[Ghoostknight]

This whole thread should be moved to tweaks.

then you didnt got what the topic is actually about

its about whether negative ions can get produced and when they are produced what we could expect from this... nothing more, i posted it here since it still has some kind of scientific background, if my theorys get invalidated because my tests im totally fine with this too, it just part of the whole picture imo

 

[bigshot]

You list it as a tweak in your sig. It should be in tweaks, not here.

 

[Ghoostknight]

You list it as a tweak in your sig. It should be in tweaks, not here.

great argument...

 

[BS5711]

You list it as a tweak in your sig. It should be in tweaks, not here.

He was largely talking to himself there, here he has people interested enough to actually discuss it even if only to say it is nonsense.

 

[BS5711]

Post 1635 in the tweaks forum you talk about polished crystals and natural crystals and state an assumption about what the difference would be, let’s assume for a moment that either could actually do anything.

Assuming an outcome then going to test if your assumption is correct is completely contrary to scientific methodology. Even more so when the test device is the auditory system that relies on the same brain that holds that assumption.

 

[bigshot]

Do polished crystals add a sheen to the sound and unpolished sounds more granular?

 

[Ghoostknight]

Assuming an outcome then going to test if your assumption is correct is completely contrary to scientific methodology. Even more so when the test device is the auditory system that relies on the same brain that holds that assumption.

i dont wanna repeat the same stuff over again... and its not part of the topic so i wont waste my time with further discussions on this

 

[bigshot]

THANK YOU!!!!!!

 

[BS5711]

i dont wanna repeat the same stuff over again... and its not part of the topic so i wont waste my time with further discussions on this

You said in post one here:

“ ….. i just wanna document some research here that might actually tell part of why people might expierence differences with crystals in combination with Hifi ….. “

My statement about you assuming something then going to test that assumption being contrary to sound science is precisely to do with your purpose and your topic.

You say you want to provide “research” that might lead to better understanding but your own words indicate you have no intention of actually doing accurate research in a scientific manner that would offer any insight whatsoever.

Assuming an outcome about anything then listening for verification of that assumption is not research.

 

[Ghoostknight]

You said in post one here:

“ ….. i just wanna document some research here that might actually tell part of why people might expierence differences with crystals in combination with Hifi ….. “

My statement about you assuming something then going to test that assumption being contrary to sound science is precisely to do with your purpose and your topic.

You say you want to provide “research” that might lead to better understanding but your own words indicate you have no intention of actually doing accurate research in a scientific manner that would offer any insight whatsoever.

Assuming an outcome about anything then listening for verification of that assumption is not research.

1. there are 2-3 mechanism how negative ions could actually effect things
2. there is more stuff like pyroelectricity that could affect things
3. what point is there to do a blind test if we already know the outcome?
4. i just wanna proof here whether negative ions get produced ... not researching "what they do", there is probably better research out there for that and imo going from that mostly not conclusive research probably everyone has to decide for themself whether negative ions do something.... but i know at some point its easier to argue all of it is BS
5. i mainly wanna know wether negative ions get produced so we can go from there knowing that negative ions "could be a factor" in the overall picture...

 

[bigshot]

i dont wanna repeat the same stuff over again... and its not part of the topic so i wont waste my time with further discussions on this

 

[gregorio]

i posted it here since it still has some kind of scientific background, if my theorys get invalidated because my tests im totally fine with this too, it just part of the whole picture imo

And that encapsulates the problem with nearly all your posts and as far as I recall, all of your threads! Firstly, you do not present any theories, if you did, then it would be up to science to invalidate them. What you actually present is unsupported claims/assertions or vague ideas that you incorrectly call “theories”, which is not up to science to invalidate, it is up to you to validate before posting (burden of proof)! Secondly, “some sort of scientific background” might be “part of the whole picture” of science but NOT be part of the whole picture of sound or audio science and is therefore by definition off-topic and posted in the wrong forum! A humming bird flying backwards and the existence of Neutron stars both have a scientific background but are not part of the whole picture of sound/audio science and any claim that they (or countless other unrelated things with a scientific background) are part of the picture, requires some validation BEFORE you post it here as a claim or assertion!

The fact that you do not comply with these basic requirements is why your threads/posts almost always run into trouble/backlash here!!

G