Peter Belt

[Greg.]

Further to my post 27 above, have a look at the time Chalie submitted his messages to the forum on his posts 7 - 9. That's rapid fire typing unless, of course there was an element of copy and paste going on. What do you think?

Has Charlie, whoever he is done this sort of campaign before?

Originally Posted by pre65

I can understand how (perhaps ) objects in the hi-fi environment like TV's on standby might affect what's going on, but not the sort of things that Belt advocates.

Reasong being, you're basing your understanding on what you already know. Not what you don't know. So "hash" in the electrical system is what makes sense to you, because it fits better with what you know. And indeed your suspicions are right. Anything plugged into your house wiring, from tv's to toasters, will have a (usually detrimental) effect on your sound. But not for the reasons you suspect. Obviously a toaster is not drawing any power while plugged in but turned off. Yet like the tv, it can have an effect on your sound, whether your system is down the hall. There are two arguments that can be made for this; one that follows convention and one that doesn't. I'm not sure they need to be mutually exclusive.

e.g. Yes, it can be shown that objects in a room have an impact on acoustic pressure waves. For example, if you move your speaker about, you can say it will interact differently with room boundaries or nearby objects, and thus produce changes in sound. But what if you move your speaker placement, and find that the same differences in placement also show up on headphones, without even playing the speaker? When you've done it enough to rule out the placebo effect, then you have to go beyond the "safety" of understanding what you know, and allow room for new ideas and possibilities to explain what is occurring. The room does affect one's sound, but it isn't just the physical form of the objects in the room that does. It's the energy fields they produce (a different kind of physics). The table legs and photos in the freezer and all of those "wacky suggestions" that have no rhyme or reason to you, are all about changing the fields, to better suit how humans interact with them. It's actually not Peter's suggestions that are weird. It's the phenomenon that's weird. Ask anyone who does serious research in quantum physics if he thinks any of it is weird.

As I said before, I did try a few of Belts suggestions but they had no discernible effects on me or my music. Perhaps if I had a degree in Psychology things would be different.

Well, I'd say some "suggestions" are more effective than others, just as some of Belt's products are more effective than others. Combined, they're usually somewhat more effective. I can't say as to why they didn't work for you, as I don't know you, what you tried, or how they were implemented. I know that some beginners have had success, and some not. I know that some have had to try numerous products or suggestions before they did. But for me, they always had discernable effects on my music, and much later, I was able to discern their physical effects. I think part of the reason might be how they are being implemented. I say that for two reasons; one I'm very skilled with how they should be installed. So if I install devices, it's going to be a positive change.

Two, I am constantly being asked by friends to improve their systems with "whatever it is you do". Especially the systems in their car. In other words, they don't care what it is I am doing, or how it works. Why should they, they're not even audiophiles. All they know is that when I am done installing the various bits and pieces, the resulting upgrade in sound always knocks them over. If I could really do this with a placebo, as the skepti-cynics allege this is what it's based on, that'd be great. I'd just tell them after a few minutes "all done, mate!". Except that malarkey wouldn't fool anyone. Not even non-audiophiles. On the other hand, if I had to try to do this using conventional methods, I would tell them "forget about it". Ever try just installing a head unit into a Honda? I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go install a new head unit into a Honda.....

I'm a great believer in following my instincts, and on these Belt matters by inbuilt bullshit detector is working overtime.

You mean you asked to read my article on improving the efficacy of listening tests, just so you can then declare it "bullshit"? Are you sure it's a bullshit detector you own, and not a bullshit producer? Sometimes people mix those two up. Are you really saying that your instinct tells you that anything you can't personally hear in audio is "bullshit"?

Originally Posted by Shane

Your reply implies that you can detect and visualise this energy field. How do you do that?

Like a bat. A bat detects objects in the dark by listening. I might do dozens of tests to locate energy point patterns on an object... but it might just take three seconds per. Obviously, if someone takes ten or twenty minutes to do a test, and still not be sure of what they're hearing, they can't do this type of research. But that's ok. It's not necessary to do research, to enjoy the benefits of research. As for the physical component, I just focus. If I could measure the fields, I would not be adverse to trying that either. My MRI scanner is on the fritz right now. Otherwise....

If you are right, and it involves quantum particles, do you think CERN should know about this?

No, not really. CERN are doing specific types of research using particle accelerators, Hadron colliders. They have their own agenda, which they're certainly not going to modify on the basis of unfounded claims made by people outside their community and organization, that may or may not concern quantum particles. That said, of course I think the phenomenon deserves some serious research, as it has far greater implications for the understanding of nature, than this piddling little community we have of cranky combative audiophiles. As soon as you find a serious scientific organization willing to fund the studies... please feel free to give them my email address. Tell them I'll help in any way I can.

[Greg.]

Hmmm, Interesting that Chalie is reponding to some here but certainly not to me. I wonder why?

Another thing, if the modus operandi is followed, Chalie (whoever he/she is) will in due course stop posting, will dissolve into the background, never to post again on this forum. I'll hazzard a guess that if in future years, someone again questions Beltism here, there will be a similar response from some other apparent disciple who will follow the same presentation Chalie has dutifully done. I expect it'll be the same old person or even a proxi, spewing out the same old alledged ****.

There is an alleged view that Beltism is a fraud. It is an allegedly reasonable assumption that proponents of Beltism are conspiritors in that fraud.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Charlie Poole

That said, of course I think the phenomenon deserves some serious research, as it has far greater implications for the understanding of nature, than this piddling little community we have of cranky combative audiophiles. As soon as you find a serious scientific organization willing to fund the studies... please feel free to give them my email address. Tell them I'll help in any way I can.

Charlie please go and get help.

Greg, it's an illness.

[pre65]

Originally Posted by Richard

Charlie please go and get help.

Greg, it's an illness.

I think you are probably right Richard, perhaps we should just let this die down and let Charlie get on with his life.

[Richard]

Yes.