Pear Cable CEO Calls James Randi's $1 Million Offer a Hoax

[Paulhoff]

If nothing else, it is their claims on why their woo-woo cables sound better then just good gauge wire and it is their woo-woo science that is on trial here.

Paul

 

[Dan O.]

I was incorrect in the previous post. Modern bug sniffers do detect both the 2nd and 3rd harmonics. Hopefully Randi's team keep their arsenal up to date.

Do you care if I have my super speaker cables suspended on little stands to keep it off the floor? Can't let the cable touch the ground or it will muddy the sound.

 

[Paulhoff]

I was incorrect in the previous post. Modern bug sniffers do detect both the 2nd and 3rd harmonics. Hopefully Randi's team keep their arsenal up to date.

Do you care if I have my super speaker cables suspended on little stands to keep it off the floor? Can't let the cable touch the ground or it will muddy the sound.

Look, the first sign that there is a problem with the test is when they pass the test, geeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Paul

 

[Dan O.]

Paul, you don't believe there is such a thing as a "golden ear" so you say the test must be at fault. That's not going to fly. If someone takes the speaker cable challenge and passes the test, the million is going to be paid unless it can be proven that there was fakery involved.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

Actually, Dan, it's even easier than that. If the protocol is followed, and the agreed upon conditions are met (within a margin of error, I believe one in a million for a pure chance win), the million is paid. Both Randi and the applicant have observers whose job it is to see that the protocol is followed to the letter.

In other words, the definition of fakery here is moot. Randi doesn't get to investigate afterwards, and refuse payment upon investigation. It's his job to pre-empt cheating by negotiating a protocol that doesn't allow it. that's why proposed telepathy protocols include clauses such as faraday cages, and standard times between ready signals between the two locations.

In this case, I'd imagine the protocol would call for measurement of the cables before the test starts, to ensure that they haven't been modified.

 

[Paulhoff]

Paul, you don't believe there is such a thing as a "golden ear" so you say the test must be at fault. That's not going to fly. If someone takes the speaker cable challenge and passes the test, the million is going to be paid unless it can be proven that there was fakery involved.

Please, re-read what I wrote, you in no way read it right.

Paul

 

[Dan O.]

If there is no post test investigation, it makes cheating much easier to get away with. For instance, I insisted that the cables be suspended off the floor to keep the sound from getting muddy. This is totally woo and the tester knows it. Will they force me to run my cable on the floor or will they succumb to the woo and insist on little stands for their cable too? Remember, I am providing all the equipment and the listening environment as specified in the RAH-E challenge. (I'm using RAH-E because I haven't seen the Pear protocol)

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Another point is that if Mr. Fremer doesn't have the backing of PEAR audio, they can claim that he wasn't a suitable candidate if he fails the test.

Presumably it follows that, since they're honorable people, they NEVER sell their $7200 cables to anyone who isn't suitable. Do they offer a disclaimer in their ads that the wonderful characteristics of their cables will be indistinguishable to much less expensive cables to at least the vast majority of people?

I think Randi ought challenge Pear to choose testers from among their actual customers--people who've actually bought the damn things.

 

[mcg]

If there is no post test investigation, it makes cheating much easier to get away with.

Yes, but that's the way it is. That's why JREF has to be careful about the controls it imposes.

Will they force me to run my cable on the floor or will they succumb to the woo and insist on little stands for their cable too?

Yes they will accommodate you, to whatever extent they can without compromising the controls. The reason is that they want to remove any possible excuse you might have when you lose the test.

 

[mcg]

For example, in some paranoramal tests, Randi has insisted on not being present and not even knowing exactly when the test is taken. This helps eliminate any claims that Mr. Randi's "skeptic energy" is hampering the test. Yes, it's silly, but that is the level of accommodation made!

 

[Paulhoff]

If there is no post test investigation, it makes cheating much easier to get away with. For instance, I insisted that the cables be suspended off the floor to keep the sound from getting muddy. This is totally woo and the tester knows it. Will they force me to run my cable on the floor or will they succumb to the woo and insist on little stands for their cable too? Remember, I am providing all the equipment and the listening environment as specified in the RAH-E challenge. (I'm using RAH-E because I haven't seen the Pear protocol)

I just wonder how Randi finds his way out of bed in the morning.

Paul

 

[Dan O.]

What is that supposed to mean? So far I haven't found anything useful in any of your posts to this thread.

 

[Paulhoff]

What is that supposed to mean? So far I haven't found anything useful in any of your posts to this thread.

THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

Paul

 

[mcg]

While I believe you, it has proven clear through this process that Mr. Randi himself doesn't really know much. How hard could it have been for him to verify that the Transparent Opus MM cables, for example, are more than just straight wire cables? A simple visit to the web page is all it takes. And how could he have even considered issuing the challenges he has without doing the measurements ahead of time? CFLarsen has been ridiculing Mr. Fremer as "stupid" for accepting the challenge without hearing the cables ahead of time: I say Mr. Randi is equally so for not measuring them first.

So I'm sure his advisors are good---I just wish he'd consult them first before shooting off at the mouth.

 

[Paulhoff]

While I believe you, it has proven clear through this process that Mr. Randi himself doesn't really know much. How hard could it have been for him to verify that the Transparent Opus MM cables, for example, are more than just straight wire cables? A simple visit to the web page is all it takes. And how could he have even considered issuing the challenges he has without doing the measurements ahead of time? CFLarsen has been ridiculing Mr. Fremer as "stupid" for accepting the challenge without hearing the cables ahead of time: I say Mr. Randi is equally so for not measuring them first.

So I'm sure his advisors are good---I just wish he'd consult them first before shooting off at the mouth.

Randi is more then smart enough to have people who are quantified to run the test. I will ask him about it next Wednesday.

Paul

 

[krabapple]

THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

Paul

Actually, Randi's gaffe about 'interconnects', and his gaffe about Transparent Opus cables, suggest *he* doesn't, in this particular area. So he'd best have very good advisors during the protocol negotiation phase. The ones he's had so far either weren't first-rate, or weren't consulted as much as they should have been.

 

[sthomson]

...weren't consulted as much as they should have been.

This is probably the correct one. Randi's already named one of his advisors, in a recent news post:

And, by the way, one such advisor is a person whose day-to-day work for the last 35 years has been in consumer and commercial electronics. He holds many patents, and his current position is as VP Marketing & Government Affairs for a billion-dollar plus electronic firm based in China. His position within the Consumer Electronics Association [CEA]: Currently he is the Co-Chairman of the Association – the "UN" of audio manufacturers and the sponsor of the Las Vegas Consumer Electronic Show – a technical working group setting audio wattage standards on amplification equipment, known as CEA R3 Working Group 8. Among approximately 2200 Consumer Electronic Association members he’s one of about 12 who hold voting rights on the full CEA Audio Committee, and last week he was in San Diego attending sessions, including his activities as Co-Chair, for the technical standards sessions. He was one of about 25 in the Audio Committee and works closely with many of the elite in engineering in the industry. He is very well known on both the audio and video and digital imaging sides, having worked for Eastman Kodak, Panasonic (and both their consumer Technics audio company and their professional RAMSA audio company), Thomson (parent of RCA, Technicolor and professional Grass Valley equipment), and Prima Technology. He is also the Chairman of the CEA Public Alert Technology Alliance, and a voting member on the Video Committee and a member of the TV Manufacturers Caucus, the CEA Government Affairs Council, and the CEA Environmental Committee.

Furthermore, I suspect that most of Randi's advisors are volunteering their expertise in whatever free time they may have.

 

[Paulhoff]

Actually, Randi's gaffe about 'interconnects', and his gaffe about Transparent Opus cables, suggest *he* doesn't, in this particular area. So he'd best have very good advisors during the protocol negotiation phase. The ones he's had so far either weren't first-rate, or weren't consulted as much as they should have been.

I did not know that the word "THEY" was equal to one person, and that was Randi.

Paul

 

[mcg]

For the sake of this challenge it certainly was. That's the problem, Paul. It should have been "THEY". But Randi was basically handling this whole exchange by himself.

 

[Paulhoff]

For the sake of this challenge it certainly was. That's the problem, Paul. It should have been "THEY". But Randi was basically handling this whole exchange by himself.

And there is no one else in the background. All you really have to do is to send him and/or Jeff an email. They may answer you and your questions, it is that easy.

Paul