I don't find it necessary to resort to personal attacks and insults unless I'm attacked or insulted in any way. However, I've never seen a Belt thread that didn't have personal attacks or insults, and this one has PLENTY towards HifiSoundGuy and GoodSound. In fact, I've never seen a Belt thread where the naysayers are actually prepared to have an intelligent debate on the issue. Or even know what an intelligent debate is.

And what I don't like, is not being able to fight back if I -am- attacked or insulted. As a Beltist, I have received no end of mockery and derision from ignorant dickwads on the net. As have ALL Beltists EVERYWHERE (except the Belt discussion group, natch). I've had 50 guys pile on top of me at once, throwing stone after stone, and for the better part of a year, I've happily taken them all on without pitching a sweat. Unlike most Belt experimenters, I'm not embarassed to stand behind the products. Problem is, those "tough geeks" who think their witless mockery and derision is somehow clever & unique, run screaming to the mods when I begin to insult them in return of their insults toward me. And then they deliberately try to break the User Policy to try to get the thread locked, or try to get me banned because they can't take what they dish out.

I could care less whether you spend $200 on the CLC. In fact, I don't care much about the CLC. And I agree its to Geoff's detriment that he doesn't publish even a basic explanation for the clock on his site. But on the other hand, as an experienced Beltist and producer of my own alternative audio products, I can understand Geoff's position on witholding the white paper for the CLC (even though he has posted white papers for some of his other alternative audio products). He says he was not encouraged to do so because of what happened when he offered explanations for his GSIC chip (and it was ripped apart by the audio inmates on AA). It doesn't matter if they did not succeed in refuting the product. They merely have to "appear" to have succeeded in refuting the product, because the avg. layperson is probably not going to make the distinction between actually knowing what they're talking about, and appearing to know what they're talking about (since the discussion is centered around the intricacies of QM, which flies over most people's heads).

And I don't care how long you've studied quantum mechanics, you can't claim to understand it well because -no one- does. It's a very bizarre world at that level, and there's a lot we don't understand about it today. What kills me is the arrogant skeptics who use science as a religion, and claim there is nothing that isn't understood. And that whatever isn't understood isn't scientific. How the hell do these people think science evolved? Fact is, there is ALWAYS some phenomena that isn't scientifically proven or validated. That doesn't mean it isn't valid, it simply means it hasn't been validated by a peer review group, for whatever reason. So how best to know whether it's valid or not? You TRY the damn thing! Especially if we're talking about audio phenomena. If you don't have the scientific curiousity to try it, that's fine too. Just don't claim it doesn't work, then! You haven't even begun to earn the right to do that.

I don't know when Kaitt plans to come out with an explanation for his CLC clock, but I'm sure you and everyone else here wouldn't believe it anyway. And that's assuming you'd understand it to begin with! All I know is that this isn't an original idea, he reworked a device that Peter Belt invented years ago. And to the idiots that think its just a Timex clock with an orange sticker on it, it isn't. You can remove the orange sticker, it'll still function as an audio device (just not as well). I tried recreating the clock with my own and an orange sticker.... didn't even come close to the sound of the CLC. It has a lot of mods to it, including something done to the lithium battery.

I can however, tell you one of those mods, that you can apply to your own digital clock in your listening room. Advance the time by 99 minutes. Can that alone affect sound, despite all the other clock mods missing? I think it can. But that little tweak is probably not something anyone I've seen here would be able to perceive. Let alone believe. And having a strong enough disbelief in a phenomenon is enough to install a reverse placebo effect on yourself.

The fact that Geoff's clock is said to work anywhere in the home, but not outside the home (other than the family car), tells me that it works on principles similar to most, if not all the Belt products. Which should tell you it doesn't push the air or heat anything up! What ignorant morons who condemn Belt products can't even get their heads around, is the fact that none of these products work on the signal chain. Nor can they, in any possible way. And when the IM's (ignorant morons) hear Belt claiming they work on the "perception of the listener", these witless goofs go on to interpret that as meaning Belt is admitting they are placebo's. It simply means what it says. Geoff's clock and all PWB products cause our senses to become more acute.

The reasoning behind that isn't something you can explain to IM's in the two-word sound bites they feel most comfortable with. The Belt's have taken 20 years to hash out the theories behind all this, until they felt comfortable with it. They take 6 pages to try to explain it, and then apologize for condensing it. But because it does have to do with the way we are constantly reacting (subconsciously) to our immediate environment, this explains why Geoff says you have to take the clock out of the house to remove the effect. He also observed that it works in the family car. I have a vague idea why, as I believe there has in the (Beltist) past been established a connection between our car environment and our home environment. Beltists routinely apply the products to their cars, and to them, even a picture of the family car has a significance.

This is what I call "dedicated audiophiles", because even the hardest core tweakers, you don't usually hear of them tweaking the sound of their car stereos (other than the usual pitiful monster cable upgrades). I have in fact transformed the sound of my car audio with simple Belt techniques (never mind the actual products). Some people can't hear the effect of the CLC, but that's a different problem altogether. Most of the time, its because of the stupid ways they're testing it (ie. if their belief system says it has to be blind tested, they'll inevitably come up with "blind results"). Other reasons are because they do not know how to listen. They have NO idea what to listen for, and fall back on what they know (ie. highs/mids/lows). Belt products don't change "highs/mids & lows". They produce changes across the board, and not in the freq. spectrum per se. Other people can hear the CLC in action, and have posted testimonials on Geoff's site. For whatever reasons that only Geoff and God understand, Geoff has decided to use these to convince people of the validity of the clock, in lieu of a white paper. But OF COURSE, predictably, the permanent hater-skeptics all say the quotes are fake. You can't ever convince someone of something they're not ever willing to be convinced by. That's what I call "willful ignorants". So.... which one are you?