Awwww... do you feel that let down my personal little ankle-biting troll, because I didn't answer your one non-trolling post? I could point out the irony of your statements here, given that you make a "frightened little fool" of yourself in -all- of your posts (and have sustained this for months on end in this thread alone!). Or the fact that I already pointed out you have a far longer list of questions of mine that you were either too scared or too stupid to answer (or both). And you still never responded to that. But instead, I'm gonna show you by example how to take "the high road", and overlook your petty trolling and ankle-biting, by taking your one attempt at an intelligent debate, seriously. I suppose since you finally somehow managed to find the balls to take me on, that's the least I can do. But if you end up regretting it... don't blame me! Okay, let's party!...


You must have really thought that was a brilliant "gotcha" response, certain to squash big bad Delius, didn't cha, Sluggo? Admit it, "didn't cha"?! Ok, wait for it......

You want answers? Here's my answer:


A. "What on earth do you think an audio system is designed to do?".


No, think harder. Think like you've never thunk before, el Sluggo....

Sluggo: "Oh, it's designed to play music!"

Delius: Harder.

Sluggo: "It's designed to create the illusion of a musician(s) before you?"

Delius: Harder!

Sluggo: "It's..."

Delius: Ok, never mind, I can see we're gonna be here all day.

Psychological stimuli are sights, sounds and smells. Last I checked, audio products are designed to provoke psychological stimuli. So are Belt products. Fancy that! You've just learned something new. And I told them that I could accomplish the impossible, and they didn't believe me! Now, for how many seconds are you going to retain that information?


And conversely, having a disbelief in a phenomenon is enough to install a reverse placebo effect.

And conversely, having a disbelief in a phenomenon is enough to install a reverse placebo effect.

And conversely, having a disbelief in a phenomenon is enough to install a reverse placebo effect.


(Are you having fun yet, Sluggette? I know I'm having fun with you.)

So, what have we learned this time, Sluggy?

Sluggo: "Having a belief in a phenomenon is enough to install a placebo effect. And conversely, having a disbelief in a phenomenon is enough to install a reverse placebo effect. "

Delius: Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You failed the test. The proper answer was: "To keep an open mind and attempt to have no expectations over the result of any scientific experiment, whatever the methodology used".


Says who? YOU? Pffft! Don't make me laugh! In only 3 days, you've already given us a faceful of how little of actual fact you know about audio. So seriously Sluggy... who? The JAES? Apparently not, as the inventor of ABX, the most rigorous audio test methodology ever devised by man, can't seem to come up with results that support your claim. ("Comparing Audio Components", JAES, 1983). Preamps, amps, pickup cartridges... It was concluded that despite using test groups sufficient in size to the inventor of the methodology, no differences could be determined. Yet most people, perhaps even "people like you" Sluggo, would admit those audio products do yield differences in sound. You still fail to realize what I've already pointed out on these pages, so-called "objective tests" are part of a "belief system". You wanna know what Clark himself has to say about your religious beliefs?

"When scientific tests have been performed, listeners' audibility thresholds have appeared to be poorer by orders of magnitude compared to casual tests. It has been argued that the methods and equipment used in the scientific test have inhibited the listener's discriminatory ability. "

Yes, it "-has- been argued". By me and many others. And if we're talking about a baby like you who doesn't even have much discriminatory ability to start out with, I'll defend that notion even stronger, in your case. Fact: everything you say think and do is part of a belief system. The question is, which belief system do you adopt? Being the fool you are Sluggo, I see you've naturally gravitated toward a fool's belief systems. I wouldn't expect you to do otherwise. It looks like in order to try to avoid being just another fool, you've adopted those beliefs and become a fool just by believing in them (not that I'm saying you weren't a fool long before that. Because I'm not). In fact, I'm willing to bet you don't even know that much about those test methodologies that you've adopted as part of your religious belief system. I'll bet you've never even participated in a true ABX test, to find out how useful and effective they are. I've taken plenty. Most audio consumers haven't taken any.

I'm curious to know what a brilliant mind like yours has to say about the millions of audio consumers out there who are presently enjoying hifi systems (as we speak), which they have not chosen by way of any form of blind testing. Seriously, we could always use the laughs down here...

Did I say you did? Show me where I said that. You can't because I didn't. On the contrary, I have always advocated the (and I know this is gonna frighten you so heed this as a warning for what's coming next....) radical concept of listening to your own ears. Why do you think I went to the trouble to post my websites, which allows people to test a couple of these radical concepts for themselves? You mean all this time that I've been generous enough to give you the website address and you still haven't made the connection that it allows you to listen for yourself? Damn, you're slow. But admit it, that's where the name "Slug-go" comes from, doesn't it?


Oh my God. And you even quoted the answer to your question two seconds ago! Forget my last remark; you're not slow, you're frozen in time....

So far, my BS meter is not registering (a first for your posts), which means the above is correct. I should add that I feel I can not be "personally faulted" for the fact that the phenomenon is not (currently) measurable in any technical way.

Well, technically, nothing is impossible to refute, so long as you get someone to believe your refutation. I mean look how many people here believe that you have succesfully refuted the Belt products? But now we're getting back to belief systems. And "easy to claim"? Eh, I don't think so. If you had any idea of the complexity of the hypotheses, you'd know they aren't easy claims to make, let alone explain. I shouldn't be personally faulted for that either, they're not my hypotheses. And they may be wrong, in part or in whole. Particularly since they are (currently) difficult or impossible to prove (I mean to the satisfaction of current peer reviewed scientific standards). That however, doesn't invalidate the phenomenon.

Let me come at you from a different angle, and maybe we'll find a concept for you that you can finally begin to understand.... The origins of the universe are currently impossible to prove. And I don't just mean the initial nucleus of a beginning (we'll say the primeval atom, The Big Bang theory, but physicists don't all agree on the origins of this either), but what conditions occurred before the point of singularity. Yet we know that somehow, everything that we have seen in our world and universe flowed from that point. It wouldn't all be here today if it weren't so, and we wouldn't be observing the phenomenon that we do through the telescopes. So if you are correct in your rigid, foolish and ill-thought out stance that reality follows what can be concretely proven in peer-reviewed journals, and all else is "pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo", then we're not having this conversation right now. 'Cos we don't exist, 'cos no one can prove exactly how our universe has come into existence.

How do we know anything about the universe anyway? Looking through telescopes right? Visual information. Humans looking with their human eyes, interpreting data. It's not that different under Belt phenomenon. You can look at a video display and interpret changes in the display prior to and following Beltist experiments. Just as with a telescope, you're using your eyes as tools to gather information. And just as you can use your eyes to measure things, you can also use your ears.

So the Belt phenomenon is not really "impossible to prove", any more than the "Hubble phenomenon". It's just that you seem to be (and struggle to remain) oblivious to the fact that our eyes and ears are used as test instruments all the time, in all kinds of sciences. And since you don't believe the eyes and ears of hundreds of Belt product users across the globe, then your only option is to do the tests yourself, in order to determine whether -your- "test instruments" are sensitive enough to pick up on the phenomenon. But given that your head seems to be filled with cement, maybe you need to be belted in the head with a sledgehammer before you'll hear anything that resembles differences. Who knows.

A bit of a clarification: The "Belt effect" is there whether someone perceives it or not. By that, I mean two things: both the change that the Belt product (or technique) effects, and the problem the Belt device is meant to address. This "problem" (a type of mental stress) is degrading your audio sound as we speak. It's in fact degrading all of your senses. You don't realize that, because you've lived with the problem your entire life. So you never knew life without it. You can't be aware of what you never experienced. That's what makes people like you fail to understand what the hell the Belt product can possibly do in the first place.

With the Belt product (or technique) in place, the change occurs, the stress on your senses is reduced, the sound is instantly perceived as better. (Note that the sound is perceived as better on any audio system in your house, and the video is perceived better as well). Now we get into the concept of "threshold of audibility/visuality". I admit I don't particularly do well as far as visual cues goes, but I can and have perceived improvements in video. I am however, an expert at audibility. Whether you are successful at determining changes for -any- audio phenomenon, including amps, speakers, turntables, cdplayers and wire, is going to depend on your threshold of audibility. Some Belt products or techniques yield relatively small differences, some larger. Some people can hear the effects and some can't. Some of that depends on the products they try and some depends on the person trying them, or a combination thereof. Naturally, many Belt products combined require a lower TA (threshold of audibility).

If a product does effect a change (and I know for a fact all Belt products and all types of audio components do), then you will perceive that change, whether you are conscious of it or not. So long as you have a functioning pair of ears (and presumably, brain). Whether you are conscious of the change is another matter. So even if you can't hear the effects of Belt product, doesn't mean it don't work, only that -you- can't hear it. However, you have already claimed you can't hear it before even testing it. That's caused by a common type of brain damage called "cretinism". Possibly caused by the slug that seems to have permanently nested somewhere inside your cranium. Is -that- why they call you "Sluggo", btw?


No, that's not what I said. Jason Jr. also got that wrong, and I'm guessing, so did all the other IM's here fail to understand my point about IM's. I've repeated it to your friend Jason, I'll repeat it to you. Please read slowly, assuming you've been able to keep up with me thus far: "If you claim the Belt effect does not exist and the products do not work, or even go so far as to claim they are fraudulent, and you have never tested such products, and/or you have no real knowledge of how and why they work, then you are, listen carefully now, an "ignorant moron"". Okay, did that finally sink in? Let me be clearer and mention that you're an IM if you behave that way over ANY audio product. And since you Sluggo have made probably the most false unsupported claims about these products, yes, you are officially an ignorant moron. I'll happily put that on a framed certificate if you want, since you seem to be happy and comfortable with this fact. But if you should ever have a problem with it, don't complain to me for pointing out the obvious truth about you. The solution is simple: stop being an ignorant moron. For some people, this mental disease is not terminal. I don't know how much hope there is in your case, particularly judging from your last post to me. But I'm a positive person, so I like to think there's hope for everyone.