PDA

View Full Version : Fantastic free CD / LP tweak!



Pages : [1] 2

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 01:38
=================
Fantastic free CD / LP tweak!

Since this subforum is about "fantastic free tweaks", I think this one I came up with recently qualifies. We're messin' with the Mekon here, so this ain't your grandfather's tweak. But it should (or rather, "could") provide a sound lift all the same. I know it's not going to make any sense to anyone, and there's no obvious reason on earth why this should do anything. But it's NOT a joke tweak, it's perfectly free, it uses household items most have, and takes a minute to implement. So... try it anyway. Consider it a science experiment in morphogenetic fields. And if you do, I hope you will post your experiences. I could use the feedback.

For the MF tweak, you will need:

* One fine point black magic marker / felt tip pen (the darker the ink the better)
* One sheet of white paper (blank)
* Scissors
* One commercial CD (with standard full size jewel case and booklet)

(n.b. Before starting anything, you should have a careful listen to your sound as is current, so you will have a better idea of what may have changed). Now, with the fine point black marker, write the following phrase in ALL CAPS, on a single line, trying to keep the letters small but legible (write along the long side of the paper, so you can get it all in one line - if you find you can't fit it on one line, that's ok, you can curve the line around the paper):

EVERYTHING IS SAFE INSIDE (x5) > O.K.

n.b. The instruction (x5) indicates that you repeat the phrase "EVERYTHING IS SAFE INSIDE" 5 times (no brackets), ending the line with: > O.K. (If possible, emphasize the "O.K." part in bolder print).

Cut the line you wrote out of the paper, keeping close to the letters, without cutting into them. Fold the printed strip of paper in half, with the printed side showing. Fold it in half again and again, until it can be folded no longer, and press it flat. (Keeping it in your fingers), remove the CD disc from its jewel case tray, place the folded strip of paper against the teeth in the centre of the tray, so that it lies across the teeth of the tray. Next, press the CD into the tray, over top of the strip (the CD will float above the tray, because of the thickness of the paper; that's expected). Now close the cover of the CD case.

You now have an IF CD "device". Place this CD inside a drawer in the listening room. You are now ready for testing.

TESTING

You will not be testing the CD you tweaked, so you will need to put on another CD for testing. I recommend the normal standard testing method for audiophiles; A/B (sighted) method, at least initially. (If you wish to do fancy blind tests, do them later, if the results under sighted are positive).

TEST A (Device IN): Listen to another CD, while the CD you tweaked is inside the drawer. Keeping the volume at a suitable level for testing and using simple music with little complexity is recommended.

TEST B (Device OUT): Because of the nature of the fields, steps must be taken to try to remove the influence of the message strip. Simply take the CD case out of the drawer, take the strip out of the CD case, and remove both the case and strip out of the listening room (preferably out of the house if you really want to be sure no influence remains). Listen again with the CD case / strip out of the room.

If you do not think you heard a difference:

A) Repeat the A-B test. The differences may just be subtle for some, and it could take a few back and forths before they are heard.

B) If no differences can be discerned as above, increase the effect. Instead of just the 1 CD, apply the same message strip to 7 or 9 CD's (keeping them all in the same drawer, removing them all at the same time during the B test).

C) Some have reported hearing differences only after the music has been playing for a while. So you might try leaving it playing for half an hour, and return to see if you can discern differences then.

If you still haven't heard any change and you wish not pursue things any further, I hope you enjoyed the experience anyway.


Addendum

I can't and won't guarantee results, but I guarantee that IMEO (In My Expert Opinion), it is worth trying out. But if one doesn't hear some sort of improvement in their sound, this alone should not be considered a valid reason for dismissing the entire phenomenon as "rubbish". I will concede that if one does discern a change in the sound, it isn't really (scientific) proof of anything either. As audiophiles, we only need to prove things for ourselves.

Know that this does not work by placebo effect, autosuggestion, nor does it require any belief in it to work. It is an experiment that I and others have had positive success with. Mind you, I have a lot of experience listening to this sort of thing. But I can hear distinct differences that I can describe, and they are consistent and repeatable, for me. So I'm curious to know if others might have success with it as well. For any other issues that might come up, I have written a FAQ to deal with that.

MF FAQ:

Q. Are the little details necessary? Or should I just run this how I feel like, because it ALL looks like nonsense to me and I can't see how any of this matters?

A. Yes. It might sound trivial, but little things do matter in this business. I spent time working out those details, in order to ensure best results for this particular tweak.

Q. This can't possibly have any correlation with the audio signal or room acoustics.

A. Tell me something I don't know...

Q. So this can't possibly work.

A. Fortunately, the tweak doesn't know that, so it does anyway. And that much has been confirmed thousands of times by hundreds of audiophiles for at least 15 years, if that means anything to you. Of course, it isn't supposed to affect the signal. It's meant to affect you.

Q. So it's a placebo then?

A. No. There are a million things that can affect the listener, that don't include "placebo", or imaginary flights of fancy. You do not have to believe it works for it to have an effect. On the other hand, being absolutely convinced you will NOT hear a difference with any listening test may be a self-fulfilling prophecy, a sort of nocebo effect. It is wise to try to keep an open mind in any sort of listening test. So stop repeating "load of bollocks!" to yourself. That would be a start.

Q. What kind of an effect?

A. Rather not say how the sound will change, because then I would be accused of introducing that bias, if someone heard the difference I described. Just listen carefully, as always, to timbre, tone, FR, PRAT, musicality and all the rest.

Q. How does it work?

A. If I told you, I would have to kill you. And I just met you. You look like a nice chap, and I'm not in the habit of killing people I just met. In fact, I could be offed myself just for sharing it with you. So let's just say, it's a novel application of a so-called "alternative science". ;)

The Vinyl Adventure
15-10-2009, 02:16
I don't want to get into or start another long winded row here so simple answer please
you say you would have to kill us if you told us.. If you told us surely we would all be clear and this alternative science would become a science!

The phrase seems to me to be talking to someone or something, do you belive that inanimate objects have some kind of intelegence, or maybe a spirit (like in that Japanese religion (can't remember it's name)). If not then who or what is the mesage for? If it's for you, then surely this is auto suggestion, almost by definition?

Like I said, short answers would be apreciated, even just to hold my attention! ;)

The Vinyl Adventure
15-10-2009, 02:40
To give you an idea of why I'm taking this stance ... I'm the sort to listen to the j.w. when they come to the door, I will even read the pamflets people hand me on the street. You never know there might be a little nugget of info or a shred of something I'm there that at least sparks an idea. I don't belive in any of the organised religions, but it doesn't mean you can't find things in there that might work for you!

Now, I think it is perhaps more unlikely that this will happen in the case of shippys ideas, but would it not be a shame to miss out on Reading somthing that might trigger your own idea that does fit in to more sensible ways of thinking?? Eg the knots in cables idea might make a someone question it enough to leas to an actual explainable theory that is a million miles from the knot idea... But it could be that the planted the seed...


Just to clarify, I really really don't buy into this stuff, I haven't been sucked in, I just don't see why if it all remains sivilised, shippy can't have a quite little corner of his own to talk about his aspect of our hobby

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 04:54
I don't want to get into or start another long winded row here so simple answer please
you say you would have to kill us if you told us.. If you told us surely we would all be clear and this alternative science would become a science!

Wherever did you get that idea?! I have been talking about how this works since I've been here. Seems all it has inspired from people is to go mad and spend their time scouring the internet to post pointless, mindless, angry, nutty conspiracy theories about me.


The phrase seems to me to be talking to someone or something, do you belive that inanimate objects have some kind of intelegence, or maybe a spirit (like in that Japanese religion (can't remember it's name)). If not then who or what is the mesage for? If it's for you, then surely this is auto suggestion, almost by definition?

Like I said, short answers would be apreciated, even just to hold my attention! ;)

Here's the problem, and the reason I didn't want to make my post longer by talking about the theories: why are you talking to me about this, instead of trying the tweak? Does it not occur that it would take less time to see if it might work than to debate how it might work? I will respect your interest by responding to your concerns anyway, but in response, I hope you will respect mine by trying it out anyway, and sharing your experience in this thread or PM. Regardless of what odds you give of this doing anything for you!

A. Understand that as far as this tweak is concerned, it doesn't matter what I personally believe, because belief doesn't enter into it. That said, no, I do not believe inanimate objects have an intelligence or consciousness of any kind. Just because I might sound insane to you, doesn't mean I actually am. I do believe they have an energy pattern, however. The message is not for the listener. I could have it say something unintelligible to you, and still be effective.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether you are aware of that message or not, because someone else in the room could hear the same improvement, without knowing the message. I'll have you know that just before uploading it, I tested this tweak on my wife tonight; who by all standards could not be described as an "audiophile", and neither could the stereo system we used. I did so because I wanted to have some kind of assurance that there's a good chance average audiophiles, with average ears, could have a chance of hearing my tweak. She got it right 3 out of 3 in a blind test, FWIW. So I felt I could go ahead and post the tweak. At no point did I say what I was testing, or whether the tweak was in or out on any given track, nor did she see the CD (let alone read the message). I wrote in my post, that this is not intended to work by placebo or autosuggestion, because I knew this would the popular misconception here. But even if one thinks it can only work by placebo, the important thing is to know first whether it has any effect on a given listener. The placebo thing can later be eliminated in a DBT, if you wish, after the initial sighted a-b test.

Beechwoods
15-10-2009, 05:12
Q. How does it work?

A. If I told you, I would have to kill you. And I just met you. You look like a nice chap, and I'm not in the habit of killing people I just met. In fact, I could be offed myself just for sharing it with you. So let's just say, it's a novel application of a so-called "alternative science". ;)

Shippy. If you're going to post far-out tweaks like this it's only fair that you take at least as much time to explain why it's likely to work as you've spent trying to wrap the rest of your post in grandiose detail.

I'm afraid that unless you can do that, it looks like this is just an ego-trip to see how many people you can encourage to try a completely pointless experiment. And yeah, I know it's free - but there are some things worth investing time in because there's a scintilla of scientific or proven, repeatable, subjective benefit - but frankly, this looks like it's just taking the piss.

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 05:21
To give you an idea of why I'm taking this stance ... I'm the sort to listen to the j.w. when they come to the door, I will even read the pamflets people hand me on the street. You never know there might be a little nugget of info or a shred of something I'm there that at least sparks an idea. I don't belive in any of the organised religions, but it doesn't mean you can't find things in there that might work for you!

Now, I think it is perhaps more unlikely that this will happen in the case of shippys ideas, but would it not be a shame to miss out on Reading somthing that might trigger your own idea that does fit in to more sensible ways of thinking?? Eg the knots in cables idea might make a someone question it enough to leas to an actual explainable theory that is a million miles from the knot idea... But it could be that the planted the seed...

Just to clarify, I really really don't buy into this stuff, I haven't been sucked in, I just don't see why if it all remains sivilised, shippy can't have a quite little corner of his own to talk about his aspect of our hobby

Nice to think that you believe there's less to what I'm saying, than Jehova's Witnesses! Especially since I'm not asking you to take anything on faith, or adopt a particular belief system. Unlike JW's and their God hypothesis, mine are things you can actually TEST.

I'm all for taking the germ of an idea that you think isn't valid, and creating something valid out of it, via osmosis. In order to come up with a better theory for the reef knots, don't you have to test the reef knots in cables first? Assuming you do, and hear its effects, I assure you, no one will come up with a better theory. I have heard many alternative theories for Beltism from those with little to zero knowledge of it. They make me laugh, so they have some value, I suppose, in some sense. But getting serious, no one has even come close to a more accurate hypothesis than the Belt's have given. That's the part that most amateur armchair researchers don't get. The "accurate" part. If you want to try to play armchair researcher and figure out a theory that better fits in with your belief system, go ahead. I'll even help you get started. That "reef knot in cables" idea you mentioned? Well there's nothing particularly special about reef knotting cables. You can reef knot sewing thread; it'll have a similar (if not better) effect on your sound. Now assuming you have acquired the necessary listening skills to hear that effect, it'll be up to you to try to explain why in the name of all that is good and holy, would placing reef knots in sewing thread improve the sound of your hifi kit. Got any ideas yet? Because next, you have to also try and figure out why does the sound only become right when placing odd numbers of reef knots.

Knowing that the hypothesis now has to fit your mental limitation that only things that sound "sensible" to you should be given any accord, I already know that whatever you try to come up with, will not be anywhere near accurate, or provable in the field. As a scientific researcher, you have a lot to learn. But the good thing is, you have a lot of opportunities to learn before you. I think I've given you a pretty good one in this thread. I hope you will start there to growing your garden!

aquapiranha
15-10-2009, 05:47
Come to free us all from our years of ignorance have you soundhaspriority? I really have no idea why you have bothered for so many years? perhaps you are on the payroll? you have been shown to do this ALL OVER THE GLOBE and I genuinely believe you are either in the employ of belt, or are a nut. Which is it?

funny how all of these 'free' tweaks are designed to get the vulnerable hooked so they then have to start to pay for the trinkets from belts travelling circus...


http://www.philzimmermann.com/images/TinFoilHatArea.jpg

aquapiranha
15-10-2009, 05:55
Seems all it has inspired from people is to go mad and spend their time scouring the internet to post pointless, mindless, angry, nutty conspiracy theories about me.


I assume that little dig is aimed at me? I am flattered.

the reason I went out of my way to prove you a are a shill is because what you and belt are doing is immoral and should be illegal. In the same way the police would gather evidence about a suspect, I looked around and found masses and masses of 'evidence' that you are an unhinged fool, on a global mission to pedal ridiculous products with no basis in science whatever you both claim. I have seen you come and go on four forums I (used) to frequent, and this one. I see no reason why that pattern will not be repeated here.

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 08:11
Shippy. If you're going to post far-out tweaks like this it's only fair that you take at least as much time to explain why it's likely to work as you've spent trying to wrap the rest of your post in grandiose detail.

I'm afraid that unless you can do that, it looks like this is just an ego-trip to see how many people you can encourage to try a completely pointless experiment. And yeah, I know it's free - but there are some things worth investing time in because there's a scintilla of scientific or proven, repeatable, subjective benefit - but frankly, this looks like it's just taking the piss.

I just spent a few days witnessing literally dozens of posts in one thread alone, that if they prove anything, prove one thing: people here have NO problem "investing" as you call it, inordinate amounts of time on a daily basis , writing posts arguing against unconventional products and ideas in audio, that in nearly all cases I have seen, they have never even once tested. If you think there is anything "scientific" about this kind of behaviour, then I would argue you don't know the first thing about science.
What is "pointless" here, is to insist that you fully understand the mechanism before you ever attempt to test a one-minute tweak. Because if you can't hear any changes, the issue of how it works is moot. And if you can, only then can it hope to make sense to you..

In one of the first responses to me, The Grand Wazoo wrote "we should welcome challenges to our scientific thinking". Well this is that challenge. This is the chance to try to prove things for yourself. At this point, not welcoming it only shows that you won't accept challenges to your closed-minded and rigid ways of thinking about audio. Especially when you can be as "scientific" as you want to be. You can plug in your little ABX comparator, and get Floyd Toole to conduct the DBT for you, if that's your fancy. All I ask is that you do this after the initial standard sighted test. You can also repeat the test a thousand and one times, to be absolutely certain that something is really going on. There's nothing stopping you from doing that, Beechwoods.

Simply put, the mechanism behind these devices is advanced enough, that there is nothing in your knowledge or experience that could act as a reference point to you being able to easily understand it, to where you calm down to the point that you feel you can safely add it to your current belief system, before having any empirical experience with it. It might help you to understand this in analogous form: If I told you I built a rocketship that can fly to the moon and back, you might react with outrage, and tell me that I am mad. Which is understandable to me, because you're a cobbler in the middle ages. I tell you that if you come to the landing pad, just over the hill, I will take you up in space in the rocket. But you won't go with a madman, will you? You're just too clever to be "taken in" by a madman. Even if he is offering -free- rocket trips to space! So instead, you demand to know how its possible for me to fly to the moon, before you will ever try the experience. You know a bit about science and believe in science, so you're open to a scientific explanation. But everything I can hope to explain to you about what may be involved, well you have no knowledge or experience with that yet. It's not any kind of science you're familiar with or heard about. So you go and query the current authorities on science to confirm whether what I am saying is true or not. And not believing in it either, as they have little if any knowledge of what I am saying, they only confirm that there is nothing factual about what I am saying. And so you refuse to walk a few hundred yards with me to explore the moon, and instead stay in your little hamlet for the rest of your cobbling life, believing that you have not missed anything. Believing even, that you avoided being taken in by a phony space hustler. Who probably just wanted to steal your goats, clever you. (wink). But of course, truth is, by your adamance on rejecting any challenge to your current belief system, and using it to control your new experiences, you did indeed miss something. You missed seeing the stars from up close.

When and if enough people take a few moments to try it and report positive results with the tweak, I'll be glad to take the time to explain any and all that I can, about the working mechanism. For that is the only chance they will be receptive to the ideas behind it.

Themis
15-10-2009, 08:32
This tweak description is very funny.
I don't know whether it's the desired effect, but just the description of it makes me hilarous.

Thank you for all the lough, Paul. :)

aquapiranha
15-10-2009, 08:45
Please can somebody ban this idiot before I go as crazy as he is? I honestly do not think it is doing this forum any good having him around, and it is not like it will be the first time it has happened. funny how he will not challenge me directly, perhaps because he realises that his mask has slipped?

So to sum up...

Soundhaspriority, you need HELP, you should see a shrink straight away. Please do so for the sake of your own safety and the sanity of others.

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 09:10
This tweak description is very funny.
I don't know whether it's the desired effect, but just the description of it makes me hilarous.

Thank you for all the lough, Paul. :)

You're entirely welcome. Let me know when you have tried the tweak!

Alex_UK
15-10-2009, 09:26
I hadn't seen this thread before I responded on the Welcome one. I think I'm with Steve (aquapiranha) on this one - I'm afraid I do genuinely think you need help, whether you know it, or are prepared to realise it or not.

Peter Galbavy
15-10-2009, 15:26
Sorry, I can't try this tweak as I am too busy arranging my colour-matched crystals in a widdershins arrangement around my special light fittings - which I understand gives a much better mid-range on female vocal acoustics in the room directly north of where my mother is at the time the lights are switched on for the 5th time on a Monday.

DSJR
15-10-2009, 15:41
Apparently, non-wine buffs such as me can be fooled by price tags on two identical bottles of wine - the dearest one will always "taste" better, despite them being the same, according to the research that was done..

I mentioned getting psychologists involved. We are SO easily influenced, by and large. Just look at how easily people such as Derren Brown can manipulate others...

anthonyTD
15-10-2009, 15:42
hi all,
tell you what,,,ill save you all the time and trouble and try this mod myself and report back, only problem is, i dont have a draw near my system to put the CD in, so is that going to be a problem, can i put it somewhere else?
let me know shippy...
A...

The Vinyl Adventure
15-10-2009, 17:36
Ha, that's the only thing that stopped me at least giving it a crack.. I have no cd, or vinyl or even drawers in my listening room ... Give us another idea shippy and il give it a crack!
P.s please please please be aware that the 50000 word essays are really of putting!

anthonyTD
15-10-2009, 18:01
Ha, that's the only thing that stopped me at least giving it a crack.. I have no cd, or vinyl or even drawers in my listening room ... Give us another idea shippy and il give it a crack!
P.s please please please be aware that the 50000 word essays are really of putting!

quite agree!!
A...

alb
15-10-2009, 18:14
Well, my "man drawer" is close to my audio rack.

But i'd feel far too silly.

Cotlake
15-10-2009, 20:23
Hi Shippy,

Do us all a favour and post a picture of your system. You can do it here or as forum expected, enter it into the gallery. As you are so sure of your convictions, spread your evidence bare so we all can see the magic of what you live with. Go on, stretch out a bit and show your human side. Some of us might even warm towards you.

Don't be bashful or shy. I realise you spend so much of your fixated time writing on forums so we'll understand if your system has a little dust on it, but hey, we're not that critical. It's all about the sound as you say. Please, let us enter a little bit into your world. If you do, I might start thinking seriously about your claims. Of course, the very best would be for you to hold a fest at your place. Do you have a big house? Loads of us would be interested. Come on mate, send out an invite.

Regards,

Greg

PS. When I visit, make sure you've got plenty of that smoking 'shit' you acknowledge as being soooooo goooooood. I want some, yes mister I really want some. It's got to be the best stuff available since Jagger was dragged to court. Go on mate, make me happy!

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 20:29
hi all,
tell you what,,,ill save you all the time and trouble and try this mod myself and report back, only problem is, i dont have a draw near my system to put the CD in, so is that going to be a problem, can i put it somewhere else?
let me know shippy...
A...

The drawer doesn't need to be near your system. Just in the listening room. But it's not a problem if you don't even have a drawer, put the CD in a box then, or enclosed inside of something until you can't see it. That's not really essential to the tweak, but I put it as necessary, because it does improve the perceived sound a bit more.




alb

Well, my "man drawer" is close to my audio rack.

But i'd feel far too silly.

Are you saying you won't try this one-minute tweak because you'd feel far too silly?

alb
15-10-2009, 20:34
Yeah, a Shippyfest.......great idea.

Oh bugger it's gonna be in New York.:(

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 20:36
Ha, that's the only thing that stopped me at least giving it a crack.. I have no cd, or vinyl or even drawers in my listening room ... Give us another idea shippy and il give it a crack!
P.s please please please be aware that the 50000 word essays are really of putting!

Tell that to my brain! I keep trying to say this, it won't listen. No CD, no vinyl, no drawers?! Bit of a challenge, isn't it. What is your source, music server? 8-track tape? Does it have a remote? If so, place the message inside the battery compartment of the remote. That will be your device. I don't know if this will be better or worse than the CD, but it will serve a similar purpose. The rest of the instructions still apply.

The Grand Wazoo
15-10-2009, 20:46
What about someone who's speakers & listening position are in a different room to the rest of the gear?

Y'see, we all want to try!!!!!!!!!!!! - But we can't, because you talk about paying attention to the smallest details.
We're trying, Shipster, we're trying!!

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 20:49
I hadn't seen this thread before I responded on the Welcome one. I think I'm with Steve (aquapiranha) on this one - I'm afraid I do genuinely think you need help, whether you know it, or are prepared to realise it or not.

Yes, yes, very original thought. I will try not to take offense at your insulting knee-jerk response, because I realize this is just you reacting to challenges to your rigid belief system. I know more about you than you do about me, based on your response here. But you don't know anything about whether I am mad for advocating this simple experiment, because you have never accepted the challenge to test your claims, to find out whether you are right or wrong. It takes a minute; so why are you afraid and what are you afraid of Alex? Becoming mad, or finding out that your baseless presumptions were wrong?

markf
15-10-2009, 20:53
Shippy,
would it be possible to do a "pictorial" I always have problems when it comes
to paper folding etc,so better if you do the process from scratch and take some pictures along the
way and post them up on here.
If you do a good job,might be a good addition to the library or reference section.

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 20:56
dsjr

Apparently, non-wine buffs such as me can be fooled by price tags on two identical bottles of wine - the dearest one will always "taste" better, despite them being the same, according to the research that was done..

I mentioned getting psychologists involved. We are SO easily influenced, by and large. Just look at how easily people such as Derren Brown can manipulate others...

If you are interested at all, there is a review you can read on PWB's red X coordinate pen. In it, David Clark reported having heard a negative difference in the sound, after his partner changed the message to a negative one. He was not aware of what was written, so could not have been influenced by the autosuggestion you are describing here. Keep in mind, the tweak I posted takes less time to implement than reading the article. Have you tried it then, and if so, why not?

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue1/beltpen.htm


Sorry, I can't try this tweak as I am too busy arranging my colour-matched crystals in a widdershins arrangement around my special light fittings - which I understand gives a much better mid-range on female vocal acoustics in the room directly north of where my mother is at the time the lights are switched on for the 5th time on a Monday.

Or because like Alex and many others, you are afraid of challenges to your narrow but comfortable belief system. Understood. ;)

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 21:03
What about someone who's speakers & listening position are in a different room to the rest of the gear?

Y'see, we all want to try!!!!!!!!!!!! - But we can't, because you talk about paying attention to the smallest details.
We're trying, Shipster, we're trying!!

And yet no reports back yet, but lots of joke tweaks to share and predictable knee-jerk reactions against it and me! Try harder! :) I said the details were important, because I don't want people skipping out on important stuff simply because they can't imagine how it might be, then screaming at me and saying I wasted 5 minutes of their precious precious time after it doesn't pan out. The listening room is whatever room you listen in, so no, it shouldn't matter really if the gear is not in it, even if its likely preferable that it is.

aquapiranha
15-10-2009, 21:04
Soundhaspriority wrote:


'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.'

But I did not attack you from your first post, if you bothered to read anything I have posted, you would have seen that this is not the first time I have come across you on the web. A couple of years ago, someone on another forum, pinkfish, mentioned belt. You were on the case instantly, just as you were here like you have some kind of belt radar. It was not long before everyone saw through you however and you are now banned from that forum. but, that is not the only forum at which you are not welcome is it? a quick google reveals you have been a very busy boy, attempting to spread your outlandish practices throughout the globe!

Now, I really do not care if you do not respond any more, I have much better and more pressing things to be getting on with than to cross swords with a wordy 'guru' such as you. It seems you have more fun on the pro-audio sites, I imagine they are an even harder sell than some of us on here (and yes, the use of the word sell was quite deliberate).

Now, in the interests of balance, everyone should be allowed to have their say, but when what is said is merely a marketing mandate, well then I think that person should be registered as trade, and not a private poster.

Oh my, this is maybe the longest post I have made here, preferring as I do to keep brief and to the point usually, unlike yourself.

alb
15-10-2009, 21:07
Are you saying you won't try this one-minute tweak because you'd feel far too silly?

Yes.

Alex_UK
15-10-2009, 21:08
Yeah, a Shippyfest.......great idea.

Oh bugger it's gonna be in New York.:(

Ah, but as Shippy keeps telling us, we shouldn't assume anything - just because it says New York on his profile, we shouldn't immediately assume that is true, he could be anywhere, Timbuktu, Bognor Regis, Montreal even - who knows?

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 21:09
Shippy, would it be possible to do a "pictorial" I always have problems when it comes to paper folding etc,so better if you do the process from scratch and take some pictures along the way and post them up on here. If you do a good job,might be a good addition to the library or reference section.

Please explain, what exactly are you having problems with, in executing the experiment, that you think it requires a step by step photo essay? Which end up of the pen to hold? The paper folding is really not that hard: you have a strip of paper with writing on it. Keep folding it until you can fold it no longer. Any other questions, don't worry, I'm here for you Mark! We'll get you through this somehow! :smoking:

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 21:19
Yes.

You're doing this in the privacy of your home, so what are you afraid of? Finding out that your prejudices against unconventional ideas were wrong?

markf
15-10-2009, 21:25
Well shippy,

I read the your initial post (not devoting 100% concentration to the details) and it
wasn't clear to me exactly what was being asked. I figured what the hell, if the guy is serious
about this piece of work he will have some pictures to show exactly what's going on.

I find it hard to believe that you haven't taken a picture of this in action.

Alex_UK
15-10-2009, 21:27
Yes, yes, very original thought. I will try not to take offense at your insulting knee-jerk response, because I realize this is just you reacting to challenges to your rigid belief system. I know more about you than you do about me, based on your response here. But you don't know anything about whether I am mad for advocating this simple experiment, because you have never accepted the challenge to test your claims, to find out whether you are right or wrong. It takes a minute; so why are you afraid and what are you afraid of Alex? Becoming mad, or finding out that your baseless presumptions were wrong?

Who's assuming now? You have absolutely no idea about my "rigid belief systems" - you have no idea if I believe in homeopathy, acupuncture spiritualism, tarot readings, palmistry or any other number of "alternative sciences" (for want of a better description) - all you know about me is that I am not prepared to invest the time and effort in your "tweak" because of a zealot who is in my opinion clearly spending far more time than is normal doing nothing other than promote the products of someone whom he claims he has no connection to, infiltrating a forum with what looks like the sole purpose of promoting those ideologies.

If you'd nonchalontly joined this forum, integrated into the community by talking about, oh, I don't know, hifi equipment, or maybe even music, or just had some fun, and then, when you'd got to know people a bit better, gently introduced some of your theories, then suggested a harmless experiment, do you think you might have got a warmer, and more open reception? Just a thought.

Spectral Morn
15-10-2009, 21:31
Who's assuming now? You have absolutely no idea about my "rigid belief systems" - you have no idea if I believe in homeopathy, acupuncture spiritualism, tarot readings, palmistry or any other number of "alternative sciences" (for want of a better description) - all you know about me is that I am not prepared to invest the time and effort in your "tweak" because of a zealot who is in my opinion clearly spending far more time than is normal doing nothing other than promote the products of someone whom he claims he has no connection to, infiltrating a forum with what looks like the sole purpose of promoting those ideologies.

If you'd nonchalontly joined this forum, integrated into the community by talking about, oh, I don't know, hifi equipment, or maybe even music, or just had some fun, and then, when you'd got to know people a bit better, gently introduced some of your theories, then suggested a harmless experiment, do you think you might have got a warmer, and more open reception? Just a thought.


Paul

I think that what Alex suggests is a very fair point.

I may try your tweak...tomorrow, but to be honest having read the instructions a couple of times I am beginning to think that what you are suggesting well smacks of "casting spells" this kind of instruction would not be out of place in an occult book. By saying this I am not having ago, just stating that I have seen this type of thing elsewhere.


Regards D S D L

alb
15-10-2009, 21:41
so what are you afraid of?

I'm afraid...........................that i can't find a black fine tip magic marker or a felt pen.

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 22:21
Paul

I think that what Alex suggests is a very fair point.

I may try your tweak...tomorrow, but to be honest having read the instructions a couple of times I am beginning to think that what you are suggesting well smacks of "casting spells" this kind of instruction would not be out of place in an occult book. By saying this I am not having ago, just stating that I have seen this type of thing elsewhere.


Regards D S D L

You've just touched upon the very problem these ideas and the products developed from them have. They have to appeal to your ("your" referring to anyone) many many prejudices. It's placebo, it's autosuggestion, it's effective marketing, it's a Japanese religion, it's morphic bunk, it's witchcraft, it's quantum bunk, etc etc etc. That prevents most people from even trying any of the ideas out. And if someone decides it would be too closed-minded to ignore the ---fact--- that many well known professional audio journalists and thousands of audiophiles the world over, including some members of AOS, have in fact heard effects from Beltism, and then try such an experiment, the experiment has to then battle with all of the prejudices they have against it. Including the idea that they feel silly while trying it. That's a lot actually to ask of any audio tweak I think! Particularly one that may not be "night and day" for listeners with average listening skills. So I don't know how my little experiment will fare against this kind of resistance.

But I would argue that much of the backlash against Beltism, which my experiment is based upon, comes from this. The reason I did not want to talk about the mechanism, is because of the crippling effect of human prejudices. The more I talk about concepts that make no sense to you, that you can't resolve intellectually from what you already believe, the more you say "This is not going to work. No point in trying it.". So rather than "overthink" the tweak, or debate it until flame wars ensue, I don't think it is ridiculous to expect people to try an experiment that anyone can do (not sure about Mark, though) and only takes a minute.

markf
15-10-2009, 22:25
The neighbors kid is pretty good at these things so I'll give him a Dannii Minogue
CD and let him lose with the paper and scissors (the control CD will be Kylie Minogue)
I'll give him a couple of days and report the findings here ,now I can't be fairer
than that.
May the best Antipodean sister win.

Stratmangler
15-10-2009, 22:27
Well, working on the basis that I listen largely via music server, I wrote out the message the prescribed five times, cut out the message from the paper, then folded the paper until it wouldn't fold anymore. Then the paper went into the battery compartment of the remote control for the Squeezebox.

I then arbitrarily selected a track - in my case it was Stevie Ray Vaughan's "Riviera Paradise" and played it.

I cannot hear any difference in the sonic quality whether the folded paper thing is inside the remote control or not.

Reckon it must be something to do with my prejudices or closed mind, nothing to do with the entire ritual being a total load of bollocks.

YMMV

Chris;)

Soundhaspriority
15-10-2009, 22:32
Who's assuming now? You have absolutely no idea about my "rigid belief systems" - you have no idea if I believe in homeopathy, acupuncture spiritualism, tarot readings, palmistry or any other number of "alternative sciences" (for want of a better description) - all you know about me is that I am not prepared to invest the time and effort in your "tweak" because of a zealot who is in my opinion clearly spending far more time than is normal doing nothing other than promote the products of someone whom he claims he has no connection to, infiltrating a forum with what looks like the sole purpose of promoting those ideologies.

If you'd nonchalontly joined this forum, integrated into the community by talking about, oh, I don't know, hifi equipment, or maybe even music, or just had some fun, and then, when you'd got to know people a bit better, gently introduced some of your theories, then suggested a harmless experiment, do you think you might have got a warmer, and more open reception? Just a thought.

This is an audio forum, Alex. And by "rigid belief systems", I was obviously referring to your approach to audio, not everything under the sun. Well sorry, at least I thought it was obvious that I was referring to audio belief systems. I don't see what your prejudices about my personal character have to do with the tweak experiment. Whether I talk about music (and I did, btw), or whether I am having fun (don't worry Alex, I am btw!), whether I joined the forum "chalantly" or non-chalantly, how "gently" I speak about things, or what I -choose- to talk about on a public discussion forum about audio that is supposed to be open to all topics on audio, well none of that has even a microcosmic relevance to whether my tweak works or not. You're saying you do not want to know whether the tweak will work for you, simply because of what you have built up in your head of my personal character. If you wish to choose such an irrational, emotional approach to new ideas in science, that's your prerogative. But understand that your stated approach here as I described, proves that I am also right about what I said of your rigid belief systems (about audio!). So you can't credibly argue against that. If you don't like having such rigid beliefs in your approach to new ideas in audio, it is always your choice to change that.

alb
15-10-2009, 23:03
Ok, let's look at this from a different perspective.
Let's start off by thinking this test might do something, instead of thinking it's nonsense.
What do we have to do?

a. We have to write something on a bit of paper and put it in a jewel case.
b. We have to put the CD case in a drawer.
c. We listen to a different CD.
d. We take the CD case from the room and then return to the listening room.

Steps a and b seem unlikely to have any effect on what we hear.
Step c won't change anything.
That leaves step d.

I suggest that the bit of paper and the CD case is just a red herring. A little diversion to distract from the only thing that could logically bring about any changes.
Which is leaving and re-entering the room.

We listen to a CD and get accustomed to the sound from the speakers and also any ambient noise.
We leave the room and immediately our ears hear something different. It may be silence, or it may be the washing machine or a TV or traffic, whatever.

The new noises somehow wipe the memory of sounds in the listening room.

So then we re-enter the room with our hearing in an altered state, and something may or may not sound different for a while. This probably happens all the time.

Alex_UK
15-10-2009, 23:06
The neighbors kid is pretty good at these things so I'll give him a Dannii Minogue
CD and let him lose with the paper and scissors (the control CD will be Kylie Minogue)
I'll give him a couple of days and report the findings here ,now I can't be fairer
than that.
May the best Antipodean sister win.

Can we introduce Holly Valance into the proceedings? Now that is a ménage à trois I'd love to see (but probably not hear, so maybe I'm not helping much...)

:)

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 00:11
I, I would like to think, have been more understanding of this cause than most... I'm no bored of it, and have been put off even trying a anything out (yesterday I was up for having a crack at it) Paul, peter.. What's you called again ... ... You have agrovated me and others with your long windedness to the pointof bordom ... No straight answers... Blah blah 50000 words ... Icant be arsed any more ... And I was one person who has actually tried to understand (with times of fault, I admit).. Your idea of putting acros a view point is detrimental to the cause!! Think on that!! I literally can't be bothers to investigate any more of this because of you!! ... To reiterate... I have thought about it ... Have given you a chance ... Now, because of your ways and atitude I can no longer be bothered ... Well done for that!! You really know how to talk your way out of being listened to, by even the most patient!

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 00:13
P.s don't bother responding ... I won't read it...

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 01:00
I'm afraid...........................that i can't find a black fine tip magic marker or a felt pen.

I didn't realize they were that rare in the UK. Look, you can try this with a regular black pen I suppose, if you really want, but I believe the results won't be as good, and the effect may be too subtle to detect for you. Don't see the harm in trying, until you can borrow something more suitable.


Well shippy,

I read the your initial post (not devoting 100% concentration to the details) and it
wasn't clear to me exactly what was being asked. I figured what the hell, if the guy is serious about this piece of work he will have some pictures to show exactly what's going on.

I find it hard to believe that you haven't taken a picture of this in action.

Likewise, I find it hard to believe that you can't understand how to execute this tweak without pictures. So I assume you're taking the piss. If you find it hard to devote 100% concentration to writing out a line of text and sticking that under a CD, I'm not sure how you expect to do any listening tests. As I mentioned, if you really don't understand something in the procedure, you will let me know. Hopefully -after- you have actually read it.

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 01:25
Well, working on the basis that I listen largely via music server, I wrote out the message the prescribed five times, cut out the message from the paper, then folded the paper until it wouldn't fold anymore. Then the paper went into the battery compartment of the remote control for the Squeezebox.

I then arbitrarily selected a track - in my case it was Stevie Ray Vaughan's "Riviera Paradise" and played it.

I cannot hear any difference in the sonic quality whether the folded paper thing is inside the remote control or not.

Reckon it must be something to do with my prejudices or closed mind, nothing to do with the entire ritual being a total load of bollocks.

YMMV

Chris;)

It may or may not have anything to do with your prejudices (I won't say you have a totally closed mind because unlike everyone else convinced it is all bollocks before even trying to evaluate it, at least you did give it a shot!). Can't say, because I never tried this variation of the experiment myself, to say whether it is as effective as the CD method I outlined; it simply may not be. But a few questions come to mind: was a dark black marker used for the writing, or anything you had on hand, and more importantly, did you actually test the device? You did not describe any details of your test, only that you listened immediately to the device (message in remote) in place. The idea would be to do two distinct trials where you repeat the same track twice from the beginning; one with the device in the room, one with the device out of the room (message taken out of the remote, remote taken out of the room, or better, residence). I'm not clear on whether you did that. I just know that the more you diminish the differences between these two conditions, the less you are likely to identify any changes. I'm suggesting that simply taking the message out of the remote, if that's what was done, may not be enough.

markf
16-10-2009, 02:25
"Likewise, I find it hard to believe that you can't understand how to execute this tweak without pictures. So I assume you're taking the piss."

The boy next door is going to give it a try,if he has any questions I'll let you know.

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 02:46
Ok, let's look at this from a different perspective.
Let's start off by thinking this test might do something, instead of thinking it's nonsense.

Gosh, thanks for finally injecting a bit of rationality into this discussion!


What do we have to do?

a. We have to write something on a bit of paper and put it in a jewel case.
b. We have to put the CD case in a drawer.
c. We listen to a different CD.
d. We take the CD case from the room and then return to the listening room.

Steps a and b seem unlikely to have any effect on what we hear.
Step c won't change anything.
That leaves step d.

I suggest that the bit of paper and the CD case is just a red herring. A little diversion to distract from the only thing that could logically bring about any changes. Which is leaving and re-entering the room.

We listen to a CD and get accustomed to the sound from the speakers and also any ambient noise. We leave the room and immediately our ears hear something different. It may be silence, or it may be the washing machine or a TV or traffic, whatever.

The new noises somehow wipe the memory of sounds in the listening room.

So then we re-enter the room with our hearing in an altered state, and something may or may not sound different for a while. This probably happens all the time.

(sigh...) Ok sorry, scratch what I said above about "rationality". Are you really trying to suggest that I am being somehow deliberately deceitful, with your notion of a "distraction" and a "red herring"? Because I have heard a lot of silly things and sillier reactions from people since I have joined here, but this is just silly beyond belief. A premise isn't valid just because you add the word "logical" to your statements, you know. Think about the logic of your postulation: "something may or may not sound different for a while". As a multi-conditional statement where there can only be two conditions, of course this "probably happens all the time"! There can only be one or the other happening, and you've conveniently covered both bases! Furthermore, is impossible to test your argument, because it would be true in the presence of a condition, and equally true if the condition doesn't exist. So good on you for your efforts in critical thinking, but you have a ways to go before you can become a good researcher I think!

However, I'm not sure why you posted this, before doing the test and offering your findings. It seems you're taking more time to speculate on the possible meaning of a test, than it would take to actually perform the test. I know a lot about what can and can't change sound in audio. But I have never learned anything from speculating about listening tests on a forum. I have learned all I know from actually performing listening tests. I am at a loss however to understand why the vast majority of audiophiles shy away from listening tests. It's pulling teeth to get them to actually conduct any; regardless of what is being tested. Then they wonder why they can't hear differences others claim to hear. Or they don't rather, and just call them "daft"! My point is, I believe you are better off trying the tweak I posted, and that will be more relevant to your concerns about red herrings and distractions. Do note that the first and -only- person so far to try my experiment, or rather a variation of it, reported no differences. So I guess now the big debate will be: did he hear no differences -because- of the conditions of my experiment, or did he hear no differences regardless of the conditions of my experiment? :lol:

Oh btw, I never said you had to leave the room. Give the CD to someone else or better still, just slide it under the door into the next room, and that way you don't have to suffer any "altered states of hearing". Sorry if that ruins your hypothesis about my test though! (and note that I didn't try to debate the very idea that you automatically alter your states of hearing by passing your hand across the threshold of a doorway, whereas you don't if you stay on the side you're on!)

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 02:46
I, I would like to think, have been more understanding of this cause than most... I'm no bored of it, and have been put off even trying a anything out (yesterday I was up for having a crack at it) Paul, peter.. What's you called again ... ... You have agrovated me and others with your long windedness to the pointof bordom ... No straight answers... Blah blah 50000 words ... Icant be arsed any more ... And I was one person who has actually tried to understand (with times of fault, I admit).. Your idea of putting acros a view point is detrimental to the cause!! Think on that!! I literally can't be bothers to investigate any more of this because of you!! ... To reiterate... I have thought about it ... Have given you a chance ... Now, because of your ways and atitude I can no longer be bothered ... Well done for that!! You really know how to talk your way out of being listened to, by even the most patient!

I can't imagine what your problem is this time! You barely make any sense whatsoever. "No straight answers"? "50000 words"?? What are you talking about, I gave you a clear, straight answer when you told me you had no cd or vinyl
I was very patient with you despite your previous attacks on my character. For the record, this was my last response to you:


No CD, no vinyl, no drawers?! Bit of a challenge, isn't it. What is your source, music server? 8-track tape? Does it have a remote? If so, place the message inside the battery compartment of the remote. That will be your device. I don't know if this will be better or worse than the CD, but it will serve a similar purpose. The rest of the instructions still apply.

There is absolutely nothing in that response that warrants your bizarre rant about "50000 words", "no straight answers" and "detrimental to the cause" (whatever "cause" you think I stand for), and so on. I'm not a psychiatrist you know. If you have deeper problems preventing you from trying a simple audio science experiment that a child could understand and carry out, I can't help you with that. But you're not going to try and tell me I did not do all I could to help you implement the tweak I posted. Earlier, you wrote that it might be a shame to not try the experiment, because Beltism, however weird and implausible that it all sounds, just might be something people are wrong about and missing out on. Well that's the one thing you were right about. Yet you're choosing to answer your own concerns by ensuring that you will not take a minute of your time to risk finding out that maybe you were wrong about all this for so many years! That's quite a nice slice of irony, that is.

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 02:57
The neighbors kid is pretty good at these things so I'll give him a Dannii Minogue
CD and let him lose with the paper and scissors (the control CD will be Kylie Minogue)
I'll give him a couple of days and report the findings here ,now I can't be fairer
than that.

To your tweaks perhaps not, but to mine, yes. Many adult audiophiles have a tough time with audio tweaks and such because they don't perform listening evaluations often enough. How experienced is your neighbour's kid going to be with listening tests of audiophile devices? I suggest that a better use of him is to maybe can get the kid to read my tweak and explain it to you, then we can forego the photo essay and you can try it yourself.

markf
16-10-2009, 04:35
Shippy,
the kid is going to sit down and follow your instructions, he probably will
have a listen himself and make up his own mind which CD sounds best. I will take
them back and try them out and I post the results here. As I won't be doing the
writing/folding/cutting I shoud have a clear mind.

I will post a picture of the treated CD, if you think it's not been done correctly you
can say why.

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 05:55
Shippy,
the kid is going to sit down and follow your instructions, he probably will
have a listen himself and make up his own mind which CD sounds best. I will take
them back and try them out and I post the results here. As I won't be doing the
writing/folding/cutting I shoud have a clear mind.

I will post a picture of the treated CD, if you think it's not been done correctly you
can say why.

Well, I don't expect much of anything to come of it, because a positive identification depends on your listening test experience in audio. But I assume you're doing this because you think your neighbour's kid has greater listening test experience in audio than you do, so maybe at least there's a better chance of an ID here than if it were solely left in your hands. Perhaps while you're at it, you can also give the instructions to a Rottweiler and then we can see what dogs think of the tweak?

markf
16-10-2009, 06:08
Shippy,
we seem to have a miscommunication here.
I will do the listening test, the boy will do the paper work, I was gong to let him listen
just to share his opinion. If you don't want to hear his views that's fine, I will give only
my results.
They don't have a Rottweiler it's some breed I'm not too sure of, looks like a small
Husky.

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 06:21
Ooo I was on the angry ale last night...:cool: :cool: :cool: :steam:
still lost interest though... Just might have been a bit more polite without the Oxford golden :)

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 07:13
Ooo I was on the angry ale last night...:cool: :cool: :cool: :steam:
still lost interest though... Just might have been a bit more polite without the Oxford golden :)

I've got a possible cure for that. Instead of a CD, try taping the curled up message of my tweak to the bottom of your ale glass. Then fill an identical glass with the same ale. For the glass with the message attached, your "angry ale" should taste a bit less angrier, a bit less bitter, smoother maybe. I've never tried it with ale, but to see if this might work, I did just try it now with orange juice in a quick blind test I conducted on myself. I properly identified the glass with the message, because the juice in that one tasted sweeter.

You might find this sort of test of greater interest to you! Of course, if you prefer angry, bitter ale and a less open mind, that's always your prerogative. ;)


Shippy,
we seem to have a miscommunication here.
I will do the listening test, the boy will do the paper work, I was gong to let him listen
just to share his opinion. If you don't want to hear his views that's fine, I will give only
my results.
They don't have a Rottweiler it's some breed I'm not too sure of, looks like a small
Husky.

Sorry, I guess I did misread you! Sure, I'd be interested in hearing both your views. Even the Husky. The more the merrier!

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 07:14
as a side note i think i can tell you where you went wrong...

(this you can concidor me questioning your character)

you come on here all

"blah blah im right about belt... hes a genius... you lot just dont understand... it doesnt fit in with you blinkerd veiw of the world...blah blah"

your very patronising, talking down to us like we are stupid for not even thinking of giving it a go
my back was up after your first few posts! i though whos this guy talking this nonsence, thinking hes something special?!
if you want to encourage people to try this sort of thing out .. something a bit out of the ordinary.. you have to be with the people, not against them for eg:

"hi my names paul
i use a lot of belts techniques and i have a lot of success with them
would anyone be interested in letting me talk you through a few of them
i know, i know they are a bit out there... there is a science behind it, but im not sure i can explain it in a way that i can make sence to you.. like i said its a bit out there!
here are some resorces on the subject (insert web pages here)
it might not work for you but it works for me and like i say i can help you on the way
if it doesnt work its good fun anyway and it wont take up much of your time"

(and before you moan i know that is what you did in this thread.. im talking about what happend prior to that)

you see what i mean? at that stage you would have had me fisinated, i would have read some of the stuff and gone "wow thats some pretty mad stuff, but this guy seems like a nice chap il give it a go" instead, like i said, i was a bit annoyed from the get go.
i think your atitude, and if i didnt make this clear enough in the last post i hope i have helped you understand in this one, is wrong! by talking to people like some kind of crazy preacher... and that really is how it sounds... you have put people off trying it! you have also put people in a defensive mood (or indeed an atacking one) and when people are in that sort of mood, even if they do try what you suggest, they are less likely to hear a difference because they want you to be wrong!

do you know what im getting at here? do you think there is a chance you got the reaction you did because of your atitude? could you the individual be wrong, or are all of us, normally quiet, happy, conversational and understanding people getting in a tiz over nothing?

and please, please for the love of belt, keep the response breif

Peter Galbavy
16-10-2009, 08:31
Are you really trying to suggest that I am being somehow deliberately deceitful, with your notion of a "distraction" and a "red herring"?

yes.

anthonyTD
16-10-2009, 09:11
hi all,
right,,, as promised, i did the experiment, ie; wrote the quote five times down the edge of a piece of A4 paper, cut it off close to the edge of the letters, folded it as stated, placed it in my CD jewel case under my CD of choice, [lou reed transformer] firstly i listened to my track of choice for the test [chris isaak, wicked games, no pun intended] without the device in the room, sounded fine, next, i brought the device in and put it back into my CD rack left of my system, i replayed the test track,,, well, i realy wanted to be able to say something positive here but unfortunetly i cant, so for me it had little or no effect what so ever, sorry paul...:(
regards,anthony,TD...

Steve Toy
16-10-2009, 13:26
including some members of AOS,


Bollocks!

anthonyTD
16-10-2009, 14:54
Bollocks!
:confused::scratch::confused:

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 15:00
i was a bit confuddled by that too ... i was going to tey and find the source of the quote ... but then decided that might take me quite a while!!!

DanJennings
16-10-2009, 15:03
And if someone decides it would be too closed-minded to ignore the ---fact--- that many well known professional audio journalists and thousands of audiophiles the world over, including some members of AOS, have in fact heard effects from Beltism, and then try such an experiment, the experiment has to then battle with all of the prejudices they have against it. Including the idea that they feel silly while trying it. That's a lot actually to ask of any audio tweak I think! Particularly one that may not be "night and day" for listeners with average listening skills. So I don't know how my little experiment will fare against this kind of resistance.



Bollocks!

there you go!

The Vinyl Adventure
16-10-2009, 16:06
that was a brave undertaking dan ... well done

DanJennings
16-10-2009, 17:18
it was such a strain to press both Ctrl and F at the same time...

I deserve some kind of award

Cotlake
16-10-2009, 19:47
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.

markf
16-10-2009, 20:46
I think Shippy deserves a chance......besides there is a good possibility that he owns a Technics turntable or something similar.

Spectral Morn
16-10-2009, 20:58
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.

If you wish to send a member to Coventry Greg then thats fine, but I and AOS will not stand for Witch Hunts on the Forum. Paul bar loosing his cool a few times, which under the circumstances was understandable. Has IMHO done nothing wrong (for the most part) other than be very passionate about, what for many are far out tweaks/products. You can disagree with him and his tweaks and Peter Belts ideas etc, but don't try to organise Witch Hunts I wont tolerate it. If Paul steps out of line, then the forum management will take action. However that will also go for anyone behaving in a bad way towards other members (whether they or their ideas are popular or not). So lets cool it down...please and no more organising the removal of other members, for their opinions or beliefs, which in Paul's case are not racist or some other kind which are unacceptable to society or AOS.

In saying all of that I feel Paul has been his own worst enemy and brought most of this grief down on himself. His one track/sided postings are a little narrow(in topic) and overly evangelical. Paul if you take part in the wider forum and take a less in your face approach things would be better...I hope.

Oh yes, by the way..who appointed you as Bollock detector for the Art of Sound. Whats next then ? People who feel Cables have a sound and can make differences, light weight perspex tables sounding best, mains cables, users of belt drive TT, horn speakers, Cd or vinyl sounds best, Reel to Reel users, cyro-treatments....all controversial and not widely held ideas etc.


Regards D S D L

Alex_UK
16-10-2009, 21:42
My 2p worth - I do not want to see anyone banned simply because they have beliefs which I and others do not, even if Paul is pushing then to the N'th degree. I have a suspicion that causing maximum disruption is the aim here, and this tweak is akin to hoax virus threat emails designed to clog up the system - but Paul is clearly well educated and intelligent and has a nice (if long) turn of phrase - I will be more than happy to discuss music, hifi components, or anything else in general, but have no desire to keep going round and round in circles on the Belt theories, where our belief is the polar opposite - so I very much doubt I will be posting on those (or similar) subjects again - agree to disagree, and move on, though preferably not to Country & Western, though, I know very little about that genre!

Themis
16-10-2009, 21:46
I will follow Neil's advice (and my education) and be "wise" and "humorous" rather than "objective" and "smart" on this subject. :smoking:

markf
16-10-2009, 21:59
I agree with Neil too.

We shouldn't pre judge and you know what, even if Paul (Shippy a.k.a Soundhaspriority) doesn't own a Techie he's probably the type of guy to have a little bit of beeswax up his bearing anyway.

Spectral Morn
16-10-2009, 22:33
I agree with Neil too.

We shouldn't pre judge and you know what, even if Paul (Shippy a.k.a Soundhaspriority) doesn't own a Techie he's probably the type of guy to have a little bit of beeswax up his bearing anyway.

Nice to see you here Mark...away from ZG. We don't want the kind of Witch Hunts here on AOS that happen over there. Though I must admit that the kind of ideas/experiences that generate them over there are fairly mainstream compared to Paul's ideas/experiences.


Regards D S D L

The Grand Wazoo
16-10-2009, 23:04
I've been a little disappointed by all of what's happened here.
I expected more people to carry out his experiment. The people who were sceptical had more reason to do it than the fence sitters - it's the only way they could possibly have proved him wrong! Otherwise, it's all just accusations.

I think that as a member here , he has a right to say whatever he chooses as long as he doesn't contravene the Ethos. - I don't think he did that, but I think some other people did, and that's rather unfortunate.

I've always tried to live by the tenet that if you're the first person to hurl insults in a discussion, then you've lost it, whatever point you are trying to get across - right or wrong. And on that premise, the AOS regulars have not come off too well, I'm afraid.

To the people who think he's talking a load of rot, I say you should try some of the suggested experiments with an open mind - you never know, you might find something works for you. If not then you get a chance to show where he may be mistaken (or worse) To the people who have the slightest bit of interest in the subject, then you should probably have a go too.
It's no different really from checking out whether a NOS valve is better than an electrically identical modern equivalent on the say so of someone else, for example. Or that a wool platter mat is different to one made of something else.

Spectral Morn
16-10-2009, 23:15
I've been a little disappointed by all of what's happened here.
I expected more people to carry out his experiment. The people who were sceptical had more reason to do it than the fence sitters - it's the only way they could possibly have proved him wrong! Otherwise, it's all just accusations.

I think that as a member here , he has a right to say whatever he chooses as long as he doesn't contravene the Ethos. - I don't think he did that, but I think some other people did, and that's rather unfortunate.

I've always tried to live by the tenet that if you're the first person to hurl insults in a discussion, then you've lost it, whatever point you are trying to get across - right or wrong. And on that premise, the AOS regulars have not come off too well, I'm afraid.

To the people who think he's talking a load of rot, I say you should try some of the suggested experiments with an open mind - you never know, you might find something works for you. If not then you get a chance to show where he may be mistaken (or worse) To the people who have the slightest bit of interest in the subject, then you should probably have a go too.
It's no different really from checking out whether a NOS valve is better than an electrically identical modern equivalent on the say so of someone else, for example. Or that a wool platter mat is different to one made of something else.

Hi Chris

I too have been very disappointed...but people are people, sadly even members of AOS. You kind of expect this sort of Witch hunting elsewhere but I too had hoped that folks would try Paul's ideas out, even just for a laugh and then report back. I will at some point give it ago...we shall see.

I think because I have been on the receiving end of this type of thing on another forum that I am more sympathetic to Paul . In my case it was mains cables making a difference and warm up times on some products...I was hung drawn and quartered.

Regards D S D L

Soundhaspriority
16-10-2009, 23:21
hi all,
right,,, as promised, i did the experiment, ie; wrote the quote five times down the edge of a piece of A4 paper, cut it off close to the edge of the letters, folded it as stated, placed it in my CD jewel case under my CD of choice, [lou reed transformer] firstly i listened to my track of choice for the test [chris isaak, wicked games, no pun intended] without the device in the room, sounded fine, next, i brought the device in and put it back into my CD rack left of my system, i replayed the test track,,, well, i realy wanted to be able to say something positive here but unfortunetly i cant, so for me it had little or no effect what so ever, sorry paul...:(
regards,anthony,TD...

Thanks for giving it a go, Anthony. I am wondering what you meant by "little effect". I would think any effect would be meaningful? You also said you placed the CD into your CD rack, and I'm wondering if this means it was fully enclosed (as in a drawer), or open. Was it just the one test then, you did not repeat it? If you think you detected a small effect, you might well be able to increase this by increasing the number of CD's you treat this way, as suggested in the instructions.

The Grand Wazoo
16-10-2009, 23:22
What actually suprised me was that there were only three of us who'd any experience of this stuff in the past! I feel that we were actually the only people in a position to criticise, but wasn't it interesting that we were practically the only ones who didn't - if we were critical it was of the way the subject was approached rather than the techniques?

I may not have subscribed to it all, but I found it interesting & quite a laugh actually, to investigate.

Spectral Morn
16-10-2009, 23:32
What actually suprised me was that there were only three of us who'd any experience of this stuff in the past! I feel that we were actually the only people in a position to criticise, but wasn't it interesting that we were practically the only ones who didn't?

I may not have subscribed to it all, but I found it interesting & quite a laugh actually, to investigate.


My getting into audio as a newbie tied in with the whole PB thing about 20 years ago, give or take. Everything was new to me then...a blank slate. So I tried everything..no matter how daft it seemed. I tried PB products foils, etc and at the time I didn't hear any effect except with the plug tweaks, which I put down to cleaning the plug. However I still line up my screw slots in mains plugs per Peter Belts instructions at the time...I don't know why I do it but I do. It does no harm or good...its just become a habit over time.

I would like to think I am still open minded enough to try things in the same way I did back then, but I know I have become a little bit more skeptical about some things, and in the case of Paul's postings recently..well being honest a bit closed minded. Some if not all of what he has suggested has been more akin to Harry Potter. However I will try the folded paper item.


Regards D S D L

aquapiranha
16-10-2009, 23:40
As probably the main focus of accusation with regard to the 'witch hunt' that has taken place, I feel I must put down a little background information that some of you are obviously not aware of.

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

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

Now, fast forward to about three years ago, on another forum in a different decade. Everyone is going about their business when guess who arrives and does exactly what he has done on this forum. ceaseless references to the master, endless pages of arguments for all those who dare to question that putting a sheet of paper under a chair leg will render your home a palace of peace and harmony, and make you hifi sound better to boot.

Ah, says I, I have seen all this before, and along with many many others questioned why we had to put up with this barrage of marketing spiel. well it wasn't long before everyone got a bit shirty and soundhaspriority got himself banned.

Now, he comes again, exactly the same modus operandi, exactly the same arguments and exactly the same references to this belt character (if you haven't visited his site yet, you should - and check the prices while you are there). Now, I have seen all this before, so it may have surprised some when I said 'go, and take your conjuring with you' without giving him time to explain himself.

Now, I did this because I have seen first hand the grief caused on the other (and now it turns out dozens) forum, and truth be told I did not want the same thing happening here which is why I have provided evidence of what happened to those that matter. So, to sum up that bit, I had seen it all before! I was not merely having a go at a hapless newcomer, this guy is a professional spammer, and in my opinion he pushes the products of nothing less than a fraudster.

So, I hope I have cleared up a couple of points, and the reasons why I have acted like I have.If anyone would like to ask more just PM me. In the meantime I hope I have made it clear that I had prior knowledge of this person, and was not just shooting from the hip.

I hope those who know personally will know that I am a reasonable chap, not normally aggressive or obtuse, but I am sorry I genuinely believe that belt is a con man and a fraud and if I had it within my power to put an end to his peddling of potions, I would do it in a heartbeat.



Thanks.

Barry
17-10-2009, 01:11
I've been a little disappointed by all of what's happened here.
I expected more people to carry out his experiment. The people who were sceptical had more reason to do it than the fence sitters - it's the only way they could possibly have proved him wrong! Otherwise, it's all just accusations.

I think that as a member here , he has a right to say whatever he chooses as long as he doesn't contravene the Ethos. - I don't think he did that, but I think some other people did, and that's rather unfortunate.

I've always tried to live by the tenet that if you're the first person to hurl insults in a discussion, then you've lost it, whatever point you are trying to get across - right or wrong. And on that premise, the AOS regulars have not come off too well, I'm afraid.

To the people who think he's talking a load of rot, I say you should try some of the suggested experiments with an open mind - you never know, you might find something works for you. If not then you get a chance to show where he may be mistaken (or worse) To the people who have the slightest bit of interest in the subject, then you should probably have a go too.
It's no different really from checking out whether a NOS valve is better than an electrically identical modern equivalent on the say so of someone else, for example. Or that a wool platter mat is different to one made of something else.

I had been meaning to post a reply to Shippy, however he lost all creditability for me when I learnt that he had actually tried listening whilst wearing odd socks; an 'off the wall' suggestion of mine, made to point out the absudity of much of Peter Belt's ideas. I had no idea that the 'odd socks' is actually part of the Beltist canon of tweaks.

As probably the number one sceptic (actually that title has been claimed by someone else), I would say that I simply can't be bothered to try out the daft ideas Shippy is promulgating. The only tweak that I might try is to remove all spare cartridges, magnetic tapes, unused cables and even my reel-to-reel recorders from the room. I suspect that I won't hear any difference at all, and Belt protagonists will no doubt say "that's because I don't want to hear any"; but at least the room will be tidy!

I have had a good read of Shippy's web site: very professional looking, takes a, not surprisingly, defensive stance but fails to present any cohesive theory as to why Belt's ideas might work. Other fringe sciences such as homeopathy, astrology, reflexology, accupuncture, water divining, feng-shwei have an underlying hypothesis. The closest to an explanation that we get is the statement that people respond to objects, materials and colours in different ways. Of course we do: that's why people have different tastes in food, drink, clothing, decor, music, literature, the visual arts etc.

However reading Shippy's web site did benefit me: I haven't had such a good laugh for a long time - you just have to read about the 'teleported' message you can pay to listen to, via a pefectly conventional telephone, that will make your audio system better.

Sorry, I wish Shippy no ill-will, he is passionate in his championing of Peter Belt and other's ideas, but that alone is insufficient for me to try them.

Regards

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 02:36
What if we pump it up a notch? Or 9 notches? Could someone with good listening test experience humour me and do a more serious application of this tweak, using nine (9) CD'S, and report back? Given what I've read, I'd like to better understand what's going on, and that would be helpful. It doesn't take much longer to write the message 9 times on a sheet of blank paper (the phrase repeated 5 times per line). You could always listen to your favourite music while doing so. Once the 9 lines are cut out, each is rolled up, each is inserted under the CD in its jewel case against the teeth in the centre of the case, and then the 9 CD's are used like a single "device". Meaning, you listen (hopefully attentively and without prejudice!) to the beginning of a track (on another CD) with all 9 CD's inside a drawer (or other enclosure where they are completely hidden from sight). Then place all 9 CD's outside of your residence if possible, then listen again to the same beginning of the same track without the presence of the 9 CD's.

It may be necessary to repeat the test a couple of times until you are familiar with the two different conditions, and can better identify changes. (n.b. This isn't going to make the tweak 9 times more effective, but it -will- make it more effective, and in doing so, it -may- make all the difference in whether someone is ever successful with this particular experiment).

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 02:37
I've been a little disappointed by all of what's happened here. I expected more people to carry out his experiment. The people who were sceptical had more reason to do it than the fence sitters - it's the only way they could possibly have proved him wrong! Otherwise, it's all just accusations.

I think that as a member here , he has a right to say whatever he chooses as long as he doesn't contravene the Ethos. - I don't think he did that, but I think some other people did, and that's rather unfortunate.

I've always tried to live by the tenet that if you're the first person to hurl insults in a discussion, then you've lost it, whatever point you are trying to get across - right or wrong. And on that premise, the AOS regulars have not come off too well, I'm afraid.

To the people who think he's talking a load of rot, I say you should try some of the suggested experiments with an open mind - you never know, you might find something works for you. If not then you get a chance to show where he may be mistaken (or worse) To the people who have the slightest bit of interest in the subject, then you should probably have a go too.
It's no different really from checking out whether a NOS valve is better than an electrically identical modern equivalent on the say so of someone else, for example. Or that a wool platter mat is different to one made of something else.

Excuse me while I wipe away a tear, Chris... ;) Seriously, thank you for a breath of reason and rationality during these times of controversy. I was starting to think mankind in general had lost all grip on it! You have said everything that I was thinking. I too expected people to carry out my experiment, particularly the skeptical, otherwise it's all accusations.. Nearly every grenade lobbed at me has been derived from or inspired by the belief that everything I say about Beltism is rubbish. Whether that's true or not, it is not going to be answered by my experiment. But if people have such strong opinions about it, well their accusations and condemnations are meaningless, if they have never seriously experimented with these techniques. That makes them just personal opinions that it's all "bollocks", but concluding that whichever opinion is more popular and accepted is the right one, well that's just dogmatism, which flies in the face of the scientific method.

Certainly, I am also of the opinion that AOS regulars have not come off too well in this. I'm sure I've exhibited a "certain unpleasantness", but this only came after a -lot- of "unpleasantness" toward me purely on account of my opinions on a subject about audio that I happen to know a lot about. In no way shape or form have I been nearly as hostile as some of the things said and done against my character. I even have no less than 2 stalker-trolls who have come to this thread only to launch a series of negative attacks against me (whilst pretending that they are ignoring my messages!). Is troll-stalking attacks not in the ethos?! And dare I say it, I can also say that the AOS management has not come off much better than the membership. One moderator calls me an obvious lunatic and another a complete nutjob. They're supposed to be the face of AOS, and hold positions of neutrality and impartiality. Instead, I log on today to find my user name has changed! I've never seen that happen before on an audio forum. Apparently done because of some conspiracy theory involving other discussion groups that one angry and clearly unobjective (if not unhinged) member insisted they act upon. It conjurs up images in my mind of people yelling "Get the monster!!", and marching up to my abode with torches and pitchforks in hand.

I find it incredible that the cynicsm and suspicion that people create in themselves when challenged by the more unconventional areas of audio (and if you visit my site, you'll learn that Peter Belt is not the sole member of this club), even extends to accusing me of sinister ulterior motives for posting a free tweak that takes a few minutes! I guess adopting these kinds of attitudes is a way to avoid any such challenges, and risk invalidating one's beliefs. OTOH, I don't think it's quite fair to say if someone doesn't hear changes, then that proves I'm "mistaken or worse". This is not meant to be a death challenge. It doesn't prove anything beyond the fact that the tester was not able to reliably identify differences. Could be a hundred reasons for that (yes, to be fair I would have to concede this not working one of them). Even if a handful try it and nobody gets a positive ID, it certainly isn't scientific for members to come to a conclusion about the phenomenon the tweak is based on. Anymore than it is scientific to challenge unconventional concepts in the alternative sciences with the idiotic word "bollocks".

I'm not trying to prove anything by the experiment. I already know this works, so I don't have to prove anything to anyone. The phenom this tweak is based on (Beltism), I use it near daily to improve the perceived quality of everything from my dvd player to my car stereo to the image on my tv to my clock radio, and have been doing so for many years. I could not be more certain of anything in my life. (Of course, I'm an "obvious lunatic", so what do I know. :exactly:) I only know that this very same accusation, along with other forms of ridicule as we have witnessed here, has been used down throughout history to delay real scientific progress. And I see it being done again now. So I am just trying to give members a chance to prove things for themselves. If they have any pretense to being serious audiophiles or truly respectful of scientific principles, they will do so. If not, I suppose they'll attack my character and offer a thousand childish excuses why they won't try the experiment, and risk challenging their cherished preconceptions.

I congratulate in advance those who are open minded enough toward the audio sciences to accept the challenge, and in an honest and fair manner. I think we need far more of this sort of thing in this hobby! There are a lot more such challenges on my website (see my welcome post); of varying efficacy. It should be again noted that the effect of any such experiment is more noticeable the more applications are made in a room. I should also note that I have read enough reports of initial flirtations with Beltism that suggest the effect may not show up at all for some people in some situations, until enough (9?) applications are made in the room. Too many seem to give up after one application, usually because they will not "suspend disbelief" longer than that. Whereas some who persist find it took many, before they finally got it. Unfortunately, it doesn't get easier from there when you try to explain to your mates that this really works! Hence the reason I say it is audio's best kept secret, as well as it's most unjustly condemned practice. Peace.

Paul

markf
17-10-2009, 03:56
I'm sure I could manage 9 CDs, I think the boy is already working on it.
I might have the first treated CD Saturday morning.

markf
17-10-2009, 04:11
slightly off topic .....but I noticed you are in New York ...The dirtiest rental car I've
ever had was from New Jersey and this is Hertz I'm talking about,looked like someone
had spilled coffee all over the carpets and the outside was all scratched too. I was only
there a couple of days so not such a problem.



Sorry, I take that back,it was actually Philadelphia where I picked up
the car,I drove to New Jersey from there.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 04:19
I think Shippy deserves a chance......besides there is a good possibility that he owns a Technics turntable or something similar.

Sorry no. Not since my teens. I own a Sugden Connoisseur, a Thorens, a Xerxes, and a Clearaudio. (Before that Axis, Systemdek IIX, Rega 3, Revolver, Dual). I think I prefer the Connoisseur most. I use Linn oil on the bearing. Before you ask, yes they've are Belted (in both senses).

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 04:19
I had been meaning to post a reply to Shippy, however he lost all creditability for me when I learnt that he had actually tried listening whilst wearing odd socks; an 'off the wall' suggestion of mine, made to point out the absudity of much of Peter Belt's ideas. I had no idea that the 'odd socks' is actually part of the Beltist canon of tweaks.

Shows what you know, doesn't it! I would have already thought that skeptics have gotten over the fact that the ideas Peter has posited sound odd. Most people who have any idea of him know that already. So it seems redundant and hardly clever for you to give us examples of how "absurd" Peter Belt's ideas are. I think everyone already knew that long before I came along. I thought we got past that point already, but it seems not everyone has. I certainly never posted the tweak I did here because I thought "Well.. -this- will make me sound credible!". These ideas are not about "credibility" Barry. They are about *sound*. They are about improving the sound of your music. Does that matter to you at all? Or is it "credibility" that matters more?

It is hardly Peter's fault that his observations are not "credible". I'm sure he would rather they sounded more credible to you. The fact is, if that is what he has observed as being things that affect our senses, than that is what he has reported. Many who have attempted to replicate his observations have reported that he is right. That's where "credibility" begins. So this is really more about being open minded, and looking at things in more than a superficial way. Unlike you, I didn't just dismiss his ideas because they were not "credible". I tested them. Every single one I ever heard about. The only thing I didn't hear an effect from is, oddly enough, the odd socks. (It might not even have been "odd socks", I don't quite recall. It had something to do with socks).

It might shock and surprise you to know that you have no credibility with me either, if you're someone who judges and dismisses every unconventional notion you hear of on the basis of how "credible" or "daft" it sounds to you in theory. Also, I don't think "credible" really enters into it, when we're talking about this free experiment I posted that takes minutes, which if tested, would give you a better idea of how "credible" or not that it is. But if you really want to focus on this, trust me, "odd socks" is by far not the most absurd thing you will hear of.


As probably the number one sceptic (actually that title has been claimed by someone else), I would say that I simply can't be bothered to try out the daft ideas Shippy is promulgating. The only tweak that I might try is to remove all spare cartridges, magnetic tapes, unused cables and even my reel-to-reel recorders from the room. I suspect that I won't hear any difference at all, and Belt protagonists will no doubt say "that's because I don't want to hear any"; but at least the room will be tidy!

Fine, but do it sensibly, at least. I mean, don't think you will hear the changes while you are doing it. Listen carefully to your sound before, remove the items (quickly), listen to the same track afterward.


I have had a good read of Shippy's web site: very professional looking, takes a, not surprisingly, defensive stance but fails to present any cohesive theory as to why Belt's ideas might work. Other fringe sciences such as homeopathy, astrology, reflexology, accupuncture, water divining, feng-shwei have an underlying hypothesis. The closest to an explanation that we get is the statement that people respond to objects, materials and colours in different ways. Of course we do: that's why people have different tastes in food, drink, clothing, decor, music, literature, the visual arts etc.

I can see you obviously didn't understand what you read. And yet you are making conclusions based on what you don't understand. That's perfectly typical of the "skeptics" I encounter. All of whom seem to be vying for that #1 spot. I was -not- talking about "conscious personal preferences", but a force in nature we are all affected by on a subconscious level, until we make ourselves become conscious of it (my tweak in this very thread is to try to help people to make themselves conscious of this reality). I know enough about you to know -very well- that you will -always- be skeptical and disbelieving of these theories, no matter what is explained to you or in how much detail. So don't expect me to make the effort to convince you of anything you don't want to know about. Since it's not theories (that you already have difficulty understanding) that will combat these considerable prejudices you have, the only possible way you have of realizing that every one of Belt's notions are valid is if you heard their effects. But of course you've told us that you won't be trying even a 1-minute experiment, because it sounds absurd to you. So therefore, you don't know and you don't want to know. That's nothing new to me either.


However reading Shippy's web site did benefit me: I haven't had such a good laugh for a long time - you just have to read about the 'teleported' message you can pay to listen to, via a pefectly conventional telephone, that will make your audio system better.

Oh boy (rolling eyes). Einstein is turning over in his grave right now, and Feynman is looking for a ruler to smack you with. You just put science back 200 years with that comment.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."

- Richard Feynman,
Caltech commencement address, 1974



Sorry, I wish Shippy no ill-will, he is passionate in his championing of Peter Belt and other's ideas, but that alone is insufficient for me to try them.

Thanks for proving Hamish and others here wrong in saying to me that if I used a different, say more subdued approach, members would be more receptive to these ideas! :lol: I wish you good will as well, sir! And thanks for the comments about my site. I think that I tried to explain the concept of Beltism in basic terms, but my intention was not to duplicate all that could be found elsewhere. e.g. This article from Mrs. Belt might explain some things better for you. It's long, so you might not understand it or have the patience to read it. But to bring up one relevant point, she writes:

from "Challenging The Conventional", 1986:


The audio world seems split into four distinct camps.

1. Those who do not listen and do not want to listen, who just want to screw bits and pieces together and call it Hi Fi.

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

In case you were wondering, you, and most here, are in camp #1.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 04:45
Hi Chris

I too have been very disappointed...but people are people, sadly even members of AOS. You kind of expect this sort of Witch hunting elsewhere but I too had hoped that folks would try Paul's ideas out, even just for a laugh and then report back. I will at some point give it ago...we shall see.

I think because I have been on the receiving end of this type of thing on another forum that I am more sympathetic to Paul . In my case it was mains cables making a difference and warm up times on some products...I was hung drawn and quartered.

Regards D S D L

Great, so now you know how Harry Potter feels! And me, so thanks for sharing. I'm in no different a position than you were, except I'm talking about products & concepts far less accepted. At least your ideas dealt directly with the signal. But let us note, the social phenomenon we both experienced is exactly the same; it comes from the same place. I too remember having long, weary, drawn out debates with what I term "blockheads" who refused to believe I was possibly hearing any effect from my home-made audiophile-grade mains cables (or commercial ones). Blind test, whatever, nothing I said was going to convince anyone arguing with me about it.

They'd reply in their usually condescending ways that I must not be aware of the fact that there is at least a couple of hundred yards of Romex wiring throughout my house, leading to the mains outlets; and it certainly isn't audiophile grade. So hey, what is 3 more feet going to do? Nothing! I'm sure I have also had the same debates about burning cables and speakers in, with the same blockheads. Now, I have to admit, audiophile mains cables seem to be much less controversial today, than when I was debating them on forums 15 years ago. So I wouldn't expect to get much flack for advocating them, in most quarters. However, I have since moved on to far more advanced ideas, and of course, having gone further than my contemporaries again in my pursuits within this hobby, the problem of being drawn and quartered for advocating some of the ways I use to improve my sound, starts all over again! But anyway, as my friend Stuart Goddard said, ridicule is nothing to be scared of.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 04:52
Originally Posted by Soundhaspriority
And if someone decides it would be too closed-minded to ignore the ---fact--- that many well known professional audio journalists and thousands of audiophiles the world over, including some members of AOS, have in fact heard effects from Beltism, and then try such an experiment, the experiment has to then battle with all of the prejudices they have against it. Including the idea that they feel silly while trying it. That's a lot actually to ask of any audio tweak I think! Particularly one that may not be "night and day" for listeners with average listening skills. So I don't know how my little experiment will fare against this kind of resistance.

Dan:
Quote:
Bollocks!


that was a brave undertaking dan ... well done

No, it was not well done. One member in this thread has talked about having heard the plug notch tweak, and members in other threads have talked about hearing the reef knots in shorting plugs. So "bollocks" to you Dan! :ner: Try pressing Ctrl-F a few more times.

Soundhaspriority
17-10-2009, 06:30
you see what i mean? at that stage you would have had me fisinated, i would have read some of the stuff and gone "wow thats some pretty mad stuff, but this guy seems like a nice chap il give it a go" instead, like i said, i was a bit annoyed from the get go.

Look, Hamish, bubelleh, it's okay, you don't have to try the tweak. It's your loss really, not mine. Even if I lose the sale, my profit margin on free tweaks is really not as high as you might think. So no skin off my nose. But again, don't say I did not try with you. You said you wanted to try it, you asked me a question, I was kind enough to help you out, I answered your question politely.... and then you went bonkers on me right after that, for no rational reason. Since I'm not your psychiatrist, I can't figure that one out. You say I have an attitude? Well, so have you had one about me. Welcome to the club, we are both members of. So has just about everyone shown attitude, I have not seen you complain about that to your mates, have I? I keep trying to make this clear: this is -not- about _me_. Stop making it about me. The question I have raised in this thread with my tweak, is the same one we have been vociferously debating elsewhere: it's about whether there exist little-explored mechanisms that affect our senses (especially that of hearing), and can be brought to bear by specific techniques that might bring it into consciousness by an average listener.

It would take far less time to try to answer that question for yourself, than you have spent explaining to me why you won't. But if you don't care to answer that question, to find out whether you may be right or wrong in your prejudicial speculations, that's fine. That means however that you no longer have any sound or rational basis for dismissing Belt's discovery. Maybe you have no scientific curiousity towards audio, and that would explain why you have no interest in this 1-minute experiment. That means you can't later claim that Belt's products or ideas are unscientific, since what is unscientific, is your very attitude toward them. It is equally unscientific to refuse to try to validate an observation on the grounds that you don't like the chap who posited it. I mean what if Hitler, nasty chap and all, was recently found to have developed an interesting hypothesis that points to a new means for an alternative energy source. I certainly wouldn't care what he did for a living if there was any chance that the hypothesis could result in the production of an alternative energy. Especially if it took 5 minutes to find out and cost nothing. No self-respecting scientific researcher in that domain would pass up the opportunity, I think. I mean sure, emotional fits and drama and tears and screaming and malicious Googling and conspiracy theories and sweeping dismissals is all well and good and fun and... but shouldn't we set aside at least some bit of time to think rationally here? And no, dismissing ideas based only on what they sound like is -not- thinking rationally! Remember, it's -your- call, Mr. Gill. :trust:

Marco
17-10-2009, 06:57
Hi Paul,

As I've already asked you elsewhere, can you please start contributing to the many other discussions on the forum? And that doesn't mean your 'Greetings Earthling' thread, which is simply an extension of this one and the PB headphones thread in Past Masters! Quite frankly we've had enough now of this 'Beltism' stuff.

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.

anthonyTD
17-10-2009, 11:24
Thanks for giving it a go, Anthony. I am wondering what you meant by "little effect". I would think any effect would be meaningful? You also said you placed the CD into your CD rack, and I'm wondering if this means it was fully enclosed (as in a drawer), or open. Was it just the one test then, you did not repeat it? If you think you detected a small effect, you might well be able to increase this by increasing the number of CD's you treat this way, as suggested in the instructions.
hi paul,
well, what i meant was, any diffrence i may or may not have noticed between the first play and the second, i put down to me actualy listening more intensely on the second play... i actualy performed the test twice, just to make sure i had given it a fair go, as stated, l couldnt realy say that i experienced any significant improvement. i must also explain that anyone who knows me personaly will also know that i am quite an open minded chap, but not easily fooled, on the other hand, if someone beleives in something which seems to be by the many a bit unorthodox [to say the least] with a pasion, i will look into it, and at least try it before condemning it, which is what i have done here. my own conclusion on what this experiment did or did not do for me must not be seen as a bench mark or an excuse for people not to try this tweak for themselves, in fact, i urge anyone who hasnt to do so, only then will you have the nescesary experience to judge for your self.:)
regards,anthony,TD...

DSJR
17-10-2009, 11:38
Eventually the fuss died down, the reviewers stopped plugging it and with the exception of jimmy the muppet hughes, everyone gave up and forgot about it. Except JH. And soundhaspriority.

Thanks.

Please may I respectfully challenge the above comment regarding Jimmy Hughes? He may be misguided in some things, but MUPPET he certainly ain't - a more knowledgeable chap would be very hard to find IMO. In HIS room and with HIS setup, which sounded really good for a few years, one could hear certain differences with his "Belt" tweaksand these differences made the music played more enjoyable to listen to. The fact that I couldn't replicate these effects at home was irrelevant to what I did hear at Jimmy's. Eventually, my stereo got much better and Jimmy went off on another tangent (apologies, he was responsible for the Tangent speaker craze in the 1070's) and made his sound far worse IMO as a result.

aquapiranha
17-10-2009, 11:46
Sorry Dave. I can only work from the things I have read and been told. JH used his position on a hifi mag to promote his beliefs which is wrong IMO ( wrong when you are talking about this belt stuff) and IMO he became an object of ridicule through his own fault. And as for the backward speaker thing.. welll, come on.

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

Marco
17-10-2009, 18:43
Hi Steve,

I'll defo see you on Friday, but please don't stop posting for a week :)

Shippy/Soundhaspriority will be required to contribute to other (non-PB) discussions on the forum, or he's off for a little holiday! ;)

Marco.

Joe
17-10-2009, 18:48
Please may I respectfully challenge the above comment regarding Jimmy Hughes? He may be misguided in some things, but MUPPET he certainly ain't - a more knowledgeable chap would be very hard to find IMO. In HIS room and with HIS setup, which sounded really good for a few years, one could hear certain differences with his "Belt" tweaksand these differences made the music played more enjoyable to listen to. The fact that I couldn't replicate these effects at home was irrelevant to what I did hear at Jimmy's. Eventually, my stereo got much better and Jimmy went off on another tangent (apologies, he was responsible for the Tangent speaker craze in the 1070's) and made his sound far worse IMO as a result.

Way back in the 1070s, eh?

I've always enjoyed JMH's record reviews.

markf
17-10-2009, 19:30
"Shippy/Soundhaspriority will be required to contribute to other (non-PB) discussions on the forum, or he's off for a little holiday!"

Maybe he will consider a post or two on the very important subject of "elephant cocks"
over on the audio room (Blank Canvas:- Testing a hypothesis)

Joe
17-10-2009, 19:37
"Shippy/Soundhaspriority will be required to contribute to other (non-PB) discussions on the forum, or he's off for a little holiday!"

Maybe he will consider a post or two on the very important subject of "elephant cocks"
over on the audio room (Blank Canvas:- Testing a hypothesis)

Maybe he could guess what that hypothesis is!

'God I could murder a Cadbury's Flake
But then I guess you wouldn't let me into Heaven
Or maybe you would coz their adverts promote oral sex
A Romany bint in a field with her paints
Suggesting we faint at her beauty
But she's got Dicky Davies' eyes ...'

Marco
17-10-2009, 19:49
"Shippy/Soundhaspriority will be required to contribute to other (non-PB) discussions on the forum, or he's off for a little holiday!"

Maybe he will consider a post or two on the very important subject of "elephant cocks"
over on the audio room (Blank Canvas:- Testing a hypothesis)

You don't approve then, Mark?

Marco.

aquapiranha
17-10-2009, 19:52
Hi Steve,

I'll defo see you on Friday, but please don't stop posting for a week :)

Shippy/Soundhaspriority will be required to contribute to other (non-PB) discussions on the forum, or he's off for a little holiday! ;)

Marco.

Hi Marco. It is not a 'protest' - ~I do not expect I will be missed for a few days! lol. I am just tired of seeing threads overtaken by the bloody nutter. I am guessing he will drift away or be pushed, but in the meantime I just can't be arsed. Some people simply should not be allowed near the internet.

:lolsign:

Marco
17-10-2009, 19:56
LOL... Well, you will be missed, so unless you have to go for a bit, stay exactly where you are. I enjoy your contributions :)

Marco.

Barry
17-10-2009, 23:44
Gentlemen,

It’s been a dull day today, so I thought I would give Shippy’s ‘free’ tweak a try. That way I would at least try to go someway to reduce both Chris’s (TGW) and Neal’s (DSDL) disappointment that no one, apart from Anthony TD, had tried the tweak.

I followed Shippy’s instructions precisely as per his post #1. Like Anthony, I do not have any drawers in the listening room, but put the prepared CD as close to the CD player as I could, but out of sight. I then played a CD and listened to one track carefully. The prepared CD was then removed from the room and the track replayed. I cannot say I noticed any difference at all. To check, the prepared CD was brought back into the room – again no difference. Next I tried playing an LP, first with, then without the prepared CD present. The same trial was made using a pre-recorded cassette tape I had made. Again I could not hear any changes.

Despite Shippy’s claim that it does not matter if the listener believes or not that the effect will work, I tried to conduct the experiment with an open mind.

Thinking that having written out the prescribed words myself, there might be a certain amount of autosuggestion involved, I thought I would try something different. About five years ago whilst I was in Ladakh for the Hemis festival, I was given a charm by one of the senior lamas at a monastery near Leh.

http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy88/barrydhunt/IMG_0001-1.jpg

This is not a good luck charm but a charm for ‘well being’. Thinking that the Buddhist monks might know a thing or two about writing auspicious words on well being, I placed the charm in a CD case and repeated the exercise. I can’t tell you what is written inside for two reasons: first, I was told that if the envelope was opened the charm would become ineffective, second I cannot read Tibetan script.

With the ‘charmed’ CD in place I did wonder if the lyrics to the track that I was listening to might be a bit clearer – I really did want to hear an improvement. Again repeating the tracks with and without the prepared CD, showed that there really was no difference at all.

The entire exercise has been a bit of a disappointment, but as least I tried it. And despite my scepticism, I did try to conduct the experiment with a good will.

Some pertinent (or maybe non-pertinent) information, I checked my biorhythms for today (17.10.09):

Physical: 90%
Emotional: 0%
Intellectual: 100%.

Oh and one more thing - my horoscope (Sagittarius) for today said:

“You are willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt and another chance if necessary. But at some point you will have to move on and realities have to be faced.” Hmm.

Regards

Alex_UK
18-10-2009, 06:11
Interesting write up Barry, (if that really was your horoscope then there is an awful lot of irony there!) Guess I'm not surprised to discover that you didn't hear any difference.

Chris (TGW) and Neal’s (DSDL) - are you going to share the results of your trial of this experiment? In view of my overt criticism of Paul "ramming it down our throats" it would be hypocritical for me to now do it, but being completely honest, if he had "settled in" and got involved, then introduced the concept in a non-evangelic way I would have given it a try. (Despite Paul suggesting in one of his tirades that my other beliefs were irrelevant as this was an audio experiment, I am actually quite open to the existence of a lot of things we can't explain.)

John
18-10-2009, 08:40
Steve
You are important member here never doubt that

Spectral Morn
18-10-2009, 09:18
I will have ago at it on Monday and report back, with photos etc as per my usual write ups.


Regards D S D L

alb
18-10-2009, 09:21
I also tried this experiment while the house was quiet last night. (First time this week.)
I have to say that i too could hear nothing different. But I admit that sometimes it takes me a while to analyse what the difference is between cables and suchlike.
But, if there is a difference at all, i can usually hear it straight away.
I'm bored with it now.

Themis
18-10-2009, 09:34
Let me share some ancient stuff with you:

One day, very long ago, a guy (let's call him Dimitri) was very unhappy about his house condition. His house was getting old, some holes on the roof were letting water pass when it was raining, his house was getting old.
So, Dimitri, went to the temple of Athena, made the necessary gifts to the goddess and asked that Athena would help him and fix the various problems with his house.
He was sincere and, after the ceremony went back home convinced that gods would certainly do something to make his life better. He thought that he had done all what it had to be done about the house and went on with the rest of his activities without thinking about the house problems anymore.
Some weeks passed, the roofs condition was getting worse. The holes were now bigger and the wind had even damaged some windows...
Dimitri got very upset: "Why Athena doesn't help me ?" he told his wife.
Furious about it, he return to the temple to complain about his situation.
"I did everything I should," he said to the goddess, "made all the gifts I should, why do you ignore me ?".
Athena answered that she had noticed he had done nothing about fixing his house. "So what ?" answered Dimitri, I made a claim, the house should have been fixed by you!".
Athena replied that she was only helping people "doing" things not just "wishing" things to happen. "Help yourself, then I will help you", she answered, then went away.

What I understand about all that, is that divinities only help "fate", not "particular points of interest". That's how it works.

To come back to music playback, there's no point in asking any divinity (or whatever) to make your system sound better. It will merely help you to know the right people at the right time. There's nothing paranormal about it : people should stick to their "knowledgeable" and "conventional" ways of doing things, then, perhaps, a divinity may help them in some way. Perhaps by making them know someone who knows someone else who knows how a "better speaker" or "better amp" or "better playback" should be.

That's how ancient greeks (and plenty of other civilizations) seem to think about it. The proverb "Help yourself, then Athena will welp you" exists in almost all cultures.

I often think about it. The key word is "fate". ;)

If I'm out-of-subject, please ignore and kindly forgive me.

anthonyTD
18-10-2009, 10:55
Gentlemen,

It’s been a dull day today, so I thought I would give Shippy’s ‘free’ tweak a try. That way I would at least try to go someway to reduce both Chris’s (TGW) and Neal’s (DSDL) disappointment that no one, apart from Anthony TD, had tried the tweak.

I followed Shippy’s instructions precisely as per his post #1. Like Anthony, I do not have any drawers in the listening room, but put the prepared CD as close to the CD player as I could, but out of sight. I then played a CD and listened to one track carefully. The prepared CD was then removed from the room and the track replayed. I cannot say I noticed any difference at all. To check, the prepared CD was brought back into the room – again no difference. Next I tried playing an LP, first with, then without the prepared CD present. The same trial was made using a pre-recorded cassette tape I had made. Again I could not hear any changes.

Despite Shippy’s claim that it does not matter if the listener believes or not that the effect will work, I tried to conduct the experiment with an open mind.

Thinking that having written out the prescribed words myself, there might be a certain amount of autosuggestion involved, I thought I would try something different. About five years ago whilst I was in Ladakh for the Hemis festival, I was given a charm by one of the senior lamas at a monastery near Leh.

http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy88/barrydhunt/IMG_0001-1.jpg

This is not a good luck charm but a charm for ‘well being’. Thinking that the Buddhist monks might know a thing or two about writing auspicious words on well being, I placed the charm in a CD case and repeated the exercise. I can’t tell you what is written inside for two reasons: first, I was told that if the envelope was opened the charm would become ineffective, second I cannot read Tibetan script.

With the ‘charmed’ CD in place I did wonder if the lyrics to the track that I was listening to might be a bit clearer – I really did want to hear an improvement. Again repeating the tracks with and without the prepared CD, showed that there really was no difference at all.

The entire exercise has been a bit of a disappointment, but as least I tried it. And despite my scepticism, I did try to conduct the experiment with a good will.

Some pertinent (or maybe non-pertinent) information, I checked my biorhythms for today (17.10.09):

Physical: 90%
Emotional: 0%
Intellectual: 100%.

Oh and one more thing - my horoscope (Sagittarius) for today said:

“You are willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt and another chance if necessary. But at some point you will have to move on and realities have to be faced.” Hmm.

Regards
hi barry,
good on you, at least we have tried the experiment now, but unfortunetly for paul the both of us [at least] have come to the same conclusion which is,,, i fear not what he had hoped!:)
regards,anthony,TD...

DSJR
18-10-2009, 11:03
Themis, you speak some of the best truth I've ever read in this whole forum ;)

Cotlake
18-10-2009, 19:14
Oh and just to show I was not simply ignorantly dismissing a charlatan's claims, I tried some PB stuff twenty years ago and it didn't make a jot of difference. It seems nothing has changed so I feel my stand was justified. Autosuggestion is a nasty manipulative tool used against vulnerable people or to create a subconscious impressing in the minds of those generally not so vulnerable.

The Grand Wazoo
18-10-2009, 21:56
I have something to report & will do so soon...................

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 00:10
OK, so here are my findings.

I have to qualify all of the following with the fact that I wasn't able to do any listening myself because of a temporary problem with the hearing in my right ear. However, the two 'subjects' are capable of hearing fine differences between audio systems and have proved able to do so on numerous occasions.

I decided that it wasn't worth buggering about with the single barrelled option as described in the original post - so I went for the nuclear solution of treatments to 9 CD's right from the word go on this experiment.

I also did not tell either of the people involved anything about what I was testing, only that I was considering making some changes to the system & that I'd value their opinions.

I let the amps & CD player warm up for 2 hours before the test, playing some background music.

When the test started, I played a CD (Clive Gregson & Christine Collister - 'Love is a Strange Hotel') and they listened carefully to the music. We played the first 3 tracks & then track 1 once again. I asked them to avert their eyes & went into the kitchen & then outside the house. I came back in & played the CD again. This time, the only difference was that I had closed the door to the kitchen, behind and to their left.

After they had listened to the music a second time, one of the subjects offered that they thought the bass was perhaps a little more defined. The other subject agreed that this might be the case.

I asked them to avert their eyes again & went back outside, this time returning with a shoebox containing 9 'treated' CD's (or what our patron in this 'tweak of destiny' refers to as 'devices'). Again, I closed the door to the kitchen. I placed the shoebox behind a chair. The chair was to the left, & in front of the listeners & the box was placed to the side of the chair out of sight of the listeners, but between the chair & the speakers. We listened again. This time, no change was noted or suggested at.

Once again, I asked them to avert their eyes & I took the box back outside, returned, & again closed the door. We listened. No change was reported, though it was still deemed to be better than the first listening.

I did not reveal what had been done & suggested we have a break of a couple of hours & try again with some different music in case some element of the system was still warming up.

The experiment was not discussed again until two & a half hours later, when we resumed proceedings.

This time I used exactly the same procedure:
1) System as normal
2) Kitchen door closed, system as normal
3) Kitchen door closed, shoebox present in room
4) Kitchen door closed, system as normal

The CD was Isobel Campbell & Mark Lanegan - 'Ballad of the Broken Seas'

Results:
1) No comments.
2) More, better defined and deeper bass.
3) Slightly more and deeper, better defined bass again. Mark Lanegan's voice was more gravelly sounding.
4) The same as 3 - no change.

My conclusions:
This experiment proved that closing a door in the room had more effect than bringing the 'devices' into the room & that listening became more concentrated as time went on & once differences had been discussed.

The Vinyl Adventure
19-10-2009, 01:10
Hmm I was planning something similar. I have come to the conclusion that I wouldn't trust my self to hear anything even if it was there due to my now negative veiw toward this whole thing :(
I had planned to use a small wooden chest instead of a draw and rope in a muso mate. I was also going to dose him with water that had been placed on the north of a magnet after the first run for good measure.... Shall I still do it? I'm not sure I can be fussed anymore...
Cheers for that chris, I think you have, after all the other negative resposes just tipped me over the I'm-not-going-to-waste-my-time line

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 08:41
I thought that my inability to carry the test out for myself was a bit of an advantage, because it allowed me to do the experiment on two people with no preconceptions whatsoever, and not only that, as I can barely hear a thing through one ear, anything I said couldn't influence their assessment.

I also thought that introducing another subtle variation to the conditions - one I knew would have an influence (i.e. closing the door) would demonstrate their ability or otherwise to detect changes & also confirm (or not) my suspicion that once you hear a change, you start to listen more closely. I felt it was important to be in control of the first change to the sound and to know in advance the effect that it would have.

I wanted to allow any others who hadn't had a fiddle with Belt stuff before & were going to try this out, to do so & to report back before I reported anything myself because I didn't want what I had to say to influence anyone else (subconsciously or otherwise). So thanks Barry for having a go. I'm eagerly awaiting Neil's report.

I suspect we will now be told that we don't know how to listen.

Once that has happened, I'll tell all the reasons why I think 'yer man' hadn't tried this little charade before he suggested that we should do it.
.........The thick plottens

anthonyTD
19-10-2009, 09:04
I thought that my inability to carry the test out for myself was a bit of an advantage, because it allowed me to do the experiment on two people with no preconceptions whatsoever, and not only that, as I can barely hear a thing through one ear, anything I said couldn't influence their assessment.

I also thought that introducing another subtle variation to the conditions - one I knew would have an influence (i.e. closing the door) would demonstrate their ability or otherwise to detect changes & also confirm (or not) my suspicion that once you hear a change, you start to listen more closely. I felt it was important to be in control of the first change to the sound and to know in advance the effect that it would have.

I wanted to allow any others who hadn't had a fiddle with Belt stuff before & were going to try this out, to do so & to report back before I reported anything myself because I didn't want what I had to say to influence anyone else (subconsciously or otherwise). So thanks Barry for having a go. I'm eagerly awaiting Neil's report.

I suspect we will now be told that we don't know how to listen.

Once that has happened, I'll tell all the reasons why I think 'yer man' hadn't tried this little charade before he suggested that we should do it.
.........The thick plottens

hi chris,
well done for at least taking the chalenge and for the indepth write up.
A...

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 09:06
hi chris,
well done for at least taking the chalenge and for the indepth write up.
A...

And thanks to you Anthony for being the first to grasp the nettle!

Themis
19-10-2009, 09:17
Thanks for the time and energy spent Chris. I really appreciate. ;)

NRG
19-10-2009, 11:03
Thanks for the write up Chris, interesting read and a result I would have expected. As Greg says autosuggestion is a very strong and manipulative tool it comes in many shapes and sizes and creates deception misleading the listner away from reality.

I've resisted posting on these threads as I tried many of these experiments the first time around and found not one of them worked...the only one that did influence the way I 'felt' about the sound being reproduced was the one where you listen with just one sock on... the reason I felt different was due to my toes getting cold and the fact I felt, and looked, a right dick. Then the cold dawn of realisation took hold that, in fact, I was being played and taken for a mug....gullible enough to try this stuff believing what was written by JH was fact.... :doh: Never again.

DSJR
19-10-2009, 11:45
My ears are so fragile these days that just yawning and "clicking" the eustatian tubes makes a heck of a difference quite often. There are just too many variables without the Belt phenomena and auto-suggestion is a huge variable. One reason I'm sure why double-blind tests are so "inconclusive" perhaps?

anthonyTD
19-10-2009, 12:08
hi all,
well, it would seem that our test results are consistent, and therefore i think i can say that for me the proof of the pudding is indeed in the eating, unfortunetly paul seems to have disapeard from AOS at the moment, so in his absence we can only conclude that maybe he is not in agreement with our findings,:confused: anyway, once again i for one would like to thank all who tried the test, at least AOS can now be seen as a place that embrace's opinions no matter how way out they may seem at the time!:)
regards,anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
19-10-2009, 12:11
My ears are so fragile these days that just yawning and "
clicking" the eustatian tubes makes a heck of a difference quite often. There are just too many variables without the Belt phenomena and auto-suggestion is a huge variable. One reason I'm sure why double-blind tests are so "inconclusive" perhaps?
totaly agree dave, even taking a few sips of water between listening sessions can make a diffrence!
A...

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 12:42
at least AOS can now be seen as a place that embrace's opinions no matter how way out they may seem at the time!


Yeehah!!!
Job done!!!!!!!

Thanks for coming Shippy!!

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 16:00
Harry Potter and the IF device.


Part One..... Building the “IF”Beast.

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment001.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment004.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment005.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment002.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment003.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment006.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment010.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment009.jpg

I followed Paul's instructions as well as I could. However, I would take issue with Paul, as his instructions left out an important fact....I will let Chris (TGW) explain and will post a picture as proof, later.


Part Two....Quatermass and the “IF Experiment”

As many are aware there has been a fair amount of very heated debate on the forum recently, as new member Paul (Soundhaspriority) has re-introduced many of us to the ideas of Peter Belt and how to improve the sound of an audio system by applying those concepts.

Having first got into audio about the same time as Peter Belt's theories products first came to light in the UK's audio press, back in the late 80's I was aware of and must confess to having tried some of the PWB items given away free (Foils, Spira Tube)by the magazine Hi-Fi Answers. As well as the freebie items, many other free DIY tweaks were written about in the pages of that particular magazine, and in the main by Jimmy Hughes. Some of which I also tried, namely filling slots into plugs metal work and making sure that all the slots on all the plugs screws, both inside and out faced the same way. I heard no difference with most of these tweaks/products except the filing of slots into plugs...at the time I put this down, to this action having cleaned the plug's pins. I didn't clean my plugs at that time...as far as I can remember it was 20+ years ago. But as we all now know , and accept, cleaning the pins of a mains plug (and other metal connectors) improves the sound.

The subject of this write up is the proposed free tweak/product, Paul suggested the at the beginning of this thread the “IF Device” as he named it. I won't bore you by repeating the instruction Paul wrote on how to make this, you can read those at the beginning of this thread. However as is my want I have included photos of me making the “IF Device”and the system I used to try it out on.

Now just to make things very clear I was fairly reluctant to make and use Paul's item..it stretches credibility to breaking point that words written on a folded piece of paper and placed in a CD can effect the sound of an audio system let alone anything else. We are IMHO in the realms of the Twilight Zone/Outer Limits on this one or indeed perhaps the ideas of Wilhelm Reich. I even feel that Frank Changs resonator cups have more credibility that this “IF Device”, I should also point out I have not tried any of Frank's products. So in best Harry Potter mode I made the device. I should also state that all my thoughts were hostile to this experiment, and further having just broken a tooth while eating lunch, my mood was even further into the negative before I listened to any music.

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment013.jpg

The System was my down stairs one....Moon Andromeda CD player, Bat VK31se pre-amplifier, Music Reference RM200 mk1 Kt 88 100 watt PP valve amplifier, speakers Anthony Gallo Ref 3.1. Cabling was Atlas Marvos 1m XLR to XLR and 2x7m of Atlas Marvos Speaker cable. Mains cables were Audience AU24. The piece of music I used was as simple and well recorded as I have Patricia Barber live -Let it Rain. I know this very well as it is one of the tracks I have used in the past to audition/review gear. This particular track is on The Dali (Demo) CD.

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/The_DALI_CD_cover_953100-0-0A.jpghttp://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PatriciaBarberPatriciaBarber.jpg

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment011.jpg

The reference system was well warmed up as I had been playing two new unfamiliar CDs earlier and I had left music playing while I had my lunch. After lunch (and calming down from damaging a tooth)I played the Patricia Barber track without the “IF Device” being in the room (it was sitting in the hall on the stairs. This track is quite left channel orientated, it is live and features Patricia singing and an acoustic guitar. It is a fairly simple recording but very open and detailed, with very good ambient clues and is also dynamic...no compression here folks.

http://i549.photobucket.com/albums/ii364/davros124/PWBexperiment012.jpg

I listened to the track through and it sounded as I expected it too.

I don't have any drawers in my listening room, but as the Kitchen is part of the room, at the far end I placed the “IF Device” in the top drawer in the kitchen near the opening to the living room. I left the slatted pull over, folded door open during listening. Before I say what happened Paul had not specified whether the CD had to be music or not (it should make no difference) so I opted for the PAD burn in CD, which came to hand as it was sitting below the Dali CD.


Part Three....There's got to be one...

So the bit you have all been waiting for, did the presence of the “IF Device” make any difference to the sound of the music, was there an improvement or not?

What I am about to type will probably damage my credibility on the forum, in fact on any forum...hell I can here the villagers shouting for me now. The flicker of their torches through the window in the distance and the glint of flames on metal tools. The tools of my destruction.

I heard a change in the sound. It was sharper, more forward and the soundstage and depth of image + ambient clues in the recording were also expanded. I was shocked and surprised and could not believe that I had heard a change (note I say change). I took the “IF Device” out of the room and tried again. I brought it back in and placed it in the kitchen drawer and had another listen, the same effect as before. I then took the CD and put it out in the yard and tried again. All the while shaking my head and muttering under my breath in true Victor Meldrew style “ I don't believe it!”...” How can this be?”

I then decided to place the “IF Device” in the cubby hole behind my left speaker where the mains distribution board is. I had another listen, the effect had increased slightly. I took the CD out of the room again and had another listen.

After doing all this I came to the conclusion that there was an effect (I have no idea how or why), but that I preferred the sound of my system with the “IF Device” out of the room. To my ears with it in the room, it was like someone turning the brightness and contrast up to much on a TV. The sound of the track is normally open and detailed but not spotlit and having the “IF Device” present made things spotlit and not to my taste....though perhaps to someone else's.

I can't believe I have just typed what I have, but I have to be honest, there was an effect, a negative one in my experience. Now the change was not massive, but it was easily discernible, and took the sound for me in the wrong direction it almost seemed to make things slightly more solid state by adding an edge to things and shifting the soundstage forward slightly. With the “IF Device” removed the sound was more musical and a whole lot more organic and natural....go figure.

Those villagers are breaking the doors down................Hel........................... ..........



Regards D S D L

PS I truly wish I had not heard anything. I feel that NOTHING IS SAFE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE and its not OK...

NRG
19-10-2009, 16:22
Try again, get somebody to move it in and out of the room for you IE: blind, without you knowing if its in the room or not...

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 16:29
Try again, get somebody to move it in and out of the room for you IE: blind, without you knowing if its in the room or not...

Why?

I don't need to do blind listening tests to be able to hear things or not. I didn't want to hear anything, I didn't ask to hear anything I was and am hostile to hearing anything. There was no placebo effect, no desire for anything except to hear nothing. I don't like putting my credibility on the line, but I have.

I know my system, I know the music.


You don't like the result and neither do I.


Regards D S D L

Barry
19-10-2009, 16:36
There seems to be a slight contradiction:

" Cut the line you wrote out of the paper, keeping close to the letters, without cutting into them. Fold the printed strip of paper in half, with the printed side showing. Fold it in half again and again, until it can be folded no longer, and press it flat. (Keeping it in your fingers), remove the CD disc from its jewel case tray, place the folded strip of paper against the teeth in the centre of the tray, so that it lies across the teeth of the tray. Next, press the CD into the tray, over top of the strip (the CD will float above the tray, because of the thickness of the paper; that's expected). Now close the cover of the CD case."

My strip of paper was folded in half 5 times resulting in a volume: 8.5mm long, 8mm wide and 3mm thick. As such it fitted within the teeth of the spider, and not across the teeth. Do you suppose this made any difference?

Neal, try the experiment again but this time use a music CD. If you still consistently hear a difference (or change as you put it), then I would be most intrigued and greatly puzzled.

Regards

The Vinyl Adventure
19-10-2009, 16:43
I would say them that the negative effect I'm the sound was down to your negative atitude towards the experiment....
What's your view on this being some kinda of auto suggestion.. This kinda relates to what I was going to say in the next installment of our convo. (I was going to relate it to my comments on varying life experiences ref. my belive system). surely the writing of text has to be the impetous/driving "force" here (it might be parhaps, being in the position of hearing a differance, to try it with out text for clarification perpouses). What do you think that text writing is effecting, you, or the equipment?
It was a negative outcome because you went into it with a negative emotion??
I'm quite glad this has happened, and that Paul has shut up a bit, maybe now we can have an interesting conversation on the posibilitys of why this might work for some people... Without a bombardment of toss from Paul...
It might be best to revert back to pm for this question neil... But how does this fit in with your belive system ref. The original source of our convo

sorry to everyone else, I wasn't sure to post this on here or as a part of a discusion neil and I are having but I felt there is enough of it that can be discussed openly concidering the circumstances.. I shall let neils answer be the direction from here..... hope this isn't to confusing for everyone else

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 16:45
There seems to be a slight contradiction:

" Cut the line you wrote out of the paper, keeping close to the letters, without cutting into them. Fold the printed strip of paper in half, with the printed side showing. Fold it in half again and again, until it can be folded no longer, and press it flat. (Keeping it in your fingers), remove the CD disc from its jewel case tray, place the folded strip of paper against the teeth in the centre of the tray, so that it lies across the teeth of the tray. Next, press the CD into the tray, over top of the strip (the CD will float above the tray, because of the thickness of the paper; that's expected). Now close the cover of the CD case."

My strip of paper was folded in half 5 times resulting in a volume: 8.5mm long, 8mm wide and 3mm thick. As such it fitted within the teeth of the spider, and not across the teeth. Do you suppose this made any difference?

Neal, try the experiment again but this time use a music CD. If you still consistently hear a difference (or change as you put it), then I would be most intrigued and greatly puzzled.

Regards

The issue is Paul's instructions. I don't want to steal Chris's thunder...so will say nothing at this stage.

I am at a loss to explain this....its the Twilight Zone and doing this should have 0 effect..how can it ?

Regards D S D L

Themis
19-10-2009, 16:48
No-one can talk or think about one's own auto-suggestions. By definition, the effects should be negated when you become conscious about it.
Funny, eh ? :scratch:

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 16:52
Hi Hamish

The effect for me was a negative, but for many the enhancement of detail and the expansion of the soundstage would be a positive not a negative. I consistently heard the change in sound. I removed the "IF Device" and the sound reverted back to what I like.

Yes I had a negative attitude, but I would have expected to hear nothing, no change at all which would have proved to me and everyone else this is crap. Instead I heard something and have put my credibility on the line by saying so. It would have been easy to lie about it. However I try very hard not to lie, even by accident and certainly not deliberately.

I think our PM discussion is best kept of the forum.


Regards D S D L

The Vinyl Adventure
19-10-2009, 16:58
very much agreed... this just crosses the boundarys of our discusion quite a lot for me... i shall let other people comments drive this thread i think. im sure you can imagine my perspective on this anyway
it is very interesting though eh??... especially now its been experienced by a someone not a "preacher"

NRG
19-10-2009, 17:00
Why?

I don't need to do blind listening tests to be able to hear things or not. I didn't want to hear anything, I didn't ask to hear anything I was and am hostile to hearing anything. There was no placebo effect, no desire for anything except to hear nothing. I don't like putting my credibility on the line, but I have.

I know my system, I know the music.


You don't like the result and neither do I.


Regards D S D L

I have no opinion on the result and I'm not suggesting to listen blind...just without the knowledge of if the treated item is in or out...I made the suggestion so *you* can rationalise the result and remove any autosuggestion either positive or negative... its your system and ears and it would appear it's you who doesn't like it ;)

I also know my system very well and can convince myself that I can detect the slightest change but when tested 'blind' with the help of my long suffering wife things are not so clear cut it would seem! Its a good base line reality check.

The Vinyl Adventure
19-10-2009, 17:04
I have no opinion on the result and I'm not suggesting to listen blind...just without the knowledge of if the treated item is in or out...I made the suggestion so *you* can rationalise the result and remove any autosuggestion either positive or negative... its your system and ears and it would appear it's you who doesn't like it ;)

I also know my system very well and can convince myself that I can detect the slightest change but when tested 'blind' with the help of my long suffering wife things are not so clear cut it would seem! Its a good base line reality check.

that seems sencible to me... add to that the blank paper test and we could have something very interesting

neil = guineapig ;)

Themis
19-10-2009, 17:07
Neil, I would respectively advice you to reconsider all this.

I've been a victim of erroneous introspection in the past. It's a silly trap, that's what I found about it. Sometimes the solution seemed to me like a choice between self-contradiction and mistake: both false choices.
The right choice is time and friends' advice. ;)

But, I'm probably overrating all this and misunderstood your point of view altogether. If so, please, kindly forgive me.

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 17:10
I have no opinion on the result and I'm not suggesting to listen blind...just without the knowledge of if the treated item is in or out...I made the suggestion so *you* can rationalise the result and remove any autosuggestion either positive or negative... its your system and ears and it would appear it's you who doesn't like it ;)

I also know my system very well and can convince myself that I can detect the slightest change but when tested 'blind' with the help of my long suffering wife things are not so clear cut it would seem! Its a good base line reality check.

Fair enough...may well do that..just to be even more sure.


Regards D S D L

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 17:12
Neil, I would respectively advice you to reconsider all this.

I've been a victim of erroneous introspection in the past. It's a silly trap, that's what I found about it. Sometimes the solution seemed to me like a choice between self-contradiction and mistake: both false choices.
The right choice is time and friends' advice. ;)

But, I'm probably overrating all this and misunderstood your point of view altogether. If so, please, kindly forgive me.

Sorry I am a wee bit confused...spell it out for me ?


Regards D S D L

DSJR
19-10-2009, 17:17
Fascinating...

If I need to sharpen the sound of my stereo, all I need to do is lean forward a little and the sound is amazing. Sitting back tends to over-smooth things, especially on LP's. I piut this down to abused ears and funny things happening phase-wise in the Spendor crossovers (there were phase-shifts as I recall).....

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 17:29
Fascinating...

If I need to sharpen the sound of my stereo, all I need to do is lean forward a little and the sound is amazing. Sitting back tends to over-smooth things, especially on LP's. I piut this down to abused ears and funny things happening phase-wise in the Spendor crossovers (there were phase-shifts as I recall).....

If you stand up the Gallo's do go dull. However because of the tweeter design and them being 180 degree designs, the sweet spot is quite wide. This makes them excellent for hearing differences. However I have owned speakers were by if you did not keep your head straight there were issues i.e Proac Super Tablets.

My listening experience is very consistent with this current set up.

Dave head movement changes the position of your ears relative to where the speakers sound locks into focus, so moving your head back and forward will change things in the bass and the treble in the main. Moving your chair back and forward does the same thing. I am fortunate that the best sound for me in this room is with the chair against the wall.


Regards D S D L

Themis
19-10-2009, 17:31
Sorry I am a wee bit confused...spell it out for me ?

Well, what I mean is you seem to think that:

What I am about to type will probably damage my credibility on the forum, in fact on any forum...hell I can here the villagers shouting for me now. The flicker of their torches through the window in the distance and the glint of flames on metal tools. The tools of my destruction.

So, you find yourself with a "contradiction" (to your own standards) and the obvious way to fix it should be to assume a mistake.

Perhaps you omitted a not-so-obvious setting ? I was wondering.
If it's the case, you'll probably need some time to find out.

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 17:36
Well, what I mean is you seem to think that:


So, you find yourself with a "contradiction" (to your own standards) and the obvious way to fix it should be to assume a mistake.

Perhaps you omitted a not-so-obvious setting ? I was wondering.
If it's the case, you'll probably need some time to find out.


No I don't assume I have made a mistake I have heard what i have heard. I am still confused by the highlighted bit.


Regards D S D L

Themis
19-10-2009, 17:45
No I don't assume I have made a mistake I have heard what i have heard. I am still confused by the highlighted bit.

I'm not saying you have made a mistake. I say simply that admitting it (because it's ridiculous to admit something false), although it seems an obvious solution, is not one.

About the highlighted bit... well, I don't know, as I don't doubt at all what you heard, it could be anything.
A door open, a car passing, a different breath rhythm, a new sound trap, anything.

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 17:51
I'm not saying you have made a mistake. I say simply that admitting it (because it's ridiculous to admit something false), although it seems an obvious solution, is not one.

About the highlighted bit... well, I don't know, as I don't doubt at all what you heard, it could be anything.
A door open, a car passing, a different breath rhythm, a new sound trap, anything.

I spent about 40 minutes listening again and again. I even listened to the tracks opening few seconds as well as in its totality + stopping the cd player as well as using track pause and resetting the track to its beginning all to try and remove any variables.

The effect was consistent. I could hear it right from the opening seconds or again not if the "IF Device" was not in the room.


Regards D S D L

Themis
19-10-2009, 18:05
Ok, I'll put it otherwise:

What is the probability that the effect was because of the presence/absence of the "IF box" vs the probability that the effect was NOT because of it ?

You seem to think that there's only one variable involved. Although it seems obvious, how about wondering whether it's the case ?

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 18:10
Ok, I'll put it otherwise:

What is the probability that the effect was because of the presence/absence of the "IF box" vs the probability that the effect was NOT because of it ?

You seem to think that there's only one variable involved. Although it seems obvious, how about wondering whether it's the case ?


Because it was over a relatively short period of time and the effect was the same each time it was applied I would have thought that any variables were small if at all. However I will try it again tomorrow at a different time and see what happens. I am keen to get to the bottom of this.


Regards D S D L

Beechwoods
19-10-2009, 18:33
This tweak - or perhaps we could call it a ritual, because I think that's where it's affect comes from, probably affects different people differently. The process involved aligns with some forms of meditation, or self-hypnosis. The repetitive reflection on a phrase, the physical manipulation of the paper, repetitively; and the suggestion that more repetition will increase the power of the talisman, seem consistent with this.

Meditation as an aid to sensory acuity has been used by man for millennia. Through history, it has time and again shown a real affect affect for those open to it. There's no reason why the affect you have experienced, Neil, is not real and valid, and explainable through this.

Spectral Morn
19-10-2009, 18:53
This tweak - or perhaps we could call it a ritual, because I think that's where it's affect comes from, probably affects different people differently. The process involved aligns with some forms of meditation, or self-hypnosis. The repetitive reflection on a phrase, the physical manipulation of the paper, repetitively; and the suggestion that more repetition will increase the power of the talisman, seem consistent with this.

Meditation as an aid to sensory acuity has been used by man for millennia. Through history, it has time and again shown a real affect affect for those open to it. There's no reason why the affect you have experienced, Neil, is not real and valid, and explainable through this.


It is exactly for the reasons that you mention here that caused me to use the word Occult earlier in this thread. Such process are common in this area, and indeed almost foundational in manipulation of both reality and the spiritual realms and go hand in hand with extremes of mental activity...Will. However, in order to avoid any of these aspects, I approached this in a quick matter of fact way. I did not dwell on it or spend much time in the activity....however a slow meditative approach might well have the effect you say Nick, and making 7 or 9 of these might well enhance that. As Chris made a number of these so called "IF Devices" (what does the I F stand for?). I felt one was enough.

However I don't in my case feel that this path offers the explanation. I am not sure what does, so will be repeating the experiment again in the hope of gaining more/any insight.

I am stumped.


Regards D S D L

NRG
19-10-2009, 20:14
Fascinating...

If I need to sharpen the sound of my stereo, all I need to do is lean forward a little and the sound is amazing. Sitting back tends to over-smooth things, especially on LP's. I piut this down to abused ears and funny things happening phase-wise in the Spendor crossovers (there were phase-shifts as I recall).....

There is a very good reason for this, its called comb filtering and its one of the reasons why tests like this should be done with help...

http://www.ethanwiner.com/believe.html

Themis
19-10-2009, 20:41
There is a very good reason for this, its called comb filtering and its one of the reasons why tests like this should be done with help...

http://www.ethanwiner.com/believe.html
What a coincidence... I was looking exactly at this page 5min ago... :)

Alex_UK
19-10-2009, 21:43
Neil (D S D L) - I'm not sure if Paul will pick up on this, (he's been online earlier, made several posts with nothing to do with Peter Belt...) but you missed out the ">" sign when you wrote out the message:


EVERYTHING IS SAFE INSIDE (x5) > O.K.

Given the comments Paul has made previously about the details being important, I wonder if adding the ">" in would make a difference?

In view of Paul contributing to other areas of the forum, which I see as an "olive branch" I have decided to do a U-turn - and at least give it a try, so am now about to do it - result to follow.

alb
19-10-2009, 22:44
I didn't write the > thing either. Thought it was just the writing in bold type.

Soundhaspriority
19-10-2009, 22:53
My strip of paper was folded in half 5 times resulting in a volume: 8.5mm long, 8mm wide and 3mm thick. As such it fitted within the teeth of the spider, and not across the teeth. Do you suppose this made any difference?

Okay, I just tested this issue to see which way the message sounds best, and it sounds best the way I originally tested it. From what I recently heard, I think it can make a difference because it's more of a musical sound that way. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear in my initial description, so I have taken a photo to illustrate what I mean. The idea is that you want the message "hidden" by the CD, while a part of it is touching or very close to the edge of the teeth (for some reason, there is a particular energy pattern on the teeth of these jewel cases). This exact size of the paper isn't essential, it's just that the more you can roll or fold it up, the better it will sound. The CD is not going to fit into the teeth of course, but as for the type used, it is best if the CD over top of the message contains the common "Compact Disc" logo.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2647/4027434404_37ace7f2e0.jpg

BTW, I thought your test was great and had some comments I had written in response, but I wasn't allowed to post any longer in this thread, so I'm sorry I did not respond.

Soundhaspriority
19-10-2009, 22:59
Neil: Thanks for being both brave and fair about this. Much respect. I was about to conclude that the test I came up with for AOSers was simply not effective enough, and leave it at that (as I have always said, the products are more effective than free tweaks - so the best I can do is try to come up with something free but effective enough that the unexperienced can detect, because I am not about to give my products away!). That is until I read of your findings. From which, I realized two things:

1) You did indeed hear the effect, because of how you described it.

Now the change was not massive, but it was easily discernible,

I would describe it exactly like that to myself. It was not meant to be a massive change, and maybe that's what some others were expecting? That's the reason I suggested testing multiple CD's in order to try to get it past everyone's listening threshold, and identified. Because I can tell you for a fact, what is "easily discernible" to me, is often not so "easily" discernible to my mates. It might require repeated tests for them, and more experience with the device, if they're ever to hear anything at all. But those who know me know that my listening skills are superior to theirs, and are generally open-minded, so not so quick to dismiss any particular device if I say it does something, but they can't hear it at first. Those who don't know me, and know PB about as well as me, assuming that I'm a "lunatic disciple" of his with some kind of sinister motive (ooooh!), are likely to be far quicker at dismissing the whole thing if they do try it, and aren't successful at first. So I think that there's a lot of factors like that, that come into play and dictate whether a listener ever succeeds at hearing the effect brought about by this phenomenon, or writes it off prematurely, as many in the UK did.

2) You have good ears (I'm not surprised, since you have a good system!). I'd expect you to be able to hear a lot of audio things (conventional/unconventional) that others might not. I have always said that whether we're talking about Beltism, that deals with improving sound directly at the receiver end (listener), or Newtonism (aka conventional audio), that deals with improving it at the transmitter end (electronics), what is and isn't "bollocks" in the mind of the listener comes down to what they can consciously perceive. Which is often dependent on their critical listening skills. (Not the same as listening experience). What then becomes "autosuggestion" or not, depends on their belief system. Obviously, it can not be "autosuggestion" or placebo in your case, since from reading you, you clearly did not believe in any of this.

Knowing that there is an incredible bias against the principle my tweak is based on (Beltism), I knew well in advance that whoever was both able to hear the effect, --and-- be brave and honest enough to report it as well, would not have an easy time thereafter. Although people on a discussion group can remain perfectly respectful when a member talks about the changes his new amplifier has brought about, if that same person who's opinions on audio they might have respected in the past talks about the changes a much-ridiculed unconventional idea brings about, then suddenly he no longer has any hearing acuity to speak of! It couldn't be that they've been wrong about the unconventional product or idea all along; the so-called "rational" response must be that their mate has just gone daft in the head, and needs psychological help. Just like JH was oft considered a knowledgeable and respected audio journalist until... he heard products no one could believe in, expounded on audio theories no sane man should, then became the laughingstock of "reasonable" audiophiles everywhere.

So I hope you don't come home now to the surprise of finding your AOS forum mates in your listening room, gathered there to a well-meaning "intervention" on your behalf, convincing you to publicly denounce what you heard as 'autosuggestion', and seek counselling before they lose you to one of those treacherous "audio cults". Your reaction of " I don't believe it!”...” How can this be?" is the very same reaction I once had, and the very same one that the thousands of people who are using the products and ideas of Peter Belt to good effect on their audio systems, have at the very beginning, had. So it's part of a normal process; the (slow) process of realizing that we don't know as much about ourselves and our universe as we assume we do.

If you can hear my morphic message tweak and you heard the effects from the notch plug 20 years ago, then I expect there's probably a LOT of similar ideas or products you'd be able to consciously perceive. The more you do, the more you come to realize that initial positive ID wasn't a fluke; but part of a much larger phenomenon you were never aware of. Becoming aware of it is of course a conscious personal choice. But it's not difficult to do; it might require something as simple as trying the plug notches on a passive cord not plugged in. This is where PB was more than 27 years ago. There are a lot of things going on in sound that conventional science has no answer for and never bothered to explore. So it's left to so-called "obvious lunatics" like me to explore it, and take the flack for just trying to have the phenom become better known and understood. To those ignorant of my research, and unable to easily repeat it, or simply unwilling, it not only appears completely ludicrous and impossible for it to be anything other than autosuggestion, it all appears unconnected. What does a tweak involving aspirin have to do with freezing photographs have to do with writing messages have to do with tying reef knots etc?

Approaching all of it with typical prejudice and typical ignorance and typical inexperience, it all has nothing to do with each other, and everything to do with how easily humans can fool themselves. But when you finally understand it, as I do, it goes far far deeper than that. It has more to do with the fact that we humans are constantly under a certain kind of tension we're unaware of, that effects our senses, because we don't know how to resolve so many aspects of our modern environment, as we have evolved. These "rituals" as they are called by the cynics, simply help us to resolve them, and cause us to live under a bit less stress. The purpose of the specific message I created, is to try to inform this unconscious mind that there is nothing inside the CD case, which you can not see inside of, that is of harm to you. This reduces the stress effect of the object in your own environment (take it out of your environment - no stress effect). This is why I tried to stipulate that the CD case should be placed inside a drawer or box. The CD you can't see inside of transfers that energy pattern to the drawer or box you can't see inside of, which reduces tension a bit more, and causes your perception of sound to be a bit better. This effect may be observed if you put the box the cd is inside of, into another box, where the sound should get a little bit better.


The effect for me was a negative, but for many the enhancement of detail and the expansion of the soundstage would be a positive not a negative.

This comment again tells me you have good ears. Because it's true, for many, an expansion of soundstage and enhancement of detail is a positive. For both of us, it isn't enough. Musicality has to improve, or not diminish. I can do that with the morphic messages, but things have to be done right. And a lot of it is trial and error. The details of my tweak is me trying to reduce the error part.


Yes I had a negative attitude, but I would have expected to hear nothing, no change at all which would have proved to me and everyone else this is crap.

FWIW, so did I, from what I read from you. So I'm as surprised as you are that anything came of it.


PS I truly wish I had not heard anything. I feel that NOTHING IS SAFE INSIDE OR OUTSIDE and its not OK...

Rest assured, this is also a "normal" reaction when a skeptic finally witnesses the Belt effect. It means having to question things one doesnt want to question in one's belief system which, I think we can all agree, took much time to develop. I think when you said the plug notch tweak must work because of cleaning the plug, it's because that fits into your belief system (electrical changes). This is why I suggested notching a passive plug. I know some who fully concur that the foils work (ie. PWB's silver rainbow foil), they have no problem hearing it... but insist it's because it affects EMI / RFI. But that theory too is eliminated, when you consider being inside a box fully shielded for EMI will not change the way it works.

Soundhaspriority
19-10-2009, 23:01
Neil: Sorry, I drifted off again and didn't really address your test too much. First thing I should say is great photos, if perhaps a bit large. It helped me realize you didn't quite write the message correctly, there is a greater than symbol ( > ) missing before the "O.K.". This doesn't negate hearing any effect, but it doesn't help. The rest of the message appears to be written fine, but I folded mine further than that. The idea is to get into as small a shape as you can (I find this helps the sound). Also, you placed it across the teeth, whereas I had mine lying on the side of the teeth, with a bit protruding out the centre hole of the CD. Again, not a dealbreaker that would negate a change, but I don't think I tested it this way, and not sure how that changes the sound. The CD you place the message doesn't need to be a music CD (only the Cd you test should be music). That said however, I forgot to mention it -should- be a CD that has the "Compact Disc" logo on it. This again will not negate the change, but it should improve the sound.

You may have noticed by now there are a number of small details I mentioned where your attempt to replicate my test was not quite the same. I'm not sure what the layout of your listening room slash kitchen is, but that may affect things too. The opened folding door could be considered a division of the room. I would have tried to keep it within your listening space, just conceal it in a box, or put it under the sofa where you can't see it. Now although my intention was not necessarily to see whether it would improve the sound, because any reliable change in the sound demonstrates the concept, yes this tweak WAS indeed supposed to improve the sound. In quite the opposite way you described; because the sound I get with the message in is a darker, sweeter and yes, more organic and musically involving sound. You certainly can however also get an uninvolving SS sound like you described, under Beltism. Just write "F--- YOU HITLER" for your message instead of my phrase, and you might hear what I mean. You could also get a more musical sound, depending on the phrase used. I know the one I devised for the test is not the most musical message I know of. But the differences I described above could well explain why you did not get an improvement, as I did. The pen itself could be a variable as well, you know. Different markers produce different sounds, even if they're all black.

As for the predictable criticism of "it must be autosuggestion" from your mates, you could next run a blind test, as I suggested in my initial post. Now I don't much care for blind tests as they are a test of listening skill more than anything, but its pretty easy to do here. Have someone put the same CD in the box each time, but change only the message. One with the proper message, one with no message. Another test could involved one with my message, one with the Hitler suggestion.(Just test 2 variables at a time please!). This way you can't know what is in the room. But I -totally- understand your reaction of not feeling this is necessary, because I totally share it. This sort of thing is only for people who don't have confidence in their own hearing or their own mind. When you hear something to where you hear it distinctly and reliably, and it continues to be there when repeated, then jumping through hoops with blind tests can and only will be for the benefit of everyone else who insists you're not hearing what you know you are. They generally don't perform blind tests for everything they here either, ironically....

Soundhaspriority
19-10-2009, 23:02
anthonyTD wrote:


hi all,
well, it would seem that our test results are consistent, and therefore i think i can say that for me the proof of the pudding is indeed in the eating, unfortunetly paul seems to have disapeard from AOS at the moment, so in his absence we can only conclude that maybe he is not in agreement with our findings,

No, I had written a response for you too. I was not allowed to respond in my own thread.


anyway, once again i for one would like to thank all who tried the test, at least AOS can now be seen as a place that embrace's opinions no matter how way out they may seem at the time!

Uh-huh. :eyebrows: So long as they don't confirm any differences heard from "weirdo tweaks" like Beltism! And if calling for my banishment is "embracing" unpopular audio opinions... boy, I'd hate to see what y'all would have in store for me if on the other hand you were rejecting such opinions. :lol:

But seriously, thanks for being the first chap to dare cross the uncrossable line into the audio path less travelled.

Alex_UK
19-10-2009, 23:07
Well, I struggled to find a black felt-tip, and a jewel case (I bin them when I buy them, and file the CDs in clear slipcases) but once these small issues were overcome I was able to construct my "IF Device" and I included the greater-than (">") sign, though alb makes a valid observation - maybe I shouldn't have? (EDIT: Paul has now confirmed the ">" sign should be included)

I chose the Zero 7 remix of Lambchop's Up With People - it's a good track to A/B with, because the intro has a nice guitar on the left of the soundstage, which is easy to isolate and remember, before the rest of the track builds, then a nice vibraphone, before bass and the beat and then the vocals kick in.

Unfortunately, despite trying 5 times with/without the IF Device (in the nearest drawer to the system, or removed to the utility room, the exteme opposite on the ground floor layout) I am unable to spot any difference at all. I left it in place for over half an hour and played the new Zero 7 album for a while, before returning to the reference track, then removing the device, and repeating again. Still nothing. (But, I have to say, I don't have a lot of faith in my own ears as I struggle sometimes with cable changes, bitrates in music files, sometimes even components!)

But, to me, I could tell no difference with the device in situ or not.

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 23:17
There seems to be a slight contradiction:

" Cut the line you wrote out of the paper, keeping close to the letters, without cutting into them. Fold the printed strip of paper in half, with the printed side showing. Fold it in half again and again, until it can be folded no longer, and press it flat. (Keeping it in your fingers), remove the CD disc from its jewel case tray, place the folded strip of paper against the teeth in the centre of the tray, so that it lies across the teeth of the tray. Next, press the CD into the tray, over top of the strip (the CD will float above the tray, because of the thickness of the paper; that's expected). Now close the cover of the CD case."

My strip of paper was folded in half 5 times resulting in a volume: 8.5mm long, 8mm wide and 3mm thick. As such it fitted within the teeth of the spider, and not across the teeth. Do you suppose this made any difference?


I too have been slightly troubled by some irregularities in Paul's instructions.
We were told to pay attention to details........

I made one of these strips of paper by writing in fairly small lettering so as to ensure it would all fit on a page height piece of paper. This was partly because Paul's suggestion of curving the line of words seemed totally at odds with the folding & placing over the centre of the CD case - if a piece of paper is curved, how can you fold it in half over itself several times & keep folding it till it will fold no more? If it's curved then surely there will be bits sticking out all over the place after the first but certainly after the second fold? At this point, you can't fold the thing in half properly.

Anyway, I managed to get the writing on a straight strip of paper. I cut the strip close to the lettering as described. I folded it five times to a point where the fold just about stayed shut if I let go with my fingers. I then realised that I could probably go one more fold. This ended up as a sort of rolled lump.
I tried to put this in the centre of a CD case & it just fell into the hole in the middle. This was not as described so I unfolded the last fold. That still fell into the hole. I looked through my discs till I found one with a newer type case with the smaller jaws. It didn't fall through - whoopee!

With some considerable difficulty, I managed to balance the paper there till I was able to place the disc on top of it as described.
THE HOLE IN THE DISC WAS TOO BIG!!!!!!!
So the paper went straight through the hole.
What to do, what to do?

So I unfolded the fifth fold as Barry had done & it more closely resembled what had been described but it still pushed through the hole under very light pressure (such as that exerted when the CD case was closed).

Another solution was to make the strip wider - but this meant that the writing had to be in bigger lettering but to make lettering taller, it also had to be wider, making it impossible to fit it all on a single page height of A4 (& giving the folding problems of a curved piece of paper described above)

Alternatively, the paper could be cut a little distance away from the lettering.

It is for these reasons that I do not believe Paul actually carried out what he described before he described it. For someone who's writing style is like Paul's I simply do not believe that he could have carried out the task he described - there are too many things that he neglected to tell us how to do.
I'm sure that if he had done it, the instructions would have been different. Remember this was written by someone who told us attention to detail is important. What he described is actually not possible to do.

Anyway I'm glad that Neil tried it & was interested to hear that he noticed a change. So far we've had four subjects & one positive result. (I'm counting the fact that anything happened as a positive result & therefore ignoring Neil's dissatisfation with the actual nature of the change).

.........and Neil's positive result came despite him not writing the '>' symbol before the 'OK'.

Come on then Alex!!!!!

The Grand Wazoo
19-10-2009, 23:22
Trouble with launching off on lengthy posts - you miss stuff.
Sorry Alex!!

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 04:56
It is for these reasons that I do not believe Paul actually carried out what he described before he described it. For someone who's writing style is like Paul's I simply do not believe that he could have carried out the task he described - there are too many things that he neglected to tell us how to do. I'm sure that if he had done it, the instructions would have been different. Remember this was written by someone who told us attention to detail is important. What he described is actually not possible to do.

You know, I understand skepticsm as important sometimes in the process of understanding. There's nothing wrong with healthy skepticsm. This isn't healthy skepticsm I'm afraid. You should realize that your speculation and conjecture about me is just that; speculation and conjecture. It's not "the truth", simply the best guess you can come up with as to what that is. It has no more to do with the reality of things than say, a blancmange. Of course, there's nothing wrong with speculation and conjecture either, Chris. It's all good fun. It's when we mistake our speculation and conjecture for fact and evidence, that we just fumble toward that dark pit of madness. So do be careful about that. It seems the reason you're making these wild accusations that I never even tried my own experiment :scratch:, is because you never thought to wrap the curved end of the message around the other part, then folding the whole thing in half (as I did during mine). Remember, i said in subsequent messages the idea here is just to get the strip into a small size, to help improve things. Most of my trials involved a straight message, because I wrote small on the long (11") side of the paper. I don't know if it occurred to you, but the length of the eventual message is directly related to how fine your fine point marker is.

After seeing Neil submit a picture of the message across the hole, I realized that my instruction relating how I placed the message across the teeth could be interpreted in a way different to how I conceived it (I had meant across the length of the teeth, not the hole itself). So I took the trouble to snap some pics of exactly what I was trying to describe it in my initial post. I am sorry for the confusion of how this one part was written or if I didn't go into detail enough, but if as you say there is "many things I neglected to tell you how to do" to where you were so "troubled by these irregularities", why didn't you just ASK for a clarification on those things, instead of drumming up another silly secret sinister conspiracy theory about me? I'm not even sure why you posted this, since it comes after I explained with photos how the message is to be placed.

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 05:27
I left it in place for over half an hour and played the new Zero 7 album for a while, before returning to the reference track, then removing the device, and repeating again. Still nothing. (But, I have to say, I don't have a lot of faith in my own ears as I struggle sometimes with cable changes, bitrates in music files, sometimes even components!)

That being the case, I would not expect you to discern the changes, because IMO, I don't think it would be any greater than what you describe struggling with. As Neil said, "not massive". The more critical listening experience one has, the more sure they are of what they hear, and the more they are going to discern differences in general, and do better with smaller differences. Moreover, those smaller differences will be reported as significantly greater than those with lesser critical listening abilities, because that's how you hear it, the better your hearing abilities. Apart from differences in ideologies, this is the fundamental reason why audiophiles differ so much on so many things. What is inaudible, what is barely there, and what is night and day. Also, what is snake oil and what is totally legit. (and that's assuming all parties involved have actually heard the same product!). I think this difference in different abilities to discern differences in critical listening is the same with this situation, as it is with every other similar controversy I have seen on audio forums over the years with conventional tweaks as well. Where the opinions on whether a tweak is audible or not varies greatly between those who tested it, and where their listening threshold lies.


BTW, "IF" = Informational Fields
(MF = Morphogenetic Fields)

markf
20-10-2009, 05:57
Paul,
was there a further instruction for the LP part of the "Fantastic free CD / LP tweak!"
I may have missed the text describing that.

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 09:12
Paul:


You know, I understand skepticsm as important sometimes in the process of understanding. There's nothing wrong with healthy skepticsm. This isn't healthy skepticsm I'm afraid. You should realize that your speculation and conjecture about me is just that; speculation and conjecture. It's not "the truth", simply the best guess you can come up with as to what that is.


Well, my scepticism doesn't appear to be healthy for you!
It was not a guess – it was a carefully considered opinion based upon the evidence I had before me. i.e. the impossibility of carrying out a task which had been described in writing by someone who takes obvious time, care and attention to detail in everything that they write and who also stated that we should pay attention to detail.



It's when we mistake our speculation and conjecture for fact and evidence, that we just fumble toward that dark pit of madness. So do be careful about that.

You may like to look at what I wrote again: "It is for these reasons that I do not believe…." Where did I imply or infer that my conclusion was a fact? What do you assume that I think this opinion is evidence for? …….I could type something patronising here like 'and please you be careful about that before you reply'.
When I went to school, the word 'believe' had a different meaning to how you seem to understand it.



It seems the reason you're making these wild accusations that I never even tried my own experiment, is because you never thought to wrap the curved end of the message around the other part, then folding the whole thing in half (as I did during mine).

I followed your directions. You insisted that attention to detail was important.




Remember, i said in subsequent messages the idea here is just to get the strip into a small size, to help improve things. Most of my trials involved a straight message, because I wrote small on the long (11") side of the paper.
I don't know if it occurred to you, but the length of the eventual message is directly related to how fine your fine point marker is.

I didn't have any problem getting the words onto a single long edge of paper. My point was that by doing this, it made it impossible to carry out your instructions as you had written them.




I am sorry for the confusion of how this one part was written or if I didn't go into detail enough, but if as you say there is "many things I neglected to tell you how to do" to where you were so "troubled by these irregularities", why didn't you just ASK for a clarification on those things, instead of drumming up another silly secret sinister conspiracy theory about me? I'm not even sure why you posted this, since it comes after I explained with photos how the message is to be placed.

Like I said earlier:
Trouble with launching off on lengthy posts - you miss stuff. The reason I didn't ask was that as I also said before, the task was described in writing by someone who takes obvious time, care and attention to detail in everything that they write and who also stated that we should pay attention to detail.

You talk about my drumming up sinister conspiracy theories Paul, but you fail to recognise that I have actually been one of your best allies on the Art of Sound. I would respectfully suggest that were it not for my support for your right to say what you appear to believe in (along with that of one or two others) and for my urging people to try what you were suggesting, then you would have been long gone and we would not be having this discussion. I held back from doing the test at first because I have already had experience with these things and I wanted others to try it first. As I explained, I wasn't able to conduct the test myself, but I made the effort to come up with some useful contribution.

I will be conducting it for myself as soon as I'm able to.

I didn't at any time suggest that the test wouldn't work or even that it was in some way bogus. I simply said that I thought you hadn't carried it out yourself when you wrote the instructions. I think you spend too much time defending yourself, my friend.

As I've implied before Paul, I have no problem with your message, but I do have a problem with the way that you have chosen to approach the delivery of that message.




However, I think there is something rather more fundamental to address:
I saw something rather more important than all of the above in a statement that you made in reply to Neil's report that I think you do need to defend:


……..as I have always said, the products are more effective than free tweaks - so the best I can do is try to come up with something free but effective enough that the unexperienced can detect, because I am not about to give my products away!.

Ahem. You say you are not about to give your products away.


Is this not a little contrary to what you've previously stated?
Did you not say that you were simply a supporter of the ideas of PWB?
Did you not say that you had no connection with PWB other than that?
Did you not say that your contribution was to carry out your own 'research' based on the ideas of PWB?
Did you tell us before that you sell products that use these principles?
Should you be registered as a Trade Member of the AOS?
Are any of these discussions in the correct place?


What is your true connection to PWB?
Are you employed by PWB?
Are you PWB?

Marco
20-10-2009, 09:38
because I am not about to give my products away!


Yes, Paul - what do you mean YOUR products?

Have you been lying to us all along about who you are?????

Marco.

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 10:24
Hi Guys


Ummmm Marco's above post is very significant..could Paul be Peter ? However that in its self does not alter the need for me to conduct another test...I want to know what is going on here.

Any way I have devised a blind test. 4 CDs in the same cases TDK CDR cases. Now 3 of the discs are identical in so far as they are CDRs, however there is music recorded on them. 1 disc is the PAD IF from yesterday but now in a TDK case. So I have A,B,C and D I shuffled the cases before labeling them and I don't know which is which.

One disc has a negative message in it Everything is not safe x5 times with FO at the end short for F... OFF. One has a blank piece of paper folded. One has no paper, and One is the PAD IF from yesterday. The negative message disc I will call a N I F...Negative I F Device.

I have read Paul's expansion on his instructions and will alter the discs later after carrying out the same tests as yesterday. I will report exactly what happens. I have left the room set up as before.

I will update you all later.


Regards D S D L

NRG
20-10-2009, 10:28
:popcorn: http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/stock/smiley-character00114.gif

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 10:30
Neil,
As I said, I'll also be carrying this out for myself when I'm able to, but I think Paul has to address the points I've raised about his products.

Cheers

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 10:35
Neil,
As I said, I'll also be carrying this out for myself when I'm able to, but I think Paul has to address the points I've raised about his products.

Cheers

I agree with you your questions are important and valid and really should be answered by Paul/Peter.

Warming the system up as I type.


Regards D S D L

Marco
20-10-2009, 10:50
Ummmm Marco's above post is very significant..


It is indeed, Neil, because if Paul/Peter/Shippy/Soundhaspriority, (delete whichever 'fantasy' you feel is applicable), has been lying then he'll be banned with immediate effect.

We have a zero tolerance policy for liars/shills or people operating surreptitiously under pseudonyms.

I therefore await an acceptable explanation.

Marco.

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 11:10
Not hard to work out Marco..Now concentrate :)

anthonyTD
20-10-2009, 11:11
anthonyTD wrote:



No, I had written a response for you too. I was not allowed to respond in my own thread.




Uh-huh. :eyebrows: So long as they don't confirm any differences heard from "weirdo tweaks" like Beltism! And if calling for my banishment is "embracing" unpopular audio opinions... boy, I'd hate to see what y'all would have in store for me if on the other hand you were rejecting such opinions. :lol:

But seriously, thanks for being the first chap to dare cross the uncrossable line into the audio path less travelled.
hi paul,
not sure what the part highlighted above has to do with me, :confused:as you have stated i was the first to throw caution to the wind on this some-what contriversal subject, so, i would appreciate that in future you do not confuse me with such characters!! anyway, if you remember, from my original test i did state that i heard little or no diffrence, i did not state that i heard nothing, but was unsure if or why i did or did not percieve a diffrence.
regards,anthony,TD...
PS, as others have stated, are you infact peter and not paul, it will make no diffrence to my views towards your opinions, but i will of course be disapointed that you couldnt have come here in your true identity.

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 11:15
Extensive use of Inverted commas was the give away for me :)

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 11:17
hi paul,
not sure what the part highlighted above has to do with me, :confused:as you have stated i was the first to throw caution to the wind on this some-what contriversal subject, so, i would appreciate that in future you do not confuse me with such characters!! anyway, if you remember, from my original test i did state that i heard little or no diffrence, i did not state that i heard nothing, but was unsure if or why i did or did not percieve a diffrence.
regards,anthony,TD...
PS, as others have stated, are you infact peter and not paul, it will make no diffrence to my views towards your opinions, but i will of course be disapointed that you couldnt have come here in your true identity.


Agreed Anthony....I too will be very disappointed.

However not in defence of Paul/Peter's behaviour if in deed we have been deceived, but I wonder if Peter Belt himself joined and posted how he would have been received?



Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
20-10-2009, 11:25
Agreed Anthony....I too will be very disappointed.

However not in defence of Paul/Peter's behaviour if in deed we have been deceived, but I wonder if Peter Belt himself joined and posted how he would have been received?



Regards D S D L
hi neil,
you have a point, but it still dosent make it right!
A...

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 11:47
I wonder if Peter Belt himself joined and posted how he would have been received?


I'm sure there would be plenty of similar hostility, but I'd like to think that:


Some of us would have defended his right to say what he appears to believe in.
Some of us would have urged people to have a go.
Some people would have had a go.
A healthy and open discussion might follow.
PWB might have gained some respect and credibility for being open & honest and for having an interesting viewpoint.


Still, as it stands, at the moment, I'm only asking questions - I hope no-one thinks 'I'm mistaking my speculation and conjecture for fact and evidence', or that 'I'm just fumbling toward that dark pit of madness'. God forbid that you may assume 'I'm making wild accusations or drumming up another silly secret sinister conspiracy theory'.

Nope, not a bit of it - I'm only asking questions!

Themis
20-10-2009, 11:58
I think that PW posting here would have an identical effect. No better, no worse. ;)

Alex_UK
20-10-2009, 11:58
Before all of this started I had no idea who Paul/Shippy/Soundhaspriority was, nor Peter Belt, so I for one, would have behaved no differently to start with - I would equally have objected to the "ram it down your throat" approach whether Paul or Peter! ;)

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 12:01
hi neil,
you have a point, but it still dosent make it right!
A...

I agree completely. If Paul is Peter,he is gone.


Regards D S D L

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 12:12
I think that PW posting here would have an identical effect. No better, no worse. ;)


Before all of this started I had no idea who Paul/Shippy/Soundhaspriority was, nor Peter Belt, so I for one, would have behaved no differently to start with - I would equally have objected to the "ram it down your throat" approach whether Paul or Peter

I agree with you both that it would've probably been identical - up to this morning. But the point is, you tried it Alex, & if we'd have known we were dealing with PWB, some more people may have tried it given the results of Neils experience & that may have resulted in a sale or two for PWB, a few people's minds being a little more open & I'm sure some confused people & some remaining staunchly anti.

However, if my questions are prodding in the right direction then what chance does he have of selling anything to any of us?
What chance is there of anyone else still being as intrigued about the whole thing as Neil obviously is now? - and he obviously is.
I've also heard some effects of this stuff and so has Dave too, but this approach has been counter productive from everyone's point of view, when it could have been very, very interesting (even if it ultimately led no-where).

Cheers

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 12:14
Okay drum roll.

The first set of listening tests are in, using the blind test I devised.

I am stumped by the result as its not what I was expecting. I only listened to the first minute of the Patricia Barbour track...so as to remove any chance of me convincing myself I had heard anything as the music played on....not that I think I would mind you.

I listened a few times with the 4 CDS out in the yard. I heard nothing each time I replayed the track. The sound was the same.

First listen was in the drawer in the kitchen, second was in the room under a seat.

CD A had no treatment. Twice I was not sure if I heard anything at all so I put a question ? against that letter.

CD B had the blank bit of paper. I heard no difference at all.

CD C was the PAD disc from yesterday. I heard no difference once and a difference on the second time when it was in the room.

And now the shocker CD D was...my negative IF Device. I heard a difference both times.

At this stage to hear a change in sound was all I was looking for (or not), not if it was better. However CD C and CD D had differences and I think I preferred Disc D. I need to do more listening to sort out any preferences between C and D.


Paul suggests that different wording and even the colour of the writing can manipulate the sound. I am more stumped by this result. I will conduct the test again. A friend is coming over tonight so I will try the test on him. I will also re-make the IF Device as per Paul's revised instructions.

The mystery deepens..........


Regards D S D L

Barry
20-10-2009, 12:21
This is getting to be a bit like the 'X-files': "The truth is out there" (but where?)

Regards

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 12:25
This is getting to be a bit like the 'X-files': "The truth is out there" (but where?)

Regards

Indeed it is. I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone.

I can assure everyone I did not know what disc was what, until I opened them up when I was finished and checked the results against my tick sheet.....I was shocked to say the least.


Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
20-10-2009, 12:35
Okay drum roll.

The first set of listening tests are in, using the blind test I devised.

I am stumped by the result as its not what I was expecting. I only listened to the first minute of the Patricia Barbour track...so as to remove any chance of me convincing myself I had heard anything as the music played on....not that I think I would mind you.

I listened a few times with the 4 CDS out in the yard. I heard nothing each time I replayed the track. The sound was the same.

First listen was in the drawer in the kitchen, second was in the room under a seat.

CD A had no treatment. Twice I was not sure if I heard anything at all so I put a question ? against that letter.

CD B had the blank bit of paper. I heard no difference at all.

CD C was the PAD disc from yesterday. I heard no difference once and a difference on the second time when it was in the room.

And now the shocker CD D was...my negative IF Device. I heard a difference both times.

At this stage to hear a change in sound was all I was looking for (or not), not if it was better. However CD C and CD D had differences and I think I preferred Disc D. I need to do more listening to sort out any preferences between C and D.


Paul suggests that different wording and even the colour of the writing can manipulate the sound. I am more stumped by this result. I will conduct the test again. A friend is coming over tonight so I will try the test on him. I will also re-make the IF Device as per Paul's revised instructions.

The mystery deepens..........


Regards D S D L

hi neil,
well, you seem to have had similar results to your first test so i think we can conclude that for you anyway it seems to have a marked effect!
why? well we can either rely on paul/peter's:confused: explanation, or we need to look more indepth at why it seems to have had more impact on you/your system than others. we wait with anticipation.:)
A...

Themis
20-10-2009, 12:46
Neil, I suggest you should have someone else placing the disks. And just note the results, without knowing what you note.
(except if you consider that "knowing about it", is a required parameter here)

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 12:46
hi neil,
well, you seem to have had similar results to your first test so i think we can conclude that for you anyway it seems to have a marked effect!
why? well we can either rely on paul/peter's:confused: explanation, or we need to look more indepth at why it seems to have had more impact on you/your system than others. we wait with anticipation.:)
A...


This is certainly all very odd...I don't have any answers, just lots of questions.

Regards D S D L

Marco
20-10-2009, 12:49
I think we need the help of one of the universe's finest scientific minds to help unravel this perplexing mystery.

Neil, summon Davros at once!

Marco.

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 12:54
Someone needs help Marco that's for sure

:sofa:

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 12:55
Neil, I suggest you should have someone else placing the disks. And just note the results, without knowing what you note.
(except if you consider that "knowing about it", is a required parameter here)

Hi Themis

As I didn't know what was in what cd cases I think its about as good as I could do this AM, however I will do the test tonight on a friend and he won't know what I am doing. That will be interesting. However if this was a scientific experiment then there are not enough people taking part..at my end that is.


Marco

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


Regards D S D L

Themis
20-10-2009, 12:56
However if this was a scientific experiment then there are not enough people taking part..at my end that is.:lolsign:

Marco
20-10-2009, 13:09
Marco

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


I'm just not treating this stuff with the respect it deserves, am I?

Marco.

anthonyTD
20-10-2009, 13:22
I'm just not treating this stuff with the respect it deserves, am I?

Marco.
nope!!:doh::scratch:;):)
A...

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 13:29
I'm just not treating this stuff with the respect it deserves, am I?

Marco.


We have a mystery here.

How can writing on a piece of paper effect the sound of an audio system when placed in a CD case with a disc ?

How can a change of words also result in an effect (change of colour can take that further according to Paul/Peter)?

Respect ? Its not for me a question of respect..it is simply that I have heard a change in the sound that ties in (or so it seems) with the presence or absence of these "IF Devices...and I want to know why.

The blind test (though not as complete as it could be) suggests a repeatable audible change that I can detect. The question is can someone else hear a change in my set up. I will try that tonight. Poor Simon..he hasn't a clue what hes in for.

Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
20-10-2009, 13:42
We have a mystery here.

How can writing on a piece of paper effect the sound of an audio system when placed in a CD case with a disc ?

How can a change of words also result in an effect (change of colour can take that further according to Paul/Peter)?

Respect ? Its not for me a question of respect..it is simply that I have heard a change in the sound that ties in (or so it seems) with the presence or absence of these "IF Devices...and I want to know why.

The blind test (though not as complete as it could be) suggests a repeatable audible change that I can detect. The question is can someone else hear a change in my set up. I will try that tonight. Poor Simon..he hasn't a clue what hes in for.

Regards D S D L

hi neil,
thats cool:smoking: i for one will be waiting with baited breath for the results!!
A...

Stratmangler
20-10-2009, 13:51
I'm just not treating this stuff with the respect it deserves, am I?

Marco.

You seem to give it as much credence as it deserves.

Chris:)

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 14:35
Paul,
was there a further instruction for the LP part of the "Fantastic free CD / LP tweak!"
I may have missed the text describing that.

No. I mentioned "LP" because it really doesn't matter what you listen to; the sound will change in general. So it's a "CD" tweak as much as it is LP, mp3, clock radio, TV, telephone, etc.

Marco
20-10-2009, 14:41
Would you kindly deal with the observation I made in post #165 before going any further.............

?

Marco.

alb
20-10-2009, 15:42
No. I mentioned "LP" because it really doesn't matter what you listen to; the sound will change in general. So it's a "CD" tweak as much as it is LP, mp3, clock radio, TV, telephone, etc.

How can this be labelled a "Tweak". If the effects cannot always be heard, and when they are heard they are not always entirely favourable.

Spectral Morn
20-10-2009, 15:53
How can this be labelled a "Tweak". If the effects cannot always be heard, and when they are heard they are not always entirely favourable.

I don't want to be seen as defending anything here (I know I am doing the tests and have heard something), however mains cables, mains filters and mains regenerators don't always render an improvement. Sometimes no difference, a negative or a very easily heard improvement. I have experienced that myself.

So are mains products a tweak ? Or not because you can't always hear the benefit.


Regards D S D L

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 15:53
Effects are there for people who think it's there

:oops:

alb
20-10-2009, 16:36
Maybe this deserves a separate thread, so that Marcos pertinent question can be answered. I shouldn't have posted after it.:doh:
Perhaps we can define a "Tweak" elsewhere, if a Moderator could move it.:)

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 16:46
Well............ I did mention that the thick was plottening.......... & plotten it did!

Marco
20-10-2009, 17:06
HEEEEEEELLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOO, Paul, Peter, or Scooby Doo................ The silence is deafening!!!

If we don't hear a suitable explanation from you by midnight UK time, you're banned.

Marco.

NRG
20-10-2009, 17:08
Strange....he was viewing the thread about an hour or so ago but did not reply...

Themis
20-10-2009, 17:17
Well, if it's for a three-volume answer, he needs time... :)

Marco
20-10-2009, 17:17
I wonder why, eh, Neal? I've got to say that if there's one thing that really pisses me of on forums, it's people who aren't honest and upfront about their identity!

Marco.

DanJennings
20-10-2009, 17:19
I should probably just come out and admit it, I'm Barry Chuckle ;)

Cotlake
20-10-2009, 18:14
I questioned whether paul was Peter a couple of pages ago but no-one else picked up on it at the time! This later 'my product' comment caught my eye immediately and was sufficient to convince me.


We have a mystery here.

How can writing on a piece of paper effect the sound of an audio system when placed in a CD case with a disc ?

How can a change of words also result in an effect (change of colour can take that further according to Paul/Peter)?of respect..it is simply that I have heard a change in the sound that ties in (or so it seems) with the presence or absence of these "IF Devices...and I want to know why.

You still haven't worked it out have you! Peter's posts are full of auto suggestion. He has managed to hook you and you swallowed his bait. Having done that and revealed your results, he responds with even more auto suggestion bigging up your ears, attitude and whatever else. You've been sucked in. It's a trick of your mind. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why not try the one sock on, one sock off experiment that brought Neal to his senses. It might help you to get straightened out ;)

Posted with good will and empathy I assure you.

Greg

Marco
20-10-2009, 18:22
I have to agree with Greg... It's simple auto-suggestion, nothing more, and a complete waste of time!

I've not said much about this 'tweak', but in the background I've been quietly shaking my head in disbelief. Sorry, Neil - this nonsense is for those in the land of loopy-loodom!

Marco.

SteveW
20-10-2009, 18:36
OK... My theory. Its May.

May Belt.

The clues are all there...the typing skills, the phrasing, the anglophile referencing, blimey...the verbiage.

and most conclusively......

How come you never see May and Paul in the same room together ?? MMmmmm ?

Themis
20-10-2009, 18:41
How come you never see May and Paul in the same room together ?? MMmmmm ?
Because any system sounds awful when they are in the same room at the same time ? :eyebrows:

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 18:45
Two's an even number is it not?

Marco
20-10-2009, 18:52
OK... My theory. Its May.

May Belt.

The clues are all there...the typing skills, the phrasing, the anglophile referencing, blimey...the verbiage.

and most conclusively......

How come you never see May and Paul in the same room together ?? MMmmmm ?

Hi Steve,

Who the heck is May Belt - his wife? I've never heard of her.

Marco.

Cotlake
20-10-2009, 18:53
Is May Peter's partner? I seem to recall from years ago that alot of his admin was done by his wife/partner. I'm I right? I hope I haven't misinterpreted Steve's post if it is intended to be subtle irony. If not, Steve, can you expand and fill in a few gaps. I've not discussed this nonsence for about twenty years!

Joe
20-10-2009, 18:57
OK... My theory. Its May.

May Belt.


Damn! I thought you were going to write 'Brian May'.

alb
20-10-2009, 18:57
Shouldn't it be Mary and not May.

Then you'd have Peter, Paul and Mary.

Marco
20-10-2009, 19:01
How about Mary, Mungo and Midge?

Marco.

Beechwoods
20-10-2009, 19:11
PD18h5VlkrE

Marco
20-10-2009, 19:23
Haha... 'Weebles wobble but they don't fall down'? :eyebrows:

Marco.

Themis
20-10-2009, 19:33
We used to have April fool... and now we have May...

SteveW
20-10-2009, 20:43
OK...it might just be me...but, have a look. http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/

Follow the white rabbit ;)

May Belt is Peter's wife, and again..it may just be me and I humbly apologise if I'm wrong, but I've looked at several of her posts and articles on the PWB site and there is something familiar about them.

It also is obvious that the guard was let down when Paul/whoever thought a chink into a forum was there and said 'my products'...as we are keenly awaiting an answer on.

Tis such a pity...as there seems to be an awful lot in this malarky, but then Peter Paul and May go and spoil it all..by softly whispering.. You put ler Left leg in. yer right sock out..

alb
20-10-2009, 21:39
A whole website full of long winded, confusing paragraphs, anecdotes and quotes that don't seem to establish much. I didn't realise there was a business behind all this.

I'm off to have a go at a DIY Quantum Clip.....even though i'm not entirely sure what its for.

Now where can i find some copper strands that are coated in a metal alloy. Ah yes, some tinned copper wire from the shed..........

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 22:50
I wrote:


No. I mentioned "LP" because it really doesn't matter what you listen to; the sound will change in general. So it's a "CD" tweak as much as it is LP, mp3, clock radio, TV, telephone, etc.

You responded 6 minutes later:


Exclamation Urgent response required!!!
Would you kindly deal with the observation I made in post #165 before going any further.............

Then no more than 2 1/2 hours later, despite the fact that I followed your latest demand and made no further post to the forum you wrote:



HEEEEEEELLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOO, Paul, Peter, or Scooby Doo................ The silence is deafening!!!
If we don't hear a suitable explanation from you by midnight UK time, you're banned.

Holy Mother of Mary, you will not stop harassing me, will you? Now I know what some people felt like living under McCarthyism in the 50's. What do you call this flavour of it, "McBeltism"? Do you have anything else to do in your day, or is this all that you want to do? What is this business of demanding from your members that they respond to your baseless silly conspiracy theories about them within hours or face banishment? Have you ever done this with anyone else at any time in this forum's history? Show me where you have, so I know I am not being prejudiced against for personal reasons. I for one have never heard of a moderator on a forum demanding a response from a member within a few hours, as though posting to AOS is all they have to do and all they should have to do in life. On a professional discussion group, or one that has any pretensions to being a professional forum, this is done in PM for one thing. Not on public display to impress your mates how you can bully around members you personally don't like and have a petty vindictive agenda against, in which you are clearly violating your own ethos to carry out.

If an administrator has issues with a member that require attention, well the PM gets the attention, and the member is required to respond before further posting. So you did actually say I should respond before posting again, and I did not post since. But then you CHANGED your own stipulation within 2 1/2 hours, and demanded this be done before the stroke of midnight, UK time!! Who DOES that?! I guess this is just simply yet one more thing that has eluded you: just because someone is registered as being "online", doesn't mean they are. My browser logs me in automatically. And even if someone is reading a thread, doesn't mean they've read your messages. And even if they are ON the page with your "urgent!!!!" message, does not mean they have read it, because they may be doing other things on the computer, or elsewhere. I could go on, but is that enough to make you understand why administrators who behave impartially and professionally use PM to contact members? Any refresh of the page and it will be evident you have a message. There IS no issue on an audio chat forum that should be considered "urgent" to where a response is demanded before the stroke of midnight.

It's not enough that you insult me along with the membership, but it seems you are only reading my thread to harass me while your mate Steve took a vacation from stalking and harassing me. Are there no other threads that require moderation here? Because I have not seen you moderate anyone but myself. I mean your friend Steve violates every rule of the ethos by stalking and harassing me to this thread, doing nothing here but crapping on my thread and assaulting my character when I have said nothing against him (so did Greg). And yet you let it all slide on by because he isn't an "obvious lunatic" as you called me, he's your friend Steve that you'll be meeting on Friday. Whereas me you insist on not leaving me alone to simply try to respond to queries being made toward me. Remember, there are -two- principles of moderation in the ethos: "strict but fair". You are only focusing on the "strict" part.

I have tried to avoid inciting more shrieking whinging fits in all of my replies yesterday, and dutifully met your demand that I post to other threads. One member even acknowledged this "extending the olive branch". Is anything going to be enough for you, or are you just hell-bent on tossing me because you have a thing against Beltism, your mate Steve has a thing against me, and all that's good enough for you? I posted an on topic thread appropriate for this forum, and I have asked you to please stop bullying me when I am not contravening the ethos or even the special demands you've made on me. I just want to talk about audio here, in this thread. This is still an audio forum yes? Am I going to be allowed to do so without you assaulting my character as well?
If you can not even pretend to be impartial and objective toward me because of your obvious intolerance and disrespect toward my beliefs or me personally, then you should hand the job of moderating this thread to someone who can. There seems to be enough administrators here that that isn't a problem. Neil is a "Genius Facilitator Moderator". How about letting him take over the duties here?!

As for your latest conspiracy theory against me that you demand I respond to, once again, NO, I do not work for ANY audio company. I am quite sure I have already said this, just as I am quite sure you have never in the history of this forum demanded of anyone else only trying to write calm responses to a free tweak they posted, that they respond to that same question. Why did I say I wouldn't give my products away to members here? Because they are MY products, genius. I bought them, I paid for them. I am not giving them away. So put the torch and the pitchfork down already.

I dont feel that I should have to entertain every stupid accusation made of me, based on nothing but pure speculation and conjecture, with a response. If I did, considering the sheer number of them since I joined, its all I would do during my day. I don't see Linnies being forced to respond to accusations of being Ivor Tiefenbrun, or being a shill for Ivor. If people want to act like fools and spend their time working on crackpot conspiracy theories where they accuse me of being Peter Belt, or Jesus Christ their saviour or whatever the latest conspiracy du jour is, that's entirely *their business*. Do not make it mine. I am here to talk about audio, and that is what I have been trying to do.

Although I wish we could focus on talking about the subject of this thread; my tweak, and stop attacking my character and obsessing about me, I realize I can't stop making people do that. People will believe what they wish to believe, including believing their prejudices is enough to base the truth on, and that folly is theirs. But for those who insist I defend your stupid accusations of me; don't. Because you will only end up looking like a fool before the world (and make no mistake, the world is reading this), you will make AOS look like a fool's paradise.

e.g. Do you really want an idea of how stupid and ignorant it is to accuse me of being Peter Belt? Or how even stupider and even more ignorant to think that Peter Belt might join this forum ? Or how ultimately stupid and ignorant it is to demand that I get Peter Belt to defend Beltism to you? (Guess who here came up with THAT?). You think it's going to reflect well on you, do you? How intelligent your observations are, how informed a person you are, how tolerant of alternative ideas in audio science that you are? Everyone here who is off their nutter calling me "Peter", should consider these facts:

* Peter Belt is probably at least 90 years old now. Do I for the life of me SOUND like a 90 year old?!!
* Peter Belt is a British subject living in the UK. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? Can we guess, kiddies?
* Peter Belt has NEVER had ANY presence on the net. Not once, not even on his own forum. Not even on his own site.
* Peter Belt has NEVER had an interview or said a word in public, in over 20 years, I estimate.

And people think he's going to choose a little personal forum of conspiratorialists like "Art of Sound" to make his first public appearance in over 20 years? So now I'm Peter Belt, am I? Oh, just ******ing brilliant, that is.


SteveW wrote:

OK... My theory. Its May.
May Belt.
The clues are all there...the typing skills, the phrasing, the anglophile referencing, blimey...the verbiage.
and most conclusively......

So now what, MARCO?? You're going to pick up on this latest stupid speculative crackpot accusation and DEMAND that I prove I'm not May Belt, or if I fail to you'll ban me within 47 minutes because "ooooh it makes you so mad when people don't identify themselves as who you think they are"?

Let this be the last word on stupid crackpot conspiracy theories. If you want to make them against me fine. But keep it to yourself and off the site. This is an audio forum, we're supposed to be focused on audio; not on my character.

ENOUGH WITH THE AD HOMINEM ATTACKS.

If you have a problem with my beliefs in audio, ---act like an adult already, and post an -intelligent- argument against them. If you can't, stay out of the thread, and let the adults try to discuss audio without the usual displays of trying to be more irrational or mad or melodramatic in your responses than your fellow member!

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 22:50
Neil wrote:

This is certainly all very odd...I don't have any answers, just lots of questions.

So ask them while you still can! It seems I have to prove to Marco the Moderate that I am not Peter Belt, his wife, Mary Poppins, Poppin' Fresh, Poppa Smurf, or work for any company that produces unapproved audio products.

And that I am not and never have been a member of the Communnist party.

And I have to prove all this before the stroke of midnight.

Anyway, didn't I explain what was going on in my response to you? I don't know what you didn't understand of that explanation.

However if this was a scientific experiment then there are not enough people taking part..at my end that is.

Rather, I would say there aren't enough taking part on the end of the members in this thread. Given how much interest there is in the thread, how they're asking you to conduct the test this or that way, and how strong the opinions are that must not know your own ears - even under blind conditions.

We have a mystery here.

How can writing on a piece of paper effect the sound of an audio system when placed in a CD case with a disc ?

How can a change of words also result in an effect (change of colour can take that further according to Paul/Peter)?

Yes, changing the colour of the pen will change the sound. At this point, you're just observing a couple of drops of a very large sea. Just asking the questions that you are asking is going further than most others who refuse to go any further and ask questions that could help explain unexplained phenomenon. I mean beyond the automatic knee-jerk response of "human bias".

People are wondering why you can hear this when they can't. Maybe being open minded has a lot to do with it. You will hear a lot about "autosuggestion" from your mates, who nevertheless choose to ignore that you were as skeptical as they were against my beliefs. But don't forget, that works both ways, eh!! They are busy "autosuggesting" an expectation bias that says none of this could possibly be true. I have said since I have been here, the biggest impedance to progress in audio comes from people not allowing for new but unconventional ideas. This problem goes far beyond just Peter Belt, in audio.

I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone.

So do I. Specifically the episode called "The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street"

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 22:51
I'm just not treating this stuff with the respect it deserves, am I?

You're not even treating me with the respect that I deserve, considering that you have now invented a whole new "ethos" that applies to me and me alone. Clearly showing that you are allowing your beliefs about audio to prejudice not only your views of people, not only your opinions, but any sense of objectivity you are supposed to maintain, as admin.

Perhaps YOU are due for a test of my tweak. Unless you're just afraid of having all those nasty prejudices shattered.... :lol:

aquapiranha
20-10-2009, 22:54
And potentially dangerous advice....

It will be found to be more economically effective to apply Cream-Electret to all the fuses within the mains plugs of all electrical appliances throughout a building than to apply Cream-Electret to the whole surface of one shelf assembly

Followed by...

We repeat, any surface can be coated. The Cream is an emulsification of oil and water. It should therefore be kept away from electrical contacts.

Oh dear, make your mind up. I have just read a large portion of the products page of the website, and I am sorry, but that is the biggest load of utter, utter crap I have ever heard on my life. The bloke just intersperses ludicrous claims with scientific sounding names to try and big up the stuff. I mean, really, have you all read this garbage? look at this for example..

All green plant material has it's own variation of salt and sugar in order for it to correctly manipulate sunlight. If a small bag containing sugar is attached to the upper surface of a leaf within your listening territory, including the garden, a noticeable beneficial effect will take place with your sense of hearing. A small bag containing salt can be attached to the underside of the leaf with the same beneficial effect.
You couldn't make this up. Oh, he just did.

:confused:

aquapiranha
20-10-2009, 23:02
Steve took a vacation from stalking and harassing me

Oh dear, I see paranoia is creeping in.

You came here because someone mentioned belt. You proceed to litter the forum with long winded wordy pseudo scientific claptrap and then tell us we are ignorant because we have either dismissed it for the rubbish that it is or tried and failed to detect an effect, with the odd exception. Who is being harassed here? I think you will find a good portion of the members here think they are being, by your good self!

Soundhaspriority
20-10-2009, 23:17
A whole website full of long winded, confusing paragraphs, anecdotes and quotes that don't seem to establish much. I didn't realise there was a business behind all this.

Like I said, Alb, audio's best kept secret. There's a business, there's online audio reviews, there are websites from customers, there are manufacturers using Belt's principles, there's a customer forum, and there are thousands of practictioners around the audio world.

The literature and the forum messages WILL be confusing to you, that's as "normal" as the predictable irrational knee-jerk reactions to these products. There are a lot of products and concepts you know nothing about or how they operate, so of course it's going to be Greek to you. It was that way to me too in the beginning. But once you've heard the effect and done the research, you learn what all that Greek means eventually, and then it becomes perfect sense.


I'm off to have a go at a DIY Quantum Clip.....even though i'm not entirely sure what its for. Now where can i find some copper strands that are coated in a metal alloy. Ah yes, some tinned copper wire from the shed..........

:lol: I love that! You've never tried anything under Beltism in your life, and in your first experiment, you're starting with an attempt at a DIY replication of their Quantum Clip, perhaps their most complex and top end product?! Let me go out on a limb and say you won't hear any effects from that. But I'm not trying to stop you, I encourage experimenation. I just think that if you're expecting something to happen because it "looks" like the object on the web site, then you don't understand what's behind the object. If what you propose would have the same effect, the company wouldn't be able to sell the clip at whatever price its at, since anyone could put it together at home. You obviously know nothing about PWB if you "didn't realize there was a business behind this", and you have to know a lot more than that to understand why you can not duplicate the effects of the Quantum Clip. Particularly in your first ever trial of Beltism! You simply don't learn what takes 27 years of research in audio by looking at photos on a web site.

So once you find your version of the Quantum Clip does nothing, instead of writing off the phenomenon as bogus, you might just find greater success trying one of the tweaks on my site. Perhaps start with the 5 pinhole paper tweak.


How can this be labelled a "Tweak". If the effects cannot always be heard, and when they are heard they are not always entirely favourable.

:scratch: I can see you don't have much experience with tweaks. There is no tweak yet invented, and few if any components, that are "always heard" by everyone. And there is nothing in the entire hobby of audio that is "always entirely favourable" by everyone either. That's how it can be labelled a "tweak". However, I prefer the word "treatment" for this type of tweak. I use "tweak" because this is the language people understand.

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 23:25
Anyone want a sandwich & a cuppa tea

The Grand Wazoo
20-10-2009, 23:31
Anyone want a sandwich & a cuppa tea

I'll make it - You stay here & watch the adverts..............

Rare Bird
20-10-2009, 23:39
:lolsign:

alb
20-10-2009, 23:57
I love that! You've never tried anything under Beltism in your life

You haven't been paying attention have you.


you can not duplicate the effects of the Quantum Clip

Correct. I don't know what the effect will be.


you're starting with an attempt at a DIY replication of their Quantum Clip, perhaps their most complex and top end product

It's not much to show, for all those years of R&D.


You simply don't learn what takes 27 years of research in audio by looking at photos

If it's a photo of a space shuttle, then no.
If it's a photo of a croc clip, a piece of wire and a dome headed nut, then maybe i've got a fighting chance.


I can see you don't have much experience with tweaks

Your crystal ball must be steamed up.

I'll have that cuppa now, please Andre.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 00:06
Steve took a vacation from stalking and harassing me

I see you're back from your vacation of stalking, harassing and trolling me. And ready to take up where you left off.


Oh dear, I see paranoia is creeping in.

You're just now seeing it? I noticed this about you by your first rant against me. Let me guess: you don't have any mirrors in your place, do you?


You came here because someone mentioned belt. You proceed to litter the forum with long winded wordy pseudo scientific claptrap and then tell us we are ignorant because we have either dismissed it for the rubbish that it is or tried and failed to detect an effect, with the odd exception.

That "odd exception" you mention that you say was "dismissed (by all here) for the rubbish that it is" was detected not just under one trial for 40 minutes, but in another trial under BLIND conditions, and by someone who had no less hostility to me and Beltism than you do. Someone with obviously better hearing skills than you. So no, I don't just say you're ignorant: I PROVE it with facts and evidence that you're ignorant. I am sorry if it pains you to do something about your ignorance of science and audio, that you would rather blindly deny it and kill the messenger.

"Pseudoscientific claptrap"? :lol: You have proven you have no respect for science whatsoever, let alone any understanding of it or its history. Your response to any scientific observation you don't understand and have never researched is "Bollocks!". Yeah, very intelligent I might add. What exactly is your justification for calling it that? Oh let's review shall we? You tried 2 products from Belt 20 years ago when you were an angry young man, and thought it was all pseudoscientific claptrap BEFORE trying them. Now you're an angry old man and your thinking hasn't changed on that, and neither has your knowledge or experience. And even if 750 out of 1,000 subjects can hear the effects under blind trials, you would still "dismiss it". Because once a mind shuts for good, it doesn't open again.

It certainly IS much easier to dismiss such a thing than it is to research it in depth, and try to find out for yourself whether you're right or not.


Who is being harassed here? I think you will find a good portion of the members here think they are being, by your good self!

Yes, well, considering how many terrible, awful, loud, crying whinging fits you have made here over me, including those calling for my banishment and asking your mates to ignore me, I already know that -you- thought you were being harassed by me by my mere existence on the forum. Because you started all these drama queen fits the moment I joined. To answer your silly in the head claim, NO ONE is being harasssed by me, *least of all you*. That's because, as has been explained to you by one of the mods Angrypiranha, you have the free will to put me on ignore or not join my threads. Instead, you came in to MY tweak thread, and you have done nothing BUT stalk, troll and harass me in this thread.

I was told by your mate Marco that I had to "contribute to the community". I did. But you on the other hand have contributed NOTHING positive to my thread. NOTHING on topic. NOTHING but attacks on my character. NOTHING but harassment of me.

You see, YOU can put me on ignore. YOU can stay the f out of my threads already, if I make you cry and go all angry and am such a threat to your narrow belief systems. I can ignore those harassing me. And as is proven by your increasingly desperate and risible pleas to me "demanding" that I answer your stupid harassing attacks on me, I HAVE IGNORED YOUR MAD, INANE AND ABUSIVE ATTACKS.

But if I am being harassed by your mate, the Administrator, I can not put him on ignore so easily, can I?

You have done nothing in this thread but whinge about me and create flame wars. I created this thread to share a free tweak and discuss the testing of the tweak. So like I said and as you have shown in every post here, if your only reason for being in this thread is to attack my personal character as you are CONTINUING to do now that you're back from your vacation from attacking my personal character, then STAY OUT OF MY THREAD ALREADY.

Go find someone else to harass and abuse. I ASK THAT WE DISCUSS AUDIO HERE, AND NOT MY CHARACTER. Endless unprovoked assaults on my personal character does not an audio forum make.

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 00:14
You know what? you can continue to misqoute and twist what people say, as you have with my post all you want. I honestly believe that you need professional help. you have been doing this for years, and show no signs of stopping, and that is aspergers or at least OCD. Get help before it is too late.
Oh, and I will not 'stay the 'f' out of your threads as you put it, I see no reason to while you continue to peddle this snake oil.


'no respect for science whatsoever' that's a laugh, your freind belt uses made up science to sell trinkets to fools.

Keep going, I am enjoying this, it is quite fun.

Your turn...

'To answer your silly in the head claim, NO ONE is being harasssed by me' except perhaps this person....

http://www.nntpnews.net/f1569/robert-morein-worthless-stalker-asshole-no-career-7859410/

http://groups.google.co.zw/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/3923907d2beb8d93

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.audio.opinion/2006-04/msg01965.html

http://www.usenet.com.au/index.php?group=20&offset=3&thread=792&id=11387

http://www.nonsolonews.net/thread-65-1-53698-368/where-does-protools-get-it-s-warmth.htm

http://www.audiovisualtalk.com/showthread.php?t=70727

http://www.hightv.de/showthread.php?t=33429

http://www.hightv.de/showthread.php?t=33429

http://www.nnseek.com/e/alt.solar.photovoltaic/


You have posted this all over the world have you not? i could go on, you are very prolific, especially when abusing others.

Who is being abusive now? hmm?

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 00:32
Quote: I love that! You've never tried anything under Beltism in your life

You haven't been paying attention have you.

If you're implying you have talked about your experiences with the phenomenon, then my answer to that would be I can not remember everything that has been said to me; there are too many messages for that. But I do know that you do not have my experience in this area, and that if I can not duplicate the clip, you can not duplicate the clip. I'd be happy to hear about your trials and results all the same. Of course, you would have to have a Quantum clip to compare and know whether you succeeded.


Quote:
you're starting with an attempt at a DIY replication of their Quantum Clip, perhaps their most complex and top end product
It's not much to show, for all those years of R&D.

Talk to me about it. What is your experience with the clip? I'm very curious to know how it compares to mine!


If it's a photo of a space shuttle, then no.
If it's a photo of a croc clip, a piece of wire and a dome headed nut, then maybe i've got a fighting chance.

What I'm saying and why all non-practitioners misunderstand the clip, is that those pieces are just the carriers. It's what is imbued on to the carriers that makes the QC what it is, with the ability to do what it does. It's kind of like saying I know what wine is made of, I've got a cork and a bottle and some grapes. I will duplicate this expensive wine with those items.

Spectral Morn
21-10-2009, 00:45
Okay

My final test.

Simon came round to visit and after letting the system warm up and talking about all sorts of stuff I asked him if he would give me an opinion on the sound of the Patricia Barbour track Lord let it rain. I played it with no "IF" Device in the room. I then went and got the Pad "IF" device, I placed it under the chair in the room after making some noise at the system end of the room (to fake that I was doing something, I did this each time we did the experiment). I then removed it and replaced it with an "IF Device I made this afternoon following Paul's revised instructions this was in a David Bowie Cd Tonight. I at no stage primed Simon for any thing other than an opinion of how the track sounded I played only 1 minute approx at any time.

Simon identified a difference between the first play and the second. He said that the second play sounded the same as the third but preferred how my system sounded with out the "IF" Devices in the room i.e the track as it sounded with no device in the room.

We tried it again and he was less sure so we took a slight break at the end of which we tried again with only the new "IF" Device in use. This time Simon preferred the sound of my system with this Device in place and felt it was less good without the Device in the room.

When I asked him to describe what he heard he described exactly what Paul felt the improvements should be. While he changed his opinion as to what he preferred he did describe the effect and further more got it right each time the Device was used, in so much as he heard a change in the sound.

When I revealed to him what it was I had done he did not laugh and want to book me or himself into the funny farm.

I am sorry guys but I am not easily duped or a victim of auto suggestion, but I do have a theory as to how this works, but I wont be sharing it...sorry. I have destroyed the Devices and will not be using there like again. So for me I am out of this one as a participant. If you want to have ago, go ahead...but not on the basis of what I experienced.

Interestingly while I sat of axis I could hear what Simon heard....he described it perfectly as I heard it.

Any future participation in this thread will only be in my role as a mod nothing more or less.


Regards D S D L

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:39
Simon came round to visit and after letting the system warm up and talking about all sorts of stuff I asked him if he would give me an opinion on the sound of the Patricia Barbour track Lord let it rain. I played it with no "IF" Device in the room. I then went and got the Pad "IF" device, I placed it under the chair in the room after making some noise at the system end of the room (to fake that I was doing something, I did this each time we did the experiment). I then removed it and replaced it with an "IF Device I made this afternoon following Paul's revised instructions this was in a David Bowie Cd Tonight. I at no stage primed Simon for any thing other than an opinion of how the track sounded I played only 1 minute approx at any time.

Simon identified a difference between the first play and the second. He said that the second play sounded the same as the third but preferred how my system sounded with out the "IF" Devices in the room i.e the track as it sounded with no device in the room.

We tried it again and he was less sure so we took a slight break at the end of which we tried again with only the new "IF" Device in use. This time Simon preferred the sound of my system with this Device in place and felt it was less good without the Device in the room.

When I asked him to describe what he heard he described exactly what Paul felt the improvements should be. While he changed his opinion as to what he preferred he did describe the effect and further more got it right each time the Device was used, in so much as he heard a change in the sound.

When I revealed to him what it was I had done he did not laugh and want to book me or himself into the funny farm.

I am sorry guys but I am not easily duped or a victim of auto suggestion, but I do have a theory as to how this works, but I wont be sharing it...sorry. I have destroyed the Devices and will not be using there like again. So for me I am out of this one as a participant. If you want to have ago, go ahead...but not on the basis of what I experienced.

Interestingly while I sat of axis I could hear what Simon heard....he described it perfectly as I heard it.

Of course I have been through what you described countless times. Sitting off axis on a couch while a friend evaluates a Belt tweak where I did not explain what I was testing. And finding him describing it exactly as I hear it (making sure not to influence his opinion by describing what I heard first, or ask leading questions).

I don't quite get why you are not willing to share your theories or unwilling to explore the phenomenon any further. I can only guess, based on what I've seen here, that it is because of the unwelcome reaction you got from your mates, for having not met their expectation biases against Beltism. The whole notion of "put some odd socks on and then realize that you are a silly arse just like Neal did". My natural instinct when I don't understand an observation in science is to observe it further and learn more about it. My reaction to realizing that the nature of perception of sound was not at all what I thought it was, and that there really was an invisible energy on all objects that could be manipulated to improve that perception? You can bet it wasn't to destroy the tweak and never think further about or explore such heretic thoughts again.

I have always been at odds with the fact that peope will pay lip service to science; believing it already has all the answers and anything too unusal that has not ever been scientifically validated must be a hoax. But when realizing the benefits of these very odd applications that I effect, with no doubt in their mind that their sound or video image has improved, you would think they'd be curious about that. Well I mean I would. But that's often not the case. Often, there is no further interest on their part to understand and explore what can only be described as a revolutionary phenomenon, one the likes of which we have never seen or heard of our entire lives. One that we only live through once. For some it's just a sound change. A party trick, as in "Oh, look, he made the sound of the hifi kit change from the room upstairs".

Then are those like me; those out of the ordinary deeper thinkers. Those intellectuals who while hated by shallow thinkers who know nothing of science, don't just pay lip service to science but immerse themselves in it. I guess the difference here is one of intellectual courage. I am not afraid to have my beliefs challenged while... well, I don't need to illustrate how much everyone else here is. The proof is on the record, as they say. :lol: This is what keeps me open minded and better informed on the world of science, validated or not yet validated. If others wish to remain ignorant, backward-minded, in their dark little caves where they watch their little soccer matches, and shout down anything that challenges their beliefs and anger and malice towards new ideas in science, they are of course free to do so.

Courage has it's rewards, though. I have acheived a sound far superior to anyone else's here, because I am using a technology that can not be duplicated by any conventional means. All because I did NOT destroy the evidence of my first Belt tweak, afraid to go further and dependent on the peer pressure from my idiotic mates who may be experts at guzzling beer, but certainly not experienced at "thinking" very hard. But hey, what can you say. Some people are forward thinkers and others... well, the term "mouth-breathing knuckle-draggers" comes to mind. These things are really more for ADVANCED audiophiles anyway. I would never expect dilletante audiophile wanna-bes to have any interest in such advanced technologies. They're still 30 years behind us figuring out whether cables matter, geez! :lol:

Anywayz, thanks for your feedback, Dalek. And for validating all that I have said about Beltism on this forum, and proving here beyond any reasonable doubt, that I was right all along: Beltism is real.

I am quite sure that everyone who has mocked and ridiculed and attacked these concepts, and me for defending them, are now hanging their heads in shame, after the proof of no less than THREE serious tests with TWO being blind, and you being just as hostile as they were to my concepts!! For anything less but shame, proves that they are nothing but pathological skeptics. And you can not change the mind of someone who's entire security is based on not changing his belief system in the face of unquestionable evidence.



Any future participation in this thread will only be in my role as a mod nothing more or less.

Then would it be too much to ask for you to tend to that and at least do something about Aquapiranha?? I would like to lodge an official complaint against him. If you look at ALL of his messages here, they have only been character attacks against me, all of which were unprovoked. I have asked him to stay out of the thread if he will not discuss audio, and he has refused, stating that he WILL be continuing to violate the ethos under no less than TWO moderators, based upon his hatred of my beliefs. It seems I'm the only one being moderated at all here.

Some of what Steve (Aquapiranha) has violated in all of his posts in all of the threads I have been in, particularly my tweak thread here:

(Filterlab):

Eunoia; Goodwill to those you address.

Things we really like here:

Friendly people.
Differences of opinion discussed sensibly.

Things we don't like here:

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

(Steve Toy):

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.

This thread with Aquapiranha in it has not been managed with this objective in mind.

Marco:

The dialogue exchanged must therefore be respectful and constructive.

Again, this has NOT been the case with Steve (Aquapiranha) here.

WHY is he getting a pass from all of the moderators and administrators even though he is CLEARLY violating all of their contributions to the Ethos?

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:50
Greg wrote:

Why not try the one sock on, one sock off experiment that brought Neal to his senses. It might help you to get straightened out


Right. Good advice as usual, Greg. Do something that doesn't sound at all plausible, that you have no hope of hearing, and that will help to set you back on the straight and narrow (minded) path you have always travelled.


You still haven't worked it out have you! Peter's posts are full of auto suggestion. He has managed to hook you and you swallowed his bait. Having done that and revealed your results, he responds with even more auto suggestion bigging up your ears, attitude and whatever else. You've been sucked in. It's a trick of your mind. Nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks for showing how "tolerant" AOSers are when their mates hear the effects of tweaks that are not "approved" by the prevailing orthodoxy. A brilliant response as usual, Greg. Being that it comes after Neil's blind test, where he tested muliptle messages, not knowing which was which, but chose the ones with the messages as affecting the sound. And started out being as skeptical as you are about all of this. Proving you don't even understand the concept of "autosuggestion", let alone what Beltism is about. :lol:


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.

:lol:! Geez, you're one to talk, you can't even do that -yourself-! You've been trolling and stalking me since day one, and you were even told by an Admin to ignore me after one of your endless boring whinging fits about me. But since you are still threadcrapping in my thread, how do you expect anyone to take you seriously? Like Angrypiranha, you're totally addicted to me. I'm like heroin to you! Man, how sick IS that? I even took your advice from the beginning. I mean you being a charlatan and bollocks spouter, I ignored you, as the best way to deal with you! Now why don't you take your own advice already and stop stalking me and obsessing over me, and stay out of my threads!

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 02:57
AnthonyTD

well, what i meant was, any diffrence i may or may not have noticed between the first play and the second, i put down to me actualy listening more intensely on the second play... i actualy performed the test twice, just to make sure i had given it a fair go, as stated, l couldnt realy say that i experienced any significant improvement. i must also explain that anyone who knows me personaly will also know that i am quite an open minded chap, but not easily fooled,

We have that in common! Again, your comments are very sensible and refreshingly so. You did two trials, and said whatever improvement you "thought" you might have heard wasn't significant. And I assume the second play that you say you "put it down to listening more intensely", was the one with the message in CD in the room. If you did more trials where you varied the order, placing the treated CD first, that would better tell you whether it is due to listening more intensely the second time. I'm just suggesting that maybe two trials isn't enough, and could require more in order to bring any differences into significance. More so, it might change the game for you if you used multiple CD devices at the same time, as I recently described.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 03:02
Originally Posted by angrypiranha
Eventually the fuss died down, the reviewers stopped plugging it and with the exception of jimmy the muppet hughes, everyone gave up and forgot about it. Except JH. And soundhaspriority.

Thanks.

DSJR wrote:

Please may I respectfully challenge the above comment regarding Jimmy Hughes? He may be misguided in some things, but MUPPET he certainly ain't - a more knowledgeable chap would be very hard to find IMO. In HIS room and with HIS setup, which sounded really good for a few years, one could hear certain differences with his "Belt" tweaksand these differences made the music played more enjoyable to listen to. The fact that I couldn't replicate these effects at home was irrelevant to what I did hear at Jimmy's. Eventually, my stereo got much better and Jimmy went off on another tangent (apologies, he was responsible for the Tangent speaker craze in the 1070's) and made his sound far worse IMO as a result.


So you DID hear the effects of Beltism at JH's! I guess there are more "obvious lunatics" than me here! And I was told "Bollocks!!" to my claim that some on AOS have indeed witnessed the Belt effect. No kidding I found it so hard to believe that of so many here who know him and flirted with his products in the 80's, none have ever heard any changes in their sound from applying his ideas or devices! And usually, folks want to ascribe it to conventional phenomenon they feel more comfortable with, like "oh it was cleaning the plug that did it!". So despite that you were not able to recreate them in your home, I'm glad to see you did not say something like "Oh, I heard a difference at Jimmy's, but it was obviously because the power grid would switch on and off at different times, causing voltage fluctuations that inevitably affect the sound of the gear!".

Don't know Jimmy, but I know why you were not able to recreate them. He's an expert, and there's a certain skill and knowledge involved in order to be really effective at it; depending on what you were trying to do of course, and you may simply have needed more knowledge. Jimmy should have gone to -your- place and showed you how to implement his Beltist tweaks, so that you could teach your mates how to do the same. I heard that your friend now avoids talking about Beltism and by the sound of it, practicing it. Due of course to the backlash against him for daring to "PROMOTE" such a controversial practice in the first place. We can see this extending all the way to AOS, with the "muppet" comment from Angry Piranha. I respectfully suggest that the reason his sound is far worse now, is because he went off on another tangent, away from Beltism.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:24
You know what? you can continue to misqoute and twist what people say, as you have with my post all you want.

Like hell. I misquoted nothing. ZERO PROOF of any claim you make, yet again. You're just embarassed at your own foolish words that I threw back in your dull-witted face, Angryphobia. But that's understandable. :lol:


I honestly believe that you need professional help. you have been doing this for years, and show no signs of stopping, and that is aspergers or at least OCD. Get help before it is too late. Oh, and I will not 'stay the 'f' out of your threads as you put it, I see no reason to while you continue to peddle this snake oil.*

Snake oil? What's wrong with snake oil? I guess you're just too stupid to realize that snake oil has a number of medicinal purposes. Not surprising, you have the IQ of a tree stump, and a face to match. You would have attacked Alexander Fleming for "peddling this antibiotic bollocks!".
*

'no respect for science whatsoever' that's a laugh, your freind belt uses made up science to sell trinkets to fools.*

Oh, so you HAVE bought Belt's products. So what the heck are you having a crying fit about then?

*

Keep going, I am enjoying this, it is quite fun.

Your turn...

'To answer your silly in the head claim, NO ONE is being harasssed by me' except perhaps this person....

http://www.nntpnews.net/f1569/robert-morein-worthless-stalker-asshole-no-career-7859410/

http://groups.google.co.zw/group/rec.audio.pro/msg/3923907d2beb8d93

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Rec/rec.audio.opinion/2006-04/msg01965.html

http://www.usenet.com.au/index.php?group=20&offset=3&thread=792&id=11387

http://www.nonsolonews.net/thread-65-1-53698-368/where-does-protools-get-it-s-warmth.htm

http://www.audiovisualtalk.com/showthread.php?t=70727

http://www.hightv.de/showthread.php?t=33429

http://www.hightv.de/showthread.php?t=33429

http://www.nnseek.com/e/alt.solar.photovoltaic/


You have posted this all over the world have you not? i could go on, you are very prolific, especially when abusing others.

Who is being abusive now? hmm?

You are. But Jesus H. Christ do you have a lot of time on your hands to abuse people. I guess that's what obsessions are good for. Keeping you from strangling puppies and shit. Where did you go for vacation, the National Front lads club? Well, I've seen some yammering fools in my time Steve, but you REALLY should be proud of yourself. You would have to pass 10 years of higher education just to get yourself to the level of "cretin". Everything you seem to know in life is based on whatever you have pulled out of your arse at that particular moment. Example. "Your friend Belt"? Uh, what is your PROOF that we are friends? Oh, yes, that's catalogued and categorized in your arse as well. You "believe I need professional help"? Like I'm suppose to give a tinker's damn about what a supreme fool like you believes perhaps? You are simply BEYOND THERAPY, so don't go repeating what the voices in your otherwise empty head are telling you.

What is your entire case on me built on? Some nutjob named "Robert Morein" apparently. And what is your incontrovertible PROOF that I am Robert Morein?! Well, that's also up your arse somewhere. Probably in the same area where your proof against Belt resides, and everything you learned in home schooling by the swine you were raised by.

Oh yes, let's not forget. That incontrovertible proof against Belt. It came from naught but TWO stupid little tests you made 20 years ago! You were deaf then and are deaf and dumb now. But that somehow "proves" that you are not an insane little Billy goat braying and neighing, crying and having a lot of temper tantrums here. No, you can dismiss what thousands of others heard, including professional reviewers, *including one of the mods here,* because of YOUR little two tests with your mate.

I say to you in the words of the immortal John Cleese: "Brilliant! Just brilliant!"

:lol:

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:26
Themis wrote:

To come back to music playback, there's no point in asking any divinity (or whatever) to make your system sound better. It will merely help you to know the right people at the right time. There's nothing paranormal about it : people should stick to their "knowledgeable" and "conventional" ways of doing things, then, perhaps, a divinity may help them in some way. Perhaps by making them know someone who knows someone else who knows how a "better speaker" or "better amp" or "better playback" should be.

That's how ancient greeks (and plenty of other civilizations) seem to think about it. The proverb "Help yourself, then Athena will welp you" exists in almost all cultures.

I often think about it. The key word is "fate.

No, the key word is "listening experience" and "expectation bias". Though I'm sure you'll point out they're both phrases. I at first thought it was listening experience that was an impedance here. I have read a number of comments throughout the forum that suggest many members do have difficult discerning more subtle differences in audio. I know from experience this is the major impedance to identifying many audio tweaks of all natures; cables as one member pointed out here recently. Those who do extensive testing in audio, such as journalists and researchers, do not have these problems. Differences exhibited in cables, cable direction, phase and absolute polarity, footers, green pens, quality power cables, connectors, audiophile grade fuses etc, there is often no controversy and no problem identifying them. Those with far less experience in testing can't; hardly a coincidence!

But thinking about it further, I realized listening experience can't be the only problem here. Because my friends who I tested this tweak on under single blind conditions, are not audiophiles and should have far less listening test experience than those here, I assume. Their systems are hardly audiophile grade as well, so no advantage there. The only difference I could think of, is they don't hate my guts (yeah, I guess that does help!), so they don't have anything to "prove" against me or Peter Belt, they don't think the whole idea behind the test is silly and could never hope to do anything (because for one I don't even tell them what i am testing), and they know me well enough to know that I do NOT want their biased opinion when on rare occasion, I run a listening test by them. I do not want what they think I expect or hope to hear.

So if we're to be honest, all those -could- be factors determing the outcome. But there is another difference I just thought of: in those tests, I was the conductor. That could be an even bigger factor, because I could know then that the test was being replicated correctly. I always used a fine point black marker (not say just a pen or pencil), always put the CD in a drawer or box (though this shouldn't negate the test, it does help improve the sound), always took it out of the room and the message out of the CD, to reduce the effect further (just removing the CD with the message from the residence will reduce the effect completely). As most don't supply explicit details of how their test might have differed from mine, I can't always know if it was done right.

You show expectation bias in relating this tweak to religion; suggesting it can only work by psychological factors. A very common misconception of Beltism, simply because the practices appear to the unknowledgable mind, to work on autosuggestion.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:29
anthonyTD wrote:

hi barry,
good on you, at least we have tried the experiment now, but unfortunetly for paul the both of us [at least] have come to the same conclusion which is,,, i fear not what he had hoped!
regards,anthony,TD...

You're assuming I have expectations. I don't. I have curiousity to know if others are able to hear it as I and my non-audiophile friends were. But curiousity is not the same as hope and expectation. You could say I have an "expectation" that if you had tried multiple devices at the same time, ie. 7 or 9, you woiuld have more likely had a positive ID. Thanks for trying it anyway though.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:33
I have to agree with Greg... It's simple auto-suggestion, nothing more, and a complete waste of time!

I've not said much about this 'tweak', but in the background I've been quietly shaking my head in disbelief. Sorry, Neil - this nonsense is for those in the land of loopy-loodom!

Marco.

And you would know, Loopy, because you obviously got real serious like Neil and made serious attempts to prove you are not being an ignorant twat about it, right? And you have Neil's listening skills too, I'm sure. Thought so! :laugh:

For many years, The Wright Brothers couldn't get arrested in their home town because ignorant twats who thought that "flying is nonsese for those in the land of loopy-loodom!" refused to even come out to a demonstration. This despite the fact that there were reports of these weird flying machines near the Wright Bros. line. So the Bros. sold their technology to the Europeans. Mind of Marco? Time to think? Mind snaps SHUT.

You people turn science into a religion. Doesn't look like you have ever travelled more than 50km from the place you were first conceived in your entire life.

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 05:36
you know, for someone who accuses me of being nasty, you sure put a lot of insults in your last post.

I think it will be sufficient to allow people to draw their own conclusions as to who is right here, and I would bet that once the level of your abuse is revealed via just a few links that I have posted, their opinion of you will have been reinforced.

It is sad that someone like yourself, who otherwise appears to be intelligent and well educated should spend their time the way you do.

Please feel free to continue your triade, for it only serves to illustrate my points.

:lol:

EDIT: Having read your comment above, I think it is time, yet again for you to be removed from another forum.

You are the weakest link, goodbye!

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:42
Strange....he was viewing the thread about an hour or so ago but did not reply...

Wow, nice conspiracy you got boiling there. Just feed it a little more inane conjecture, and you're sure to get a good attack angle on me. You know what's "strange" Neal? That you actually SAW me viewing the thread. Not that you're adding yet another stupid unproven conspiracy theory about me, but that you SAW me viewing the thread. Because the little text at the bottom of the screen that you think tells you I was on the thread, means I was actually VIEWING it at the time. Yeah, that -is- strange. :mental:

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:47
This is certainly all very odd...I don't have any answers, just lots of questions.

Regards D S D L

I've already given you answers. so that is odd. If they don't appeal to your prejudices, you can discuss it with your mates here who are sure to know better than the man who spent the last 27 years working out the principles behind the tweak I made for your forum. I am more than certain they will come up with answers that will better appeal to your prejudices. Or that your uninformed stabs in the dark based on your complete and willful ignorance of Beltism, will do. Or you can start here if you're serious about getting a clue. But I doubt it will appeal to you any more:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue1/beltpen.htm

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 05:50
You seem to give it as much credence as it deserves.

Chris:)

Well I guess blind tests from several people don't prove anything to anyone here! Looks like the only proof possible for AOSers will be if Jesus comes down from heaven and says he's cool with my tweak.

Yup, another red letter day for science in the UK! :lolsign:

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 06:01
Neil,
As I said, I'll also be carrying this out for myself when I'm able to, but I think Paul has to address the points I've raised about his products.

I don't have to address dick scratch all, McCarthy. Keep your stupid little conspiracy wackjob theories to yourself. I could not care less whether you try the experiment or not. You should be thanking me for even being generous enough to share it with you and your mates. So since I am telling you to go to hell with your dumbass crackpot conspiracies about me, DON'T try my tweak. If I could delete it at this point, I would.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 06:06
This tweak - or perhaps we could call it a ritual, because I think that's where it's affect comes from, probably affects different people differently. The process involved aligns with some forms of meditation, or self-hypnosis. The repetitive reflection on a phrase, the physical manipulation of the paper, repetitively; and the suggestion that more repetition will increase the power of the talisman, seem consistent with this.

Meditation as an aid to sensory acuity has been used by man for millennia. Through history, it has time and again shown a real affect affect for those open to it. There's no reason why the affect you have experienced, Neil, is not real and valid, and explainable through this.

Yeah, whatever theory appeals to your prejudices. Rituals, Shamanism... WHy not witchcraft? I'm surprised no one here has thought of that yet. Whatever sounds "logical" and "reasonable" and appealing to your narrow belief system, that will work. Only problem is, Neil has the valid test experience you don't have, and did those tests blind. Sorry that puts the kaibosh on all of your misguided theories.

Soundhaspriority
21-10-2009, 06:10
Alex_UK ranted:

You repeatedly bang on in your posts about the tweak "only taking a minute" but that is purely creating the so called "device" -

But wait, I -said- exactly that. The -set up- is one minute.

(Tirade continues:)


you then expect people to test and then re-try the testing process if that doesn't work, then try more "devices" - hours, not minutes, potentially,

Look, calm yourself down, you don't need to scream at me about it. I was only trying to help people -get there-, to the point where they can finally hear the effect I am talking about. If it upsets you THAT much to just think about how much time it would take to write 9 lines on a sheet of paper, then forget about my tweak! I mean really, this is not meant to help -me-, it's meant to help -you-! If you don't care to try very hard to find out whether this really is a revolutionary phenomenon in audio that you're missing out on, well you certainly have company there. But if you might wish to get beyond all of your prejudices and presumptions, I was giving you all the means to do that.

And if it takes the average AOSer "hours" to write out 7 or 9 lines (of 20 words each), then you're right, maybe it isn't for AOSers. BTW, if you're the same chap who told me today you think I never even tried my own test, well bollocks to you mate! :) I have done literally -hundreds- of tests with morphic messages (this is what it's called). I didn't arrive at the message I gave by picking words out of the phone book. If it took me "hours" to do each test, I'd be dead and buried by now. So obviously, those taking these tests do not have my skill in listening. Because apart from the 5 minutes MAX it would take me to write the 9 lines, it takes me 30 seconds to put them in CD's, and 30 seconds or less to find out exactly how they have changed the sound. I get 6 minutes from that, you get "hours". See the difference? Now that is precisely why I worried about whether an average AOSer, with his limited experience doing listening tests, would have a chance at hearing differences. So I had my non-audiophile wife volunteer for a blind test on a cheap old hifi incorporating a low end JVC receiver and a midfi carrousel CD player, and she got 3 out of 3 right. That's for a SINGLE cd. Since a couple of people so far have not even been able to do that, I realized with some disappointment, that your listening skills were worse than I even imagined them to (if the Belt-bashing comments I received from AOSers were any indication - and it turns out they were). So knowing this -can- be heard by non-Beltist ears, and wanting this to succeed because I think it benefits -all of us- (the more Beltists there are in the world the better your sound.... but I don't wanna make it worse for you, so forget I said that! ), I strongly suggested that at least -one- person should try a more serious effort; ie. 9 CD's.

I don't "expect" people to test and re-test the tweak; rather I expect them to do exactly what you are doing here. Have an emotional knee-jerk reaction against anything I write, and then say this somehow prevents them from testing out the Belt hypothesis, and giving science its due regard. I expect that if they do the test, to do a very quick sort of test, and if they think there may be differences, to ascribe those differences to something other than the Belt effect, and disregard them, pursuing the test no further. If anyone does otherwise, and so far no one has not met my expectations, then I would be surprised. So you are playing this according to script, I assure you.

I note: This same raging "F-U" attitude I am seeing prevented so many Brits from pursuing these concepts after their pimples dried up, back in the 80's when Belt was the talk of the town. We of a different mind and attitude because I recognize a fact that you can not: all of those young Brits who flirted with Beltism back then, and then whether they heard the effects or not "grew up out of their folly", but did not stop being audiophiles, missed out on the most exciting thing to happen to their audiophile lives. That's maybe 20-25 years of a pleasurable sound they have never been able to acheive without the Belt concepts. All because of either a head-in-the-arse attitude about what the ideas sound like in theory, or because of what I was trying to prevent here: a half-assed listening test that was not effective enough to make them recognize what sort of a change the Belt effect brings about.

Sorry, I guess you really can't re-write history! :)



that rationally I am not investing my time in, as much out of principal as anything now, in the same way I may refuse to read the "Watchtower" because someone is trying to shove it down my throat.

I understand the bit about Watchtower. I don't take kindly to JH's trying to brainwash me. But I've heard that unoriginal analogy used a million times on me. And I always have to repeat the same: you are on an AUDIO board. So I am NOT trying to talk about anything not related to audio here. And I'm sorry but there is nothing "rational" about your reaction. I've already explained this. It's an emotional reaction you are having, with this weird notion that you are doing -me- a favour here. Not at all. I can't "prove" anything to anybody over the Belt hypotheses alone, since they have not been scientifically validated. So the only way to prove this *isn't* bollocks is to prove it to yourself. As my friend George Harrison says, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.


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

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

No. No one can. I can see it hasn't occured to you that this was likely originated by an employee of Walker's Crisps?! :lol:
Thanks for the laugh though, Alex!

John
21-10-2009, 07:50
Paul Peter or what ever can you stop refering to Beltism it is not a science no matter what you think its only a word that you use to promote certain ideas and products Also like many before I am totally put off by the almost cult like langauge you use; its just puts most reasonable people off and does little to promote your views in a positive manner

John
21-10-2009, 07:53
No one hear thinks Neil is mad as a hatter Neil has been open and reported what he has heard without the need to make it sound like some kind of new science. Can you stop trying to cause divisions here its really is not on

Marco
21-10-2009, 08:41
This is an audio forum...


It's much more than that, actually. AoS is a community of like-minded (real) people who share a passion for music and hi-fi - a community where you obviously don't fit in.

I've just scanned through Soundhaspriority's ravings and can't spot any explanation as to why he referred to the PB stuff as HIS products - can anyone else who can be bothered to read through it see an explanation?

No matter, after the latest reams of mindless diatribe I've had enough of this lunatic, so it's time to remove him.

Bye-bye "Paul", whoever you are! :wave:

And now, people, let's get back to some semblance of normality.... :)

Marco.

aquapiranha
21-10-2009, 08:51
At last. I thought you were going to do it when he called you a **at, but I can't se that post any longer so I am guessing he removed it.

Unfortunatly, this will happen again on other forums, time and again, but that is not our problem.