rgro wrote: > To answer your first point. What you said was, "Any claim that all > audio systems have problems with poor SI is obviously false." Perhaps I > misconstrued your remark, so please explain how that was not an > inference that JS/Uptone are claiming that all audio systems have SI > issues? >
There is no perhaps here. The remark has been forcibly and violently misconstrued. The only question in my mind is whether it was misconstrued as an honest error, or maliciously. It is very possible that some people who read that remark have the same perceptual difficulty that makes it impossible for them to read when I write: "Some amplifiers sound different" without perceiving: "All amplifiers sound the same." Their name is Legion! > > Not to mention that I'd be well within the bounds of your own "rules of > engagement" to ask you for empirical proof that your statement is > actually correct and true---which, by definition, would mean that you > have, indeed, tested all audio systems and proven with measurements > that, in fact, some do and some don't have poor SI, or that none do. > The above statement is doubly in error. The first error is that I don't have to test every audio system to find that in fact some of them don't have poor SI. All I have to do is test one of them and find that it doesn't have poor SI. The second error is that I'm not in the business of managing the SI of audio systems, and I have made no claims that special SI modification products cause audible changes (I'm a skeptic about that, too), so the burden of any such proof does not fall on me, but on those who have made a business out of doing the same. I'm just a skeptic trying to use such flawed tools for science and reason as I have to make sense of the world about me and perhaps share a few of my findings with others who may for some odd reason be interested in the same. ;-) > > Secondly I think you're barking up the wrong tree here, Arny. The > correct and proper person to take this up with would be John Swenson. > He's truly the only one out there that can back up (or not) the why's > and how's of his product design. Perhaps in the context of a private > conversation with him you might learn more about his engineering theory > and designs. Without that, you and everybody else are just speculating. > > Since Mr. Swenson has presented himself as an authority in these things, and does not appear to have provided any empirical evidence let alone proof, it is indeed up to him to back up his claims. As I've said before my role in this situation is being an honest, rational, transparent skeptic. However, it appears that you have been functioning as his advocate. > > A decent amount of what you say makes sense. I don't know you and maybe > we'd enjoy each other's company in person but, frankly, the tone that > you take is pedantic and off-putting and I doubt it's just me that has > this take---whether one agrees or disagrees with your opinions. > I gave this matter a little thought and did some research. The Regen is a novel device - its a USB 2.0 hub with one (1) downstream port. I don't know that there are any other such devices because in terms of the function of a USB hub it makes no sense. The purpose of a USB hub is to connect additional devices to a USB host port, and this one is unable to do that. The normal retail price of a USB 2.0 hub with a useful number (>1) downstream ports is about $2, and more like $5 with a external power supply. Those prices are for postpaid delivery of new merchandise from one or more eBay sellers. The parts for making such things are just about a drug on the market because the world is rapidly migrating to USB 3.0. Therefore it appears that Swenson has happened upon a methodology for selling degenerate USB 2.0 hub circuit cards containing obsolete parts for about 22 times market value ($45), and if he adds a case and a power supply his price multiplier is more like 35 ($175). Nice work if you can get it but knowing what I know technically, I'd have to compromise my ethics to do it. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that any person actually doing this sort of thing is either ethically challenged or lacks certain technical knowledge that I am privy to. > > Between you and jkeny it's definitely oil and water. Somewhat amusing > to watch but hard to get through the rhetoric. I think your style gets > in the way of your substance. And I'd say the same to jkeny. I don't see any difference between you and jkeny, except a matter of degree - IOW the number of times each of you has violently misconstrued my statements. Jkeny is way ahead in that contest because he's had months more time to do it. Check the annals of the Hydrogen Audio and Audio Video Science forums. His aggressive stance here can be reasonably interpreted as the consequences of hurt pride. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ arnyk's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=64365 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103684 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
