Magic Audiophile Gear

[Ladewig]

A friend of my dad's makes generators. He told me once about one they made with a double muffler system. You could stand right beside it and have a normal conversation while it was running. However for your generator to stop the quantum interference of using the wrong metal each muffler would be about $75,000 so to get a nice quite system add $150,000 to your price.

While you and force_redo may find turning to the dark side tempting, let me warn you that there is a special place in hell in for people who turn from skepticism to fleecing the believers. You'll find yourself handcuffed to Sylvia Browne and James VanPraag. There will be great wailing and gnashing of teeth and your unbearable pain will be made worse by people telling you that if you put crystals on your body, the pain will be reduced.

 

[Francois Tremblay]

I found it by searching through the JREF site.
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/index.html

It's a real doozy.

 

[force_redo]

While you and force_redo may find turning to the dark side tempting, let me warn you that there is a special place in hell in for people who turn from skepticism to fleecing the believers. You'll find yourself handcuffed to Sylvia Browne and James VanPraag. There will be great wailing and gnashing of teeth and your unbearable pain will be made worse by people telling you that if you put crystals on your body, the pain will be reduced.

Sorry MRWiffen, I have to axe these business plans, I didn't know it was that risky...

FR

 

[Freethinker]

Oh, and by the way, I presume electricity from nuclear power plants sounds a lot better than the usual fossil energy, doesn't it? I think I'll start selling diesel power generators soon that sound even better at only £250.000 each.

FR

That's only true if you use the diesel fuel straight out of the pump. If you pour it through my "Quantum Resonance Filter Funnel", the sound you get will be notably more pure and the nonaudible components will be significantly enhanced, while the exhaust fumes will regrow hair. I can let them go for $1200 US, but if you are interested in marketing your generator, I'm sure that we could work out a volume purchase deal that would allow you to include this necessary enhancement.

 

[force_redo]

That's only true if you use the diesel fuel straight out of the pump. If you pour it through my "Quantum Resonance Filter Funnel", the sound you get will be notably more pure and the nonaudible components will be significantly enhanced, while the exhaust fumes will regrow hair. I can let them go for $1200 US, but if you are interested in marketing your generator, I'm sure that we could work out a volume purchase deal that would allow you to include this necessary enhancement.

Hmmm, I'm getting tempted again...
must... resist... the dark side.

On a serious note: I think I just experience with myself why there is so much of that audio stuff out there: You're having a laugh with a friend over a drink and the next day you start earning serious money with it... It is just too easy.

FR

P.S.: The good thing about your funnel would be that it's a dual use device:
http://www.rolaa.de/sehensw/radio/pspieler/over/trompete.gif
(The sound is great if you use it this way)

 

[MRWiffen]

Sorry MRWiffen, I have to axe these business plans, I didn't know it was that risky...

FR

If it works like the Catholic Church used to we could just donate say 50% of the profits to the JREF or other skeptic organizations and get a "get out of Hell" free. And the thought of Van Pragh and Browne chained together makes me wonder which one will call the other a fake first?

 

[Flange Desire]

What is a bit surprising to me about all this, is that so many people see the BS and comment on it, but seem to avoid using the word FRAUD.
Is it because of fear of litigation in the US, or is it a tact/cultural thing?

Does anyone know if Machina Dynamica or any other Geoff Kait scams are marketing in Australia?

And does anyone know why they have not been taken to task by the appropriate consumer protection agencies in the US?

 

[force_redo]

What is a bit surprising to me about all this, is that so many people see the BS and comment on it, but seem to avoid using the word FRAUD.
Is it because of fear of litigation in the US, or is it a tact/cultural thing?

Does anyone know if Machina Dynamica or any other Geoff Kait scams are marketing in Australia?

And does anyone know why they have not been taken to task by the appropriate consumer protection agencies in the US?

I personally think (maybe that's just me) as long as people are happy with what they get and believe in it it's not really fraud. (I know by law it is, but from a moral standpoint I'd say that one of the parties have to think that they've been defrauded, too) When seller and buyer are happy with their trade, well... fair enough.

Fortune Tellers are rarely taken to court, or crystal sellers or astrologers or representatives of cults/religions etc.

Again: This is just my opinion, it's not based upon nor backed up by any law in the world

FR

 

[jimlintott]

And does anyone know why they have not been taken to task by the appropriate consumer protection agencies in the US?

I also have an opinion on this.

The claims that these companies make are often bizzarre and would be difficult to prove or disprove. Opening the soundstage, quantum alignment ( or whatever). If your quantums are unaligned and some magic dot fixes it then I guess you got your moneys worth. It's not like they are claiming to sell a 30 inch TV that only has a 20 inch screen.

The audio world already suffers from a lack of standards. I have two home theatre amps and both claim 100 watts per channel. The detailed specs reveal the differences but to the average consumer they are both the same and one costs four times as much as the other. It sounds ten times better but through mediocre speakers it might be heard to tell. So, it's already a confusing industry.

The agencies that deal with trade probably also have better places to expend their efforts. Some of this stuff is so expensive that you have to be wealthy to buy it. That doesn't make it right but it is often assumed that the very wealthy have brains enough to make good decisions and need less protection. Also, there are probably no complaints to start any investigations.

Any way those are my guesses as to why this will continue.

 

[MRC_Hans]

You are right, there are no complaints. For some of these reasons:

So Joe Audiofool buys a 250£ widget with a fancy name that is supposed to deepen his soundstage and align his overtones.

Chances are, with 250£ on the scale, Joe is going to persuade himself that he can indeed hear a difference.

Even if he realizes he cannot, when his neighboor, Bill Stereoaddict comes by, is Joe going to tell him "I just blew 250 bucks"? Nah, that is admitting he's a sucker. Instead he'll say "Well it's pretty stiff, but just hear how deep my soundstage got, and listen to those overtones line up" ... And Bill is not about to sound dumb, so he'll go "Mmmm, cool"

AND even if Joe decides to complain, he'll contact some complaint organization and say "I bought this widget, but my soundstage hasn't deepened" and they'll say "your WHAT??"

AND even if Joe gets his complaint to bear, the company that sold the widget will just claim that it is because Joe has neglected to adjust his quantum streams, so of course the widget can't operate properly.

Hans

 

[roger]

I personally think (maybe that's just me) as long as people are happy with what they get and believe in it it's not really fraud. (I know by law it is, but from a moral standpoint I'd say that one of the parties have to think that they've been defrauded, too) When seller and buyer are happy with their trade, well... fair enough.

Really?? So, if I am your car mechanic, you bring in your car with a problem that turns out to be a blocked fuel filter, and I lie to you and tell you the engine needs to be replaced, and you say "okay, go to it", you are okay with that? Just because you didn't know I lied to you makes it morally okay for me to lie to you?

In that case, let me tell you I'm a financial advisor. Send me all your money and I'll invest it. I promise you that someone will walk out of this deal with a profit equal to 100% of your investment. PM me for details.

 

[force_redo]

Really?? So, if I am your car mechanic, you bring in your car with a problem that turns out to be a blocked fuel filter, and I lie to you and tell you the engine needs to be replaced, and you say "okay, go to it", you are okay with that? Just because you didn't know I lied to you makes it morally okay for me to lie to you?

Well, not exactly. Your example applies if I would come to you being absolutely convinced I needed a new engine. And not because someone talked me into it, but because I consider myself a car mechanic, too and think this is the only good way to deal with a blocked fuel filter.

This is what advertising tries to do, too: To make you believe that product A is far superior to product B, even if it's not. So in their best case scenario you go out and buy it and will be still convinced it's better than B, although it might be even more expensive.

(But I do see your point and that's why I tried to keep my last post as subjective as possible.)

FR

 

[MRC_Hans]

And would you think that a car mechanic who said "OK, Mister, I'll chage your engine", knowing that a 1$ fuel filter would do the job, an honest fella? I wouldn't. There is such a thing as professinal pride and integrety.

So if somebody parks his car and leaves the key in and the door open, it is OK to steal it? Just because you steal from an idiot, you're still a thief. Even if you steal from a rich idiot who practically begs you to rob him, you remain a thief.

IMHO.

Hans

 

[force_redo]

And would you think that a car mechanic who said "OK, Mister, I'll chage your engine", knowing that a 1$ fuel filter would do the job, an honest fella? I wouldn't. There is such a thing as professinal pride and integrety.

Oh, I totally agree and I'm not saying that people selling this stuff are "honest fellas".
And that's why we're here to tell those poor, lost souls they shouldn't pay money for this crap. But however hard we try, they still do. (see "trainman") So, all I'm saying is that if they're convinced buying it and even a bunch of people tell them it's nonsense and why, there will always be somebody selling it to them and I don't blame them for doing so.
We can't ban them from buying these things, can we?

So if somebody parks his car and leaves the key in and the door open, it is OK to steal it? Just because you steal from an idiot, you're still a thief. Even if you steal from a rich idiot who practically begs you to rob him, you remain a thief.
Hans

I hope you agree that theft is something different from trading (albeit useless) things.

If a rich idiot says "here, have my car, I give it to you as a present. just like that." he might be still an idiot, but it doesn't make you a thief.

FR


ETA:
P.S.: If you want to flush ten grand down the drain, I won't be (legally) able to stop you. But don't blame the guy who installed the drain nor the guy in the sewers who picks them up...

 

[bruto]

Of course I think it's fraud plain and simple, at least in the moral or ethical sense, but it could be hard to enforce legally. Taking the automotive example again, what if I'm already a woo-woo type, and I take my car not to the mechanic down the street, but to my favorite car psychic? The car psychic says "well, those corporate-funded allopathic mechanics would probably say it only needs a fuel filter, and I can get it going for 24 bucks if you don't mind the bad karma, but if you really want it to run in harmony with the universe, I think it would benefit from one of these specially prepared engines I have been buying from the Krishna Manitou Piston Blessing Company. They use quantum crystal technology to realign the DNA in the cork gaskets." I say, OH yeah, that' sounds good. I buy the engine. I'd swear that the car runs better than it ever did.

Now of course that's crazy, and fraudulent, but legally, if the car psychic swears he believed the claims, and if I believed the car psychic, whom can we sue? It's not really all that different from more minor automotive woo, like the "precombustion catalyst" they were touting back in the 70's, or the electronic rust preventers, etc. etc., nor from the claims of pet psychics, homeopaths, palm readers, astrologers and on and on. Unless you can find a smoking gun, all they really need to do is to claim they really believe their own nonsense, and they can pass the buck on the fraud.

 

[vbloke]

We need something analogous to Godwin's Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
as applied to quantum physics

"If you quote something works by quantum means and you are not a quantum physicist, your claims can be summarily dismissed as crank"

 

[Reeco]

Hmm... tricky one.

Clearly the companies who market and sell these products have no integrity, however it can't be denied that what they do gives their customers enjoyment - no matter how much that enjoyment is a result of delusion.

Yes, these do-nothing products shouldn't be available, but the fact is a lot of people want them to be. It seems that the pursuit of audio perfection is never-ending for some people. Once they have their basic kit, they'd be at a dead end without the stickers, the cable-rings and all the other junk.

So you could argue that the audiophile companies are providing a service. I wouldn't, but you could. It's BS, but it makes people happy.

I'm new here, by the way. Just de-lurked myself.

 

[force_redo]

Hmm... tricky one.

Clearly the companies who market and sell these products have no integrity, however it can't be denied that what they do gives their customers enjoyment - no matter how much that enjoyment is a result of delusion.

Yes, these do-nothing products shouldn't be available, but the fact is a lot of people want them to be. It seems that the pursuit of audio perfection is never-ending for some people. Once they have their basic kit, they'd be at a dead end without the stickers, the cable-rings and all the other junk.

So you could argue that the audiophile companies are providing a service. I wouldn't, but you could. It's BS, but it makes people happy.

I'm new here, by the way. Just de-lurked myself.

Hello Reeco and welcome.

I just want to stress the point again, that I'm not arguing on legal grounds. I think from a legal perspective it might be fraud. That might also depend on the laws of the country they're operating from.
But I "feel" that as long as no harm is done, there's no fraud. These guys know that the effect they're investing money in is not scientifically proven. Yet they choose to believe in it. And as long as they're happy with what they got, it's their free choice.

FR

 

[Ladewig]

The auto analogy is not useful here because government licensing and regulatory agencies could take a car with no problems, remove the working fuel whatsit, replace it with a faulty one and take it to mechanics in their jurisdiction to see if they recommend replacing the fuel thingy or replacing the engine. They can do that because every well-trained auto mechanic can use diagnostic tools to determine that a specific part is not working properly.

The audio folks make up words and then say things like:

,the Ultra Clarifier's DUAL BEAM configuration further enhances the treatment process of the compact disc. Nothing can prepare you for the absolute impact on your senses when your discs have been treated with the new DUALBEAM Ultra Clarifier.

"You need a new engine" is a claim that can easily proven to be false and thus can be classified as fraud. "This configuration further enhances the treatment process of the CD" cannot easily be proven to be false. The audio-conmen are careful to never make a claim that can be measured by equiptment; they don't say the volume of sounds between 10,000 and 11,000 Hz will be increased by at least 4 dB. Instead they say, "the listening experience will be improved," or "the multi-dimensional vibration flutter will be reduced."

Fraud is less about what is true or not and more about what can be proved to be true and proved to be false in court.

 

[bruto]

The auto analogy is not useful here because government licensing and regulatory agencies could take a car with no problems, remove the working fuel whatsit, replace it with a faulty one and take it to mechanics in their jurisdiction to see if they recommend replacing the fuel thingy or replacing the engine. They can do that because every well-trained auto mechanic can use diagnostic tools to determine that a specific part is not working properly.

"You need a new engine" is a claim that can easily proven to be false and thus can be classified as fraud. "This configuration further enhances the treatment process of the CD" cannot easily be proven to be false. The audio-conmen are careful to never make a claim that can be measured by equiptment; they don't say the volume of sounds between 10,000 and 11,000 Hz will be increased by at least 4 dB. Instead they say, "the listening experience will be improved," or "the multi-dimensional vibration flutter will be reduced."

In my "new engine" scenario, though, having my car psychic acknowledge that "technically," all you need is a fuel filter, but that the overall spiritual experience of driving the car, etc. would be enhanced by the special new engine, you can sidestep the obvious diagnostic issues.

Fraud is less about what is true or not and more about what can be proved to be true and proved to be false in court.

I think it's all still fraud ethically, no matter what harm is or is not done, and no matter how satisfied the customer is, if the person perpetrating it knows it's untrue. That's an abuse of trust and exploitation of others' foolishness. I find it nearly impossible to believe that someone who takes a piece of surplus electronic junk, or a sticky label, or a cheap chinese clock, and resells it as a magic device for audio, actually believes what he says. If he did, and he were honest, he'd acknowledge that you can buy the same clock somewhere else, and have it perform the same miracles. For something this silly and unlikely, I think there's sufficient presumption of guilt on ethical grounds to accuse these people of it, even if one cannot make a case in court.