penance
Arrogant Cock
Seems any misunderstanding was inititiated by the first post of the thread.
ra asa outcome
- Thread starter zanash
- Start date
Well that's cleared that up then. According to Russ's PR fella the article in Custom Installer was factually inaccurate. This agrees with what the ASA had to say.
Ben Duncan's research does not, in my opinion, substantiate the claim ââ'¬Å"proven to dramatically reduce RFI which was already on the mains supplyââ'¬Â made about PowerKord mains cables and subject of the ASA ruling. This claim was removed from the RA website and literature and has not since been repeated (as far as I know).
The Devil
IHTFP
It is actually PR spin.
The first thing that needs to be demonstrated is that people can hear a difference between different power cables. Once that's established, then you can go looking for a mechanism.
SCIDB
Moderator
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 2,501
- Reaction score
- 2
Hi,
Here is the info on Dr Craig Sawyers and some of things he has been involved in.
http://www.tech-enterprise.com/experience.htm
http://www.qi3.co.uk/people/associates
http://www.qi3.co.uk/archives/994
http://www.tech-enterprise.com/casestudies.htm
SCIDB
Here is the info on Dr Craig Sawyers and some of things he has been involved in.
http://www.tech-enterprise.com/experience.htm
http://www.qi3.co.uk/people/associates
http://www.qi3.co.uk/archives/994
http://www.tech-enterprise.com/casestudies.htm
SCIDB
Given that Russ Andrews has invested substantially in this, yet has chosen not to answer any of the obvious questions, it's likely that not only is it foo, he also believes it to be foo.
(By 'foo' I mean something that is about the state of mind of the purchaser and not about the sound waves coming from his loudspeakers.)
Paul
(By 'foo' I mean something that is about the state of mind of the purchaser and not about the sound waves coming from his loudspeakers.)
Paul
Not necessarily .
There could be a whole gammut of reasons why he is holding his own council.
Yet again, I wonder why, when one person doesn't gain success with a piece of equipment......then is no one else must be able to either.
From personal experience the differences are indeed subtle....but there nevertheless.
Why write 'Zanash' style?
So why did Russ Andrews make a substantial investment in research and yet not attempt to answer the question that would have substantiated his products?
I'll help you a little,
1, Is there 'RFI' on the average mains?
2, Does his cable attenuate it?
3, Are the results audible?
Pretty simple, IMO.
(It's 'gamut' and 'counsel', FWIW)
Paul
So why did Russ Andrews make a substantial investment in research and yet not attempt to answer the question that would have substantiated his products?
I'll help you a little,
1, Is there 'RFI' on the average mains?
2, Does his cable attenuate it?
3, Are the results audible?
Pretty simple, IMO.
(It's 'gamut' and 'counsel', FWIW)
Paul
Where am I wrong?
Thanks for the corrections btw....I don't beleive they detract from my point.
"I'll help you a little,"....yoiur patronising note wasn't lost on me....but it WAS wasted!
This subject has been round and round more times than I care to mention (hence my spelling inaccuracy....thankyou).
I sometimes wish some of you "scientists" could leave people to form their own conclusions on things.
Science (as always) hasn't got all the answwers and no one knows everything....just as you don't know what happened when I tried different cables in my lounge...
Some times people just like to try stuff. se what it does in THEIR system. Maybe some thing, maybe nothing. Its THEIR choice though.
That is an opinion. Which of the statements in Phil Hansen's post do you claim not to be factually true?
With what?
You either are 'Zanash' or you are copying his strikingly irritating posting style.
Anyway it doesn't matter what your personal experience is, this is about an ASA ruling on claims made by an advertiser and the adequacy of the advertisers response.
'David F of Shropshire doesn't use my products but reckons they may work' isn't likely to appear in RA ad copy...
Paul
Nothing wrong with "try my cables, I think they improve sound...see what you think".
Problem is, the marketing contains attempts to big up the product and somehow becomes "our cables have proven ability to improve on stock items, because of A, B, C etc." I think the onus is on them to prove that, or not to use it. Fortunately, the ASA seem to require same.
Nothing against Russ, but claims should require evidence otherwise they mislead. Opinions are fine and if somebody hears something to justify the cost of a cable from him, or anyone else - no problem. But that's not what this is about.
Steve
Last edited by a moderator:
no......
Paul, I don't copy any one!
I form my own conclusions on things!
If I use an artistic....or shall I say....a hobby approach to it, I'm sorry if that irritates you (am I?...I suppose I am in a way) but I think that has just as much a place on these forms as the "no, it can't work so I'm going to close my mind to it" approach.
The forum is place for exchanging ideas and suggestions?
That would be my opinion anyway.
Could be for any of a variety of reasons.
No, true enough it isn't.
Like I say RA's ad copy is only one place for infromation.
It is a shame that some of these traders use some what colourful language when describing their products.
The Devil
IHTFP
The so-called "scientific research" is completely irrelevent to the question of whether Russ Abbott mains cables improve the sound of any given hi-fi system. A big assumption has been made, and the methodology seems rather suspect.
Bad science, IOW.
wadia-miester
Mighty Rearranger
Is that the same as bad wine there bub?
How are things up there James, long time no see.
How are things up there James, long time no see.
Look at 'Zanash's' posts....then look at yours.
But it is the topic of this thread.
Paul
Maybe!
Maybe Zanash and I agree on somethings.
Even in this day and age thats not a hanging offence.
(Yet).
Yes, I know.
There were some (I felt) unbalanced remarks being made, so I commented.
Not what I asked. You called 'spin' with reference to Phil Hansen's post. I asked you to state which part of his post was factually inaccurate. His only comment as to the scientific accuracy was to state that Ben Duncan had produced a supportive report. To dismiss this reasearch as 'irrelevent' (sic) you must know more than BD does about the topic. Please could you provide scientific evidence to refute BD's conclusions and what you know of his methodology.
Many thanks.
bottleneck
talks a load of rubbish
What a fascinating thread.
I'm not overly familiar with the tweaky side of the industry, personally eschewing many of the types of products mentioned.
Ben Duncan - is that this person?
http://www.britishaudio.co.uk/pureseries.htm
If I have the right person, has Russ Andrews hired a manufacturer of hifi mains related products to provide independant evidence that these products have effect?
I'm not overly familiar with the tweaky side of the industry, personally eschewing many of the types of products mentioned.
Ben Duncan - is that this person?
http://www.britishaudio.co.uk/pureseries.htm
If I have the right person, has Russ Andrews hired a manufacturer of hifi mains related products to provide independant evidence that these products have effect?
The Devil
IHTFP
It's nonsense research because no-one has established that any mains cables make any audible difference when substituted into a hifi system. So they are searching for an explanation for a phenomenon which almost certainly doesn't exist in the first place. This is a Bad Way Of Going About One's Research. It's pretty transparent "8 out of 10 cats" stuff: manufacturer with PR problem hires tame "scientist" to do some duff "science" in support of some duff claims.
You're welcome.
