grooves1

grooves1

grooves1

grooves1

grooves1

Wrong, James Randi is a well known debunker, he used to offer 10,000 dollars, but his fundation is the one offering the 1,000,000.
It's not him.
So, the money is there for the taking of any charlatan that turned out not to be one afterall.
Of course there hasn't been a single one.
See, the amazing thing about the world is that there are no miracles.

Kamus

Personally, a threat of physical violence (which, if you said it in Peeps' physical presence would be a crime) is much more ban-worthy, Neidermeyer.

If you don't like how you're spoken to, then bail. For reference, I don't know you, Peeps doesn't know you, and nobody on the whole series of tubes we call the Internets knows you. Doesn't mean that I can't think your avatar is a j@ckass and post my opinion of the same. You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny. Remember that one?
Let it go.

Elvisisdead

Faggoty marketing BS for men with adequacy issues.

Grow. The. Fuck. Up.

Ur Wires suck? No: Your life sucks.

(selling the stupid iPhone tomorrow and buying a kyocera anonymous)

erikislame

Of course the $7500 cables "sound" better. They sound better for the same reason that people feel better when they are given a pill that does nothing. It's called the placebo effect, and it's well documented.

The correct way to test whether these cables are better is to use an A/B/X test. You listen to the $100 cable (A), then to the $7500 cable (B), then to an unknown cable (X), which is the same cable as A or B. Your job is to decide whether cable X is cable A or cable B.

The process is repeated, with cable X randomly chosen to be A or B. If your guesses are significantly better than chance (statistics come in here), we can say that A and B are perceptually different.

This is what Randi wants.

Now, I'm sure that you're going to say, "but the cables measure differently". They probably do. With a good scope, I can measure the difference between a 30-foot wire and a 30.1-foot wire. Whether or not that extra 1.2 inches makes any difference at all is the question.

Even if you have super-mega-uber hearing, you simply cannot hear anything past about 25kHz. This is well established by years of medical research. And, guess what? Just about anything is fine at 25kHz.

Randi doesn't care if there's a measurable difference between these cables. I work for Agilent (one of the big companies in electronic test and measurement), and I can assure you that our equipment is more than up to the challenge. We make multimeters that can measure the resistance change in a 1-inch copper wire because of a 0.1C temperature change.

But I can assure you that 10^(-8) ohm change in resistance isn't going to be perceptable. You claim that these tiny differences are heard by a select few. We think that you're full of crap.

You claim that you can hear the difference. We claim that it's in your head. Perhaps you should prove that your ears truly are "superior" rather than expecting us to blindly accept your claim.

bsoft

A good source of sanity in the land of hi-fi coo-coos is The Audio Critic, who have been fighting this sort of nonsense for years: [www.theaudiocritic.com]

This issue, [www.theaudiocritic.com]
available as a free download, has detaild graphs of just how high end audio cables "improve" the signal coming out of your amplifier.

SalParadise

Aero7

Maybe Randi went through a high school only, but this Adam Fake guy does not even know proper grammar.

puzz

Adam Blake is a huckster. So why not encourage Randi to remove the red herrings that Adam has flung at the challenge? Randi could write a letter tailored to this one challenge, removing references to "paranormal," establishing the basis for the reward, and clarifying that it is a test of Adam's cables, not his own educational background? If Adam insists on linking educational background to cable performance, we could have some PhDs in the room to encourage his cables to function at their very highest level, if that's what Adam is getting at.

frigg

Yes, Randi is best known for challenging "psychics" but the challenge is about testing claims which defy the known laws of science (my wording, not Randi's).

People who wish to avoid the Challenge often bring up the bugaboo about Randi only challenging people who have been publicized in the media.

That rule was only added to the Challenge earlier this year. Prior to that, ANYONE could apply for the Challenge. The problem with that was that many of the people who applied were, shall we say, unstable or VERY difficult to deal with. If you go to randi.org, you can find details of the negotiations that went into dealing with these people, sometimes literally stretching into years of back-and-forthing.

Since Randi doesn't have a large staff, he finally had to winnow the applicants down to those who have gotten some media attention.

He is on record as saying that he will give Pear the money if they can demonstrate that their cables produce better audio than normal cables in a double-blind test. The rules for the Challenge DO NOT preclude such a test; it is exactly what Randi is proposing. The guy from Pear is misrepresenting this. He can take the money by simply demonstrating the superiority of his cables in a double-blind test.

In my opinion, Pear is ducking the Challenge because the owners of the company know that their snake oil can't win.

crankymediaguy

Nothing.

If you cannot see the intangible currencies of trust, emotion, and value systems these men are both trading on, you are leaving yourself rather open to be railroaded by the end-result.

Brace.

erikislame

Pear Audio cables ... are wire!!! Pear Audio cables are made out of wire!!!

If you care:

The distance between the audio source at line level and speakers is not that great and so these relatively short cable lengths are not that critical. Even if the cables were priced reasonably for what they are ($200?) they would be overkill.

In more difficult cabling circumstances, like between microphones and a sound board 50-100 feet away, "high end pro audio cables" like Canare Star Quad are more than sufficient and a fraction of the price of the Pears. They're what George Lucas uses although since he too is a high school graduate, perhaps he has misjudged?

frigg

RastaSega

banmojo

Blake, you are the man!

gundamsdontkillpeople

To sit around and write and write and write, calling Randi names, saying that the Paranormal language makes the offer "invalid" or "void" is just ridiculous and betrays Blake's unwillingness to really put his cables to the test of human ears (not graphs/analyses that demonstrate sensitivities beyond human detection).

OKay, here, I'll do it for you, Blake - just copy and paste this and stop effing around:

"Dear Randi,
Thank you for your $1 million offer. As you know, the rules for your current offer are tailored for paranormal claims, different from comparing speakerwire and evaluating them. So, I propose you edit out all the stuff in your challenge that talks about paranormal and put in language that specifies that this is also a $1 million offer to demonstrate that humans, in a double-blind test, can tell the difference in sound quality between our high-end speaker cables and lower-end speaker cables. We'll have to work out which cables you want to compare ours to, and the specifics of the double-blind test, but I am confident we can iron out these details to our mutual satisfaction and that our speaker wire will be proven superior. Please feel free to contact me at [put your number/e-mail here, Blake] and we can get rolling on this. Let the games begin!
Sincerely,
Mr. Blake, President, Pear Cables"

OK! So there you go, Blake - free of charge, I just drafted a most reasonable letter for you to send to Randi. If he backs down on this, THEN you've got something to talk about. Until you propose something eminently reasonable like the above to Randi, keep your fat mouth shut and stop your blathering.

GottaGo

blake? ya got the balls to go for it?

pepe the king prawn

Here is the real crux of the matter however. Audio is mixed digitally these days, run through many filters (software and hardware) which have sonic characteristics which essentially limit the dynamic range and fidelity of the signal. Yes those limits are of higher frequency/accuracy than the final recording, but they are there nonetheless. The entire production is monitored on good speakers. Not extravagent speakers, not extraordinary speakers, just good transparent speakers (typically PMC, ATC, or B&W) using good (but not exorbitantly priced) cables. At the end of the production cycle the audio is put through more shaping (typically) because it MUST be recorded in the distribution format whether that is uncompressed 44.1Khz uncompressed audio (CD), Mp3, AAC, or whatever. The point being that there is no greater amount of signal to extract, no amount or cost of cable is going to create sound that just is not there. And GUESS WHAT... if you are creating audible content that is not in the zeros and ones on disk you are creating noise plain and simple. The characteristic may be pleasent or unpleasant but the bottom line is that it is not part of the original audio signal.

If you want a really killer listening experience, grab a set of your favorite high end headphones and a good headphone amp. I guarantee you will hear music as you have never heard it before. To recreate this experience with greater imaging, depth of soundstange and dynamic range, get a really good stereo system. get decent cables to hook it all together. sit back, enjoy. spend the $7K that a**hat wants for his cables on something worthwhile.

earthling

Baloney. You can't guarantee anything. It all depends on the size of the sample. If you had 10 people do the test, it would be very difficult to get significant results, even if there was a very strong effect. If you had a million subjects, anything would be significant. It's all a matter of statistical power.

If I were Randi or Blake, I would be very careful to specify ahead of time how many people would be in the test, and to decide what the decision criterion was.

pixbuf

trrll

ANoel

Give me a break. Did you think about what you wrote? 80-90% of people have "average" or "poor" hearing? I don't think you know what average means.

Trust me on this, kiddo: studio engineers and producers who have to listen critically for a living make fun of people who buy products like this.

Commenting on the flavor of frequencies no one can hear on a pair of $7000.00 wires is just another way for perfectly boring rich people to show you how much better and more refined they are. Because obviously, poor people can't have "golden" ears...how would they know, without cables like these to test their super-listening abilities?

CaliforniaCajun

What you don't seem to grasp is that if the cables do, in fact, work then they are by definition paranormal. Because they are working beyond the realms of established science. All the science says they can't possibly make an audible difference.

wjousts

ibelli

Ever since when a personal attack (name calling-"highschool educated") counted as a valid debate technique?

And why is it "shifting the focus onto the other dood" a good debate standpoint? Shouldn't a good debater be on point at the issue itself but never attack his/her opponent personally?

And please don't take it personal and rally to get me banned too. I'm just commenting on the technicality, not personality.

cobbe1

Nintenboy01

You on the other hand would be wise to keep a more civil tone towards people you do not know.

Funny, it looks like others agree with me:

Helen Skor says:
Pope John Peeps II is a dick. And not in the good way. Eff him.

Sven says:
Seriously; how anyone calling themselves "pope john peeps II" can suggest than someone else has lowered the tone of the internet beggars belief. Why not just call himself "hi, I'm a giant twat: ignore me" and have done with it.

I love consensus.

Stealth43

Or how about a car? Is Bentley Continental GT that much better than a, say Chysler Crossfire or Lexus GS? They both will get you to the same place safely and comfortably. Some people appreciate the additonal amenities in the Bentley.

ChopSue-Me

ChopSue-Me

I agree with the poster above who equated these cable to the lottery. They are nothing more than a tax on the gullible.

ianken

Pope John Peeps II

They're both fruit, so one would assume they'd be good together...

But from the way it looks, Apple's prices are ripe, but Pear's prices are rape. Slight difference...

Ashman

I said: As for that parcel (referring to your attempt to suggest that I was so stupid that I'd buy land on the moon from you), I've got a big package with your chin's name on it.

Try again...

Stealth43

Stealth43

The reason I went off is becuase he doesnt know me and certainly shouldnt be making those sorts of comments to me without provocation. The worst part is that he misinterpreted what I said.

I understand your position and response though, and I generally don't get peeved by that sort of comment, and certainly not simply because someone disagreed with me. Its just the insults that are uncalled for, unneeded, and unprovoked that bother me.

@wjousts: No it is not my first time on the internet. In fact I dont take that sort of comment from people in real life, and I very much doubt he'd dare make those sorts of snide comments to my face, thats not what cowards do. I think its ironic that people think that because they can hide behind their anonymity online it gives them the right to disparage others.

Stealth43

I'd just like to remind you that your response to my offhand comment was to double post, first telling me to eff myself, that you'd punch me in the face, and then to burn in hell.

Listen, I genuinely don't care about you one way or the other, but here's some honest advice: The internet is the dumping ground of western civilization. Why bother getting angry about it? If you don't get yourself under control, YOU'RE the one who's going to end up banned.

Pope John Peeps II

Sometimes I would leave his cables in for three samples in a row and he would call it differently each time. He called the coat hangers as his cables as much as he called it correctly. In the end it came down to completely random guessing - he had no idea what cables were which.

I'd be willing to bet large amounts of money the EXACT same thing would happen to these "audiophiles."

By the way, have any of these "aidiophiles" ever taken one of their pieces of equipment apart? The path the signal travels over circuit board and soldered connection is NOT 16 gauge gold wire in an argon matrix or some nonsense. It's pretty thin, pretty basic wire in there, or it's a circuit board. You cannot *improve* the signal once it leaves the machine unless you alter it. And that should be anathema to an audiophile.

JimK

ninjashock

A more common problem in m experience is with POWER. A good piece of hardware will filter out noise, but most stuff doesn't do the best job of it, so if you don't use a power strip or something similar to filter noise from your AC line it can cause problems. At my old house I had to get a new UPS to get my speakers to stop popping constantly.

ninjashock

Anyone else think the Mythbusters should tackle this one?

aseriesoftubes

Falconfire

Yes, Terry and Zippy, the ARRL is a real organization. (I am a member, FWIW.)

The fact that RFI can be DETECTED in a speaker cable has no bearing on whether it would produce any audible signal, or distortion in a desired audio signal. RFI is typically measured in MICROVOLTS, and might be significant on amplifier INPUT, but rarely in a speaker cable.

Back to the double-blind challenge, perhaps using "trained audiophiles" as well as Joe Sixpack music lovers. Can THEY detect a diffrernce? If so, is such a difference worth hundreds of dollars?

MikeHinds

I'm not sure why the Bush joke hit you so hard, maybe a long day, maybe you guys are tight, I don't know, and it doesn't really matter. But really, you're not doing yourself any favors here.

The only reason I'm even responding is that I generally don't like it when people proposing banning others for their comments in a single post.

92BuickLeSabre

It's been about knowing I'm right, and never getting proved wrong--'cause I'll never countenance that I might be deluded. THIS is where the satisfaction lies.

scarbrtj

wjousts

Is this your first time on the internet or something? Don't worry, you'll get used to it. It happens all the time.

wjousts

ChopSue-Me

I'm sure they *think* they can tell the difference. But then, of course they think that, otherwise they'd have to admit they wasted a boatload of money on a difference that even *they* can't tell in a double-blind test. How many of these "golden ears" have ever taken a properly set-up double blind test? Few, if any.

Snopes

Or do you get off bashing others? Do you have a low paying, unsatisfying job, and this is how you compensate?

Stealth43

wjousts

wjousts

Seriously though, from what I can tell on JREF website, there is only one set of rules, which is directed to claims of paranormal or supernatural. Randi merely extended these to include Dave Clark's claims, so maybe technically Blake may have a point that the rules can't apply but if he wanted the million I'm sure him and Randi could negotiate a new set of rules.

I would say that, if pear cables are truly that much more electronically superior and costly to make then they should be marketing them purely to applications that could actually use that capability, maybe high end server rooms, or acoustic testing facilities.

In the end though, if some gullible audiophile willing to spend that much money on cables, who are we to stop them? sometimes you just need to let nature take its course...

Fierock

The stuff is nasty. I smoke and drink coffee and eat a lot of hot peppers, and I can still tell enough to ask for tap instead.

(I can't believe I just made a serious argument about the relative tastes of waters, but I did - and I stand by it.)

92BuickLeSabre

Did you even read the article that I linked? I'm going to assume that you didn't. Let me sum it up, cheap cable == expensive cable.

Think about it this way, why WOULDN'T people be happy to know that the cheaper stuff sounds just as good as the expensive stuff? The reason? Either you make a living selling the expensive stuff, or you bought the expensive stuff and you don't want to know that you could've saved a bunch of cash. Otherwise, why else would you end up defending a company whose products and claims are questionable? Yeah, I probably could hook these cables up to a waveform analyzer and see a difference.....but just looking at a piece of equipment won't tell me if that difference is good or not.

kidgenius

The only real way to tell I guess would be to make it happen.

Stealth43

I can pretty much guarantee that you would get a VERY significant statistical result. That's why Randi won't respond to Blake.

ChopSue-Me

Although a test would be fun to see so we don't have to look at a BS press release like this...

/2 men enter, 1 man leaves

EvilSnowMan

Stealth43

Lets take two instances.

The first, is these speakers hooked up to a denon 3808. Its a nice mid-range offering from them with as I recall, very low THD. And how about some nice HK speakers (do they still make speakers?). lets say for the entire setup you spend 4000 dollars, not counting the cables.

I'm going to guess that you'll agree with me that with this setup you wont notice the difference between the Pears and say, a 200 dollar per cable run.

The second, a real tricked out set up. You name it, top of the line B&W speakers, separate preamp and amp. A reference grade turntable. The Pears vs. the 200s.

This is what we are arguing about, yeah?

Stealth43

KriKit

And what kind of cables do you figure those sound recording engineers use when they do their recording and mixing? They aren't using these types of cables. Instead, they are using stuff that is going to be a hell of a lot cheaper. These are the things that are used to make the "reference" material you listen to on a "reference" system. How is a cable going to improve the original material? It won't. And stop spouting off about AB tests, you need to use an ABX test. For example, here's an article from an "Audiophile" magazine which actually did perform a proper ABX tests, and guess what they found? Lamp Cord == Expensive cable

[www.bruce.coppola.name]

kidgenius

Stealth43

ChopSue-Me

Please for the sake of not going on a tangent, lets not get into SACDs and DVD-Audio.

Stealth43

This would make the entire argument for a $850/inch cable moot. I mean you can still justify the cost of Radio Shack vs Monster cables for really long runs over 50ft, but for a digital signal it would be impossible to justify anything this expensive.

Sort of the ironic thing is that the idiots who would buy such cables would be trying to play their 128kbs mp3 of current pop music through them with their iPods. Though I suppose since lotteries are a tax on the stupid poor, we always need a tax on the stupid rich?

satoru

ChopSue-Me

Pope John Peeps II

As an exercise. Go call some sound engineers who work for recording studios and ask them if they can hear a difference!

Being a guitarist as well as a concert bassist, and having worked with many sound engineers, guess what, THEY COULD GIVE A RATS ASS. The work and equipment a sound engineer uses is a completely different beast from what these so called "audiophiles" use. Not to mention we dont spend the money on bullshit like Pear is trying to push, we spend it on reliability, since recording cables are hooked and unhooked a good 20-30 times per a session or more depending on how things are being set up.

But they too couldnt hear a difference from what Pear is trying to sell... again I point you to the science of the mater which basically shows even a superior human ear could NOT hear the nuances in tonal quality these guys are trying to bullshit about.

Falconfire

I was talking about this with a friend last night with relation to analogue vs. digital, and digital compression....

I know I can tell the difference about 90 % of the time between analogue and uncompressed digital, but 320kbps vs. 500? Not a chance in hell. At least on any system I as a mortal can afford.

Stealth43

ChopSue-Me

ChopSue-Me

Oh yeah, let just call some guys and ask them. Very scientific!

wjousts

Love it. Really. I guarentee you, real audio engineers (that is people who do audio work as a career) will never ever use these cables. period.

Stealth43

Take note in my post I didn't say "average" human, I just said human. That includes "golden ears." There are ranges of sound that are inaudible even to people with "golden ears," and if these are the ranges where Pear excels, than it still doesn't matter one bit.

I say get 40 people together. 20 "normals" and 20 "golden ears." One at a time have them listen to the same track played on the same high end system 5-10 times using a different set of cables each time. Have them note which one sounded the best. See what happens.

Bender

wjousts

If you have to sit around and pick out the tiniest defects in things like this, then you really must not be enjoying life much.

bdkennedy1

desimal

Actually You bring up a good point, and Im not sure if this is what you meant, but with these wonder cables you'd have to have a 70,000 dollar setup (going on the 10% method) to even notice the difference between these cables and others (assuming a difference in 7 thousand dollar speaker cables would be noticeable to you or me, which I posit is not gonna be the case.)

Hooking these up to a Bose for instance, wouldnt do a lick of good, as the source wouldnt be able to utilise their potential...Radio Shack cables really would be just. as. good.

Stealth43

Adam Blake disparages Randi's educational achievement as "high school." However, while Blake's higher education may help him sell snake oil to a handful of gullible customers, I would imagine that most high school or even grade school students would realize this is b.s.

frigg

As an exercise. Go call some sound engineers who work for recording studios and ask them if they can hear a difference!

ChopSue-Me

So there must be something to it.

REAL point: Don't the speakers used have more than a little to do with the ultimate output?

eufreka

jplink123

Well, I think you are right, that he probably is not as up on the science of speaker cables as maybe the folks in this company are, but thats not his area of expertise it would seem.

What he seems to be good at is spotting snake oil salesman, whether they are selling psychic ability, or speaker cables.

Stealth43

Falconfire

The_Archon

ChopSue-Me

Basically he is saying that there is no point in spending 7 grand on wires, if the human ear cant possibly tell the difference between these and others regardless of what audiophiles say. He has a very valid point as people like myself who have proven to hear nuances and tones most cant hear (as well as I am perfect pitched) cant hear the crap these audiophiles are trying to spew. Its not possible as the human ear just CANT hear it.

And thats a scientifically proven fact that people like Blake gloss over in the pursuit of ripping people off.

Falconfire

ChopSue-Me

Blake just doesn't get Randi's point. It doesn't matter if Pear cables can handle certain freqencies better if those frequencies are indetectable to the human ear. I'm not buying cables for my dog, I'm buying them for me.

Bender

I told you people that the there are people who CAN distinguish the difference between a monster cable and the $7k one. That's why this Randi would NOT let Pear do the challenge because he knows that he would loose the $1 million.

Like I posted in the earlier thread, 80% - 90% of the people have average to poor hearing so obviously can tell the difference but for those people who have flat line hearing 20hz- 18khz will be able to tell. It's like letting people compare one cola to the next. Some people have piss poor sense of taste and smell while others can pick one from another 100% of the time. I for one, can pick Evian water from any other 100% of the time.

ChopSue-Me

Nintenboy01

Whether or not you are able to hear any difference between lamp cord and speaker cable, the fact is that lamp cable is not designed for use as speaker cable and is unsuitable for that task. It is designed to carry power only, and from sources that are designed to deal with excessive resistance if necessary. Your receiver is designed to work with speaker cable, with minimal resistance.

Do yourself and your electronics a favor. If you're going to be a tightwad, at least spring for something that is sold as speaker cable. Using lamp cable is a great way to ruin your electronics and look like a complete idiot while doing so.

Andy S.

jdjonsson

It's well known that the rules of the Tour de France are a hoax.

92BuickLeSabre

He is an ex-magician turned skeptic,-which as consumers we can appreciate - but perhaps he needs to stay away from calling out tech as paranormal lest he really knows what he's talking about.

cybermatt85

I am going to prove, scientifically, that my car can get 30mpg. But oh no! The rules for the Tour de France say that I can't use a car!

Anjow

IF there is any difference in the audio signal the human ear would not be able to tell the difference. These things are pure snake oil. Period.

magista

DRive Genius

[www.randi.org]

So not only is Blake a name-calling shyster, he's also apparently too dim to read and comprehend the JREF website.

av8thor

Adam Blake: Send BLam the cables. Let BLam put them to the test. Double Blind. 30+ person sample. Put up or Shut UP!

Cyborg28

Elvisisdead

Burn in hell

Stealth43

Pear Cables: the choice of the High School educated who somehow stumbled into money.

sansovino

Seriously, people like you gave Bush a second term. Cripes.

Excuse me? Go F*** yourself

You obviously have no understanding of debate technique.

As for that parcel, I've got a big package with your chin's name on it.

Stealth43

Honestly, the real way to tell is double blind tests. A lot of these so called audiophiles are idiots with money to get taken from them...a chump is born every minute.

That said, there is a certain quality level that must be reached before the difference becomes un-noticeable to human ears. You and I can both obviously tell the difference between 10 dollar headphones and 75 dollar ones, but once you reach a certain point it becomes indistiguishable...I guess where that point exists is what is so heavily debated.

I personally dig shielded cabling for my speakers, not because I think it will give me greater dynamic range or (insert audiophile mumbo-jumbo here), but because I fully recognise the effects of having rats nests of power cords and video cords, and whatever cords behind ones entertainment console will cause noticeable distortion, and you dont have to be an audio snob to notice that.

Shielded 12 guage floats my boat, but I'd say do what sounds right for you. Lotsa love to monoprice and BJC

Stealth43

Randi just doesn't want to deal with all the little snacks out there that just want their 30 seconds of fame. Of course, when the challenge is done they all say the contest was rigged... Because they can't accept they are not the real thing. It hurts their egos and they wanna justify themselves so they can continue fooling gullible foos'.

Also: PHD does not equal logical. Randi has about 549 more times common sense than some PHD fools in truthology out there. Randi is a pro magician, which means he's trained to smell the bull out there. Don't try to fool the man - he sees what you're doing. It's his JOB to fool people.

Take Randi for an old senile and you'll regret it.

IrisMR

Chris Rowe

"Hey all, this guy's a fraud. I'm going to quote some clearly unrelated part of his challenge text out of context to my advantage, then I'm going to give you some unsubstantiated quotes, mention the words science and objective, give you a link that doesn't work, and reference people on forums who quite likely have the same I.P. address as I do! Hooray! I'm full of piss and win!"

Pope John Peeps II

I say lets submit it to the AES (Audio Engineers Society) or Alma (Loudspeaker Manufacturing Association) or EIA. or IEEE. Any of these are legit and professional and well trained. And all of these are going to shoot you down on these BS cables.

Instead this Fucktard is gonna claim that the ARRL a bunch of nobodies who arent ENGINEERS or even really that knowledgeable about AUDIO and Acoustics.

Get real. The offer is Real. Either put up or shut up. Oh and picking on James Randi for his formal school training is rather stupid. Hes bested a lot smarter people than this Adam fucktard....who is selling SNAKE OIL!!

(Alma Member, AES Member....happy to point out that Adam is full of shit!)

zippyZ

Wow! Way to play the man rather than the ball.

wjousts

1. that Pear Cable and others have posted lab results showing the differing frequency response of their product (something Randi addressed, I believe, in his initial post);

2. that the owner of Pear Cable claims that Randi is lying about statements made by Atkinson;

3. that the rules of the contest bar entry to would-be participants unless they are "part of the media," which seems an odd requirement.

sammy baby

Mayor McRib

It's one thing to call a (assumed) bluff, it's another to be a complete ass about it.

mfaerber

Another charlatan afraid to take Randi up on his challenge, spouting nonsense about how devious and unqualified Randi is. Big surprise. All these audiophile nuts sound like broken 400-lb. $50k record players. Played through $7k "danceable" cables.

syzygy

I would simply like to point out that "ad hominem" attacks like this are a classic example of misdirecting the argument from the data (a flaw in rational argument). Maybe the wording isn't appropriate given the reference to the paranormal, but if this guy believes in the quality of his cables he should work out a new written challenge and submit to the harsh mistress of unbiased blind testing. Until then all he has is advertising and marketing, which are the polar opposites of scientific testing.

azuredrupe

That is a very good point. Giz, now that you have contacts at both Monster and Pear, its time to arrange a smackdown. No financial stakes, only bragging rights. No press people, only audiophile enthusiasts. Do it!

mpjohnst

There's a sucker born every minute as the saying goes.

Calling the magician high-school educated pretty much proves this guy isn't legitimate either. I've known plenty of PHDs who couldn't plug in an Ethernet cable.

As in the lottery, these speaker cables are a tax on the gullible. Regardless of whether the challenge is a hoax or not.

leicaman

fbartolini

The JREF keeps their million dollar prize money in an account with Goldman Sachs. This comes from the rules page:
One million dollars in negotiable bonds is held by an investment firm in New York, in the "James Randi Educational Foundation Prize Account" as surety for the prize funds. Validation of this account and its current status may be obtained by contacting the Foundation by telephone, fax, or e-mail.

The JREF may not have been around as long as psychics and cancer-curing speaker cables, but the prize is there, ready to be paid out. The Foundation has also run preliminary tests on dozens, if not hundreds of applicants and none have passed. How surprising.

budder

Mayfield

itouchnipples

I won't dispute that on an scope, there may be less RFI in the ripoff cables. But it won't make a damn bit of difference to the listener.

I work in the entertainment production business and deal with sound systems and real people all the time. Sound engineers often have what we call "The Producer Knob" on their consoles. This is a knob or fader that does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. But when the client or show producer walks up and complains about the sound being "too boxy" or "not danceable" you can fiddle with said non-functional knob, look them in the eye and say "How's that?" and they will say "Much better." and walk off.

It's called psychoacoustics and it's how assholes like Blake get rich.

av8thor

I also don't believe that this Randi guy has any intention of taking anyone up on his offer, or that he even has a million dollars to pay out if someone wins.

If the cables cost that much, imagine how much they spent on the components and speakers, and the room they go in. We're talking about a completely different dimension on a totally different pla