New PSA Subs

[ATLAudio]

You just have to ignore this guy. It works surprisingly well with the new forum set up. Try it. Your experience will get better. Promise.

No, because I can't enjoy a PSA thread without him hijacking it with his toxic BS. I DO have him on ignore, but not everyone does, so every PSA thread just digresses into him spouting incoherent nonsense, and others discussing it.

He's on an agenda, and everyone knows it. I see nothing good he brings the forum.

 

[KEW]

Lol, I am not so sure the measurements of the Hsu prove your point, because the differences are so slight and very unlikely to be audible. If I were you, I would have used the PB13 Ultra as evidence to that effect, as the impulse response is far more improved going from ported to sealed. That said, articulation and clarity are subjective terms, and I probably should not have used the word measurements when a better way to gauge articulation and clarity would be something like a blind test. Anyway, since there are no studies that I know of where anyone is able to differentiate between a sealed and ported subs when all other things are equal, I would say my point stands, although it is perhaps badly stated.

You offered a challenge. I met it.


It was a false statement.

You can start qualifying it now to try to obfuscate the falsehood, but if anyone actually reads it in the context of the discussion, the following points are all that is needed to see you are merely attempting to weasel out of the hole you dug for yourself.

1) You did not say audible difference, you said "That greater clarity and articulation isn't reflected in any measurements. Impulse response? Group Delay? Decay times?" In other words you said measurements don't show a difference.

2) Also note that you offered Impulse Response as a metric which does not reflect this. So you (correctly, IMHO) associated Impulse Response with clarity and articulation then, but now you are declaring these subjective terms, and impulse response measurements are not relevant.

3) I chose the HSU VTF15 in sealed vs ported mode because the specific argument you were making in the thread was that I was misinformed to suggest that running his VTF2 in sealed mode would offer clarity and articulation. Your mention of the PB13 Ultra has nothing to do with this conversation other than perhaps distance the conversation from the topic of your false statement.

However, since there are no studies that I know of proving you have noble intentions to repeatedly attack PSA, my belief that you harbor emotional baggage with Tom or PSA stands.

As BSA's signature says, You will not be punished for your anger, but your anger will punish you.

In case you missed it, I am being sarcastic at the end. The absence of a study proving something, does not allow a contradictory statement to be considered fact.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Hey Kew, leave Buddha sayings alone!
And as far as subs go, i just got word back from reaction audio re: echo 15. Since numbers are unpublished yet, I don't think i should, but compared to pv15x, they improved overall response a bit across the total range and especially in very low end bass.

 

[Alex2507]

No, because I can't enjoy a PSA thread without him hijacking it with his toxic BS. I DO have him on ignore, but not everyone does, so every PSA thread just digresses into him spouting incoherent nonsense, and others discussing it.

He's on an agenda, and everyone knows it. I see nothing good he brings the forum.

Then he should be banned. Seems pretty simple.

The arguments are mostly over my head and a little outside my interest since I'm not in the market for a sub so it's easy for me to veer away to other internet content that isn't going to leave me dumber than when I got there.

I'm going to have Adam find his address so Rick and I can take a drive to his house.

 

[Chu Gai]

Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.

Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?

Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card. If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host.

There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that.

 

[ATLAudio]

Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.

Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?

Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card. If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host.

There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that.

“Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.”


This doesn’t capture my entire point. He’s on a well-documented mission to slander PSA. He’ll promote argument/point A when it doesn’t support PSA, then disagree with argument/point A when the conversation dictates that it would support PSA. This is again well documented, it’s highly disengenous and goes far and beyond just ‘spirited debate.’ Not only that but when he argues exclusively against PSA he does so with unsubstantiated BS which he’s been called out on time and time again, yet continues to present it ad argumentum ad nauseam to hijack threads. This should be unwelcome on a forum which values TRUTH in audio.


“Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?”


I don’t see how any of those types of posts mentioned can possibly create a toxic environment like some posting as I’ve seen from this individual. They are also not hijacking threads. Showing off your system is what we’re here for. It’s like saying a Hot-Rod thread shouldn’t show off their new hot-rod because it’s annoying. Wow, completely disagree.


“Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card.”


They aren’t well reasoned, and a simple google search can reveal this. Experience on different threads reveals this for many- not just me. If they are in fact a reflection of an agenda (and it clearly is) it’s just noise that we shouldn’t put up with.


"If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host."


Strawman argument. I'm not suggesting stopping all dissenting opinion of PSA, or creation of a PSA spank fest. There are legit arguments I'd support that would be critical of PSA and any other manufacturer's products I own. I'm asking AH to stop someone who's on an obvious documented mission to fan-boy against PSA thus creating a toxic environment for other more legit posters.


"There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that."


Really big strawman argument. For one I'm not arguing for inclusiveness. Obviously the bar should be substantial for AH to warrant action to suppress posting, but I believe it's present for the purposes of a private forum, and others concur. The bar to suppress thought for a university should be stratospheric.

 

[PENG]

I think AH has rules that they can enforce. IMHO if no rules are broken then one still has the ignore feature option, or choose to call anyone out and back up with facts and counter arguments. That's what TV has been doing, and some may learn from those posts.

 

[Steve81]

Time to tone it down gents. Shady has been sent a PM to keep a lid on the insults, and time-outs will be issued if they keep flying (from anyone) and the thread will simply get locked.

As far as the technical back and forth goes, if you think he's wrong, feel free to refute him. As PENG notes above me, we learn more by talking than by banning.

 

[shadyJ]

You offered a challenge. I met it.


It was a false statement.

I hate to get pedantic, but there is no way to directly quantify terms like 'clarity' and 'articulation' because those can mean different things to different people. That being said, I wouldn't say that impulse response, group delay, attack and decay times, frequency response, etc, would have absolutely no relation to clarity and articulation, because if those measurements are really bad, then yes, articulation and clarity would suffer in probably anyone's view. However, with respect to the level these subs are at, it's difficult to see how those effects would be audible, but I am definitely open to changing my view on the matter if I see some information that points to the contrary. It wouldn't be very difficult to gather that information either; all that is needed is a blind test.

The way I would conduct such a test is to get some ported subs that support sealed modes such as the VTF15h or PB13 Ultra. Shroud the subs so the listeners can't see what mode they are in, and test if the modes can be distinguished by the listeners. One important detail is that the output in any test must never surpass the capability of that of either mode, so that the extra bass extension does not give the operating mode away. When I think about it, this would make for a good article for audioholics, although I wouldn't expect them to invest all that time and effort merely to settle our petty dispute. I do think the results of a test would be of interest to a many people.

But that is all beside the point. What I was originally responding to is your implication that I say deliberately false statements, which is not true. If you are only saying I am merely wrong about a lot of things, well yeah, I could link to lots of posts where I make incorrect statements, but the context of your charge is that I go around lying.

 

[billy p]

Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.

Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?

Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card. If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host.

There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that.

Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.

Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?

Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card. If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host.

There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that.

Agreed, Shady simply plays the game within the rules he has been doing so for years. But just because I tell someone "I mean no disrespect just before I disrespect or insult them" doesn't necessarily make it right? He has gone out of his way to voice his opinion...if guy's like yourself or Dave condone this sort of behavior makes me wonder about your own motives.

 

[shadyJ]

..if guy's like yourself or Dave condone this sort of behavior makes me wonder about your own motives.

Billy, I agree one hundred percent, I have found Chu's motives to be suspect from the very first post I read from him. As a general rule I advise people never to turn their back on Chu Gai!

 

[Alex2507]

Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?

If Bill or Kurt need positive reinforcement ... I can do that. I actually saw AND heard some of their gear. Sh!t was tight.

Back to ignore it is then.

 

[KEW]

I think AH has rules that they can enforce. IMHO if no rules are broken then one still has the ignore feature option, or choose to call anyone out and back up with facts and counter arguments. That's what TV has been doing, and some may learn from those posts.

Time to tone it down gents. Shady has been sent a PM to keep a lid on the insults, and time-outs will be issued if they keep flying (from anyone) and the thread will simply get locked.

As far as the technical back and forth goes, if you think he's wrong, feel free to refute him. As PENG notes above me, we learn more by talking than by banning.

The problem is that we already have censorship.
When inappropriate comments get removed, (as well as any posts which highlighted his comment as inappropriate), anyone critically evaluating the attitude/credibility of the poster are not being given the whole picture.
These provided worthwhile info in evaluating maturity and the extent of his vendetta against PSA.
Anyone just now reading the thread would not have the benefit of that info and were it not for our discussion of it, I think most people would never notice that a moderator modified his post.

If I look at AH as a simple resource for me to get information, the ignore feature does the job. However, I think of AH as a community.

 

[Chu Gai]

“Shady and I have upon occasion disagreed but to look to censor or ban him because one does not approve of his challenging posts is IMO misguided. Spirited debate where focus is directed in specific areas by both parties is useful and beneficial. It can clarify matters at times by showing the wisdom or inconsequentialness of positions.”


This doesn’t capture my entire point. He’s on a well-documented mission to slander PSA. He’ll promote argument/point A when it doesn’t support PSA, then disagree with argument/point A when the conversation dictates that it would support PSA. This is again well documented, it’s highly disengenous and goes far and beyond just ‘spirited debate.’ Not only that but when he argues exclusively against PSA he does so with unsubstantiated BS which he’s been called out on time and time again, yet continues to present it ad argumentum ad nauseam to hijack threads. This should be unwelcome on a forum which values TRUTH in audio.

I wasn't looking to capture all your points. If you have specific examples where Shady has flip flopped arbitrarily to suit himself, post or link to the relevant passages to support your position. And really, slander? Damned difficult to prove in a court.

“Are Shady's posts here and elsewhere more or less useful than reading a never ending stream of "welcome to the club, congratulations, or show us a pic of your product" posts? Are owners of any product so insecure that they require constant positive reinforcement after the purchase?”


I don’t see how any of those types of posts mentioned can possibly create a toxic environment like some posting as I’ve seen from this individual. They are also not hijacking threads. Showing off your system is what we’re here for. It’s like saying a Hot-Rod thread shouldn’t show off their new hot-rod because it’s annoying. Wow, completely disagree.

From what I've read, I don't see the disagreements and and questioning as toxic. Shady may be rght on some points, wromg on others, and for some there is no clear answer.
Further, this isn't like a hot rod thread where people posts pics of their rides because they're all different. It's more or less a box with a driver in the same finish just a different setting.
Now, if you want websites that strongly discourage controversy, then places like AudioCircle and HTS are the places to go because they're heavily biased towards manufacturers and paying supporters. Might as well toss in AudioKarma too.

“Well reasoned posts and responses with the appropriate civility should be welcomed and not sought to be throttled by playing the agenda card.”

They aren’t well reasoned, and a simple google search can reveal this. Experience on different threads reveals this for many- not just me. If they are in fact a reflection of an agenda (and it clearly is) it’s just noise that we shouldn’t put up with.

If in your opinion they're not well reasoned and point to an agenda then directly support your position without saying 'just google it'. And who is this illusory we you speak of that somehow entitles you to act as the spokesman?

"If you're left of the political spectrum, you want to be on MSNBC because you can be assured that you won't be challenged for cockamamie thoughts so long as they're consistent with the views of the host."

Strawman argument. I'm not suggesting stopping all dissenting opinion of PSA, or creation of a PSA spank fest. There are legit arguments I'd support that would be critical of PSA and any other manufacturer's products I own. I'm asking AH to stop someone who's on an obvious documented mission to fan-boy against PSA thus creating a toxic environment for other more legit posters.

No, it's an analogy. Nothing stops you from specifically responding to questions Shady has raised and you are more than welcome to share your impressions, measurements, graphs, contrasting your current sub with others you may have owned in the past. Threads can support a wide variety of seemingly disparate discussions.

"There's enough banning and silencing going around presently in our universities under the guise of inclusiveness. Let's not turn AH into an extension of that."

Really big strawman argument. For one I'm not arguing for inclusiveness. Obviously the bar should be substantial for AH to warrant action to suppress posting, but I believe it's present for the purposes of a private forum, and others concur. The bar to suppress thought for a university should be stratospheric.

Once again, an analogy. Bans, removal from threads, and the like are at the discretion of the moderators and other principals of AH. Each website has their own culture and thresholds for action.

 

[ATLAudio]

I wasn't looking to capture all your points. If you have specific examples where Shady has flip flopped arbitrarily to suit himself, post or link to the relevant passages to support your position. And really, slander? Damned difficult to prove in a court.

From what I've read, I don't see the disagreements and and questioning as toxic. Shady may be rght on some points, wromg on others, and for some there is no clear answer.
Further, this isn't like a hot rod thread where people posts pics of their rides because they're all different. It's more or less a box with a driver in the same finish just a different setting.
Now, if you want websites that strongly discourage controversy, then places like AudioCircle and HTS are the places to go because they're heavily biased towards manufacturers and paying supporters. Might as well toss in AudioKarma too.



If in your opinion they're not well reasoned and point to an agenda then directly support your position without saying 'just google it'. And who is this illusory we you speak of that somehow entitles you to act as the spokesman?



No, it's an analogy. Nothing stops you from specifically responding to questions Shady has raised and you are more than welcome to share your impressions, measurements, graphs, contrasting your current sub with others you may have owned in the past. Threads can support a wide variety of seemingly disparate discussions.



Once again, an analogy. Bans, removal from threads, and the like are at the discretion of the moderators and other principals of AH. Each website has their own culture and thresholds for action.

“I wasn't looking to capture all your points. If you have specific examples where Shady has flip flopped arbitrarily to suit himself, post or link to the relevant passages to support your position. And really, slander? Damned difficult to prove in a court.”

If you aren’t going to respond but to half of my point, why bother? I’m not trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, but I will say that responding to only half of the prosecution’s case would likely get your client convicted. Feel free to conduct your own research with your Google machine. If you’re too lazy to do that, I don’t care. If you have done that and don’t agree, then fine- agree to disagree. But, your argument isn’t against my claim due to lack of evidence, you simply don’t think it’s an issue, as I’ll explain.

“From what I've read, I don't see the disagreements and and questioning as toxic. Shady may be rght on some points, wromg on others, and for some there is no clear answer. Further, this isn't like a hot rod thread where people posts pics of their rides because they're all different. It's more or less a box with a driver in the same finish just a different setting. Now, if you want websites that strongly discourage controversy, then places like AudioCircle and HTS are the places to go because they're heavily biased towards manufacturers and paying supporters. Might as well toss in AudioKarma too.”

I don’t think it’s as simple as this guy being wrong here, and right there- you’re right, that wouldn’t be toxic. His posts are mostly self-serving because he carries emotional baggage from Tom, or PSA, or something. Most of us know this because he frequently posts in favor of argument/claim A when it doesn’t support PSA, then refutes the EXACT SAME argument or claim when it DOES support PSA.

“If in your opinion they're not well reasoned and point to an agenda then directly support your position without saying 'just google it'. And who is this illusory we you speak of that somehow entitles you to act as the spokesman?”

Fine, look at this thread, he’s done it twice just here. Again, I have no desire to prove it to you with facts and figures, but others have; again in this thread. It is apparent anyone who would care to evaluate. But, like I said, I honestly don’t think you would care if I proved it or not. Is this your way of saying that if I could present evidence you’d support my position? I doubt that’s the case, so I’m not wasting my time. Should you believe me, sans evidence? No you don’t have to. As for you second sentence, WTF? I’m simply presenting a grievance to AH. It’s up to them now.

“No, it's an analogy. Nothing stops you from specifically responding to questions Shady has raised and you are more than welcome to share your impressions, measurements, graphs, contrasting your current sub with others you may have owned in the past. Threads can support a wide variety of seemingly disparate discussions.”

Call it whatever you want, but it’s a strawman because you’re changing the proportions of my argument and attacking the new caricature you’ve created. Like I’ve said it’s not him bringing up a point and being wrong sometimes, and right other times. It’s his normal routine where he brings argument A in a positive light only to later shift his opinion of argument A because it favors PSA, is when I believe he’s gone too far. To say nothing about his typical tossing pickles at the windshield of ridiculous opinions and just seeing what sticks, only some of which are even in the ballpark of being a quality criticism.

“Once again, an analogy. Bans, removal from threads, and the like are at the discretion of the moderators and other principals of AH. Each website has their own culture and thresholds for action.”

And once again, a strawman. Calling something an analogy doesn’t shield it from being a strawman fallacy. I’m arguing that AH should use their discretion. They seem to disagree with me, that’s fine too. Not the end of the world.

 

[djreef]

Wow! You guys need girlfriends.

DJ

 

[Chu Gai]

“I wasn't looking to capture all your points. If you have specific examples where Shady has flip flopped arbitrarily to suit himself, post or link to the relevant passages to support your position. And really, slander? Damned difficult to prove in a court.”

If you aren’t going to respond but to half of my point, why bother? I’m not trying to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, but I will say that responding to only half of the prosecution’s case would likely get your client convicted. Feel free to conduct your own research with your Google machine. If you’re too lazy to do that, I don’t care. If you have done that and don’t agree, then fine- agree to disagree. But, your argument isn’t against my claim due to lack of evidence, you simply don’t think it’s an issue, as I’ll explain.

My first post in this thread did not quote anything you wrote but represented my overall position, hence, please don't take umbrage that I wasn't referring to you specifically.
I'm not too lazy to use my google machine but IMO it behooves the person to support their claims and not to shift the onus on the reader. As one of the mods on another forum has said, attack the post and not the poster.

“From what I've read, I don't see the disagreements and and questioning as toxic. Shady may be rght on some points, wromg on others, and for some there is no clear answer. Further, this isn't like a hot rod thread where people posts pics of their rides because they're all different. It's more or less a box with a driver in the same finish just a different setting. Now, if you want websites that strongly discourage controversy, then places like AudioCircle and HTS are the places to go because they're heavily biased towards manufacturers and paying supporters. Might as well toss in AudioKarma too.”

I don’t think it’s as simple as this guy being wrong here, and right there- you’re right, that wouldn’t be toxic. His posts are mostly self-serving because he carries emotional baggage from Tom, or PSA, or something. Most of us know this because he frequently posts in favor of argument/claim A when it doesn’t support PSA, then refutes the EXACT SAME argument or claim when it DOES support PSA.

Fair enough. If Shady does that then point to a couple of examples where he plays both sides of the fence. All the casual reader has at this point is your word that this a common modus operandi.

“If in your opinion they're not well reasoned and point to an agenda then directly support your position without saying 'just google it'. And who is this illusory we you speak of that somehow entitles you to act as the spokesman?”

Fine, look at this thread, he’s done it twice just here. Again, I have no desire to prove it to you with facts and figures, but others have; again in this thread. It is apparent anyone who would care to evaluate. But, like I said, I honestly don’t think you would care if I proved it or not. Is this your way of saying that if I could present evidence you’d support my position? I doubt that’s the case, so I’m not wasting my time. Should you believe me, sans evidence? No you don’t have to. As for you second sentence, WTF? I’m simply presenting a grievance to AH. It’s up to them now.

I don't know what specific points that Shady was making that speak to an agenda so I'll take a couple and summarize them from my POV.
Shady brought up the point that some of the CEA measurements were done outdoors when the temperature and possibly the humidity were not within the range of the specification parameters. PSA states that even so, their internal studies indicate that correction factors (I think I've heard them call it a transfer function) can be applied to account for that. IMO, if you're going to do that for strictly internal purposes, fine. To have to wait until conditions are just so before you do R&D seems counterproductive. Do the bulk of your product development while you can and then fine tune and refine it when the conditions are right.
However, if you measure under non-standard conditions, it is improper and misleading to release such numbers for public consumption and state that they're CEA results. They're not because the conditions were not adhered to. Love them or hate them, if you're going to use a standard then you have an obligation to adhere to the conditions. If you deviate, you have an obligation to fully disclose the nature if you're going to present it for public consumption. By fudging things you give the public every reason to then question other statements you may make. It's ethics.

Now Shady also made a point that standards should not be used for marketing purposes. That depends on whether you manipulate the results of the standard to create new metrics which may or may not have validity. Certainly standards are routinely used in marketing - adherence to a mil spec, acceleration, drag coefficient, lumens, etc. In a broad sense I disagree but recognize that manipulation of results deserve additional scrutiny.

Shady also brought up the term articulation and that there is no metric or standard that specifically defines it. Hence it means different things to different people. Maybe it's like getting a great BJ. We may each define it differently but we inherently know when we've had one. IMO, Shady is overreaching here and I think some leeway needs to be given to the manufacturer when it comes to language.

“No, it's an analogy. Nothing stops you from specifically responding to questions Shady has raised and you are more than welcome to share your impressions, measurements, graphs, contrasting your current sub with others you may have owned in the past. Threads can support a wide variety of seemingly disparate discussions.”

Call it whatever you want, but it’s a strawman because you’re changing the proportions of my argument and attacking the new caricature you’ve created. Like I’ve said it’s not him bringing up a point and being wrong sometimes, and right other times. It’s his normal routine where he brings argument A in a positive light only to later shift his opinion of argument A because it favors PSA, is when I believe he’s gone too far. To say nothing about his typical tossing pickles at the windshield of ridiculous opinions and just seeing what sticks, only some of which are even in the ballpark of being a quality criticism.

Then please specifically cite where he routinely does this.

“Once again, an analogy. Bans, removal from threads, and the like are at the discretion of the moderators and other principals of AH. Each website has their own culture and thresholds for action.”

And once again, a strawman. Calling something an analogy doesn’t shield it from being a strawman fallacy. I’m arguing that AH should use their discretion. They seem to disagree with me, that’s fine too. Not the end of the world.

Well just let the hot rod statement by you slide. In the meantime how'd your system measure with your PSA sub installed?

 

[Alex2507]

Ban them both already.

Shady and his typist.

 

[KEW]

I hate to get pedantic, but there is no way to directly quantify terms like 'clarity' and 'articulation' because those can mean different things to different people.That being said, I wouldn't say that impulse response, group delay, attack and decay times, frequency response, etc, would have absolutely no relation to clarity and articulation...

You can attempt to re-frame the conversation, but you specified impulse response as an example of a possible measurement of clarity and articulation in your own post:

That greater clarity and articulation isn't reflected in any measurements. Impulse response? Group Delay? Decay times?...

Your words not mine. Regardless of whether impulse response is a measure of clarity and articulation, you thought so then and listed it as among relevant metrics saying they did not exist.

What I was originally responding to is your implication that I say deliberately false statements, which is not true. If you are only saying I am merely wrong about a lot of things, well yeah, I could link to lots of posts where I make incorrect statements, but the context of your charge is that I go around lying.

Here is what I actually said:

Those of us who know him to have made false statements in the past...

I never even thought "deliberately".
I have to believe you knew the HSU VTF15H had been fully tested by Ricci and was in Data-Bass and might include measurements comparing sealed and ported mode. I thought it reckless to declare these tests did not exist, without taking a little time to check or reflect on your own knowledge. But that was/is all guesswork on my part. I thought it sloppy, but never deliberate. Anyone presenting themself as an authority should be more diligent, IMHO.

If you are only saying I am merely wrong about a lot of things, well yeah, I could link to lots of posts where I make incorrect statements...

So perhaps you should not have made the following challenge?

Please point to a false statement of mine. Just one.

Note that you did not leave the option of my being gracefully quiet:

If you can't accomplish that much, where does that leave you and the accusation of levying false statements?

 

[shadyJ]

If you want to parse things this finely, you will need to know how well does articulation correspond to impulse response. How long would the decay need to last and at what amplitude would it need to be perceivable? I don't know the answers, but I would really doubt that the differences in impulse response in the VTF15h sealed and ported modes would make an audible difference. Stereophile measures impulse response to see how well different drivers are in phase, and many times John Atkinson has commented how unlikely that an imperfect impulse response measurement is going to be audible - and he is discussing frequency bands far more humanly discernible than bass below 100 Hz.

I think its a stretch to ding me for saying articulation can't be measured, because in the context of that statement we were discussing subwoofers where impulse response isn't likely to result in an audible difference. Furthermore, like I said before, there is no industry standard quantifier of 'articulation' or 'clarity'. One would hope those qualities would arise out of a spread of different measurements, but how many times have we seen goofy subs like Rels with objectively questionable performance being lauded for their articulation and clarity? JL Audio and Rythmik are very often recommended for their articulation and clarity, but their impulse response measurements are far from the best at data-bass.com. 'Articulation' and 'clarity' are not technical words with precise objective meaning, and they are best left to the subjective section of audio reviews.