magiccarpetride wrote:
> That's not what I said. All I said was that you are the king of haters.
> I didn't talk about anyone else.
Of course, that doesn't invalidate anything I said. I'm not the only one
here who has been harsh to you, and you have been banned here before for
being a twit, so y
lake_eleven wrote:
> Enjoying the sound out of vanila SBT on wireless.
>
> One problem though - After moving the SBT from wired to wireless,
> actions from squeezebox app on iphone is slow to respond - takes a 3-4
> seconds fro SBT to respond. Any idea why this could happen?
It's possible that
Enjoying the sound out of vanila SBT on wireless.
One problem though - After moving the SBT from wired to wireless,
actions from squeezebox app on iphone is slow to respond - takes a 3-4
seconds fro SBT to respond. Any idea why this could happen?
---
magiccarpetride wrote:
> That's not what I said. All I said was that you are the king of haters.
> I didn't talk about anyone else.
Suszej: have a hard time somewhere else
pski's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/mem
totoro wrote:
> What an amazingly witty comeback. So the way the world works is that you
> act like an obnoxious moron, and when anyone calls you on it he is a
> "hater"? Must be nice living in your own alternate universe.
That's not what I said. All I said was that you are the king of haters.
I
magiccarpetride wrote:
> Like I said, you are the king of haters.
What an amazingly witty comeback. So the way the world works is that you
act like an obnoxious moron, and when anyone calls you on it he is a
"hater"? Must be nice living in your own alternate universe.
-
totoro wrote:
> Actually, you are pretty much the poster boy for Dunning Kruger. Your
> posts have this really remarkable combination of complete stupidity
> mixed with a rather pathetic pseudo-intellectual snarkery. The usual
> tagline for Dunning Kruger is "unskilled and unaware". Change unskil
magiccarpetride wrote:
> If I were you I'd check it out. Medicine nowadays is capable of
> performing miracles.
Actually, you are pretty much the poster boy for Dunning Kruger. Your
posts have this really remarkable combination of complete stupidity
mixed with a rather pathetic pseudo-intellectu
totoro wrote:
> My guess is unable due to cognitive deficit and a severe case of Dunning
> Kruger syndrome.
If I were you I'd check it out. Medicine nowadays is capable of
performing miracles.
magiccarpetride's Profile: h
edodo wrote:
> Insulting people are always TROLLS
>
>
>
> What I meant is "which active speakers with active crossover are
> inferior", please elaborate.
> Now your statement is basically what "chest pump" you are referring to.
>
> I have a good ear, and I know a thing or two about music hist
totoro wrote:
> I at least pointed out what some issues with your post were. Your reply
> was exactly nothing but a rather pathetic attempt at a chest thump. I
> personally love k+ h speakers, which are active. My next pair will be
> gedlee abbies though.
>
> It's fairly clear that you are eithe
edodo wrote:
> Now that's a troll! Which active speakers are you speaking of? Typical
> troll..
you have a masters in musicology, you should really be more informed
about this stuff, especially the psychological component!
---
edodo wrote:
> Now that's a troll! Which active speakers are you speaking of? Typical
> troll..
I at least pointed out what some issues with your post were. Your reply
was exactly nothing but a rather pathetic attempt at a chest thump. I
personally love k+ h speakers, which are active. My next p
totoro wrote:
> Conflating multi-amping with tweaking is idiotic. And whether you are a
> grownup or not, you are still subject to confirmation biases. There are
> advantages to active crossovers, but it is not the case that all active
> speakers are better than all passive ones. Plenty of other
edodo wrote:
> What if I don't smell the upgrade? I don't have to smell it, only thing
> I "HAVE" to smell is the person sitting next to me while commuting...
> When you have a nice setup like mine, not those with big flaws like the
> majority of passive speakers and their crude power level cross
edodo wrote:
> If you system is flawed how can you judge the work of Soundcheck?
Good point. I insist that Soundcheck provides me with a system that's
not flawed so that I could judge his work!
magiccarpetride's Profile:
What if I don't smell the upgrade? I don't have to smell it, only thing
I "HAVE" to smell is the person sitting next to me while commuting...
When you have a nice setup that has no big flaws like the majority of
passive speaker and their crude crossover network, I can honestly the
improvements...
edodo wrote:
> Best thing I happend to have upgraded in my setup is the TT 3.0 mods by
> the great Soundcheck, KUDOS MAN!
> If you don't hear the upgrade you are deaf!
What if you don't smell the upgrade?
magiccarpetride'
I actually did the mod, felt the HUGE improvement right away, then days
later read that thread full of downer and said to myself I may have been
fooled!
So I did a factory reset, set the FLAC to not be converted in the SBT,
then listen carefully to reference track.
Then I did the 3.0 TT mod again
Best thing I happend to have upgraded in my setup is the TT 3.0 mods by
the great Soundcheck, KUDOS MAN!
If you don't hear the upgrade you are deaf!
edodo's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=55876
Vie
I've been away from this forum for quite a while and it's depressing to
see such mud-slinging as this thread serves up. Who really cares if
someone else does, or does not hear a difference (improvement or not) in
some kit/tweak etc. It's not a competition. If you like someone great.
If I don't, we
SBGK wrote:
> another fantasy post, does the klimax play spotify ?
>From someone in perpetual fantasy land, that makes me smile. For the
person who thinks you may actually be able to turn green into gold, (a
la Blackadder) I cringe. Well, I don't actually, because if you are Lord
Percy, then you
Given that SBT can be used as digital transport into your DAC of choice,
your comment seems non-sensical to me.
pandasharka wrote:
> Those people who proffer that all streamers dish out the same music are
> simply wrong.
>
---
pandasharka wrote:
> Boy I didn't realise there was quite so much pent up negativity around
> here - chill pills chaps! I know there are trolls to be fed, but even
> so...
>
> Anyway, time for a goodbye. Am having a Linn Klimax DS and amps
> installed tomorrow - home trialled over Easter, and it
Boy I didn't realise there was quite so much pent up negativity around
here - chill pills chaps! I know there are trolls to be fed, but even
so...
Anyway, time for a goodbye. Am having a Linn Klimax DS and amps
installed tomorrow - home trialled over Easter, and it was night and day
over the SB,
adamdea wrote:
> Actually psychology has a lot to say about how human beings can delude
> themselves into imagining things which are not there. The problem with
> your flight of fancy is that it is anything but the most economical way
> of explaining the observed phenomena.
> There is no need to
rgro wrote:
> That's brilliant. You ask me for my explanation, I take the time to do
> that, and the best response you can come up with is to point to, of all
> things, a Wikipedia page that essentially says that my belief that human
> nature does not adhere to the same laws and parameters as, s
darrenyeats wrote:
> In my opinion certain people have a deep need for a framework explaining
> everything in the world and the desire to educate others about it.
>
> In the past these people ended up as religious types but these days a
> lot of them are hard core reductionist scientific types.
darrenyeats wrote:
> In my opinion certain people have a deep need for a framework explaining
> everything in the world and the desire to educate others about it.
>
> In the past these people ended up as religious types but these days a
> lot of them are hard core reductionist scientific types.
In my opinion certain people have a deep need for a framework explaining
everything in the world and the desire to educate others about it.
In the past these people ended up as religious types but these days a
lot of them are hard core reductionist scientific types. A lot of them
tend to be binar
Soulkeeper wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-so_story
That's brilliant. You ask me for my explanation, I take the time to do
that, and the best response you can come up with is to point to, of all
things, a Wikipedia page that essentially says that my belief that human
nature does not
rgro wrote:
> They neither believe in their own pre-conceptions nor anyone else's.
> The only way they can be truly convinced that something doesn't work is
> to actually try it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-so_story
---
TheOctavist wrote:
> awesome. ignorant regional discrimination. it might actually funny if
> you weren't known for being a troll. the north(and everywhere else in
> the world) is rife with racism too, they just try and cover it up. Ive
> been a southern boy all my life, and race relations simp
Soulkeeper wrote:
> Because the rational answer (and how to reach it) matters. Even when the
> question is trivial.
>
>
>
> Okay, then please explain me this: If the first flying machine builders
> didn't expect their tweaks to make a change, then -why did they do
> them-?
Since you asked: I
rgro wrote:
> Aw, c'mon why so serious?
Because the rational answer (and how to reach it) matters. Even when the
question is trivial.
rgro wrote:
> And, back to the original point I took issue with: were everyone that
> has contributed to aeronautics imbued with your philosophy that "If you
> d
magiccarpetride wrote:
> Yeah, sort of like the "racist south".
awesome. ignorant regional discrimination. it might actually funny if
you weren't known for being a troll. the north(and everywhere else in
the world) is rife with racism too, they just try and cover it up.
-
Soulkeeper wrote:
> Absolutely not. Aerodynamics has its root in observation (of e.g.
> birds), trial and error, and 'the gradual collection of knowledge about
> various subjects, and eventually combining it all into one working
> framework' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamics#History). -I
rgro wrote:
> I would be the one saying that, someday, someone will figure out how to
> get 1,260,000 pounds (the max takeoff gross weight of an Airbus A-380)
> of metal, people, and other materials to fly 7 miles above the earth's
> surface, for over 8,000 miles without falling to the earth. Y
rgro wrote:
>
> Would you agree that we could have made this same bet, on a different
> subject, a few hundred years ago? I would be the one saying that,
> someday, someone will figure out how to get 1,260,000 pounds (the max
> takeoff gross weight of an Airbus A-380) of metal, people, and othe
Soulkeeper wrote:
> How much? ;)
Heheh, we both might well not be around to collect, however!
Would you agree that we could have made this same bet, on a different
subject, a few hundred years ago? I would be the one saying that,
someday, someone will figure out how to get 1,260,000 pounds
Soulkeeper wrote:
> How much? ;)
>
> And how long is the long run? A picture of a thousand monkeys with
> typewriters suddenly occured to me.
>
> No offense intended, by the way. I'm sure that both Triode and
> Soundcheck have some kind of clue about what they're doing.
It didn't take Triode
rgro wrote:
> But, I'll bet that, in the long run, somebody like a Triode, soundcheck,
> or SBGK will figure something out that'll turn at least a portion of the
> current thinking/knowledge on its head.
How much? ;)
And how long is the long run? A picture of a thousand monkeys with
typewriter
RonM wrote:
> That's kind of lame.
>
> "Soviet" refers to a particular kind-of-sort-of-Marxist-Leninist
> political and economic model, and you might like to think it had more
> than a few tinges of fascism. One thing you can say for sure about
> modern Russia is that it is no longer "Soviet"
RonM wrote:
> Of course, "Soviet Russia" should be referred to in the past tense, not
> the present. Or maybe it's all a matter of perception.
>
magiccarpetride wrote:
> Yeah, sort of like the "racist south".
That's kind of lame.
"Soviet" refers to a particular kind-of-sort-of-Marxist-Len
I think the issue here is differentiating between what I would call
"pure research" and applied research. There is an old axiom that is
often brought up by people who are doing pure research which is: ""If I
knew what I was doing, it would not be research."
My point remains that, in the realm
totoro wrote:
> And in Moronia, you're a wise man. Here you're just a troll.
In Hatelandia you're the king.
magiccarpetride's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=37863
View this thread: http://forums.
RonM wrote:
> Of course, "Soviet Russia" should be referred to in the past tense, not
> the present. Or maybe it's all a matter of perception.
>
> R.
Yeah, sort of like the "racist south".
magiccarpetride's Profile: htt
rgro wrote:
> When the inquiry is in response to someone else's claim, I would mostly,
> but not totally, agree. Sometimes a claim, even if it may sound odd or
> spurious, can stimulate someone to a path of inquiry that ultimately
> ends in new discovery. And, as I know has been brought up prev
When the inquiry is in response to someone else's claim, I would mostly,
but not totally, agree. Sometimes a claim, even if it may sound odd or
spurious, can stimulate someone to a path of inquiry that ultimately
ends in new discovery. And, as I know has been brought up previoiusly,
to blanket-a
rgro wrote:
> But the notion that, because you don't expect something to elicit a
> change---good or bad, you refuse to try it, runs contrary to scientific
> inquiry.
I'm not a scientist, but I like to think that I know a thing or two
about the process and standards of science, so here goes:
Som
Well, on that point, you'll get no argument!
But the notion that, because you don't expect something to elicit a
change---good or bad, you refuse to try it, runs contrary to scientific
inquiry. The audiophile/phool demanding that a :"scientific" double
double blind test be the gold standard of
rgro wrote:
> I wholeheartedly disagree, sir. Science of all kinds, including the
> empiricism we all adore here, would be in sad shape if this was one of
> its core principles.
Audiophilia can be many things, but science it is not.
magiccarpetride wrote:
> I know. But theoretically there is no chance that making changes on SBT
> could result in measurably audible differences. Or let me put it this
> way: we haven't seen any metrics that would corroborate such a
> hypothesis. So you claiming to be able to hear those differen
Soulkeeper wrote:
> If you don't expect a tweak to make a change, you're not very likely to
> apply the tweak. Since you didn't apply the tweak in the first place,
> the change you didn't hear didn't exist either, so you'll most likely be
> correct in concluding that there is no significant chang
magiccarpetride wrote:
> In Soviet Russia, you do not apply the tweak, the tweak applies you.
And in Moronia, you're a wise man. Here you're just a troll.
totoro's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=
Soulkeeper wrote:
> If you don't expect a tweak to make a change, you're not very likely to
> apply the tweak.
I wholeheartedly disagree, sir. Science of all kinds, including the
empiricism we all adore here, would be in sad shape if this was one of
its core principles.
-
Of course, "Soviet Russia" should be referred to in the past tense, not
the present. Or maybe it's all a matter of perception.
R.
RonM's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=17029
View this thread: htt
Soulkeeper wrote:
> If you don't expect a tweak to make a change, you're not very likely to
> apply the tweak. Since you didn't apply the tweak in the first place,
> the change you didn't hear didn't exist either, so you'll most likely be
> correct in concluding that there is no significant chang
rgro wrote:
> But I have rarely seen anybody discuss the mirror image, and what would
> seem equally possible: that, due to the same expectation biases and/or
> other mechanisms, we do not hear changes that are actually there.
If you don't expect a tweak to make a change, you're not very likely
I think mcr raises an interesting point. 99% of the talk here is about
hearing differences that supposedly/theoretically do not exist. But I
have rarely seen anybody discuss the mirror image, and what would seem
equally possible: that, due to the same expectation biases and/or other
mechanisms,
NoRoDa wrote:
> If you read my earlier posts, I was convinced that the TT3.0 made an
> improvement to my system.
> If you read even harder, you will see that I still think the TT3.0 makes
> a difference. Not an improvement, though.
> Closing my eyes made me see what the TT3.0 is, a tweak that doe
magiccarpetride wrote:
> I think you may have fallen a victim of the expectation bias. All the
> available measurements point to the fact that there could not possibly
> be any difference between the 'vanilla' SBT and an SBT tweaked with
> TT3.0.
If you read my earlier posts, I was convinced tha
magiccarpetride wrote:
> I think you may have fallen a victim of the expectation bias. All the
> available measurements point to the fact that there could not possibly
> be any difference between the 'vanilla' SBT and an SBT tweaked with
> TT3.0.
You may have more success baiting your hook on an
NoRoDa wrote:
> They do make a difference, they sound worse...
> Me too prefer the "vanilla" SBT
I think you may have fallen a victim of the expectation bias. All the
available measurements point to the fact that there could not possibly
be any difference between the 'vanilla' SBT and an SBT twe
pandasharka wrote:
> In the beginning I thought the TT mods made a difference - I tried TT2 &
> TT3 over the last several months. Then reverted to vanilla SBT and
> preferred it.
They do make a difference, they sound worse...
Me too prefer the "vanilla" SBT
> The conundrum, I think, is that
pandasharka wrote:
> In the beginning I thought the TT mods made a difference - I tried TT2 &
> TT3 over the last several months. Then reverted to vanilla SBT and
> preferred it.
>
> The conundrum, I think, is that every one of us has a different
> environment downstream of the SBT. And that inc
In the beginning I thought the TT mods made a difference - I tried TT2 &
TT3 over the last several months. Then reverted to vanilla SBT and
preferred it.
The conundrum, I think, is that every one of us has a different
environment downstream of the SBT. And that includes possibly an
external DAC,
67 matches
Mail list logo
