13 ms·

Stereophile routinely recommends $20,000 'power conditioners' and multi-thousand dollar cables. FFS they've claimed CD players 'sound better' sitting on 'specia

by mbell 7y ago

Stereophile routinely recommends $20,000 'power conditioners' and multi-thousand dollar cables. FFS they've claimed CD players 'sound better' sitting on 'special' racks. (https://www.stereophile.com/standsracks/206finite/index.html https://www.stereophile.com/standsracks/206finite/index.html) This is the history of a successful charlatan.

xhroot 7y ago
And my favorite: Coloring CD edges with a green marker to improve sound https://www.stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/index.html https://www.stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/index.html
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- sertsa 7y ago
  Was a subscriber for a few years until they started talking about green highlighter on CD edges. There was even a specific model from a certain store that was supposedly the best. A basic understanding of how a CD works tells you this is nonsense.
  - at-fates-hands 7y ago
    In high school I was working at the local used CD store and when this broke I saw tons of CD's came in with green marker on them. Not to mention the hundreds of people I had to explain (in some detail) how a CD actually works and how this was total rubbish. For some of these people, it was if they just discovered Santa Claus wasn't real.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
  The trick is to make sure the green markers are the super smelly sort, and to do it in a confined space. For some reason without the fumes you can't hear a difference.
dsr_ 7y ago
Shakti Stones. http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/shakti-stone/ http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/shakti-stone/
- mbell 7y ago
  This one is even more fascinating: http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/hallograph/ http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/hallograph/
- smhinsey 7y ago
  "The SHAKTI Electromagnetic Stabilizer (aka “the Stone”) has three internal trap circuits (Microwave, RF and Electric Field) to absorb the broadest spectrum of EMI. Placement on automotive CPUs has measurably increased engine horsepower." Sheesh.
  - smolder 7y ago
    Ha! I'd like to see them back that engine computer claim up. There is NO way a fair test would show any improvement outside the margin of error, and that's not a measurement problem.
  - JudgeWapner 7y ago
    The output on my Free Energy Device (shhhh, don't ask me about it, the government is actively trying to stop the spread of these to protect the interests of Big Energy) doubled when I set a Shakti Stone on top.
- dan_quixote 7y ago
  If only the Shakti Stone could absorb all that JPEG in its product pic...
SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOOK THROUGH, I wrote USE. This has an obvious point of diminishing returns. I would never buy higher-highend glass. Another example is something like TV black levels. If you don't notice black levels - good for you! Don't look for it. Because once you have a dark room and notice it, you'll see it forever. I notice soap opera effect, black levels, local/regional dimming, burn in, and it all removes me from the material. Again, Sucks. I wouldn't buy a higher-highend TV, but I pretty much can't get by with low end anymore. So... I KIND OF WANT to believe there is a serious quality range with audio gear, but I guess the difference is in glass or TV black levels, I can snap a picture and prove a difference. Audio is only ever perception. I can't prove a wave on an oscilloscope is more pleasing than another exactly within reason. That said.... You're right. Sterophiles and Audiophiles seem to be people with too many dollars and not enough cents/sense, and lots of people taking advantage of that. But maybe I just haven't used the right gear yet.
- janekm 7y ago
  You can measure all the differences in TV picture you described (and you didn't even mention colour gamut & dynamic range). You can measure the differences in optical glass. You can't measure the difference between a $10/m speaker cable and $10000/m speaker cable (usually... some of the expensive speaker cable is so crazy it may mess up the sound), or an amplifier sitting on a $5000 stand. And $1000 power cables, plugging into your usual wall outlet...
  - SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
    We can measure the difference in cables though! I can put them through a scope or analyzer and I can even show you real hard differences between them. What we can't do is prove that makes a difference to your ear vs mine and that's the real problem. So there are two difference classes of scam here. The one where it's true there is a difference in this $10 and $10000 cable, but they're effective identical. And the scam where this is no measurable or even logical difference at all. It's the former scam that I think allows the "audiophile" industry to thrive.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
at-fates-hands 7y ago
> This is the history of a successful charlatan. For two summers in college, I worked at a Home Theater company. They did custom home theaters, distributed audio, and a ton of mixed AV stuff. Needless to say, the majority of our clients were very rich and most of the theaters we installed were in the 300K-500K range. The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded than a $15K pair of speakers. I've heard a lot of great speakers, but was never good enough to tell the difference at that level. I finally asked the owner's son why he would push something that didn't seem to be a big upgrade from 15-25K for these speakers. The answer was simple. His margins on the more expensive ones were better. His rich clients never questioned his expertise, it was pretty eye opening. The next summer, I finally realized everything he pitched his clients on were always about maximizing his own profit, not necessarily designing the perfect bespoke theater for his clients.
- johnvanommen 7y ago
  > The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded than a $15K pair of speakers. The funny thing is that it's actually the complete opposite. Due to the law of vanishing returns, the difference between a $25K unit and a $15K unit can be subtle. It is astonishing how good speakers are these days. I'm running a set of Behringers that cost $300 and they exceed anything you could buy for a $1000 in Y2K. Of course, this assumes that you buy new. If you buy used, there's a lot of great stuff under $1000.
smacktoward 7y ago
I know we all love to marvel at the idiocy of audiophiles, but the actual article we're discussing here says next to nothing about audio gear. It's a reflection by a copy editor on the craft of copy editing, and (IMO) a well-written one. I liked this bit, for instance: > We like to think, or at least we like to say, that each writer's voice is unique, but it isn't. Too often, what a writer most fondly feels is his unique voice is actually a combination of bad habits and received language and tones shared with all too many other not-very-good writers. The inspired copyeditor's task is to bend an ear finely tuned to hearing the least hint of unique music in a writer's voice, strip away the accretions of junk language and tone picked up in a life drenched in TV and marketing and promotional copy and political obfuscation and bureaucratese, and then revise, even rewrite the piece in whatever authentic voice remains. The job is to produce a final edited article written in the writer's own voice, but in language and tone more consistently and authentically the writer's very own than that writer can produce herself or himself. As someone who's done a little writing myself, I can relate to this. A good editor is someone who can cut the thing you're actually trying to say out of the tangle of spaghetti you carry around inside your head. And this passage would apply just as well to an editor working at any other magazine, it has nothing to do with Stereophile's particular editorial bent or the relative merits of green Sharpies.

by mbell 7y ago

xhroot 7y ago

And my favorite: Coloring CD edges with a green marker to improve sound https://www.stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/index.html https://www.stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/index.html

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
sertsa 7y ago
Was a subscriber for a few years until they started talking about green highlighter on CD edges. There was even a specific model from a certain store that was supposedly the best. A basic understanding of how a CD works tells you this is nonsense.
- at-fates-hands 7y ago
  In high school I was working at the local used CD store and when this broke I saw tons of CD's came in with green marker on them. Not to mention the hundreds of people I had to explain (in some detail) how a CD actually works and how this was total rubbish. For some of these people, it was if they just discovered Santa Claus wasn't real.
SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
The trick is to make sure the green markers are the super smelly sort, and to do it in a confined space. For some reason without the fumes you can't hear a difference.

dsr_ 7y ago

Shakti Stones. http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/shakti-stone/ http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/shakti-stone/

mbell 7y ago
This one is even more fascinating: http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/hallograph/ http://www.shakti-innovations.com/product/hallograph/
smhinsey 7y ago
"The SHAKTI Electromagnetic Stabilizer (aka “the Stone”) has three internal trap circuits (Microwave, RF and Electric Field) to absorb the broadest spectrum of EMI. Placement on automotive CPUs has measurably increased engine horsepower." Sheesh.
- smolder 7y ago
  Ha! I'd like to see them back that engine computer claim up. There is NO way a fair test would show any improvement outside the margin of error, and that's not a measurement problem.
- JudgeWapner 7y ago
  The output on my Free Energy Device (shhhh, don't ask me about it, the government is actively trying to stop the spread of these to protect the interests of Big Energy) doubled when I set a Shakti Stone on top.
dan_quixote 7y ago
If only the Shakti Stone could absorb all that JPEG in its product pic...

SlowRobotAhead 7y ago

>This is the history of a successful charlatan. Agreed. Its tough though... I know of a couple times in my life I've thought something was OK until I saw something else. Examples, Glass. Binoculars, camera lenses, rifle scopes, telescopes. Glass differences are very real. You might be A-OK with some Bushnell Binos, but USE Swarovski or Vortex Razor or something lower-highend and you'll get it. Now, I didn't write LOOK THROUGH, I wrote USE. This has an obvious point of diminishing returns. I would never buy higher-highend glass. Another example is something like TV black levels. If you don't notice black levels - good for you! Don't look for it. Because once you have a dark room and notice it, you'll see it forever. I notice soap opera effect, black levels, local/regional dimming, burn in, and it all removes me from the material. Again, Sucks. I wouldn't buy a higher-highend TV, but I pretty much can't get by with low end anymore. So... I KIND OF WANT to believe there is a serious quality range with audio gear, but I guess the difference is in glass or TV black levels, I can snap a picture and prove a difference. Audio is only ever perception. I can't prove a wave on an oscilloscope is more pleasing than another exactly within reason. That said.... You're right. Sterophiles and Audiophiles seem to be people with too many dollars and not enough cents/sense, and lots of people taking advantage of that. But maybe I just haven't used the right gear yet.

janekm 7y ago
You can measure all the differences in TV picture you described (and you didn't even mention colour gamut & dynamic range). You can measure the differences in optical glass. You can't measure the difference between a $10/m speaker cable and $10000/m speaker cable (usually... some of the expensive speaker cable is so crazy it may mess up the sound), or an amplifier sitting on a $5000 stand. And $1000 power cables, plugging into your usual wall outlet...
- SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
  We can measure the difference in cables though! I can put them through a scope or analyzer and I can even show you real hard differences between them. What we can't do is prove that makes a difference to your ear vs mine and that's the real problem. So there are two difference classes of scam here. The one where it's true there is a difference in this $10 and $10000 cable, but they're effective identical. And the scam where this is no measurable or even logical difference at all. It's the former scam that I think allows the "audiophile" industry to thrive.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

at-fates-hands 7y ago

> This is the history of a successful charlatan. For two summers in college, I worked at a Home Theater company. They did custom home theaters, distributed audio, and a ton of mixed AV stuff. Needless to say, the majority of our clients were very rich and most of the theaters we installed were in the 300K-500K range. The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded than a $15K pair of speakers. I've heard a lot of great speakers, but was never good enough to tell the difference at that level. I finally asked the owner's son why he would push something that didn't seem to be a big upgrade from 15-25K for these speakers. The answer was simple. His margins on the more expensive ones were better. His rich clients never questioned his expertise, it was pretty eye opening. The next summer, I finally realized everything he pitched his clients on were always about maximizing his own profit, not necessarily designing the perfect bespoke theater for his clients.

johnvanommen 7y ago
> The funny part was the owner constantly talking about how much better a $25K pair of speakers sounded than a $15K pair of speakers. The funny thing is that it's actually the complete opposite. Due to the law of vanishing returns, the difference between a $25K unit and a $15K unit can be subtle. It is astonishing how good speakers are these days. I'm running a set of Behringers that cost $300 and they exceed anything you could buy for a $1000 in Y2K. Of course, this assumes that you buy new. If you buy used, there's a lot of great stuff under $1000.

smacktoward 7y ago

I know we all love to marvel at the idiocy of audiophiles, but the actual article we're discussing here says next to nothing about audio gear. It's a reflection by a copy editor on the craft of copy editing, and (IMO) a well-written one. I liked this bit, for instance: > We like to think, or at least we like to say, that each writer's voice is unique, but it isn't. Too often, what a writer most fondly feels is his unique voice is actually a combination of bad habits and received language and tones shared with all too many other not-very-good writers. The inspired copyeditor's task is to bend an ear finely tuned to hearing the least hint of unique music in a writer's voice, strip away the accretions of junk language and tone picked up in a life drenched in TV and marketing and promotional copy and political obfuscation and bureaucratese, and then revise, even rewrite the piece in whatever authentic voice remains. The job is to produce a final edited article written in the writer's own voice, but in language and tone more consistently and authentically the writer's very own than that writer can produce herself or himself. As someone who's done a little writing myself, I can relate to this. A good editor is someone who can cut the thing you're actually trying to say out of the tangle of spaghetti you carry around inside your head. And this passage would apply just as well to an editor working at any other magazine, it has nothing to do with Stereophile's particular editorial bent or the relative merits of green Sharpies.