

Which explains why I have this impression the forum is administered by 12 year olds, and many of its members are around that age, since they behave that way.


So, to sum up that bit,

Gee, and you didn't even get to talk about when you were in the hospital for trying to drive your head through the tv. Are you SURE this is your entire heart that you have spilled out here, Steve? Next time you might want to save some for your therapist though.



I had seen it all before! I was not merely having a go at a hapless newcomer, this guy is a professional spammer,

I can see that you don't know what "spamming" is any more than you know what Beltism is.


and in my opinion he pushes the products of nothing less than a fraudster.

Make no mistake, EVERYTHING you spew is merely your OPINION. And that opinion of yours is shared by everyone on this forum. Except one. Neil. The moderator. Remember him? The guy who heard the very principle those products are based on, in not 1, not 2, but THREE tests, including TWO blind ones, and TWO people heard it, and none of those people was YOU. So know that by calling Belt a "fraudster", you are also calling Neil a fraudster and a LIAR. You on the other hand never did any blind tests and never heard any effect. So this is proof that it is YOU that is a "fraudster".



So, I hope I have cleared up a couple of points, and the reasons why I have acted like I have.If anyone would like to ask more just PM me.

You have mail! ;) No seriously, I think that's about all of your drug-addled brain you need to be sharing.


In the meantime I hope I have made it clear that I had prior knowledge of this person, and was not just shooting from the hip.

The only thing that's clear is that you have never provided proof for a SINGLE thing you have ever said about me or Belt. You have ZERO prior knowledge of me.


I hope those who know personally will know that I am a reasonable chap, not normally aggressive or obtuse,

I don't actually see anyone here confirming that Steve. So I guess we're going to have to go with "agressive and obtuse" on this one.


but I am sorry I genuinely believe that belt is a con man and a fraud and if I had it within my power to put an end to his peddling of potions, I would do it in a heartbeat.

Well that really shows more of your objective outlook on all of this, doesn't it? You're pretty sick puppy, you realize that, Steve? Obviously not. You think that scientific invalidation comes from TWO, count them, TWO attempts to validate the phenomenon, that you made 20 years ago. Your friend Neil validated it in a few hours. THREE times. You need psychiatric help Steve, you really do. Getting an education, if not a clue as to what science is about, wouldn't hurt either.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:20
Themis wrote:


Paul, your conclusions are false. The reason is simple though: you are using too many arbitrary variables in your sentences' logical constructions.

Educated human beings have a natural mechanism of heuristic simplification which refuses to analyze sentences with a high percentage of false variables and false postulates. This mechanism is essential to the analysis/synthesis process, and this process is an essential part of educated humans. This mechanism, invalidates huge parts of what you're writing.
I'm sorry to say, but you should try to discuss one point at a time, if you wish any discussion at all. Otherwise, no discussion is possible, and I wonder what are you posting for.

Hint: I explained why I posted that in the very title. "Conclusion". Perhaps you are not familiar with formal debates. This is simply a series of statements intended to put light on the debate in this thread. I have been fair and objective in my conclusive statements. The fact that no one has refuted any of them confirms that.

You obviously haven't even read long enough into my message to even know whether my "conclusions are false". I don't know if you realize this, but there's this thing called "proof" that is supposed to accompany such an argument. What you cited doesn't even begin to support your false conclusion of my alleged false conclusions. The stuff about "too many arbitrary variables" and "heuristic simplification" is absolute rubbish. You're confusing that with "simplification simplification". Meaning that those with short attention spans who's brain starts hurting after a few lines find it hard to get through messages of any length. Anyone who can read a book not written by Dr. Seuss does not have trouble with the length of my messages, and prefers messages of substance, instead of the usual 2-line throwaway AOL chat room messages that you and others put out. And anyone who spends as much time here as the regular members who've complained about the length of my messages have, certainly have the time to read them; that's not the stumbling block. An education and a few brain cells to rub together are all that is required to read messages of any length on a chat forum. If you don't have that much, you won't replace it with faulty logic.

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 05:47
Is the story where you were kicked in the head by a mule as a child? Because I think we've heard that one already.


In the Late eighties I worked in a hifi shop for just under a couple of years. During that time, 'beltmania' was just about coming down from it's zenith, and many had begun to think they had been had. I did try a couple of these 'tweaks' and there was universally no change whatsoever to either the sound or the perception of it for the staff. Ok, so we had a go and it didn't work.

So that's it? That's the the ENTIRE reason for your irrational hatred against Peter Belt, and your obsessive agena of hatred towards me? You once tried two of the tweaks, and you already had a bias against it because it was so strong, it's still driving you to sick anger, hatred and obsessive fits of Googling, some 20 years later! Wow, that REALLY explains where you went off the deep end, doesn't it. Well, maybe not entirely. So you who knows squat about the devices and don't know how to install them correctly, tried just 2 tweaks. Which you don't name of course, so they're probably ideas you got out of Hifi Answers, because you're too cheap to actually buy any of PWB's products. I mean you didn't go to any length of trouble like, say, trying 10 at a time. 15 applications at a time. No, just the two, thank you. If that's not enough, then I will hate this product and anyone who defends it until I croak. Yeah, how very open minded an attitude; you're an inspiration of wisdom to us all, I'm sure. But Steve, don't stop there. Do keep on explaining your entire life story to everyone, on how you have become the sorry, angry, narrow minded troll-fish we see before us today.



:lol: ROTFLMAO!! What a ridiculous lie. Yet another unproven lie about me that you pulled out of your bunghole. JH has since stoppped pursuing the practice so that leaves me. SO YOU ARE TELLING US THEN!!!: That for the next 25 years, PWB stayed in business making hundreds of tweaks since the time that you were too deaf to hear 2 of them, ALL ON MY BUSINESS!! Wow. That's pretty amazing. Yup, pretty rational and sane of you to claim that, Steve. And of course, I must also be responsible for all the articles in their newsletter these last 10 years, or the hundreds of posts on their forum (all of which I am talking to myself), and those online reviews of Belt devices are written by me, correct?, and of course, let's not forget the ultimate in your stupid groundless conjecture: I AM Peter Belt. Which two thirds of the idiots on this forum have come to believe, since they are now addressing me as both "Paul" AND "Peter". AND Soundhaspriority, let's not forget. Of course, you also claim I'm Robert Morein, LET'S NOT FORGET. As usual, not thinking very hard about any of this, are you? So anyway, now, the problem we are faced with is people have to address me as Paul, Peter, Soundhaspriority, AND Robert Morein. How the fuck is your friend Marco going to squeeze all of that on my user name title is what I want to know. :lol:

What can an intelligent person say to this kind of profound mass stupidity and mass self-delusion in a single setting, other than to quote my friend Stuart Goddard, who said it best:

"If evil be the food of genius, there aren't many demons around".



Originally, in your first whining baby fit that you wrote against me, you said it was ONE year ago. So what is it, 3 years, 1 year, 13 years ago? Funny how facts change when you pull them out of your bum, isn't it? Speaking of "facts", uh, where the hell are they here?



Uh, where's the tangible evidence that I'm that person? Let me guess: it comes in the form of your blind speculation again? Oh the writing style's are similar, so must be the same person? The content is similar, so must be the same person? The beliefs are similar, must be the same person? MO similar? Must be the same person? And of course, you said I'm the only one who still supports Belt's concepts, so that just proves you right, yes? Sorry junior, but ALL of that crap is HERESAY. And the chair leg tweak is on the company's website for all to see. You sound like a million other wacko Belt bashers with a similar MO, writing style, content and beliefs. So I could say the same thing about you, and trawl Google for posts that resemble yours, if I had no life like you. I am certainly not the only supporter of PWB, but you're entire case here is resting on your personal experience on forums! You haven't "heard" of any other forum members supporting PWB, just like you haven't "heard" of anything called morphogenetic fields, so whatever you are ignorant of, doesn't exist!

Let me know if you ever figure out what "proof and evidence" means, and bring it on. Until then, shut yer gob, maniac.



Yes, I'm sure any audio company would love to hire someone as effective at marketing as I am! God, are you ever a blind idiot.
You probably stand on street corners screaming at kids that the government is implanting chips in their brain. Maybe it's implanted one in yours, goofy. Better go and check! Get the tin foil hat out.

If I'm a "shill for Beltism" according to you, YOU are a shill for "Newtonism", for PROMOTING your Newtonian beliefs. So eat that for lunch, brainiac.

How nice to admit that all the UK audio forums you are on are intolerant about audio beliefs that differ from the norm. I wonder, is that because YOU and your mates are on them, or is that because you're saying all British are raging hateful bigots like you? I'd hate to think it's the latter.



Nice. You have really showed your impartiality against me now! You have the judge totally convinced! The prices btw are quite a bargain compared to what you wasted on upgrading your kit .


Now, I have seen all this before, so it may have surprised some when I said 'go, and take your conjuring with you' without giving him time to explain himself.

When you apply this same Belt bigotry of yours against the next person who dares talk positively about Peter Belt on any forum you've infected, that you think is me, that's going to be hilarious! Poor sap is probably going to have his user name changed ten times before your mate bans him for life! :lol:

Now, I did this because I have seen first hand the grief caused on the other (and now it turns out dozens) forum,

What about thousands? Aren't you going to claim THOUSANDS of forums destroyed by little old Paul? Because I'll see your thousand and raise you 5 million. I say there have been 5 million people destroyed by your rantings, Steve Angrypiranha. AKA "Stewart Pinkerton"!!!! Where's my proof you ask? Well, it's in your bum. Along with your proof that there were "dozens" of forums I caused grief on. You see, on AOS, you don't need proof. You just need to make a hateful accusation and have your bigotry in the right place.

As for the grief Mr. Hypocrite, I know you certainly CAN'T be very worried about that. Since you are the one who has been causing all the grief with your endless flaming tirades and diatribes against me since I joined!!!! The only reason there hasn't been MORE grief, is simply because I ignored you all this time! I didn't ignore you because you are too much of a threat or a challenge to me, as you in your Pinky brain presumed. I could DECIMATE you, as I have shown in the very little effort I have made today, in your name. I can rape you with logic, I can slaughter you intellectually, I can pulverize you with proof, and in a battle of wits with me, well you have none. That's the only reason you never tried to debate me on Beltism. Because you already know I will make you look like an even bigger ignorant fool than you already make yourself out to be. The only reason I have done none of those things and mostly ignored you, is because we both know that there is a double standard here to moderation. You can get away with murder. Literally murdering my character. But of course, if I say "boo" to you, you will start crying, bawling and moaning to Marco or one of the other admins you are mates with, and insist that they ban me (you intellectual coward, you), or otherwise you will threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, and leave the forum until I am not tossed. So I've learned that apart from your irrational fear and hatred of new technologies that are too advanced for your peanut brain to handle, you're really kind of a girlie-man, aren't you?




And of course, in true Kafkaesque manner, I was tried and accused of your inane conspiracy theories, and found guilty to where my user name was changed to someone I have NO affiliation with, without so much as a SHRED of that alleged "evidence" ever being presented. a

This dear readers, is a FIRST IN AUDIO CHAT FORUMS.

Which explains why I have this impression the forum is administered by 12 year olds, and many of its members are around that age, since they behave that way.



Gee, and you didn't even get to talk about when you were in the hospital for trying to drive your head through the tv. Are you SURE this is your entire heart that you have spilled out here, Steve? Next time you might want to save some for your therapist though.



I can see that you don't know what "spamming" is any more than you know what Beltism is.



Make no mistake, EVERYTHING you spew is merely your OPINION. And that opinion of yours is shared by everyone on this forum. Except one. Neil. The moderator. Remember him? The guy who heard the very principle those products are based on, in not 1, not 2, but THREE tests, including TWO blind ones, and TWO people heard it, and none of those people was YOU. So know that by calling Belt a "fraudster", you are also calling Neil a fraudster and a LIAR. You on the other hand never did any blind tests and never heard any effect. So this is proof that it is YOU that is a "fraudster".




You have mail! ;) No seriously, I think that's about all of your drug-addled brain you need to be sharing.



The only thing that's clear is that you have never provided proof for a SINGLE thing you have ever said about me or Belt. You have ZERO prior knowledge of me.



I don't actually see anyone here confirming that Steve. So I guess we're going to have to go with "agressive and obtuse" on this one.



Well that really shows more of your objective outlook on all of this, doesn't it? You're pretty sick puppy, you realize that, Steve? Obviously not. You think that scientific invalidation comes from TWO, count them, TWO attempts to validate the phenomenon, that you made 20 years ago. Your friend Neil validated it in a few hours. THREE times. You need psychiatric help Steve, you really do. Getting an education, if not a clue as to what science is about, wouldn't hurt either.

Utterly hilarious! you really are a world class loser aren;t you? Oh dear, keep taking the pills. Oh, and the evidence of your banning fron PFM is public knowledge, I did not 'pull it out' of anywhere, now run along, I am sure there are any number of forums around the world that await you to rescue the posters from their ignorance.

I would like to say it was nice knowing you, but I would be lying. so, I will simply assure myself that this meeting and the one three years ago will reinforce my view that care in the community simply does not work.
Oh, and this has to be the single most amusing post I have ever read in my life, thanks for the laugh!..

I can pulverize you with proof, and in a battle of wits with me, well you have none. That's the only reason you never tried to debate me on Beltism. Because you already know I will make you look like an even bigger ignorant fool than you already make yourself out to be. The only reason I have done none of those things and mostly ignored you, is because we both know that there is a double standard here to moderation. You can get away with murder. Literally murdering my character. But of course, if I say "boo" to you, you will start crying, bawling and moaning to Marco or one of the other admins you are mates with, and insist that they ban me (you intellectual coward, you), or otherwise you will threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, and leave the forum until I am not tossed. So I've learned that apart from your irrational fear and hatred of new technologies that are too advanced for your peanut brain to handle, you're really kind of a girlie-man, aren't you?

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 05:58
Actually, I have had an epiphany, and decided you are not actually a shill for belt.

If you were, I think he would be suing you for making him a laughing stock around the globe, job well done then. Keep it up!

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 06:41
Utterly hilarious! you really are a world class loser aren;t you?

Tell me about it. So what kind of LOSER does that make YOU, that you spent the last two weeks of your life obsessing about me on here, every single hour of every single day, like the little ankle-biting stalking troll that you are? A pretty petty sad and pathetic loser, at the very least. :lol:


Oh, and the evidence of your banning fron PFM is public knowledge, I did not 'pull it out' of anywhere,

One problem with that, kingfool. You never proved I was on "PFM" you flaming idiot. The ONLY proof you could have is to show matching IP addresses. Where are they? Oh. Up your bum I see. With all your other proof. Wow, no kidding you're so anal! :laugh:


now run along, I am sure there are any number of forums around the world that await you to rescue the posters from their ignorance.

Oh yes, and this thing about "around the world" you keep mentioning? I guess you never realized that the internet is GLOBAL. "Around the world", next door, it's all the same thing, imbecile! This confirms my belief that you have never travelled further than the pub down the road, in your life.


I would like to say it was nice knowing you, but I would be lying.

That's right, because you don't know me. So you should say it would be "nice obsessing about you". :lol:

Next time, save it for your psychiatrist, dildo.


Actually, I have had an epiphany,

Let me guess: you just realized that the moon landing was a hoax as well?


and decided you are not actually a shill for belt.

What do you mean "shill for Peter Belt"?? Before you were saying I WAS Peter Belt, you imbecile! Keep sniffing glue, that's doing wonders for you. Oh, and thanks for stinking the entire forum up to high hell with your risible tirades thinking I was. I still think you're a shill for birth control though.


If you were, I think he would be suing you for making him a laughing stock around the globe, job well done then. Keep it up!

So you're saying he isn't then. Interesting. Have you ever been diagnosed with bipolar disorder though?

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 07:38
note to mods.

Please do not ban him, we can have him as our forum jester, and wheel him out when we need a laugh.

Soundhaspriority, you need help, get it before it is too late. Seriously. You need to read your posts (and others) more carefully - I have never said you are belt, I have no idea where you get that from. I would say however that your resorting to personal and childish insults is a symptom of your realisation that you are now a dead duck, an object of ridicule. Your swan song if you will.

We all know you were banned from PFM, why lie? what are you trying to hide?

your mask has slipped, leave while you have a modicum of credibility left, don't embarass yourself more than you already have.

RobP
03-11-2010, 21:18
Hello,

I have recently joined the Art of Sound having come across the information on PWB headphones on the internet.

I have an old pair of these headphones, but I cannot use them as one of the transformers in the energiser box has stopped working. Does anyone know how I can get hold of a replacement box? I can post photographs of the headphones and box if it would help with identification. The rest of my hi-fi is pretty old too - I have a Pioneer PD-S701 CD player feeding a Sugden A48 class A amplifier.

Apologies for joining this late - I can see that posts go back to 2008 on PWB - but any help sourcing an energiser box would be greatly appreciated. I haven't used these headphones in years, but I would love to get them up and running again.

Thanks,
RobP

Martyn Miles
14-03-2015, 19:00
My only connection with Peter Belt was my purchase of a pair of his headphones in the 1970s.
I think I paid about £25 for them.
They worked well, if a little heavy on the head.
When the foam earpiece surrounds became older they slightly deteriorated, so I 'phoned PWB in Leeds.
A very pleasant lady ( presumably Mrs. Belt ) arranged for a new pair to be sent FOC.
I was impressed by this level of service.
I later sold them to a classic audio retailer in Leicestershire who paid me about £35 for them.
He was a lover of Quad Electrostatics and had been looking for a pair of these PWB headphones.
I've no doubt they are still in use...

cyclopse
14-03-2015, 21:24
And here is the Quantum Clip, what I think is the most powerful PWB device.

http://i1250.photobucket.com/albums/hh538/cyclopse14/image.jpg1.jpg

Haselsh1
14-03-2015, 21:48
LOL

Haselsh1
14-03-2015, 21:50
In Switzerland they have a huge tunnel and millions of magnets. PWB has a piece of bent wire...!

Martyn Miles
15-03-2015, 11:26
PWB made loudspeakers with Kef drive units.
Somewhere I have a HFN review of them.
Ralph West liked them and he was using Spendor BC1s at the time...

Martyn Miles
05-06-2016, 09:39
PWB made loudspeakers with Kef drive units.
Somewhere I have a HFN review of them.
Ralph West liked them and he was using Spendor BC1s at the time...

To carry on this thread, I have acquired a pair of PWB's NS2 loudspeakers.
Not standard models, but with EMI ( as far as I know...) bass/mid. drive units and
Audax ( as far as can be discerned ) cone/dome tweeters.

I have refurbished them and the results are remarkably good.

Martyn Miles.

YNWaN
05-06-2016, 20:40
PWB and similar 'devices' are the equivalent of new age religion for the godless - if it helps you cope with today's anxieties fill your boots.