Once again, I am late in responding.
I had to go to the US for awhile on an emergency and was unable to keep up with posting.
But even though some time has past I want to respond anyway because this argument is a pet peeve of mine. I am sure that people will still be reading this thread in the future and I am hoping that someone will read my response and get something worthwhile out of it.
My answer to the poster who sarcastically asked ''Do you try everything?'' is no I do not try everything. BUT neither do I form opinions, positive or negative, about things that I have not personally experienced.
Many posters on this and other forums do denigrate products which they have never experienced. And they like to call those of us who believe in such things as cables, tweaks, break-in, etc. ''audio-fools.'' But any reasonably intelligent human being, with just a smattering of wisdom, realizes that in reality the person who forms an opinion of anything whatsoever, without having actually experienced it, is a very foolish person indeed.
Can you imagine a researcher submitting to a scientific journal a treatise on something that he himself has never actually had any experience with which says in effect, ''Well, I don't have to study it because, given that which we already know to be true, I just KNOW that it simply cannot work?''
I wonder what the journal's editing department would do with that?
Your diatribes laced with technical and/or scientific ''proof'' are just as empty of substance as that treatise would be because you have no real first hand knowledge of the products you are denigrating.
Your attitudes toward these products is somewhat akin to the little child who, when confronted with a new food, says, ''I don't like it'' before even trying it... but with one glaring and important difference. The little child is talking only of himself. He is not trying to get everyone else not to like that food.
I have been around long enough to have learned that in this world there are many many phenomena which, as of yet, have no logical or scientific explanation. But these phenomena do in fact exist. I am sure that you are also aware of many such phenomena yourself.
Audioholics is a highly respected online website dedicated to objective reviews of audio equipment that are based on hands-on listening and testing. It performs a truly valuable service for all of us who are interested in this hobby. In this case, however, I do not feel that the Audioholics' article on the Akiko Tuning Sticks written by Tom Andry (to which this thread is attached and who's sarcasm, admittedly, is amusing and entertaining) lives up to Audioholics' high standards. Given, however, that the article is only a preview perhaps it doesn't need to. I don't know.
But what I do know is that it is certainly off-putting, as is also the tone of the posts that follow it. And, all-in-all, the result is a disservice not only to manufacturers who have put time and effort into developing their ideas but even more so to potential consumers who might otherwise decide to give different products a try. Today, what with manufacturers offering sometimes up to 60 days of trial use, tying out products is easier than ever. And, since the last word that I have read in many reviews and on many many threads is ''trust your own ears'' trying products that one may be interested in should be encouraged, not discouraged.
Does it at all occur to you that manufacturers who offer trial periods do so because they actually believe in their products? If companies like Akiko were shysters deliberately trying to foist sham products on us, how would it behoove them to let us try those products out first?
If you say it is because they know that a certain number of those who try will somehow be fooled (or will fool themselves) into believing that those products do work then my first question would be, ''How do you know either that this is the company's intention or that anybody would in fact be fooled?' Such argumentation is merely conjecture.
My next question would be, ''Isn't the last word on the subject always, 'trust your own ears?' ''
Well, if we trust you and don't try the product then how can we trust our own ears?
But when we do trust our own ears, you denigrate us for that. We tell you we actually heard improvement and you put us down. You offhandedly dismiss our observations. You say we are imagining it. You say we are ''subconsciously'' leading ourselves into hearing improvements because that's what we want to hear.
Well, if that's the case then no one... not you, no reviewer, no consumer, no manufacturer... should ever trust his own ears because we all have a subconscious and we are all being influenced by our subconscious all of the time.
So right here and now let's throw out the whole concept of trusting our own ears. Instead, let's trust you who with your vast knowledge of physics and technical know-how ''know'' the real truth. Let's deny our own ability to hear and discern, and let's just trust and follow you...
like sheep!
Are you aware that the following magazines -- STEREO TIMES, 6 MOONS, CANADA HIFI, POSITIVE FEEDBACK, MONO STEREO, HIFI PIG, TNT AUDIO, HIFI ADVICE, PIANO 10 (FRENCH) PHILSTAR (FILIPINO), ALPHA AUDIO (DUTCH), QUALITY HIFI (DUTCH) -- have all written very positive reviews of the Akiko Tuning Sticks? Stereo Times gave them a 2013 Most Wanted Components award and 6MOONS gave them a Blue Moon award. All of these reviews (at least the ones I can read... can't read the Dutch) say that the improvements are immediately very noticeable... not subtle. And all of them say they are definitely worth trying.
Also, on the very off chance that Stereo Times and 6 MOONS were promoting these products in order to protect some financial interest, they could have certainly written positive reviews without conferring awards on them, no? Conferring awards on products that are a sham would be very risky for a magazine, don't you think? So why the awards if they don't really believe in the Sticks?
I am not saying that these reviewers are correct in their assessment. Never having tried these tuning sticks I can neither affirm nor contradict what they have written.
But please, you tell me. What do you think? Are all of these people out and out lying to us? Or are they sincere but deluded simpletons who are all unable to hear properly? Are they maybe all on Akiko's payroll? Or are they all letting their subconscious lead them around by the nose because they want SO VERY BADLY for the tuning sticks to work?
A couple of questions:
Which of you, who put so much faith in measurements and technical knowledge, if faced with two amps where amp B sounded better to your ears than amp A would choose amp A because it measured better?
And which of you, given the opportunity to try a tweak or a cable, upon discovering that it actually did bring a big improvement to your system would reject it on the basis that logically such improvement just could not be happening?
Do I think that you or anyone else should try everything? Of course not! Such would be impossible.
What I do think is that you should report only on items that you have had hands-on experience with and if your assessments includes technical analysis then so much the better for all of us. But until you do so, your statements are not even worth reading -- just empty negative speculation which you make sound impressive by falling back on theory... but empty speculation nonetheless. The problem is that the others of us often have to sift through pages of such negative speculation in order to get to the meat.
I for one am tired of having to sift through pages of negative speculation based on ''technical savvy'' in order to get to the meat. But what I most take offense to is being told that my experiences don't matter... that my ears are not as good as your head knowledge... that you are in-the-know, in the inner circle, and I am just an ''audio-fool'' who is trusting the wrong input... my own ears.
At the end of the day your speculative naysaying does no service to anyone other than, perhaps, to your own ego attachment to your intelligence and erudition.
Well... intelligent you may be and erudite you may be, but wise you are not. (the opposite of wisdom is foolishness).
I have been wanting to write such a post for a long time now. By not forthrightly answering my question but, rather, responding so defensively and accusatorially you opened the door for me to do so. I thank you.
