I have been away for a week or so and haven't been keeping up. But I can't resist jumping into this fray, even if I am late to the party. Here are my thoughts.
I go back and forth between the ideas of scientific method vs. subjective listening in regards to verifying audio tweaks.
I hold a high regard for the ability to use A/B/X testing to verify the validity of a difference between using a tweak vs. not using a tweak. At the same time, it suffers from its own issues and is not the be-all end-all. I also understand that many with a scientific and engineering background poo-poo anything that can't be proven with scientific measurements. I think history has proven time and again that science cannot and does not explain everything that we hear. Some products measure perfectly and still sound like crap; whereas other products measure awfully and still sound awesome. Many products with nearly identical measurements can produce very different sonic signatures. Everyone must recognize that Science is limited at any point in time by what we do not know. We still do not know plenty about audio reproduction.
The bottom line is that we use our ears and brains for listening, not calibrated electronic devices designed to measure distortion and frequency response. Therefore, my thought is that if you hear a discernible difference when using a tweak, then that should be enough for you. Others may not hear it or may not believe it, but that is not your problem. You are spending your money on your system and you are the one who must enjoy it. This forum is for debating and discussing all of these issues, but we must do so with respect for each individual's opinions and experience, even if they differ from our own.
I do believe that how we respond to things like this makes a difference. I think that saying someone is crazy or living in a fantasy land because they state that they hear a difference in their system shows poor character, especially if you have no experience with their system or the product which they are discussing. And I am quite sure I have done just this numerous times in my time on this forum. We are human, after all.
I have a lot of respect for Ethan's background and understanding, but at the same time I do find his responses are often a little egotistical and "holier-than-thou." A very black-and-white, know-it-all, "I am right until you prove me wrong" kind of attitude. I have seen similar traits in my own responses, so I am not casting stones but merely stating that these are just human traits which each of us possess in varying degrees. We are who we are. Gordon tends to be a little defensive and will light into a frenzy pretty quickly if he feels his integrity is being questioned. Which I also understand.
Ultimately, we do need to try to keep to facts and personal observations and avoid personal attacks based on differences in what we believe to be true. As Gordon said:
I find the product to be worthwhile. Others may find it to be fantasy or whatever.
We can certainly agree to disagree recognizing that this hobby is quite subjective and that the "right" balance of hardware and room induced anamolies will be different for each individual.
There is no question that hi fi audio is a subjective hobby. The debates between measurements vs. listening and A/B/X testing vs. long-term listening comparisons will continue to rage forever. There is no right and no wrong answer, only lots of opinions on a continuum. Let's try to have these discussions with this point in mind.
By the way, my opinion is that the tuning dots probably do provide some audible difference. Glass resonates at particular frequencies and anything you can do to dampen those resonances is going to provide a better sound. Reducing any unwanted vibration or resonance in your listening room will result in better sound. Just makes common sense to me. Understand that the rear wave of the speaker is directly impacting these large glass panes in Gordon's listening room. When you have the Summits cranked at high volume level, there seems little question that you would have resonances from the glass muddying your sound. Why wouldn't you try to dampen those resonances?
I have heard Gordon's system and it sounds great, which is not what you would expect from seeing the expanse of glass behind his Summit's. At the same time, I have not done any A/B comparison to hear the differences without the dots. But Gordon has and I trust that his opinion was that they made a difference. Ultimately, that is all that matters.
Whether or not there are more cost-effective means to achieve the same results is another argument entirely. Of course there are. There always are. Because audio tweaks are by their nature way over-priced and there are always cheaper ways for the diy'er to achieve similar results.
