Greetings, earthling.

[Soundhaspriority]

Hi y'all. I'm Paul in NYC, NY. I like both kinds of music (country AND western)... actually, all kinds, except the stuff that makes my hair stand on end. I'm told I was born singing and dancing to the Beatles. (But never been much of a Beatles fan, oddly enough). Right now I'm listening to the Bowerbirds if that helps (In our talons now).

Apart from good music, I've had a passion for good stuff to play it on, since I was about 12. In my budding audiophile days, I used to change kit like people change their underwear. I would sell it off to my audiophile friends, or pawn brokers, or the store that sold it to me... and then something new would take the place on my Target stand. This was my way of figuring out what the goal really was, in the pursuit of audio nirvana. Thankfully, I have, and no longer have doubts about what kind of sound I want. I still have a special affinity for audio produced in that golden era of the 80's (mostly UK gear), when you still could have innovative cottage industry manufacturers putting out gear in small numbers (cough Nytech cough), that would trounce what the big boys were making. Or at least know how to play a tune, and not just sound that resembles music.

I also had a special affinity for tweaking, because I discovered that I could stretch my audiophile budget a LOT longer if I simply modified what I had, instead of just always buying the latest and greatest version of whatever model is out. I have since discovered that with effective tweaking, I can affect changes far greater and more significant, than I could by changing gear in the first place. I also have a much better chance of getting the sound I want, than I do of going the usual route of buying gear that I think sound good in the store, only to find out months later I'm really not satisfied with the sound (especially when I hear what I am missing elsewhere). I remember that some of the tweaks I would indulge in at the time were considered "pretty much out there" by the rest of the audiophile community. But they were all based on conventional principles, and they all effected changes (some good, some questionable). And that's about when Hi-Fi Answers introduced me to Peter Belt's version of tweaking, and "pretty much out there" became "not of this world".

Since I was already used to convetionally-minded audiophiles looking at me funny when I talked of my -conventional- tweaks, it didn't much matter to me what they were saying about Mr. Belt's ideas; my only interest was in seeing whether they would improve my sound. I think I have yet to try one that didn't, and I have tried many. I have since come to understand that no matter what you do, each "domain" of tweaking, changes the sound in ways particular to that domain. The "domains" I am referring to are: changes (aka 'tweaks') to electronics (ie. the signal), changes to the electrical current (power supply), changes to room acoustics, and finally, direct changes to our actual perception of sound (aka "Beltism"). I can often predict what sort of change has been made (what domain was affected), by the characteristic of the sound; even though sound can be changed many ways within a domain. I learned that there was nothing that could change my sound, in the same way as those under the Belt domain (whether via PWB products themselves, or ideas that use their principles). It became my favourite domain to work in, because it almost always improved the sound in musical ways that the other domains could rarely come close to achieving.

All audio systems/environments I listened to thereafter, which lacked any effect from being "treated" by Belt concepts, sounded more strident or harsh to me than what it should be, and less musically engaging; even ones that were pricetagged at over 50,000 pounds. So realizing the potential of what I already had, I started focusing less on buying new gear, and more on improving what was already here. Even working on Belting old gear that was never much good to begin with, I found I could often get results that would outperform gear that was supposed to be good. The "mystique" of new gear was no longer the same thing it was for me, but it was replaced by the challenge of creating diamonds out of coal. During those days of "challenges", I had amassed a number of tweaks, all based on principles first discovered by the brilliant Mr. Peter Walker Belt, some 25 years ago. I realized I should probably not sit on ALL of them, because I couldn't see why there wouldn't be some who would achieve at least some of the same benefits I did. (n.b. If the emails are anything to go by, there have been...). So I created a website to share a few of them, along with all those tweaks that inspired me all those years ago from Mr. Belt. (Every time I discovered new free tweaks that he had popularized, I added them to the list). I think I have now over 30, the most free Belt tweaks available anywhere on the net. What can I say, I aim to please!

For some reason I don't have the inclination to work on, the site's a little slow to get started at the moment, but it does work....: http://www.theadvancedaudiophile.com

Speakers: Avalon Aspect
Amp: VTL (valve)
Source (analog): Clearaudio Performance
Source (digital): Roksan Kandy

[The Vinyl Adventure]

welcome, i hope despite the oposition to your views you can find your self i place here.. its all very welcoming (for the most part)

[Beechwoods]

Welcome, Paul. And thanks for the intro! While there may be some skepticism about some of your ideas, it's certainly interesting to hear from someone who's made it their mission to try them out.

Welcome and enjoy...

[The Vinyl Adventure]

do you host that site on your home computer? ... i wanna read what you have to say but i cant get anything to do anything!!!

[Alex_UK]

Welcome, Paul, whilst I am cynic #1 with all this, it is nonetheless interesting to read your posts, which you are obviously putting a lot of time and effort into. I still remain to be convinced it isn't all a load of old twaddle - well, most of it, at least - but if you're happy then that's great for you, and they still let you out into the community at large, which is brilliant! ;) Enjoy the forum - I particularly liked the Footnote on your website, which clearly demonstratres you can take (make) a joke, and hopefully won't be offended by me!

"Footnotes: 1If you plan on sending me any death threats, I receive many of those, so please put "I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" in the subject header of your message to ensure that your email doesn't end up in my Spam box. Thank you."

(That is pure quality!)

[twelvebears]

Hi Paul.

Well if Alex is cynic #1, then I'm probably skeptic #1 :) That said, I love doing work for good causes, so you're more than welcome.

Unfortunately I have an engineers brain and so if I can't see at least some type of logic as to why something works, I'm just not interested. So much so that even if my ears thought they heard a difference, my brain would probably say 'stop being silly', slap them and ignore it.

Quality cables and supports is about as tweaky as I get. In fact one of the most surprising experiences was the SHOCKING difference (improvement) that a pair of Townsend seismic sink speaker stands made. But even then I could see the logic because of defusing the unwanted stored energy in the cabinet.....

Anyway, welcome to AOS Paul. You swivel-eyed loony! ;)

[Spectral Morn]

Hi Paul


Welcome to AOS.


Regards D S D L

[Soundhaspriority]

do you host that site on your home computer? ... i wanna read what you have to say but i cant get anything to do anything!!!

No, not hosted on my own computer. Really, the pages don't work? I don't have a problem on my end, and I'm currently on another computer, so don't have the advantage of a prepared cache. I know the first page takes about a minute, but after that it should be okay. Or, try this address, its more direct. Let me know if you still cant access the pages:

http://theadvancedaudiophile.110mb.com/

[Soundhaspriority]

[QUOTE=Alex_UK;71826]Welcome, Paul, whilst I am cynic #1 with all this, it is nonetheless interesting to read your posts, which you are obviously putting a lot of time and effort into. I still remain to be convinced it isn't all a load of old twaddle - well, most of it, at least - but if you're happy then that's great for you, and they still let you out into the community at large, which is brilliant! ;) Enjoy the forum - I particularly liked the Footnote on your website, which clearly demonstratres you can take (make) a joke, and hopefully won't be offended by me!

"Footnotes: 1If you plan on sending me any death threats, I receive many of those, so please put "I AM GOING TO KILL YOU!" in the subject header of your message to ensure that your email doesn't end up in my Spam box. Thank you."

(That is pure quality!)


Trust me, thinking Beltism is all a "load of old twaddle" is a "normal" (or common) reaction. It's far rarer for me to see a person who doesn't automatically react in that fashion. After all, 200 pound crocodile clips, right? And safety pins that no punk rocker could afford?? That change the sound??!! Absolute codswoddle! Total hogswop! Pure bunktussle!

But that's just it. If you think just a bit harder about it, it's actually TOO crazy to not be legit. Too snake oily to be snake oil. It can almost be regarded as "fake snake oil". There's really nothing clever or particularly persuasive about putting out clips, creams and safety pins at outrageous prices, a bit of vague ad copy, and then thinking "let's see how many suckers we can pull in". Unfortunately, in real life, people are not as retarded as internet cynics would make them out to be. No audio company that makes products that don't do anything would last very long. There must be something to it, if everyone from John Atkinson to Greg Weaver can hear the effects of such unexplained phenomenon. But alas, for most people, it's easier to just assume that everyone who claims to have heard something is mad, even if they've been hearing it for decades, than to take the time and effort necessary, to try to study and understand what's really going on.

As for me, yes they do let me out, but only on the weekends, mind you. At least until I can show that I have stopped biting people randomly. But they like when I use the computer, so I use it a lot. Because, well, it's cheap for them to operate, and it keeps me distracted from biting people.

[Soundhaspriority]

Hi Paul.

Well if Alex is cynic #1, then I'm probably skeptic #1 :) That said, I love doing work for good causes, so you're more than welcome.

Unfortunately I have an engineers brain and so if I can't see at least some type of logic as to why something works, I'm just not interested. So much so that even if my ears thought they heard a difference, my brain would probably say 'stop being silly', slap them and ignore it.

Quality cables and supports is about as tweaky as I get. In fact one of the most surprising experiences was the SHOCKING difference (improvement) that a pair of Townsend seismic sink speaker stands made. But even then I could see the logic because of defusing the unwanted stored energy in the cabinet.....

Anyway, welcome to AOS Paul. You swivel-eyed loony! ;)

For a Beltist, dealing with the skepticism it engenders is certainly a challenge. But I like challenges. That's why I chose to respond to the post in the PWB cans thread. But understand that most Beltists, once they try to share their enthusiasm for these amazing experiences in audio they've had, and quickly realize their mates treat them like they are, oh I don't know, "swivel-eyed loonies" for example, they learn to keep "audio's best kept secret" to themselves. That is exactly why Beltism remains "audio's best kept secret".

Audio engineers are among the hardest to convince in a demonstration, for the very reasons you outline above. Even if they "think" they hear a difference (and to an engineer it usually is a carefully constructed "think", as opposed to "damn - what just happened?!"), they try to negate the difference, if they know in advance what the demonstration is about. Those prejudices built up since grammar school can be very very hard to put aside; particularly when there is nothing in your specialized training that accounts for the mechanism used in the DUT.

This is why most of the time when I am giving a demonstration of a Belt product or concept, I won't even say what the hell I am demonstrating. That way, I can be more sure the response is an honest one. Last year, when I tried to give a dem of a PWB product at a hifi show to an engineer of Class D amplification, he was perfectly okay in agreeing to the demonstration. That is until he started asking me what it was, and then how it worked. It took me longer to try to explain it than it would have to run the dem. But before I could, he declined the demonstration after hearing about how it was supposed to work! One example of how many engineers, and those of like mind, limit their experiences in audio to whatever makes "sense" to them.

Peter Belt was no different in the beginning; he is after all a classically trained electronics engineer, and nothing in his training accounted for safety pins that can change the sound. But he went a little further than most, in understanding what exactly is going on with perception of sound, that is little understood. e.g. Quite by accident, he found that when he had ordered cables for an isodynamic loudspeaker he was working on, they didn't sound quite the same as the previous cables. Yet the manufacturer insisted they specced exactly the same; other than the color of the cable insulation. So Peter isolated this variable and sure enough, found that all else equal, the color of the insulation on a wire could affect perception of sound. This eventually led to him developing his "Spirotube" product, which has a particular color and imbued with a particular "pattern", from which just a small piece at the end of a cable can change the pattern on the cable, and thus the sound, of that cable. Almost as though you had changed the insulation. Such observations also led, eventually, to discovering that there were many, many unexplored aspects of audio equipment, and the environment it's in, that affect our perception of sound, even if they don't affect the travelling signal at all. All of which are in a sense, globally related to the effect of color on cable insulation.

I have done many of my own experiments with color on cables, independently of Peter. So I'm not just citing ad copy here. Colour counts. As an engineer, you can choose to ignore this variable, and focus on other aspects that you know about, and prefer to remain focused on. But I know that if I was an engineer, I would want to know as much as I could about how such things affect the products I will be engineering. Not just because I want to produce the best sounding product I can, but also because I know that with a "stick your head in the sand" approach, there may be inconsistencies that I am at a loss to control. As Peter surely found out in the early stages of his discoveries, there's no "logic" to any of it, as far as our conventions of "logic" are concerned. But it became obvious that there really was something there and it couldn't be denied. Given that you have keen listening, once you experiment in this domain of sound as much as I have, you come to realize there actually -is- a "logic"(al) pattern to it all. A consistency, and an order. A means of predicting a specific change in the character of the sound, with a specific action. It's very cutting edge, so no, I don't think this area of research is for everybody. Particularly those with little experience in after-market modifications.

But try to think back on your sound -before- you ever replaced your cables and speaker stands. You probably thought it was perfectly fine, didn't really need to "fancy it up" with accessories.... and were then blown away by some of the changes they could bring about. And now I would probably have to pry your cables and Townshend stands away from you, from your cold dead hands. It's no different here. Once you are used to a properly Belted system, you won't be happy to go back to what you had. But if you've never had that, it's obviously not going to seem important at all.

[Jonboy]

"I have done many of my own experiments with color on cables, independently of Peter. So I'm not just citing ad copy here. Colour counts."

I have been told about this before from a local cable maker, that the colour of the sheaths makes things sound different.
i'm not trying to be rude but i think you must have to much time on your hands to be able to write this much in your first few postings:ner:

[Spectral Morn]

I for one like lengthy posts, plenty to read and get your teeth into. So keep up the good work...by saying that I don't want to give anyone the idea I am a PWB fan. I tried some of his bits etc 20 odd years ago, and could hear nothing with those things I tried. With the exception of the plug scoring....that works because you are cleaning the plug. Nothing more nothing less IMHO.


Regards D S D L

[Alex_UK]

As for me, yes they do let me out, but only on the weekends, mind you. At least until I can show that I have stopped biting people randomly. But they like when I use the computer, so I use it a lot. Because, well, it's cheap for them to operate, and it keeps me distracted from biting people.

Thanks for the reply Paul. Now I'm just a little worried, and have a rather disturbing vision of what I think your Avatar should be...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Yu6lJst3lkM/Snt-1kmj-mI/AAAAAAAAEss/r433llZf-SU/s400/%21_Hannibal_Lecter_%21.jpg

In all seriousness, if nothing else, the time you are taking to write your posts is appreciated.

[DSJR]

Thanks for sharing your views and findings Shippy. I'l try to keep an open mind, but as I've been there and done it twenty five years or so ago and moved on to a far better sound without these things, I'll stay as I am, thank you :)

P.S In all seriousness, if the arts of Beltism were so far reaching and obvious in their "improvements" I think we'd all be at it. A shame that cynicism comes with increasing age, experience (and maturity?). I'll leave it to the psychologists to decide on that one..

[Steve Toy]

I think Beltism is one stage too far and one that brings the whole subjectivist approach into disrepute.

Paper clips and folding the corners of one page of all your books makes no difference. Ergo stands and cables make no difference.

[Joe]

P.S In all seriousness, if the arts of Beltism were so far reaching and obvious in their "improvements" I think we'd all be at it. A shame that cynicism comes with increasing age, experience (and maturity?). I'll leave it to the psychologists to decide on that one..

I've been cynical for 40 years.

Anyway, hifi is full of 'things' that are supposed to make a night-and-day difference, cause one's jaw to drop, and redefine the state of the art. Trouble is, for every believer in these things, there's a non-believer. Thus for some the answer is computer-based audio, for others it's valves, vinyl and big Tannoys, for others it's DSP.

[Joe]

I think Beltism is one stage too far and one that brings the whole subjectivist approach into disrepute.

Paper clips and folding the corners of one page of all your books makes no difference. Ergo stands and cables make no difference.

And there's the rub. If to me paper clips make a sonic difference that you can't hear, neither of us is 'right'; ditto with stands and cables. If a difference isn't measurable, its existence is all down to what each of us perceives.

[SteveW]

Well, anyway Paul...you did the right thing, and introduced yourself here and at least banished the niggle that was beginning to tickle.
Thankyou.

you are of course barking...but hey, welcome to the pleasure dome.

[Soundhaspriority]

I for one like lengthy posts, plenty to read and get your teeth into. So keep up the good work...by saying that I don't want to give anyone the idea I am a PWB fan. I tried some of his bits etc 20 odd years ago, and could hear nothing with those things I tried. With the exception of the plug scoring....that works because you are cleaning the plug. Nothing more nothing less IMHO.


Regards D S D L

You said this, and I responded to the contrary. Don't assume, test your hypothesis. if you can hear the effects of the plug notch tweak, test it both on an active plug, and a passive one, not plugged to anything. Assuming you will not allow your preconceptions to interfere with the test, you might experience the same thing I did recently, and find yourself wrong on that count. Or just don't clean the plug! (Remove, reinsert the plug a few times, then score it).

Consider that much of the controversy you see comes from the fact that most people will not go to the effort to scratch the surface via experimentation, and better understand what affects perception of sound.
Instead, going on preconceptions of what would or should.

[Soundhaspriority]

Thanks for sharing your views and findings Shippy. I'l try to keep an open mind, but as I've been there and done it twenty five years or so ago and moved on to a far better sound without these things, I'll stay as I am, thank you :)

That's fine, your call. Many other UKers who knew of PB are in the same boat as you, and I'm trying to better understand that. For example, have you tried any of their products? Concepts?(tweaks) Because I don't get what makes you think you have moved on to a far better sound, unless you have heard the effects of the Belt products. Especially when one takes into account that PWB have also moved on to a far better sound with the product lines of today, than what they would have had 25 years ago.



P.S In all seriousness, if the arts of Beltism were so far reaching and obvious in their "improvements" I think we'd all be at it. A shame that cynicism comes with increasing age, experience (and maturity?). I'll leave it to the psychologists to decide on that one..

So does narrow mindedness. Most people tend to get far more set in their ways as they get older. Less curious, and more suspicious of new things. This explains why so many UKers were so open minded about the PWB products and concepts when they were younger. Then they were willing to be taught and learn new things. Now, they figure they know everything already, it seems! And yes, I'm acutely aware of this misconception (yeah, I call it that!) that if Beltism was legit, it would be more accepted and influential.

But that's too simple an analysis of the story, I'm afraid. First of all, I'd be the last to say the improvements are "so obvious". That is in fact probably the biggest factor against the products and concepts. I don't have any stats on how many who test them can hear their effects, but I think there are too many who don't. Then they are even more contemptuous of Beltism than they were before. I can really only guess at the reasons in general, but I think they are:

* Often, it is FREE tweaks that are demo'ed. The free tweaks are less effective than the actual products. And of the actual products, I think its only SR foil that has often been made available as a free sample. I can hear it's effect fine, but I can't say it's the company's most effective product. But potential customers are usually not going to get to hear the better products.

* The sonic characteristic of Belt products and tweaks (whether they are the company's products or my own Belt-based tweaks!), are unique to this phenomenon. You can not create this sound with any conventional products. This means the non-Belt customer who has never heard their products, has no reference point to their sound. Yes, they may hear changes anyway. But, OTOH, they may not be expecting this particular kind of change, and maybe it flies right by them. IOW, the change is there, they just don't firmly recognize it.

* The testing method: I have discovered, to my dismay, in conversing with 'philes who are testing tweaks, that they often use the silliest methods to do so, and really don't know how to do a proper listening test. So sometimes, they kind of abuse the opportunity to do a test on a Belt device, by thinking that, say, if they apply the tweak in the MIDDLE of the track playing, they will somehow instantly hear a change in the quality of sound. No way, no how. It just isn't that obvious, and few things are in the tweak dept. Then people assume "if it isn't that obvious, I want nothing to do with it!". Well the trick to Belt devices, is to implement them en masse. While I can always hear the effect of one, the party only really starts to get going, when you have many in place. This is where it can better compare to component upgrades. Sometimes, depending on the product, it also requires a certain knowledge to be used effectively. Sticking anything anywhere isn't the way to go about it.

As for "far reaching", well much of that depends on press reception, and PWB received a backlash at the end of the 80's from the press, due to a backlash from advertisers and subsequently, editors. Hence the growth of their popularity was stunted by that, and certain bad press. If you look around here, you can not ignore the -fact- that most of the negative comments about Peter Belt products are being made by people who have either ZERO experience with the actual products, or relatively MINOR experience with the products, or the usually less effective free tweaks. So, much of their perception is NOT based on "reality" at all; but blind preconception. Which is basically ignorant assumptions that none of this could possibly be legitimate. Mind you, most PWB customers start out this way as well. They just had successful dems I guess.

[Alex_UK]

But that's too simple an analysis of the story, I'm afraid. First of all, I'd be the last to say the improvements are "so obvious". That is in fact probably the biggest factor against the products and concepts. I don't have any stats on how many who test them can hear their effects, but I think there are too many who don't. Then they are even more contemptuous of Beltism than they were before. I can really only guess at the reasons in general, but I think they are:

Sorry? I'm getting to the point where I have had enough, this was fun to start with, but is getting beyond a joke now -"the biggest factor against the products and concepts" ...is that people can't hear the effects - in other words, they don't work! And then, you're surpised people are "even more contemptuous of Bletism than they were before" - wonder why?



* Often, it is FREE tweaks that are demo'ed. The free tweaks are less effective than the actual products. And of the actual products, I think its only SR foil that has often been made available as a free sample. I can hear it's effect fine, but I can't say it's the company's most effective product. But potential customers are usually not going to get to hear the better products.

Ahh, so now we're getting to the crux of the matter, if you really want to hear what Belt can do - throw some money at him - I'm sure he could do with a few more SHILLings in his piggy bank!

Amazing, isn't it, that there are hundreds of ways of chanelling these (unseen, unproven) energies into better sound reproduction (whether we can hear it or not - doesn't mean its not there...) - but the "divine power" or whatever it is that created them, has decided that only the ones that cost lots of money will make the biggest difference! How uncanny!

I'm not going to waste any more of my time dissecting this, but thank you for your continued attention, and your exhaustive knowledge of everything to do with Peter Belt which I was unaware of until you brought this back from the dead.

[Soundhaspriority]

I think Beltism is one stage too far and one that brings the whole subjectivist approach into disrepute.

Paper clips and folding the corners of one page of all your books makes no difference. Ergo stands and cables make no difference.

So nothing makes a difference and everything makes a difference. Sounds about right.

Beltism is everything that high end audio tries to be, tries to acheive. It's already there in the Belt sound. it is in fact, the counterpart to all conventional audio research.

The subjectivist approach is only in "disrepute" by objectivists. Who are themselves in disrepute by subjectivists. Beltism is only too far for those audiophiles afraid to go beyond a certain distance. At least not without a tether and a chaperone, assuring they will find their way back. I'm not in this hobby for reputation, I'm in it for "sound".

[Soundhaspriority]

Sorry? I'm getting to the point where I have had enough, this was fun to start with, but is getting beyond a joke now -"the biggest factor against the products and concepts" ...is that people can't hear the effects - in other words, they don't work! And then, you're surpised people are "even more contemptuous of Bletism than they were before" - wonder why?

Are you having me on? Are you being deliberately obtuse? I don't twist your words around, please don't twist mine. You quoted them, then you responded with a distortion of my quote. Why, if not to argue against me in a dishonest way? I wrote "the biggest factor against the products and concepts" is that they are not "so obvious". Even so, that depends on how bad your listening skills are. But you deliberately distorted this to claim I said "people can't hear the effects - in other words, they don't work!". Do you not realize that it's obvious to people that you are inventing words to put in my mouth?

I have performed countless blind tests throughout the years, that have shown that people could hear the effects of PWB products, or ideas. Perhaps it is time for me to ask you Alex, what exactly is YOUR expertise on Beltism here? How many demonstrations have you given? How many tests have you run? What methodologies did you use? Exactly what products have you tested?
I get the feeling that you are "arguing from ignorance" here. In which case, clearly, as can be witnessed with so many, the contempt audiophiles have for Beltism is unwarranted. Not to mentional ignorant and irrational. It is in fact an insult to the entire notion of science, and scientific history.


Ahh, so now we're getting to the crux of the matter, if you really want to hear what Belt can do - throw some money at him - I'm sure he could do with a few more SHILLings in his piggy bank!

Did you write this after the first pint of Guiness, or the last? Now I feel like I am debating a 3 year old. Let me try to find a concept a 3 year old can understand, that might make it for you. Okay, how about this: do you believe that speaker wire sound isn't a hoax, or does that also fall into the devil's domain, according to you? For now, I'll assume that audio speaker wires aren't part of a grand conspiracy of deception for you. The cheap 22g zip wire that comes free with your loudspeakers is going to work just fine, isn't it. It will provide "proof of concept", that it will improve the sound more than if you don't use it, or say, employ a coat hanger in its place. And the wire's free, which appears to be your favorite selling price. Now here's the bad news, so hope you're sitting down for this: if you "really want to hear what speaker wire can do", you should really buy some Nordost cabling, or something along those lines. Now Nordost is also going to insist you throw some SHILLings in their piggy bank for the wire. You see my dear little Alex, unfortunately, it's hard to find audio companies these days that give their products away at your favourite price of free. PWB is about the only one that will, as a matter of fact.

If you have some kind of moral issue or whatever with paying a company for their products, you are free to suffer with the freebie speaker wire. Even free to believe its every bit as good as the Nordost. Just don't complain about the fact that quality sound is something you have to pay for in this hobby. Either get used to it, or find a new hobby.


Amazing, isn't it, that there are hundreds of ways of chanelling these (unseen, unproven) energies into better sound reproduction (whether we can hear it or not - doesn't mean its not there...) - but the "divine power" or whatever it is that created them, has decided that only the ones that cost lots of money will make the biggest difference! How uncanny!

Look, I have to say this Alex: you're ranting now, it's an ignorant foolish rant that only betrays your willingness to pretend you know something about subjects you obviously have little to no experience in, and I think it's unbecoming of you. Maybe Aquapiranha has started to rub off, or maybe I gave you too much credit for having a head on your shoulders, and being able to think and reason. Not go diving off the deep end, into fallacious presumptions.

Ever heard of Dr J. Hughes Bennett? Because that's who you are emulating here. He was one of the surgeons famously ridiculing Joseph Lister, the father of antiseptic surgery, saying "Show us the germs! Quick, close the door or Lister's invisible germs will get in!!". He of course refused to believe in Lister's hypothesis that people were dying at high rates on the wards because surgeons went out of their way to not adopt clean procedures. While Lister's concerns were ignored and his hypothesis unable to be proven to accepted standards of scientific rigor, people continued to die from preventable infections, caused by unclean medical practices. From Glasgow University some 100 years ago to your door, nothing has changed for those who share your attitudes. It is these very attitudes of blind arrogance that hold up real scientific progress. If you are wont to do this, that's fine with me. Just do not even try to pretend with me or anyone, that you know anything about science or scientific protocol, or have any respect for scientific discovery. Where you walk, you walk with the Luddites and the Bennetts.

There is obviously no new knowledge that can enter your gated mind at this point in your life, but purely for the benefit of others that may be reading, I will educate you anyway on your misguided rant:

- Not "hundreds", there are innumerable ways to change the energy patterns. I have probably changed them hundreds of times, just myself alone. They are not "unproven". You just pulled this out of your backside. Of course, you don't state what "proven" is, so it's a concept that's always debatable.

- "Whether we can hear it or not, doesn't mean it's not there" applies to EVERYTHING in audio. You've just never been able to think hard enough to realize that.

- By "divine power that created them", you assume they were "created". I take it you are religious and believe in God, from having said that. I'm not and I don't, but then, I don't believe in making blind ignorant assumptions in the first place, when I'm trying to understand an unfamiliar concept. No one who has studied them extensively, knows the true nature of the energy patterns (but they do know a lot more than anyone who hasn't studied them. Get the hint?). Just like no one knows what occurred before the universe came into existence. So maybe, whatever force is responsible for the energy patterns are part of our universe and were always there. Or maybe they came into being with the creation of our species. All I know is that YOU know nothing about this, so don't say they were "created".

- "The "divine power" or whatever it is that created them, has decided that only the ones that cost lots of money will make the biggest difference! How uncanny!"

As for this most mindless of your mindless presumptions, it should probably be noted at this point that Peter Belt is not the only engineer working in audio who has made observations that simply don't fit with conventional theories that engineers are versed with; nor even the only one who has flirted with the energy fields he is most associated with, and came up with products or ideas that exploited them.

Having worked with it for 25 years plus, he understands the phenomenon better than anyone on the planet. Where the hell do you think all these "free tweaks" came from exactly? You don't seem to realize how silly you sound, comparing free tweaks from PWB, with their paid products, and complaining that the free ones should be just as effective as the ones you pay for. There is a lot of (brilliant) research, development and hard work that goes into making Belt's products, and most importantly, proprietary knowledge which neither I nor anyone else in the world has. That alone would and should explain why you sticking paper clips in your ears are not likely to create products more effective than Peter Belt - PWB can. I certainly can't, and you certainly wouldn't have a hope in hell of doing so. But sometimes I think I have come pretty close, and I'm pretty jazzed about that. That is, until I actually hear one of PWB's actual products, and then I'm quickly reminded of how brilliant Belt is, and makes it all look easy. But what you so dearly fail to understand is, there is no "rule of law" from any "divine power" that says that one can not create methods of channeling these energy patterns in ways more effective than a PWB product, including their top of the line products. But he took 25 years to develop his TOL products, and discovered the phenomenon. So the chances that anyone today could, is unlikely.

If you think you could, there's nothing stopping you, go right ahead. I'll even agree to test it against a top PWB product and give your device a fair assessment. But if you think you could take any common object, do nothing to it and expect it to sound the same as those I am talking about, then you're just a talker, and useless as an audio researcher. I could easily pick your useless object as having no influence on the sound, in a blind test comparison. So if its that easy to sell do-nothing "mojo trinkets" like everybody on AOS thinks PWB is selling, and that you can make a mint off of them by doing so like Peter Belt is doing, then why the hell isn't anyone else competing with PWB?? It's obviously not because no company in the world would think to want to sell items to gullible customers, or that anti-PWB ranters here have too many scruples. Even if the products do NOTHING, it's not even illegal to sell them as audio devices. The reason no one in 25 years has put up shop selling cheap common untreated household objects that do nothing but yet purport to affect sound, is because they know they would lose money on the startup, and not make a dime after it gets out that their products don't do anything.

[Steve Toy]

There is a certain unpleasantness to your posts Paul. In even robust expression of our argument here we remain polite and respectful of others. Read our ethos.

Troll alert!

[Alex_UK]

Paul, I do require further education - you are correct that I have not bought any of PWBs products, so yes, I am speaking from "ignorance." Frankly, I am not willing to invest my money (or time trying multiple "free" tweaks), which in my opinion (and lots of other) have no logical or scientific foundation.

Trying to compare the cable argument with Belts products is "deliberately obtuse" in my opinion - comparing something that has sound theory in science to something that "appears" to the uninitiated to be "magic" - surely you can see that normal, rational people will not easily accept some unseen, unproven and unmeasured "energy field" exists, that can be manipulated simply by putting pieces of paper under chair legs, specially treating safety pins, putting clocks forward etc. etc. etc. - just because Peter Belt and his followers say it does?

Surely you can see that? You appear to be a well educated and intelligent man, so I am wondering why you are making it your mission to educate us "non-believers"? What's in it for you? You obviously believe these products make a huge difference, maybe like Jehovah's Witnesses who go door knocking, you just feel compelled to spread the word out of the goodness of your heart?

The most interesting part of your last post to me - "There is a lot of (brilliant) research, development and hard work that goes into making Belt's products, and most importantly, proprietary knowledge which neither I nor anyone else in the world has."

For the benefit of me and the rest of the forum, please could you describe the processes of the "(brilliant) research, (and) development" and maybe quantify the hard work for Belt's products? And how do you know only Belt has this knowledge?

[REM]

Surely if there was anything at all in any of PWBs' products or procedures or methods or whatever then Paul and indeed Belt himself could have retired as millionaires long ago, without having to sell so much as a safety pin or green marker pen to anyone.
How, simply submit your 'scientific' theories for appraisal by that nice James Randi bloke. If you can convince him any of it is genuine he will give you a million bucks, so there it is, a fortune ready and waiting, like taking sweets from a baby. So Paul, why are you waiting?;)

[Soundhaspriority]

There is a certain unpleasantness to your posts Paul. In even robust expression of our argument here we remain polite and respectful of others. Read our ethos.

Troll alert!

"Troll alert!"?? Are you serious? Well first of all, if you are referring to my response to Alex above, then you must have missed the fact that he was being rude to me without provocation, and I don't like when people deliberately misrepresent my words like that, especially when they know how to properly quote them. Now, let me tell you a few things about how I have seen others remaining "polite and respectful of others" in the "robust expression of our argument here" toward me.

Right following my first post to the forum, Steve, aka Aquapiñata, writes a nasty personal rant against me; the first of a geat many such angry rants against me. Next post he calls me a "deluded nutjob". He does however threaten to leave the thread. But then, predictably, returns to it, to continue a campaign of personal attacks against me, whereby he has been trolling me **in every single post** of his. However, I did not see you issue one of your "troll alert!'s" to him, over his behaviour in that thread. Did I miss that? Well he is now officially stalking me from the PWB thread, over to a thread I started in the tweaks section. Whereby in every post he makes to it, all he is doing is attacking me and crapping all over my thread. He is listed as a Senior Member, but is apparently still unaware of these ethos rules:

"Defamatory comments about any other member of this forum or any other hi-fi forum.

We aim for this forum to be relaxed, easy-going backdrop for stimulating and informative discussions to take place. The forum will thus be managed with this objective in mind."

So are the admins it seems, because Aquapiranha is given free reign to attack me in -every- single one of his posts about me. All of which I have graciously refrained from responding to, you will note, in order to avoid an all out war, and respect the board's ethos. Because if I ever did respond to the troll's rabid rants about me, that's exactly what you would have. A lot of "tears" that he warned about. (Except they would all be coming from him). But yet, while continuing this obsession he has had with me as soon as I joined, and attacking me in my own thread whilst contributing absolutely nothing to the topic of my thread, I see he has now just called for my banishment. Simply because he has this personal vendetta against me, and is currently having a **total and complete meltdown** over the fact that I am ignoring him.

I don't think Steve is the only one who doesn't get the "polite and respectful" part of the ethos you refer to. I believe I was accused by two members of "wearing a tin foil hat", simply on the basis that they don't approve of the audio products I consume (even though they are proudly made in the UK!). Not a very original insult, but then, we're not exactly talking brilliant minds here. One of your fellow adminstrators called me a lunatic, and then "just" a raving fanatic. I was accused of being "immoral" by Aquaboy, a "drug dealer" by another member (Greg), who openly wished me to go to prison no less. I was also accused of being Peter Belt , as well as accused of being a "brainwashed disciple" of Peter Belt (Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong....). The conspiracy nutters here have also accused me of being a host of other people that showed up in their Google searches, along with being an "evangelist", a "SHILL" (in both small case AND caps), of "preying on potential punters" (whatever that means), and told to shut up and go away more times than I can recall.

So far, no Admin has said anything about any of that, however. But, for daring to respond to a post misrepresenting PWB, and for defending my positions, two admins have weighed in, calling me a "troll" and a raving lunatic. Even though I have not made the kind of outright character attacks on others here, as I have just described above. And you talk to me of a "certain unpleasantness" you are sensing. Well, I'll tell you, I'm sensing it too.

[Themis]

Paul,

I think you should find several kind of "tweaks" :

- One that would make most of the posters here take you seriously (it will be a hard tweak, this one)
- One that will help you respond normally to criticism (without using phrases like "knowledge that can enter your gated mind at this point in your life" or "this most mindless of your mindless presumptions" and so on)
- One that will make you understand that in forums "there's no point in trying to discuss publicly with an admin"
- Finally, one that will help you shorten your lengthy messages, especially when there's little to say. (this appears to me a very hard tweak, too^^)

I would advise you to ask PB some help on these, too much for a single person... :lolsign:

[Stratmangler]

.... .. / ... .... .. .--. .--. -.-- / -....- / .. - .----. ... / - -- . / - --- / -... . .- -- / -... .- -.-. -.- / - --- / - .... . / -- --- - .... . .-. ... .... .. .--. --..-- / -. --- -... --- -.. -.-- / .... . .-. . / --. .. ...- . ... / -.-. .-. . -.. . -. -.-. . / - --- / -.-- --- ..- .-. / .--. ... . ..- -.. --- -....- ... -.-. .. . -. - .. ..-. .. -.-. / -... . .-.. .. . ..-. ... .-.-.-

Chris:)

If you're wondering what the above means make use of this (http://morsecode.scphillips.com/jtranslator.html).

[Soundhaspriority]

Paul, I do require further education - you are correct that I have not bought any of PWBs products, so yes, I am speaking from "ignorance." Frankly, I am not willing to invest my money (or time trying multiple "free" tweaks), which in my opinion (and lots of other) have no logical or scientific foundation.

I just posted a tweak in the appropriate section that takes 1 minute to set up. Now I know for a fact you have spent longer than a minute just writing these replies. So really, "logical or scientific foundation" doesn't enter into it in this case.


Trying to compare the cable argument with Belts products is "deliberately obtuse" in my opinion - comparing something that has sound theory in science to something that "appears" to the uninitiated to be "magic" -

You're comparing the idea of whether cable works at all, with the idea of whether PWB products work. That's not what I was comparing. There is no controversy about whether audio cable passes a signal, except maybe with guys like "Aquapinata", huddling in the corner over there. The controversy comes when you claim cable sound can not simply be predicted by its capacitance, resistance or inductance values. As most HE cable manufacturers and adherents do. But because PWB is not the ONLY thing that can't fully be objectively measured in audio, you still have a lot of controversy about whether, if it can be presumed the values are sympatico with your equipment, there is any sonic benefit to fancy audiophile grade cables.


surely you can see that normal, rational people will not easily accept some unseen, unproven and unmeasured "energy field" exists, that can be manipulated simply by putting pieces of paper under chair legs, specially treating safety pins, putting clocks forward etc. etc. etc. - just because Peter Belt and his followers say it does?

Surely you can see that?

Of course. You have no experience with it, or at least no positive experience with it, that confirms that the professional journalists who swore they did hear the effects were right. That is why I keep insisting that the two essential things that people who wish to argue theories on audio forums need to do:

1) Listening tests

2) MORE listening tests

They don't even have to be Belt-based listening tests. A lot of the problems I run into with tests, is that audiophiles simply don't do much of them, and hardly enough to get past all but the grossest differences. No wonder loudspeakers are always such a hot item in audio. For right or wrong, I believe the better your skills, the more likely you are to hear differences in e.g. cable direction, phase, Shun Mooks, the Furutech LP demagnitizer, the Hallograph candleabra, and finally, Belt devices. If you can't resolve to medium or fine differences, then believe me, Belt devices is not the only thing you won't hear. You'll tell me a lot of things are bollocks if you have no real experience hearing them. What I'm saying is if you can hear the Belt stuff, then how it all works underneath it all **does not and should not matter**. It never mattered to me, WHY should it matter to you or anyone else? I probably have over 30 tweaks on my site that if combined and applied wisely, have the potential to completely transform a system, and add at least thousands of pounds (currency!) to it. That fact passes most people by. Why? Basically 3 reasons: 1)Fear, 2)Crippling ideologies and 3) Didn't run a successful test

That last one's usually the dealbreaker. The difference between most Beltists of 25 years and those who think Belt should be horsewhipped and dragged through the streets of old London on the back of a carriage, is one endured a successful listening test; the other didn't. The latter who didn't are basically cement-headed fools not yet realizing -they- are the gullible fools, not the Beltists. And all it takes is the ability to recognize what has changed in the sound. One such fool once threatened to come to Leeds to punch my lights out, after the test didn't work. Problem is, I've never been to Leeds. But that's a fool, for you. (Foolishness can be guaged by the "more assumptions you insist on making in life, the bigger the fool you are"). And all it took was a little aspirin, a small bit of paper with 5 pin pricks, and a picture of a cat. Oh, and (finally), one last listening test that worked. And the fool became a slightly happier and more grateful man, and never spoke an ill word of me or Mr. Belt again.


You appear to be a well educated and intelligent man, so I am wondering why you are making it your mission to educate us "non-believers"? What's in it for you? You obviously believe these products make a huge difference, maybe like Jehovah's Witnesses who go door knocking, you just feel compelled to spread the word out of the goodness of your heart?

What's all this nonsense about a "mission"??? I never said I had a "mission"! That is simply another one of YOUR misguided presumptions. Does anyone say you are an evangelist with a "mission" if you like and advocate Naim products, or whatever it is you fancy? I'm not doing anything different than you or anyone else here, by defending audio products or ideas that I happen to believe in. However, it seems like it's some kind of a crime to you to defend products or ideas in audio that one believes in, if the audio product or idea doesn't jibe with what most think it should be. There is a lot of ignorant misconceptions about Peter Belt and PWB. So it's natural that I would have a lot to say about it. If there wasn't such a massive swell of false assumptions about Belt (and really nasty ones I might add), then I would have less to say on the subject, I guarantee you.

What's in it for me, you say? Interesting that PWB skeptics really have cynical, mistrusting hearts and minds, because they always wish to imply there is something sinister going on with me, simply because I dare to defend products they don't believe work (and wouldn't know, since they usually never give them a serious try). e.g. Several of your forum-mates have accused me of being a "shill" for PWB. I'm sure no one here has ever been accused of being a "shill" for speaking out on behalf of their Rega decks. That said, it's true that PWB is different than Rega, in that its products operate under different principles than nearly every other product in audio. The Belt products are, and you would have to agree with this if you heard them working, nothing less than REVOLUTIONARY. They are not simply a means of making a few bucks in an audio niche market; that is simply how the science is being applied (it could be applied to treating water, or improving the image on video monitors or perhaps even treating certian medical conditions). They are elements of a new science.

THAT sir, is "what is in it for me", if you must know. Science. Unlike nearly every respondent I've seen so far, I have a respect for science. I understand its limitations, as *well* as its value. If the response to my tweak thread are anything to go by, there is another way in which my thinking is more unique than that of my opponents here: I have a genuine curiousity toward science. I never use science as a crutch to **avoid** science (ie. avoid understanding new concepts or technologies; no matter how far out they may seem). Even if I can not conceive of how something can work and don't wish to find out, with no experience in that domain, you will not hear me say "That's total bollocks that is!! And I should know, I'm familiar with what bollocks looks like, as a lot of that comes out of my mouth naturally!". I won't make such a judgement until its proven one way or the other to me. Beltism is a science which has largely been ignored, simply because it does not appeal in any way to common prejudices, and that causes people to pass nasty judgements and make sweeping dismissals of it, without even bothering to have any experience with it.

That is an anti-scientific attitude of arrogant dogmatism, and I have seen more than my share of this from AOSers in the PWB thread. This is what I believe should be fought against by ALL true believers in science.




For the benefit of me and the rest of the forum, please could you describe the processes of the "(brilliant) research, (and) development" and maybe quantify the hard work for Belt's products? And how do you know only Belt has this knowledge?

Well gee, they're his products, and only his company makes his products. That is the definition of proprietary knowledge. I know of one company that makes a product based on one of Belt's products. But I also know from what I read, that their version of the product is their version; not based on any knowledge of proprietary information from the company. I hope you understand that I do not have intimate knowledge of the specific processes that go into developing the products, and if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't share it with you, or on any forum. For that would be the "proprietary knowledge" concept I talked about. I know from reading the company newsletters over the years, a bit of what goes into making the products. e.g. Some products are more expensive to manufacture than others, some products took a long time to develop, because of having to sort out potential problems they may have under certain conditions. As with any manufacturer, consistency is important, and you have to try and deliver a product that's going to perform in predictable ways, as you claim it will or should. It's easy to see how other products, such as the coloured ring ties, took a lot of time to develop; because each colour only sounds best inside of a certain combination of colours, and that pattern changes depending on what kind of object (wire) it is connected to. One carrying AC signals requires a different layout than one carrying audio signals. Then there is figuring out where each colour is best located on the cable, in relation to the other colours. (Not to mention figuring out how to induce the proper energy pattern into the ring ties in the first place).

[DanJennings]

Shippy, do you talk about anything but beltism?
This is a wide and varied forum, maybe you could ingratiate yourself to others by talking about something else.... or was the sole reason of joining this forum to promote Peter Belt?

But having said that, I do believe some people are being overly harsh.

[Rare Bird]

Blimey i recon this intro lark needs a topic all on it's own..

[Spectral Morn]

Guys

This is a Welcome thread and so far both hear and on the PWB headphones thread Paul has not IMHO been made to feel very welcome....frankly I am disappointed in the way he has been at times attacked.

Paul I agree with Dan that perhaps engaging in other discussions without reference to PWB should be possible. The problem based on past experiences on forum is those who shout loudest about an item or product are quite often found to be a secret paid promoter of that product. Now I am not saying you are. However you are coming across like that.

You probably feel you have been doing nothing more than defending your opinions and thats fine though recently you have reacted too strongly to your critics IMHO. Its easy to do that..been there myself.

So can I request that all members taking part in any discussions on any topics with anyone do SO WITH RESPECT AND CIVILITY. Thank you.

Paul the depth of your postings are interesting, but I would like to hear/read more about your actual system room etc and the music you like to listen to. It would also be nice to see photos of your set up at home.


Regards D S D L

[Alex_UK]

Thanks for the response again Paul.

I'm listening to some music, and I think I will be too busy doing just that for some considerable time, so it may be a while before I reply to your post.

Or, on the other hand, I may find I'm really rather bored with the whole subject, and may have to live with myself (and my under-performing system) for deciding that "Beltism" is not something I wish to pursue. I've never considered myself an "Audiophile" - I just love music, preferably reproduced in a more superior way than most "convenience" systems offer. I really am not your "target audience" - I have no desire to test and re-test ANY tweak or change to my system, if I can't hear it the first time, I'm not going to keep flogging a dead horse until I convince myself I can, or have a new suit of Emperor's clothes.

[twelvebears]

Guys

This is a Welcome thread and so far both hear and on the PWB headphones thread Paul has not IMHO been made to feel very welcome....frankly I am disappointed in the way he has been at times attacked.



Quite agree Neil. Just because people don't subscribe to the same views as Paul (and I would count myself as one who doesn't), doesn't give them the right to constantly have a go at his beliefs.

I think Paul's got a great turn of phrase and writes in a very interesting way, even if I don't buy-in to the subject. So I'd very much hope that Paul doesn't get put off contributing to AOS on some other topics such as musical interests and equipment, rather than 'tweaks'.

[Rare Bird]

The mistake was Shippy quoting responces in post 8,9 & 10..Should have just tottered orf & started a topic regarding Belt & took it from there.

[aquapiranha]

Sorry Neil if you think I have been a little harsh, I assume as one of the people posting there you think that. However, some of you here know me and I think I would not be speaking out of turn if I said I think I am a reasonable, freindly person. However, I really, really think that those defending soundhaspriority MUST, I repeat MUST do a bit of research, and you will see what a truly spectaculary prolific and arrogant poster this person is, and I am talking WORLDWIDE here, banned from lots of places, unwelcome in others - his ONLY interest is promoting belt products, and he has been at it for YEARS. If you have any doubts, look on google!

I like it here, and I like the people here, and I hope we do not have to put up with this kind of marketing / indoctrination purely for the sake of politeness?

I have said enough on this subject now, I really do not have to go on about it.

Just have a look for yourselves, the man is a marketing machine, either that or he is truly a psychpath.

:confused:

[Spectral Morn]

Sorry Neil if you think I have been a little harsh, I assume as one of the people posting there you think that. However, some of you here know me and I think I would not be speaking out of turn if I said I think I am a reasonable, freindly person. However, I really, really think that those defending soundhaspriority MUST, I repeat MUST do a bit of research, and you will see what a truly spectaculary prolific and arrogant poster this person is, and I am talking WORLDWIDE here, banned from lots of places, unwelcome in others - his ONLY interest is promoting belt products, and he has been at it for YEARS. If you have any doubts, look on google!

I like it here, and I like the people here, and I hope we do not have to put up with this kind of marketing / indoctrination purely for the sake of politeness?

I have said enough on this subject now, I really do not have to go on about it.

Just have a look for yourselves, the man is a marketing machine, either that or he is truly a psychpath.

:confused:

Hi Steve

If you could PM me your research on Paul, the management can then review it and see whats what.




Regards D S D L

[The Vinyl Adventure]

I would like to think that it has been recognised that I have attempted a level of patience and understanding, I have only cracked when I came to belive it was a joke!
Niel; I shall be mentioning all this in the continuation of our convo when I get round to it.. Which I will, soon!

[Spectral Morn]

I would like to think that it has been recognised that I have attempted a level of patience and understanding, I have only cracked when I came to belive it was a joke!
Niel; I shall be mentioning all this in the continuation of our convo when I get round to it.. Which I will, soon!

I look forward to that Hamish.


Regards D S D L

[Soundhaspriority]

Surely if there was anything at all in any of PWBs' products or procedures or methods or whatever then Paul and indeed Belt himself could have retired as millionaires long ago, without having to sell so much as a safety pin or green marker pen to anyone.

Your logic boggles the mind! Where did you get this silly idea that I have any financial ties to PWB? Do you believe other forumers are stockholders on the board of Rega, if they defend their Rega decks to you? If there was anything at all to the stuff you're making up, you'd have presented facts by now. As I have pointed out, anyone can find out whether there is anything at all to any of this for themselves. I have provided many free means to do that on my site. So what are you afraid of? Being wrong? With all these beliefs you're relating to me that you are basing on things that you just make up on the spot, that I can understand! I think a lot of people are afraid of being wrong with this. Which to me is an even bigger phenomenon than Beltism!

Next, you're also presuming PB is only interested in making money and retiring. You know nothing about the man, so your presumptions are worthless. Being an audio engineer his entire life, he could simply be interested in expanding the state of the art. I suppose if you were a millionaire, or even knew millionaires, you'd already know by now that most successful and brilliant businessmen are not in it for money, but are driven by personal acheivement. Note: you have to acheive something in life first before you understand that.


How, simply submit your 'scientific' theories for appraisal by that nice James Randi bloke. If you can convince him any of it is genuine he will give you a million bucks, so there it is, a fortune ready and waiting, like taking sweets from a baby. So Paul, why are you waiting?;)

Give the man a cigar for another clever and original rebuttal! Seriously, if I had a dime for every time I heard someone use this to attack Beltism, well that's a million dollars right there. But then, how do you know I'm not already a retired millionaire? Only by assumption, again. There's nothing "nice" about James Randi, nor is there anything honest about him. As with others who have debated me here, you are certainly not shy about talking about things you clearly know nothing about. I mean first off, I couldn't take the Randi challenge if I wanted to, so try reading the rules first before you use this argument.

Next, I'm more familiar with the process than you are, as a friend of mine applied to test a product similar to PWB's and was jerked around for nearly a year, before they chickened out and terminated his application. Then there's the Pear cable scandal and a lot of other Randi scandals I don't need to go into, so read up on that. James Randi is a fraud and charlatan by trade, who has NO intention of ever giving up the million. The whole thing is a pathological skeptic's scam to attack any and all alternative sciences, in defense of the blinkered thinking exhibited by all those here who have soundly denounced Beltism on principle alone, without even thinking they need to try any of its concepts before doing so. Those who are gullible enough to think the James Randi scam is winnable, PM me. I've got a bridge to sell you, real cheap!

[The Vinyl Adventure]

you cant deny it looks like you have a motive paul...
... you still havent really said much else for your self apart from the endless talking about about this belt chap, at the risk of sounding rude (without intent) change the record matey .. let us know more about other aspects of your hobby in some other threads!

[Spectral Morn]

Hi Paul


5 pages and no mention of your system or the kind of music you like.

So what items do you use to enjoy music with ? and what kind of music do you listen to on it or them if you have more than one system.

Please answer and give the PBW a rest for this post. Thanks


Regards D S D L

[The Grand Wazoo]

Unless I'm a victim of selective recall, (and quite frankly, I can't be nadgered to go back & read all of this again) I don't think you've told us what improvements the 'mojo-trinkets' will make to the sound of our gear, Paul. I should like to know just exactly what results and aural delights we might expect to get by unleashing your morphic mojo-hand on our systems. Any clues?


P.S. I want full recognition of that it was me who coined the term 'mojo-trinket' & I expect an entry into the AOS Glossary of Terms to that effect, right away.
Beechy, where are you?!

[Soundhaspriority]

Guys

This is a Welcome thread and so far both hear and on the PWB headphones thread Paul has not IMHO been made to feel very welcome....frankly I am disappointed in the way he has been at times attacked.

Paul I agree with Dan that perhaps engaging in other discussions without reference to PWB should be possible. The problem based on past experiences on forum is those who shout loudest about an item or product are quite often found to be a secret paid promoter of that product. Now I am not saying you are. However you are coming across like that.

You probably feel you have been doing nothing more than defending your opinions and thats fine though recently you have reacted too strongly to your critics IMHO. Its easy to do that..been there myself.

So can I request that all members taking part in any discussions on any topics with anyone do SO WITH RESPECT AND CIVILITY. Thank you.

Paul the depth of your postings are interesting, but I would like to hear/read more about your actual system room etc and the music you like to listen to. It would also be nice to see photos of your set up at home.


Regards D S D L

Thanks for saying so. Because it seems as though I'm not as bothered by that as I was by seeing other administrators criticizing me but not saying a word to anyone else, including Steve (Aquapiranha) who is currently pursuing a campaign of personal attacks on my character he initiated since my first post. In fact, fully no members have a problem with anything that ie. AP or Greg has said to or about me (ie. I must be a drug dealer), for they haven't denounced that, but are not shy about telling me they don't like my 'tude. Attacks, I can take. Hypocrisy and injustice, I have a harder time tolerating.

I don't much like being accused of being a "shill" either. Because where does it end? Can I just stupidly accuse someone of being a wife beater, if their name reminds me of a wife beater's name? Is that okay? "It is my personal opinion you might be" is perhaps a little more tolerable. But then I would argue that you should keep those opinions to yourself, because they only serve to escalate flame wars. Personal accusations are neither respectful nor civil. If I come across as a paid shill, that's really not my fault, and nor should it be my problem. It is the baseless presumption of those making it. To me, it's a means of oppressing thoughts and ideas you don't agree with. Some have been less subtle in their efforts to oppress my thoughts and ideas, by telling me to "shut up and go away" and calling for my banishment.

If people go mad because they simply can not stay out of a particular thread that speaks of audio products that offend the very core of their being (ie. AP), and they are not intellectually or emotionally mature enough to tolerate any advancement or debate of ideas in audio that don't sit square with them, **they** should be held responsible for their problems, not me! I made no secret of the fact that I was drawn by the misrepresenations of PWB, and I don't see why I should be told to stop talking about it, if all I am doing is responding to people who are talking to me about it.

That said, I find it amazing that you and several others now have said I have not made any other posts on any other subject. Why do people not think to do searches on my posts when they make these claims? I have at the very beginning posted on other subjects in other threads. Including my system and the music I listen to.

I have to say, I'm left with the impression from numerous suggestions to stop responding to PWB-related issues, and the reactions some of that fostered, that people do not like their belief systems challenged. Well I'm sorry, but I'm NOT at all like that. I am fully willing, mature enough and capable to have my belief systems challenged. Incuding the belief that Beltism is NOT a scam for gullible audiophiles in the world.

I don't really care much the gear these days, simply because I focus on its details less, since I discovered that my time was better spent not worrying about the sound of my gear, but changing it to what I want through the use of Belt devices. Hence the reason I don't talk about gear so much. I love music and have no problem talking about that, although few people know anything about many of the artists I like. But I also have a strong interest in the science of audio, so that would explain why I might find talking about the myriad of things that can affect sound and perception of it, more intellectually engaging and interesting than just talking about how I love my gear or my music. As exemplified by the length of my posts!

[Soundhaspriority]

Thanks for the response again Paul.

I'm listening to some music, and I think I will be too busy doing just that for some considerable time, so it may be a while before I reply to your post.

Or, on the other hand, I may find I'm really rather bored with the whole subject, and may have to live with myself (and my under-performing system) for deciding that "Beltism" is not something I wish to pursue. I've never considered myself an "Audiophile" - I just love music, preferably reproduced in a more superior way than most "convenience" systems offer. I really am not your "target audience" - I have no desire to test and re-test ANY tweak or change to my system, if I can't hear it the first time, I'm not going to keep flogging a dead horse until I convince myself I can, or have a new suit of Emperor's clothes.

So maybe you'll hear it the first time, who knows. My friend did, and she's far less of an audiophile than you. Anyway, its there if you ever feel like looking into it. I would argue though, that while personal opinions are fine, one doesn't have a right to make strong pronouncements against Beltism, Peter Belt, or PWB products, if they have never even bothered themselves to ever test anything out.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Could've sworn I saw Beechy here a minute ago!

[Beechwoods]

Shippy - Neil's post above was made after discussion amongst the management team. Whatever opinion we may have about your ideas - and most of the time when Admin or Mods post they are just expressing their own opinion, and not a party line - respect and civility are key components of our 'ethos'.

How's about we try and put this behind us and move forward now we've had a chance to get things straight :)

[The Grand Wazoo]

That said, I find it amazing that you and several others now have said I have not made any other posts on any other subject. Why do people not think to do searches on my posts when they make these claims? I have at the very beginning posted on other subjects in other threads. Including my system and the music I listen to.

I was one of those people & I have looked at what you've posted - You've appeared on 5 threads. A total of 12 sentences in 2 threads that were not on the subject of PWB (I include your introductory thread as being about PWB because it is). Three of those 12 sentences were labels to photographs.

If you want people to treat you as though you are not the Braces in 'Belt and Braces', you should involve yourself in other discussions.

[Beechwoods]

Could've sworn I saw Beechy here a minute ago!

Indeedy Chris - I just needed a little time to work out how to break it to you. Your 'mojo-trinket' isn't quite a googlewhack :)

Results 1 - 10 of about 39 for "mojo-trinket". (0.05 seconds) (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=o8W&q=%22mojo-trinket%22&btnG=Search&meta=)

http://blindman.15.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=25754&view=findpost&p=363612

If it does however end up in common usage on AOS, a place in the Pavilion of AOS Parlance will be yours! Keep 'em peeled!

[The Grand Wazoo]

Please answer and give the PBW a rest for this post.

I'd like this thread to continue, but without the venom from anyone - Humour's useful though! But I'd also like to see some participation in other discussions.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Indeedy Chris - I just needed a little time to work out how to break it to you. Your 'mojo-trinket' isn't quite a googlewhack :)

Results 1 - 10 of about 39 for "mojo-trinket". (0.05 seconds) (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=o8W&q=%22mojo-trinket%22&btnG=Search&meta=)

http://blindman.15.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=25754&view=findpost&p=363612

If it does however end up in common usage on AOS, a place in the Pavilion of AOS Parlance will be yours! Keep 'em peeled!


I actually didn't know that it was a recognised term. But I think it's use in the field of hi-fi's pretty bleedin' spiffnificent, don't you?
BTW - how did you find a reference to it & a reference to FZ?

[Spectral Morn]

Thanks for saying so. Because it seems as though I'm not as bothered by that as I was by seeing other administrators criticizing me but not saying a word to anyone else, including Steve (Aquapiranha) who is currently pursuing a campaign of personal attacks on my character he initiated since my first post. In fact, fully no members have a problem with anything that ie. AP or Greg has said to or about me (ie. I must be a drug dealer), for they haven't denounced that, but are not shy about telling me they don't like my 'tude. Attacks, I can take. Hypocrisy and injustice, I have a harder time tolerating.

I don't much like being accused of being a "shill" either. Because where does it end? Can I just stupidly accuse someone of being a wife beater, if their name reminds me of a wife beater's name? Is that okay? "It is my personal opinion you might be" is perhaps a little more tolerable. But then I would argue that you should keep those opinions to yourself, because they only serve to escalate flame wars. Personal accusations are neither respectful nor civil. If I come across as a paid shill, that's really not my fault, and nor should it be my problem. It is the baseless presumption of those making it. To me, it's a means of oppressing thoughts and ideas you don't agree with. Some have been less subtle in their efforts to oppress my thoughts and ideas, by telling me to "shut up and go away" and calling for my banishment.

If people go mad because they simply can not stay out of a particular thread that speaks of audio products that offend the very core of their being (ie. AP), and they are not intellectually or emotionally mature enough to tolerate any advancement or debate of ideas in audio that don't sit square with them, **they** should be held responsible for their problems, not me! I made no secret of the fact that I was drawn by the misrepresenations of PWB, and I don't see why I should be told to stop talking about it, if all I am doing is responding to people who are talking to me about it.

That said, I find it amazing that you and several others now have said I have not made any other posts on any other subject. Why do people not think to do searches on my posts when they make these claims? I have at the very beginning posted on other subjects in other threads. Including my system and the music I listen to.

I have to say, I'm left with the impression from numerous suggestions to stop responding to PWB-related issues, and the reactions some of that fostered, that people do not like their belief systems challenged. Well I'm sorry, but I'm NOT at all like that. I am fully willing, mature enough and capable to have my belief systems challenged. Incuding the belief that Beltism is NOT a scam for gullible audiophiles in the world.

I don't really care much the gear these days, simply because I focus on its details less, since I discovered that my time was better spent not worrying about the sound of my gear, but changing it to what I want through the use of Belt devices. Hence the reason I don't talk about gear so much. I love music and have no problem talking about that, although few people know anything about many of the artists I like. But I also have a strong interest in the science of audio, so that would explain why I might find talking about the myriad of things that can affect sound and perception of it, more intellectually engaging and interesting than just talking about how I love my gear or my music. As exemplified by the length of my posts!

Hi Paul

My post 43.
Hi Paul


5 pages and no mention of your system or the kind of music you like.

So what items do you use to enjoy music with ? and what kind of music do you listen to on it or them if you have more than one system.

Please answer and give the PBW a rest for this post. Thanks


Regards D S D L


Its not about willy waving and talking about ones gear as such, but gives a point of reference to enable understanding of what you have and where you are coming from. Without a point of reference you are not making it easy for me or the other members.

So I ask again what system do you have and what music do you like ?


Regards D S D L

[Beechwoods]

BTW - how did you find a reference to it & a reference to FZ?

I know! Pretty cool eh? The power of Google! Fan-panty-tastical :)

[Stratmangler]

I'd like this thread to continue, but without the venom from anyone - Humour's useful though! But I'd also like to see some participation in other discussions.

I tried to keep things light hearted here (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showpost.php?p=72424&postcount=29) but it seems to have passed by largely unnoticed.

Chris;)

[Alex_UK]

I LOVE the morse code translator Chris, it beeps and everything! It did pass me by originally, because I knew not of this translator of which you now speak - every day is a school day, isn't it? Just today, I learned so much about how ignorant I am! Several times!

[Stratmangler]

I LOVE the morse code translator Chris, it beeps and everything! It did pass me by originally, because I knew not of this translator of which you now speak - every day is a school day, isn't it? Just today, I learned so much about how ignorant I am! Several times!

I just thought it appropriate, subject matter and all considered.

Chris;):)

[Soundhaspriority]

you cant deny it looks like you have a motive paul...

Well first, what things "look" like to chaps on an internet audio forum is meaningless. For example, to the same people, it "looks like" everything to do with Beltism is a crock. But that assumption couldn't be further from the truth, as everyone who has actual experience in this field knows. So stop basing your knowledge on what things "look" like. That is not how you acquire knowledge in life, my friend. If you don't know the truth, don't assume you know the truth about the truth, or be intellectually lazy and just figure your blind assumptions about things are good enough. Even if you call it a "logical assumption", that doesn't mean anything; and certainly doesn't mean its the truth. I have since given you and others a means of finding out what may be true for yourselves. You and most others have refused that opportunity. So that says a lot about how much interest there is in what may be true, and what may be "bollocks". As for "motive", that's also a meaningless charge. -Everyone- here has a "motive" for every message they write. What if I was interested in tape recorders and you're primarily interested in amplifiers. Should I be on you for not writing enough about tape recorders?!


... you still havent really said much else for your self apart from the endless talking about about this belt chap, at the risk of sounding rude (without intent) change the record matey .. let us know more about other aspects of your hobby in some other threads!

Sorry, but like you, I deal with the threads and messages that interest me. I do not ask you to create or respond to threads that don't interest you, do I? And I simply don't have the time at present to deal with anything further than the threads and messages that interest me. I barely have the time to deal with those actually, and many responses to or about me go unanswered. As for the endless talking about the Belt chap, well we did not advance the issue at all, did we in the PWB thread? There was never even reasoned debate on the issue. Just a lot of knee-jerk reactions, and mindless ridicule. I think that if you and others would be honest with yourselves and admit to me that the reason you won't even make a -reasonable- effort (as in a 1-minute tweak) to go further than your crippling prejudices in finding out what Beltism is about, is because you are simply -afraid- of going outside the comfort zone of your blinkered belief systems, and afraid of being proven wrong in your rigid beliefs, then I think I would have no choice but to accept that and stop nattering on about Beltism. Otherwise, there's still a conflict of ideologies going on, isn't there. One where I would still feel compelled to argue against the tide of ugly knee-jerk reactionism.

So Hamish.... are you willing to be the first party to admit that? :smoking:

[Soundhaspriority]

Hi Paul


5 pages and no mention of your system or the kind of music you like.

So what items do you use to enjoy music with ? and what kind of music do you listen to on it or them if you have more than one system.

Please answer and give the PBW a rest for this post. Thanks


Regards D S D L

It seems you missed the post that started this thread, where I mentioned my systems and the sort of music I like.... It's on page 1. If there's anything else, just ask!

[Soundhaspriority]

Unless I'm a victim of selective recall, (and quite frankly, I can't be nadgered to go back & read all of this again) I don't think you've told us what improvements the 'mojo-trinkets' will make to the sound of our gear, Paul. I should like to know just exactly what results and aural delights we might expect to get by unleashing your morphic mojo-hand on our systems. Any clues?

I didn't talk much about the sound, because I did not want to influence anyone who might try my tweak, describe the sound, then have someone else declare it can only be autosuggestion on their part, because they have read my description. I made no real secret of the fact that my Free CD-LP tweak in the Strokes of Genius section, is in fact based on Beltist principles. Since there seems to be little chance of anyone trying the tweak.... I suppose I can talk about the sound now!

One of the reason I advocate Beltism so strongly, is because I know that the particular sound they are able to produce, can not be realized under any conventional audio product. I want this to be better known and understood, because I think it's a very important aspect of audio today, that is being missed out on. It's a sound that true audiophiles would love, so people should have the option of having access to it. You know how audiophiles might often say the mid or tweeter on this or that loudspeaker is too harsh or painful? Or how a system seems to get everything right but is not involving (no PRAT)? Well as an experienced Beltist, I can change aspects like that with careful experiments on any system, and get the kind of sound I want.

As with conventional audio though, there isn't any "one" quality of sound under Beltism, or with Belt products. The qualities of sound vary with the product, or success of your tweak (FYI, I consider the tweak I posted to have a -good- quality of sound, even if it is certainly not the strongest application of a PB device). Some applications however may worsen the sound, or just not be as good. For example, if the message reads "F--- YOU HITLER", instead of the very thoughtfully derived "EVERYTHING INSIDE IS SAFE", it will likely worsen the sound, and at the very least not sound as good as the latter. So the sound depends on what you apply, how you apply it. Even how many times you apply it. That's not that different from conventional applications, really.

If many applications of a Belt device are made at once, the changes in the sound you perceive start to take on more shape and depth. So, assuming I had a quantum clip with me or something really effective, and went about your listening room, or key elements in the rest of your residence, applying the Belt treatment, significant changes could be expected. Some that I have observed with some treatments include less "hash" or "grainyness" to the sound, making for a much less fatiguing and much more natural sound. At first it might sound like things just got muddier and may not sound right. But that's because you are used to a less natural, brighter sound that does not have as fine a resolution. If you listen more carefully, other aspects of the sound indicate it's a superior change.

Better resolution of timbre is possible, so that instruments like the sax, take on a character that much resembles the real instrument playing in your space. The singer's voice also develops more of its real character. Sometimes allowing you to hear certain words for the first time. Imaging also gets better, and eventually, the speakers disappear. (There are some huge homemade speakers from the 70's sitting on the floor in a friend's apt.; a place I Belted extensively. They are recessed a bit behind a cabinet, and a large hdtv sits on the cabinet, in between the speakers. A large coffee table is only inches away from the front of the speakers. And yet... for all intents and purposes, the speakers are not there. You simply do not notice the sound is coming from the speakers when music is playing at a good clip).

You might also hear new melody lines you never heard before. Reason for that is the soundstage can go a lot deeper and wider, with more air and space around instruments and voices. Bass can take on a fuller bloom and more character as well. This can have the effect of making a cheap boomy subwoofer sound like a much more expensive one, making it more tolerable. Above all, what I can only describe as "musicality" is often what increases. If the treatment session was good, this for me, means becoming transfixed to the spot, and deeply immersed in the music, and moving to the rhythm. If you sing to the music, your singing becomes better after a good sound lift. These examples of course are all taken from things I personally observed in my experience. But fair to say that in Beltism, even more than other areas of audio, YMMV. If you have been able to do extensive upgrades with the treatments, then it gets even more interesting after you turn on your tv. Because the video picture improves along the same lines. So does your telephone or cell phone, your kitchen radio or music server, your computer monitor and even print in books may become clearer, from what I've read of some experiences.

[twelvebears]

Shippy.

Can I just say, that as someone who though you were being given a bit of a hard time initially, your insistence on making EVERY post an epic AND one which inevitably gets back around to Beltism in one form or another, is becoming a bit of a bore.

Making passing references to equipment and/or music in the midst of a massive 'Beltist' post doesn't really count, and if you were interested in being a part of this community (and we are a community, many here have got to know each other very well via AOS, we're not just user-names in the ether), then you'll notice there are various areas for different topics of conversation. Some are silly and just for fun, but the point is that even our most serious/up-tight members (and we do have a few stuffed-shirts among us) have a go at contributing everywhere.

Also, being of a scientific bent doesn't rule out the use of a witty one-liner or brief pithy response from time to time.

The bottom line is that if you want to carry on with the epic Belt-focused essays without getting involved elsewhere, then people will just skip over your posts without reading them. Which would be a shame as there may be interesting bits which aren't completely off-the-wall in there, but people won't see them because of all the other 'noise'.

I'm kind of already at that point myself.

Your choice of course.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Paul thank you for your reply.

Now then.
A cynic (& let's face it mate, on this subject, you're up against it) might note that in all your previous posts, you've cleverly laid out your next move ready for when someone reports back that they've heard nothing different from the norm.

- you've made constant reference to the posibility that some people don't have the requisite listening skills (which I consider to have been made in rather a condesending manner, by the way).

- you've repeatedly pointed that the free treatments are a considerably watered down version of the commercially available ones.

[Soundhaspriority]

Shippy.

Can I just say, that as someone who though you were being given a bit of a hard time initially, your insistence on making EVERY post an epic AND one which inevitably gets back around to Beltism in one form or another, is becoming a bit of a bore.

Making passing references to equipment and/or music in the midst of a massive 'Beltist' post doesn't really count, and if you were interested in being a part of this community (and we are a community, many here have got to know each other very well via AOS, we're not just user-names in the ether), then you'll notice there are various areas for different topics of conversation. Some are silly and just for fun, but the point is that even our most serious/up-tight members (and we do have a few stuffed-shirts among us) have a go at contributing everywhere.

Also, being of a scientific bent doesn't rule out the use of a witty one-liner or brief pithy response from time to time.

The bottom line is that if you want to carry on with the epic Belt-focused essays without getting involved elsewhere, then people will just skip over your posts without reading them. Which would be a shame as there may be interesting bits which aren't completely off-the-wall in there, but people won't see them because of all the other 'noise'.

I'm kind of already at that point myself.

Your choice of course.

A number of people have said this here but never looked at my record! I did start out getting involved elsewhere in other forums in some of my first posts. One was in a thread about classic gear, and not only naming fond old gear I have in one of my systems, I posted photos of it! No one responded. So I thought I would give this Belt thing a try! There I got responses. As I mentioned to another poster here just prior to you, I still have too many that keep me too busy from having the time to check out all the messages on the different subforums; and I realize there are quite a few here. Just so many hours in a day, so like you and everybody else I'm sure, with limited time, I tend to focus on the messages that interest me. The length of my messages is usually related to my interest in the subject. I don't expect everyone to share the same interest; that's copacetic.

I'm kind of used to people shutting their minds down when they read what they deem "completely off the wall" descriptions of audio practices or products (and what I know to be valid audio concepts). Not thinking any further on the question of how or why so many different sources all share like experiences with unconventional devices, that suggest there is something going on that mainstream science and audio community adamantly and even arrogantly, refuses to look into. Does that mean I should hide my interests in audio if they are not widely accepted or known, and not talk about them? Not to me. As for a witty one-liner, I have from time to time; within the context of a post. But I don't particularly care for messages that have nothing to say, so if you're saying I should post one-line chat-room style messages that say nothing, well that's not me. But that said, I do post very brief throwaway messages sometimes. You just have to wade through the longer ones to get to them..... :eyebrows:

[Soundhaspriority]

Paul thank you for your reply.

Now then.
A cynic (& let's face it mate, on this subject, you're up against it) might note that in all your previous posts, you've cleverly laid out your next move ready for when someone reports back that they've heard nothing different from the norm.

- you've made constant reference to the posibility that some people don't have the requisite listening skills (which I consider to have been made in rather a condesending manner, by the way).

Sorry for trying to be honest. Look, I know that most audiophiles have a problem understanding and accepting this. But I'm sorry, it's a -fact of life-. So there is no way I could point out this fact of life, without offending someone. I think it would offend them more if I said so -after- their test, don't you? I am trying to get people to understand another simple fact in life: just because someone doesn't hear the effect of an audio device, Belt-type or otherwise, does -not- mean that tweak does nothing. It just means it does nothing **for you**. I say this because look around you: there is a busload of people here all shouting at me that if you don't hear the effects of something, then that means it does not do anything! It is a backward-minded philosophy to be sure, but it is a popular one. And it allows people to dismiss very valid products, simply because they haven't acquired the skills to hear it. Or have them, but don't know how to run a proper test, and missed the changes entirely.

I've seen this happen countless times with all manner of audio accessories and components for over 20 years, and what I am saying is nothing particularly original either. I can hear the changes produced by my audio stand, after moving it an inch, and I can hear the changes in sound from moving coins on top of my speakers a few mm in any direction. But I don't expect to be able to demonstrate this to anyone, and have them hear those changes. I don't know why this misconception that everyone in the world has the same listening skills is so tenacious among audiophiles (ego, I guess), but it isn't so. Identifying changes in audio has nothing to do with physical hearing ability, rather, it's a learned skill. This is why I always try to encourage audiophiles to do more listening tests, and it's like pulling teeth, because they would rather spend their time on a chat forum debating whether they should do more listening tests! And why that I tried my tweak in a blind test on my wife, who does not have any special listening skills, and she got it right 3 out of 3.3, to help me guage whether it might be identifiable by AOSers. So if anyone actually tries the tweak (why haven't you?!), I guess we'll see.

Please do try to keep in mind: I do not get a commission every time someone successfully hears my free tweak. And I said in my initial post, not hearing it doesn't prove anything in and of itself about whether the concept is valid, and hearing it only proves it is valid for that listener. None of that should be difficult to understand, I feel.


- you've repeatedly pointed that the free treatments are a considerably watered down version of the commercially available ones.

And understandably so, otherwise they wouldn't be free. I have said before, they were given away by PB and meant as a "proof of concept". Not a substitute for his commercial products. So I'm not sure the point you're making here. If I thought my tweak was as good as any of PB's commercial products, trust me, I wouldn't be sharing it with you's guys. :eyebrows:

[Stratmangler]

Sorry for trying to be honest. Look, I know that most audiophiles have a problem understanding and accepting this. But I'm sorry, it's a -fact of life-. So there is no way I could point out this fact of life, without offending someone. I think it would offend them more if I said so -after- their test, don't you? I am trying to get people to understand another simple fact in life: just because someone doesn't hear the effect of an audio device, Belt-type or otherwise, does -not- mean that tweak does nothing. It just means it does nothing **for you**. I say this because look around you: there is a busload of people here all shouting at me that if you don't hear the effects of something, then that means it does not do anything! It is a backward-minded philosophy to be sure, but it is a popular one. And it allows people to dismiss very valid products, simply because they haven't acquired the skills to hear it. Or have them, but don't know how to run a proper test, and missed the changes entirely.

I've seen this happen countless times with all manner of audio accessories and components for over 20 years, and what I am saying is nothing particularly original either. I can hear the changes produced by my audio stand, after moving it an inch, and I can hear the changes in sound from moving coins on top of my speakers a few mm in any direction. But I don't expect to be able to demonstrate this to anyone, and have them hear those changes. I don't know why this misconception that everyone in the world has the same listening skills is so tenacious among audiophiles (ego, I guess), but it isn't so. Identifying changes in audio has nothing to do with physical hearing ability, rather, it's a learned skill. This is why I always try to encourage audiophiles to do more listening tests, and it's like pulling teeth, because they would rather spend their time on a chat forum debating whether they should do more listening tests! And why that I tried my tweak in a blind test on my wife, who does not have any special listening skills, and she got it right 3 out of 3.3, to help me guage whether it might be identifiable by AOSers. So if anyone actually tries the tweak (why haven't you?!), I guess we'll see.

Please do try to keep in mind: I do not get a commission every time someone successfully hears my free tweak. And I said in my initial post, not hearing it doesn't prove anything in and of itself about whether the concept is valid, and hearing it only proves it is valid for that listener. None of that should be difficult to understand, I feel.



And understandably so, otherwise they wouldn't be free. I have said before, they were given away by PB and meant as a "proof of concept". Not a substitute for his commercial products. So I'm not sure the point you're making here. If I thought my tweak was as good as any of PB's commercial products, trust me, I wouldn't be sharing it with you's guys. :eyebrows:

:D

It crossed my mind to pick some holes in this post - fact is I cannot be bothered.

Paul, if you have something interesting to say on any subject other than the weird and wonderful perceptions of Peter Belt, politics and religion also excluded, then please do so.

Otherwise please shut up and ship out.

Thanks
Chris:)

[The Grand Wazoo]

And understandably so, otherwise they wouldn't be free. I have said before, they were given away by PB and meant as a "proof of concept". Not a substitute for his commercial products.So I'm not sure the point you're making here. If I thought my tweak was as good as any of PB's commercial products, trust me, I wouldn't be sharing it with you's guys

My point is that a cynic might think that you would expect someone who doesn't have the listening skills to hear what you say you hear to take a leap of faith, by spending real cash on a product that can't be demonstrated to work before said cash is handed over. I can listen to a new amp or I can have a test drive of a car before I pay for it.


So if anyone actually tries the tweak (why haven't you?!), I guess we'll see.
.
How do you know that I haven't tried it? -you're making irrational assumptions and you see that as a fault in others

[Spectral Morn]

It seems you missed the post that started this thread, where I mentioned my systems and the sort of music I like.... It's on page 1. If there's anything else, just ask!


Apart from good music, I've had a passion for good stuff to play it on, since I was about 12. In my budding audiophile days, I used to change kit like people change their underwear. I would sell it off to my audiophile friends, or pawn brokers, or the store that sold it to me... and then something new would take the place on my Target stand. This was my way of figuring out what the goal really was, in the pursuit of audio nirvana. Thankfully, I have, and no longer have doubts about what kind of sound I want. I still have a special affinity for audio produced in that golden era of the 80's (mostly UK gear), when you still could have innovative cottage industry manufacturers putting out gear in small numbers (cough Nytech cough), that would trounce what the big boys were making. Or at least know how to play a tune, and not just sound that resembles music.

Sorry Paul, I must be thick, but where does it tell me what you use. Do you still have a Target table and Nytech ? I am not being funny here, but thats like me saying I have some valves and a turntable oh yes and a cd player...what can you learn about me from that...not a lot. I for one, and you can call me overly curious if you like but I love finding out about different peoples audio journeys and the gear they have had and that in turn helps me to an understanding, why and how they share what they do and to be able to offer any advice or help I can. However if I don't have a list of the components how can I come to any understanding. There is no component snobbery here on AOS so anything is of interest.

So far I am left with the idea, that you think the PWB products you have added to your set up are more important than the items that make the music the electronics. Even to the point reading between the lines that you don't think your electronics are very important.

Come on Paul help me out here....please.


Regards D S D L

[The Grand Wazoo]

Neil

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................

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?p=72742#post72742

[Spectral Morn]

Hi Chris


:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:

Paul ignore my post :(...at least I can hear...sight thats another thing :lol::lol:

I will take myself off for a lie down, whats that saying about not seeing the wood for the trees. Or being a prat.


Regards D S D L

[The Grand Wazoo]

It's understandable mate - hard to be in 3 places at once

[Steve Toy]

We are all being far too indulgent of this complete nut job who is banned from most other sites as I have had confirmed to me this morning.

'Shippy' you were called 'Soundhaspriority' elsewhere. Why choose a different name here?

[The Vinyl Adventure]

i think its a shame he cant get past his extreme views and just talk to us like a human being.. he obviously has a sence of humer

[Marco]

Oh, he's got a sense of humour all right - just like your phonetic spelling has with the English language! :lol: ;)

Marco.

[Steve Toy]

Shippy has been renamed Soundhaspriority whether he likes it or not :eyebrows:

[The Vinyl Adventure]

Oh, he's got a sense of humour all right - just like your phonetic spelling has with the English language! :lol: ;)

Marco.

p.s. I use Elizabethan spelling so no questioning it, rite?!

tosser!

:lolsign: that angry ales still in my veins

[Marco]

Right you are, guv'... Please don't stab me with your elephant cock! :lol:

Marco.

[The Vinyl Adventure]

if it was mine it would have been as big as me... now there is an odd mental image

[Marco]

Aye, between that and yer freaky toe! Mind you, Halloween's coming up..... ;)

Marco.

[Rare Bird]

Anyone mind if i drill the fantastic world of the RATA Philosophy into peoples heads?

;)

[Alex_UK]

Go ahead Andre - it would make a change! Moonies, next?

[Themis]

Anyone mind if i drill the fantastic world of the RATA Philosophy into peoples heads?

;)
:lolsign: (And rename the forum the RAT of sound ? :eyebrows:)

[Cotlake]

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 stops 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.

[Soundhaspriority]

Anyone mind if i drill the fantastic world of the RATA Philosophy into peoples heads?

;)

Not at all. I'd love to learn more about RATA. So drill baby, drill. I think it's an interesting company, with progressive ideas. Of course, I would. ;)

[Soundhaspriority]

My point is that a cynic might think that you would expect someone who doesn't have the listening skills to hear what you say you hear to take a leap of faith, by spending real cash on a product that can't be demonstrated to work before said cash is handed over. I can listen to a new amp or I can have a test drive of a car before I pay for it.

That's true. Some audio products, including PWB's, are only sold by mail order. Because... how many hifi shops do you think would sell them? "Oh yes, the sonic safety pins are over by the amplifier section. We're getting a new shipment of quantum clips next week. The new model's out".

The PWB products are in a sense in direct conflict with the gear being sold at a hifi shop. The idea is to sell you new kit all the time, with newer versions to replace your old models. The Beltist way is often to invest in the products instead of upgrading your components. Many of PWB's customers find this makes more sense than component upgrades, soundwise. This is in direct conflict with buying new gear. Hifi shops are in business mainly to sell new gear. It is in fact the reason I believe there was a backlash against the company in the UK press. Now to the cynic who insists this is all a scam because gosh, it certainly is credible that a company can stay in business for 25 years selling foil, cream, clips and such at outrageous prices that do absolutely nothing, I've got 2 answers to your "leap of faith" scenario. One is that you can request a free sample of one of the products (foil), if you give the company feedback on your trials of the product. What other audio company does that, prey tell? The other is that all the products come with a money back guarantee. That's something you NEVER hear from the cynics and naysayers who bash Peter Belt.


How do you know that I haven't tried it? -you're making irrational assumptions and you see that as a fault in others

It's hardly an "irrational" assumption, when I requested that people report their experiences in the thread or by PM. You haven't done either, far as I have seen. Now an example of an "irrational" assumption, would be someone insisting that I am a "lunatic" for saying I am able to improve the sound of every sound-producing device in my home through the use of Beltism, and having been doing so for two decades, and so have thousands of others, while -they- have never tried the products; or maybe did once or twice 20 years ago. See the difference? :)

[Marco]

Hi Paul,

As I've already asked you elsewhere, can you please start contributing to the many other discussions on the forum? We've had enough now of 'Beltism'.

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.

Do I make myself clear?

Marco.

[aquapiranha]

You are wasting your time Marco. He ONLY arrived here because someone mentioned belt.

He is ONLY interested in promoting belt products, and any posts elsewhere at your request are merely designed to prolong his time here so he can promote some more.

He will not leave here while he has a platform to promote belt products.


I was going to post a load of links this morning to posts he has made on other forums and usenet groups, but then I thought 'why should I bother?' any one here with half a brain could do that themselves and discover the truth.

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...

that he is an object of derision around the globe and that he has picked up a reputation for being a misguided idiot.

I am sure I am not alone in finding the subject tiresome.

:steam:

:steam:

[The Grand Wazoo]

It's hardly an "irrational" assumption, when I requested that people report their experiences in the thread or by PM. You haven't done either, far as I have seen. Now an example of an "irrational" assumption, would be someone insisting that I am a "lunatic" for saying I am able to improve the sound of every sound-producing device in my home through the use of Beltism, and having been doing so for two decades, and so have thousands of others, while -they- have never tried the products; or maybe did once or twice 20 years ago. See the difference?

And several requests have been made of you, also, and you have not complied with them. Now the people who's site you are a guest of are making the same request & you are ignoring them - rather rude, I would suggest.

If I carried out your experiment I will tell whomsoever I choose to tell about it at a time of my choosing. I will not work to your agenda.

I actually think that you haven't done this experiment yourself - at the very least you are guilty of not applying the care and attention to detail that you have stated we should take.
Anyway, I have more important things to be doing at the moment.

[Soundhaspriority]

We are all being far too indulgent of this complete nut job who is banned from most other sites as I have had confirmed to me this morning.

'Shippy' you were called 'Soundhaspriority' elsewhere. Why choose a different name here?

This is an outrage, that you would change my user name like this - and without even consulting me. It appears you are confusing me for someone called Robert Morein, who I happen to know posts under that name. I am not Robert Morein. He lives in Drescher, PA, I can give you his phone number if you want. He -is- a complete nutjob, AFAIC, as for one thing, he often adopts the very identity of the people that he has a vendetta against. But you're not far off for having done what you did. I have never seen this sort of thing on an audio forum before. There is no excuse for what you did. "Angry piranah" has personal issues with those of views he dislikes so he wants me banned, so he goes on a cockamamie Google spree and comes back with all sorts of gross speculation and conjecture, offers it to you as "proof", and you of course indulge his obsessions with me. Proof of WHAT, his mad obsession with me? Where is your evidence? Do you know the difference between proof and conjecture? The only valid evidence I know of is an IP match. That was the only way that people could tell the real posters from Morein's impersonations. And you will NOT get an IP match between me and anything that Morein, aka "soundhaspriority", has published.

Moreover, even if I -was- Robert Morein aka "soundhaspriority", what I do on other forums, especially those not officially sister forums of yours, is none of your business. What I choose to call myself on other forums is equally none of your business. What I do on YOUR forum should be the only concern to you. And I have certainly behaved myself -far- better than many of the more established members. If you're making it your business to find out what every one of the members of AOS does on other forums since the beginning of the internet, then I suggest you may have way too much time on your hands. Maybe this is the only forum you have ever been on in your life. Not me. I have been a member of a lot different internet discussion groups for over 20 years, of all stripes and colours. You probably never even saw a computer yet 20 years ago. And you are seriously trying to tell me that you expect me to have kept the same user name from one discussion group to another, because I might run into an audio group called "The Art of Sound" one day, where a moderator on there will have expected me to retain and register the same user name for ALL discussion groups that I register with. Are you insane? I run 3 audio forums, and I do not even use the same user name on all of mine! Furthermore, there IS no rule in your own ethos about demanding that users register under the same name(s) they use elsewhere.

Nor does it say anything anywhere here warning new members that if they join the Art of Sound, and their views on audio are unpopular and unwanted, they can expected to be subject to a Google-wide witch hunt by the members and staff alike; whereby they will be drawn and quartered in a mass of conspiracy theories from speculation and conjecture of whatever is to be presumed by the Google searches on their possible activities in other discussion groups in the past. Seriously, you are NOT behaving like you are representative of a professional organization in the slightest here. This I would expect of a 14-year old, who just heard of vBulletin, and lets anyone join his little virtual treehouse... but then kicks them off the forum once he finds out from one emotionally-disturbed member, who found out from a member of another forum, who heard from his cousin, who got the info from his sister's boyfriend's uncle's plumber, that the member they only just allowed on doesn't like Superman comics.

And where exactly did you put the proof to support this ridiculous accusation that I have been "banned on most forums"?? Do you even have any clue as to how many audio discussion forums there are on the net? I have never even been a member of most of them, so how the heck can I have been "banned" from them?? What you did by changing my name shows contempt for the , and that you are treating me differently than other members under your own ethos. As if it isn't bad enough that you as moderator have no compunctions about insulting me by calling me "a complete nut job", when you are supposed to be an objective party, and I have certainly never insulted you.

It is childish, petty and immature to have changed my user name; on the basis of a complaint by an unhinged member who has been waging a campaign of spreading lies about me, stalking me in every thread I am in, posting nothing but character attacks against me in those threads, and thus creating flames for a flame war, so that he can then say I am disrupting things and ban me asap. So even though he has violated the ethos with his every post about me, that you are okay to ignore, yes? I ask that you change my user name back to what I chose for myself, or allow me to do so, or just leave it at "Paul".

[Steve Toy]

Jeez this guy can ramble!

Firstly why has it taken him a week to object to his change of username even though he's lived happily and posted under the new name during that time?


Moreover, even if I -was- Robert Morein aka "soundhaspriority", what I do on other forums, especially those not officially sister forums of yours, is none of your business.

The hi-fi community is a small world. The UK forums are all linked because the administrators of each know each other personally and occasionally compare and share notes on certain contributors.



What I choose to call myself on other forums is equally none of your business. What I do on YOUR forum should be the only concern to you.

Not true. We like to know the identity of our contibutors here. Some may object but this is how we operate. As for the information we ask of our contributors potentially leading to identity theft or burglary of your cherished kit that is just a pathetic justification for the very cowardly anonymity that exists only to cause ill feeling. If people object to this policy they are free not to register here.



And I have certainly behaved myself -far- better than many of the more established members.

Regardless of who is to blame for saying what to whom, the root cause of the ill feeling is you. The other members involved do not usually react so adversely but for your verbose tirades and sheer lunacy. As an individual you lack self-awareness but the anonymity ensures it can't adversely impact on your real life - if you've got one that is!



If you're making it your business to find out what every one of the members of AOS does on other forums since the beginning of the internet, then I suggest you may have way too much time on your hands.

I don't usually make it my business. You are quite unique.



Maybe this is the only forum you have ever been on in your life.

I'm registered with all the major UK-centric forums and have been contributing on them for nearly ten years. This place is less than two years old.


Not me. I have been a member of a lot different internet discussion groups for over 20 years, of all stripes and colours.

Just because admin on other sites choose to tolerate you doesn't mean that we have to.


You probably never even saw a computer yet 20 years ago.

I was writing little programs in BASIC in 1982 for my Sinclair ZX Spectrum.


And you are seriously trying to tell me that you expect me to have kept the same user name from one discussion group to another, because I might run into an audio group called "The Art of Sound" one day, where a moderator on there will have expected me to retain and register the same user name for ALL discussion groups that I register with.


Are you insane?

You haven't driven me mad just yet.



I run 3 audio forums, and I do not even use the same user name on all of mine! Furthermore, there IS no rule in your own ethos about demanding that users register under the same name(s) they use elsewhere.


That's why it's an ethos not a set of rules or an AUP. You embrace the spirit of an ethos rather than skirt around the boundaries of a set of rules.

You have failed even to comprehend this concept.

Good riddance. I'm fed up with the complaints about you.

[Barry]

Good riddance. I'm fed up with the complaints about you.

Does this mean Steve, that Paul/Shippy/Soundhaspriority has been banned from AoS?

Regards

[Steve Toy]

Yes.

[DSJR]

What a shame, we could have had some fun with this, had the free "tweak" been more gently put forward with none of the entrenchment that so often seems to happen with hobbies like this...

I must admit to not liking the visciousness that started on here these last few days as it reminds me of another large audio forum or two that can get really nasty on occasion.

Onwards and upwards :)

[Themis]

rNQRfBAzSzo

[Alex_UK]

I wasn't 100% convinced Paul/Shippy actually was Soundhaspriority, or this Robert Morein character, but this post on PFM does seem to confirm it -

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18144&page=3

"Shippy's" recent "bigging up" of the Sugden Connoisseur in our "Best Kept Secrets?" thread maybe just confirms he has a passion for the same turntable - or too much of a coincidence?

Also, he is (IMO) without doubt these people:

Jan Vigne on ecoustics.com

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/21154.html Scroll down to see the posts... Style look familiar? (says he's From Dallas, Texas, this time.)

He even does reviews:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/47077/156699.html

14,000 posts if you're bored... http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&hs=KQx&q=+site:forum.ecoustics.com+jan+vigne&ei=SxzfSrz1L8H_4AbI8rUj&sa=X&oi=forum_cluster&resnum=2&ct=more-results&ved=0CBEQrQIwAQ

And do you see anything familiar in these posts by Posy Rorer on audioasylum.com?

http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=1764
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=1769
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=2311

Unfortunately the Posts search doesn't work for that user, because the user has been deleted!

The search does work for this one, though May Belt! - so they've definitely known each other!

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/search.mpl?author=May%20Belt&user_id=32628&forum=ALL&sortRank=None&sort=date&sortOrder=DESC

Oh, and no wonder Shippy came to us, doesn't look like anyone goes to him, to discuss Belt on his own forum:

http://advancedaudiophile.110mb.com/phpBB3/

As far as I can tell, only one other person has ever posted. So, if you're missing the Beltist Bleetings, you know where to go!

If anyone was feeling even the slightest bit sorry for "Shippy" (I'll admit at times I was, just a bit) then I can assure you that my research has confirmed that we are far, far better off without this trouble maker, though I do hope he takes the advice to get some help, because I genuinely feel he needs it.

[DSJR]

In the meantime, try his "tweak" even only for a giggle, and just see if there just "might" be a difference after all. I mean, all you need is a quarter of an hour, a sheet of thin A4 paper and a black (?) pen...................

[Themis]

I guess the best "tweaks" of this kind, is the ones we can imagine ourselves for our exclusive use ...

But, is it really necessary ? I wonder. ;)

[Barry]

My first reaction was: "Thank goodness for that", as I was finding myself becoming both depressed and annoyed by Shippy's belligerent rants.

However, he did provide some amusement; for those who have not done so, have a look at his website and the links therein. I've haven't had such a big laugh for a while (well not since the Jokes and Funnies thread in AoS)!

At least he got himself banned by the moderators, rather than voted out; an idea I never liked.

Now all we need to do is to try and account for Neal's findings. :scratch:

Regards

[aquapiranha]

I wasn't 100% convinced Paul/Shippy actually was Soundhaspriority, or this Robert Morein character, but this post on PFM does seem to confirm it -

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18144&page=3

"Shippy's" recent "bigging up" of the Sugden Connoisseur in our "Best Kept Secrets?" thread maybe just confirms he has a passion for the same turntable - or too much of a coincidence?

Also, he is (IMO) without doubt these people:

Jan Vigne on ecoustics.com

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/21154.html Scroll down to see the posts... Style look familiar? (says he's From Dallas, Texas, this time.)

He even does reviews:

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/47077/156699.html

14,000 posts if you're bored... http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&hs=KQx&q=+site:forum.ecoustics.com+jan+vigne&ei=SxzfSrz1L8H_4AbI8rUj&sa=X&oi=forum_cluster&resnum=2&ct=more-results&ved=0CBEQrQIwAQ

And do you see anything familiar in these posts by Posy Rorer on audioasylum.com?

http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=1764
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=1769
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=isolation&m=2311

Unfortunately the Posts search doesn't work for that user, because the user has been deleted!

The search does work for this one, though May Belt! - so they've definitely known each other!

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/search.mpl?author=May%20Belt&user_id=32628&forum=ALL&sortRank=None&sort=date&sortOrder=DESC

Oh, and no wonder Shippy came to us, doesn't look like anyone goes to him, to discuss Belt on his own forum:

http://advancedaudiophile.110mb.com/phpBB3/

As far as I can tell, only one other person has ever posted. So, if you're missing the Beltist Bleetings, you know where to go!

If anyone was feeling even the slightest bit sorry for "Shippy" (I'll admit at times I was, just a bit) then I can assure you that my research has confirmed that we are far, far better off without this trouble maker, though I do hope he takes the advice to get some help, because I genuinely feel he needs it.


Alex, I see you have gone a bit more in depth than I did! Funny how after I googled his user name for 10 minutes and posted the links I have suddenly been waging a two week non-stop campaign against him where I have spent every waking hour stalking him! He wishes he was worth the effort lol. this is exactly what he accused a member of PFM of doing when they dared question his beliefs. The guy has so much paranoia he must sleep with one eye open and a gun under the pillow.

IMO there is absolutely no doubt he has a mental issue, perhaps aspergers syndrome or similar.

Anyway he has gone now, I would love to say I told you so but....

:lolsign:

[Alex_UK]

Alex, I see you have gone a bit more in depth than I did! Funny how after I googled his user name for 10 minutes and posted the links I have suddenly been waging a two week non-stop campaign against him where I have spent every waking hour stalking him! He wishes he was worth the effort lol. this is exactly what he accused a member of PFM of doing when they dared question his beliefs. The guy has so much paranoia he must sleep with one eye open and a gun under the pillow.

IMO there is absolutely no doubt he has a mental issue, perhaps aspergers syndrome or similar.

Anyway he has gone now, I would love to say I told you so but....

:lolsign:

It doesn't take much effort, and I wasn't that bothered, (certainly not stalking him!) - and there's a lot more conjecture I could throw out there - but I just wanted to assure anyone who might have a doubt that he has "history"

[aquapiranha]

Quite. i had already 'had the pleasure' a couple of years ago and I could almost script what was going to happen. It must have looked to the casual observer that I had launched into an an unmerited attack, where as I say I had been there before. I know everyone should have their say, but the evidence shows time and again that this guy is actually the WORST advert for the belt hocus pocus he could ever have, and everywhere he posts ends up picking up the pieces.

:)