Sigged.
No need. If I don't hear an improvement, then there wasn't any.
Not even close. If you don't hear improvements, it simply means YOU did not hear an improvement. And there could be many reasons for that, apart from the tweak itself.
I've spent several years exploring all kinds of instruments, amplifiers, cabinets, and effects pedals. I'm used to looking for the differences, because even though the audience will likely not notice, I certainly will, and it will certainly show up on recordings.
That certainly helps. Note that Belt's products also show up on recordings. That's why I'm currently working on a YouTube video that will show anyone an example of a real-time before-after effect, from using a Belt product or idea. It can work because it doesn't just affect the listener, it affects everything in the environment.
The rest of Peter Belt's legitimate work is of no concern to me, because it is irrelevant to the suggestions written on the site.
ALL of Peter Belt's work is "legitimate work". If you're suggesting otherwise, you don't know what you're talking about. Among other things, he used to produce state of the art orthodynamic loudspeakers. The reason he dropped electronics, is because he eventually was able to improve sound beyond what he was able to do in the more conventional domains, with his speakers.
He certainly didn't pursue this because he thought people would really take well to the unconventional ideas. Although I don't think even he predicted this much shrieking and backward-mindedness 25 years later.
Well, that's fantastic. So science can't measure it or analyze it. Care to direct us to the studies that do support it, or should I just file this next to " "Bigfoot sightings" and "Planet X Preachers?"
I don't know if people realize this, but they sound really ignorant of the exploration of science when they equate all phenomenon that science can't yet measure with "bigfoot sightings" and "Planet X preachers". Scientists can't fully measure dark matter, are not sure what female orgasms are about, don't know everything about magnetism, and can't measure what came before the big bang. So should I conclude we don't exist?
STUDY:
This editor talks of a Hungarian HiFi magazine talks of a study he had done in the mid 80's. Won't meet peer review standards, but it incorporated 1,000 subjects, with 75% positive results:
Link Removed
Here, Mrs. Belt recounts a study done on Belt treated hearing aids at a top UK medical facility, where 75% heard differences:
Link Removed
Peter Belt is trying to pass this off as something far more than it truly is. His theories, as you so eloquently pointed out, don't depend on physics. Or any science which could measure the results, outside of a select few. Guess which ones those are?
Are you kidding me? There are *countless* things which exist in any number of fields of study, but which are difficult to measure or can't be measured. Quantum physics, for one. So no, I don't read minds and won't guess exactly what you're thinking.Plus, I don't have time to play games.
Perhaps if he had spent 50 years studying the human psyche as well, all of this would make a lot more sense to him. It's not his products that are producing the "magic" you hear, yet he's certainly trying to claim they are.
I've spent the last 20 years studying his discovery. That's what tells me his products -are- producing the magic I hear. You've spent how much time researching them? Oh, yes I remember. ZERO time. You just went and read some articles on their site. So that means you know absolutely -nothing- of what you're talking about, but don't mind pretending you're an expert in the field of Beltism. I'm sure Belt knows the human psyche far better than you do. I'm more than sure that I know more than you about that, as well. If your cute spiel is trying to suggest his products work on placebo, then you also don't know the first thing about what placebos are or how they work. Which in turn suggests you know little about the human psyche.
I've noticed an interesting trend: Where scientists and engineers debunk audiophile beliefs with science, audiophiles have tended to retort by attacking minor flaws in grammar and claiming that the results simply can't be measured by science.
Those same scientists "debunked" cables, where audiophiles said otherwise. Now most of them have accepted that cables can influence the sound. They also said all turntables sound alike, and CD is "perfect sound forever" and a million other stupid things at the time that were later proven wrong. You understand little about audio, or audiophiles, if you think audio scientists and AES engineers hold all the answers, (or don't have an agenda of their own), or that they really "debunk" anything, and that they can measure everything the human ear-mind can take in.
You think so? Why don't you start by telling me how you measure "emotional connection" on a spectrometer? Before you answer with the predictable "this is a subjective criteria", let me inform you that it isn't. Thinking it is, only means you don't have the ability to measure this yourself. But I can, and have done so for years, on a regular basis. By this I mean, I can effect a change (particularly with a Belt tweak) that will not change FR or phase, but will predictably increase the emotional connection the music makes with me. I can subjectively "measure" this increase, knowing when it's greater or lesser, through listening. I've yet to see anyone show me a correlation with that on a measuring bench. There are many other qualities audiophiles can predictably hear that can't be picked out and identified under measurement, by instruments not sensitive to them.
What you are missing here is that there is a mind attached to the ears; and it processes what is heard. Stimulus that affects the mind, affects what is heard by humans. But is not measurable by the VERY limited electrical instruments we have to measure only sound itself in a room. This is very basic neurology, audiology and audio I'm touching upon, but yet you missed that. That should give you a clue as to how much is missing from your education on this subject.
BTW, "phatbass" just attacked me on a minor flaw in grammar. I guess that means you're wrong on the second point as well.
One particular writer for Positive Feedback Online summed up your type rather well without realizing it:
"People would rather pay; it lets them feel they're actually getting something."
So you believe what you read in Positive Feedback Online? Aren't they the magazine that positively reviewed Belt's products? LOL!
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue8/belt.htm
BTW, you don't know the first f'in thing about me or my "type". You just keep on pretending you know what you're talking about, when it's painfully obvious that you don't. If you did, you'd know I've rarely ever bought tweaks. I prefer to create them. And most of my Belt stuff and tests I've done are from Belt-based tweaks I created myself. All you're doing is spouting well worn stereotypes of audiophiles, thinking you're clever and just stumbled upon a new powerful insight. Well that just reveals your ignorance to me as well, you know.
Psychology does play a role after all, but few audiophiles will ever come close to admitting it. Deny it all you like. If your business depends on it, it's your duty to deny it.
First of all, don't say "does play a role", because you don't know whether or when it does. Secondly, psychology *can* (note emphasis) play a role in ALL OF AUDIO, with ALL audio components, including companies like PWB. It can also play a role in musicicans playing live concerts. Do you announce that psychology might play a role to your audience, before every show?
No, 'cos that would be just stupid. So is your idea that all audio companies should announce psychology could play a role, otherwise they are, oooh "denying it"! Nice conspiracy theory, but please get back to reality.
This is another tired stereotype you have about audiophiles (typical of gearheads who are not audiophiles), that they don't know psychology can play a role. Every audiophile I know already knows that, and long before you did. The more intelligent or interesting question is: when can you be sure that psychology is NOT playing a role, in audio?
Originally Posted by CK1
Many professional reviewers have identified improvements with his products.
And guess which community they belong to and report to? That of audiophiles.
Wow, that's a shocker. Belt's are audiophile products. Which community would you expect to be reviewing them? Sheep herders?
The same people who are convinced that a $5000 AC power cable can make their equipment sound infinitely better. The same people who still think that LPs are superior in all respects to even the most advanced digital audio. The same people who default to the "immeasurable results" defense
Apparently so. And when exactly did you prove all those things were impossible? Geez, how many $5,000 dollar AC power cables have you heard exactly? I'll bet as many as you've heard PWB products. What's the best turntable you heard? The Pioneer your UncleJoe threw out? Just because you don't share their experiences, or they make your skeptometer go wild, doesn't mean you are right to denounce them.
So sure, what you think you're hearing is something that you believe exists. But what does this have to do with Peter Belt's products, if no method of measure can prove that those products made the difference?
Who told you "no measure can prove they make a difference?". And what do you mean by "proof"? Everybody has their own definition of that you know. "Proof" for me is his products working for 20 years straight. Sometimes I try to satisfy skeptics like you, and do blind tests. I've passed numerous such tests with statistical significance. I happen to think that if you rely on someone else to "prove" such things for you, you're no better than a sheep or a lemming. Prove things for yourself, instead of just demanding it of others.
Are you suggesting that we rely on your powers of persuasion and quasi-religious belief in Peter Belt's "scientific" theories?
No, where did I suggest that exactly? I'm suggesting you try things out for yourself, and at least you can say you gave it a shot (however good or bad that shot was), instead of speaking from pure ignorance, and arrogantly claiming you're an expert on things you know nothing about. And I don't really care about his theories. You do. Me, they mean nothing to me or my life. Only his ideas and products matter.
I just don't see the value of a $500 wooden volume knob, a $5000 power cable, a power conditioner the size of a refrigerator, or a magical Christmas card for the vast majority of hobby musicians, professional artists, engineers, and listeners of music.
I agree with you. Those things are not designed FOR the "vast majority of hobby musicians, professional artists, engineers, and listeners of music". That doesn't mean they can't benefit from those things. Sadly, they all can. Especially the Belt stuff. Which is very advanced audiophile stuff, and yet my non-audiophile friends benefit from it, after I turned them on to it. Even if the masses can benefit from esoteric audiophile products, they can't afford it. (Not the Xmas card though. PWB sends that to its customers for free. And yeah, Positive Feedback reviewed that as well, and several prominent audio people heard its effect).
I can see you guys like to scoff at the pricey **** that "those crazy audiophiles buy". I can't imagine any of you have audio systems in which those $500 knobs and $5,000 would be a small fraction of what you invested, and thus would make much more sense. To someone with well trained ears (from a lifetime of good equpment), and a highly resolving system, he's going to hear a lot more differences from that $5K AC cord than someone with a $5,000 system or cheaper. The guy with the cheaper system (e.g. non audiophile) tries it and says he can't hear a diff or it ain't worth $5k. Well no kidding! But then you go and trash someone else's experience and deny he's having it, because he hears what you can't and don't even have the equipment to? I don't even understand why you spend so much time putting down products you can't afford. Is there a Toyota forum that trashes Roll Royces and Jaguars, because the members can't afford it? From the comments I've read, most people here don't even give a crap about the quality of their sound to begin with. Until you can empathize with audiophiles and understand why they care about the quality of their music reproduction, you can't judge them.
Now, the minority would rather pay those extravagant sums of money for deceptive products, because it makes them feel like they're getting something worthwhile.
BS. I know audiophiles that have $500,000 systems. No audiophile I know buys extravagantly priced products that don't do diddley for their sound. They usually agonize over such purchases, even when they can easily afford them. And 99 times out of 100, these products are returnable to the dealer. So they wouldn't keep products that they didn't feel were worth it. Again, you're judging products you've never even had in your home. You are not in a position to say whether they are deceptive or not. A lot of people think that of PWB's clip. Because it looks for all the world, like pair of tweezers and an alligator clip. For over $800 simoleans. Except I've heard it. And deem it to be worth more than that, because of what it can do, soundwise. Even though the parts themselves are only worth about $8. I can't speak for the knob guys though. Even to me, that seems like a bit of a stretch. But Im not judging....
