You are here

Log in or register to post comments
es347
es347's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Feb 9 2006 - 10:58am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)


Quote:
"Here's an interesting perspective offered by JGH back in the late 80's re: the Peter Belt elixirs. It couldn't be stated more clearly."

So what? Anyone can cherry pick reviews. There are plenty of positive reviews of Belt products, so the occassional "I didn't hear anything" doesn't mean all that much.

There you go being clever again. So what? So it's written by JGH and therefore interesting. You don't have to cherry pick much to support the skeptical position on this nonsense. Besides, I'm not trying to convince anyone that they shouldn't invest their hard earned $$ in this stuff if they think it works. If they choose to drink the tweaker's kool aide no one will dissuade them anyway. PT Barnum had a name for these folks and it wasn't rocket scientist. Ok your turn to be clever again.

Benonymous
Benonymous's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 12 2006 - 7:22pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)

The main thing I owe Peter Belt is a big "thankyou" for all the laughs he has given me. His site, one of the most unprofessional efforts at HTML I have ever seen, abounds with comical ideas and ludicrous pseudo-science. If I hired a team of comedy writers, they'd be hard pressed to top the nonsense he babbles out on his scrappy little website.
If he is selling the laughable artefacts that he creates to people it proves the PT Barnum quote in spades. Another proof is that the mind can be fooled into creating the perceptions that it is expecting.
To even suggest that a gentleman with no more than maybe a high school level grasp of physics could have discovered a "new type of energy unknown to science" is true ROTFLLMAO material. It's like our good friend with his liquid cables (where have you gone Kevin?) had to pretend to have a product that rewrote the laws of physics His product was exposed as nothing more than a gimmick in the end. These ART system devices are a similar gimmick with no explanation of how they work or any supporting data. Maybe this will be remedied soon, maybe.... I shan't hold my breath.
But as I have always said, I don't care how you spend your money but I will challenge claims made by people manufacturing stupid, gimmick products. As a true skeptic should.
Many of the links to hokey products I have found on this site have made their way to my network of friends and colleagues who work in professional audio and broadcasting. The cables, the underpowered valve amps, the vinyl demagnetiser, the list goes on. They often write back to me to express their amusement and boggle at the ignoramuses that plunk down their money for such fake audio enhancers.
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! We go in unison

I was actually musing on this today whilst hunting for fossils with my eldest daughter. If you put your favourite (demagnetized) vinyl disc on your multi thousand dollar turntable, turn up your multi thousand dollar pre amp, turn up your multi thousand dollar (valve) power amp and then listen via your multi thousand dollar cables to your multi thousand dollar speakers, listen to the first half of the track, then stick your fingers in your ears. At this moment you will have achieved, at no cost, an ASTOUNDING change in your sound system. The highs will be less "splashy" the mids will have less "glare" the bottom end will be more "creamy" and the overall sound stage will be less "bitter" . Feel free to insert any HiFi reviewer favourites in the inverted commas Basically, you have made a difference, not an improvement (maybe) This appears to be the only objective of tweak creators. Either real or imagined, there is an alteration that is immediately pronounced an "improvement" However I believe that most HiFi reviewers wouldn't know the difference any more. They've made a business of endorsing everything and criticizing nothing.
Power cables are a prime example. The AC waveform going into your HiFi PSU is totally isolated from the amplifier circitry by dint of being converted from AC to DC power. Nothing could be more simple to grasp as a concept but people continue to buy fraudulent products based on the commercially driven endorsements of HiFi reviewers and magazines. If you really believe in the power cable as a critical HiFi component then you are a truly ignorant individual and a sucker and you deserve to be fleeced.
I wish I was dishonest enough to go into business making them, 26 years of system design and construction with all of the tradesmen's skills involved would see to it that my power cables would be irresistible to gullible audiophiles. I'd have oodles of sleeving and coloured heat-shrink and I'd make them weigh twenty pounds a piece, there's a lot of perceived quality in that kind of weight
Maybe I'd branch out into singing-bowl room resonatoators after I made my first million

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)

"Besides, I'm not trying to convince anyone that they shouldn't invest their hard earned $$ in this stuff"

Yeah, right. Just an open minded skeptic, eh? (cough, cough)

satfrat
satfrat's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 23 2008 - 9:45pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)

Well I will say that by waiting a week,then coming back here and picking thru the garbage, there is things to be learned. # 1 would be if this is the normal everyday way Ethan Whiner fosters his business here on Stereophile than I can't say I dislike the guy but I can say I've lost any respect I ever had for the guy and I do happen to own some of his products. It's not like I haven't heard him slam other products before, he's done it to at least 2 other acoustic products that I also happen to own. But when he's done his thing on another forum, he's been basically respectful about it. Seeing him here cutting lose and walking a tightline of lawsuit slander cuz this forum allows him the rope to do so, well Ethan Whiner, this sorta stuff should be made available to all the audio community so's to test that "highly regarded" status that I always thought you had. To my eyes, this is a good example of how low some audio manufacturer's will stoop to get a sale in a tuff audio market. At this point I can't imagine why I ever thought you were better than this but it's surely the last thing on my mind now.

Unlike some of the others, I won't bother repeating myself a hundred times, once is enough.

Cheers,
Robin

satfrat
satfrat's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 23 2008 - 9:45pm
Re: Synergistics Research Acoustic ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
RG,
No similar reports but then our two products are very different. For one my resonators are more massive- think matchbox toy car to a Mac Truck. Because of this we can treat an average room with 2 or 3 resonators (one or two Gravatron Satellites and one Bass Station) with a complete treatment of 5 to 6 resonators (one Vibratron, one Bass Station, two Magnitron Satellites and one or two Gravatron Satellites). On top of this, Frank's resonators are made from precious metals so they are much smaller compared to my resonators and this not only necessitates more resonators to effectively treat a room, it also means Frank's resonators operate at much higher frequencies. Frank's resonators do not have the same multiple frequency resonance patterns of the Acoustic ART System so you end up needing multiple resonators (I believe Srajan's room has over 30 of Franks resonators), of different materials (gold, gold special, silver, platinum and copper) to get an ideal acoustic balance- this can take several weeks of trial and error (and several thousands of dollars) to achieve since there is no set way of determining which of Franks resonators will be needed to effectively balance a room. Since my resonators resonate at multiple frequencies, their is no need for additional resonators aside from treating key pressure points in a room to create a desirable acoustic balance- again this means less resonators and better performance at a fraction of the price. We also have patents pending using magnets to contour the activation and decay properties of our resonators as well as a new resonator shape- The Vibratron. This is the reason you see round magnets atop the Vibratron (two large gold and four small silver magnets)- you can actually tune the Vibratron with magnets (simply play with the number of gold and silver magnets atop the Vibratorn) and this in turn tunes the other Satellite resonators in a room without the need for multiple resonators of different materials with different resonance frequencies to acoustically balance a room.

Lastly I think if Marja, Henk, and Srajan are sensitive to Frank's resonators, they may also be sensitive to Wi Fi and many other forms of high frequency emissions but again, my resonators do not operate at such high frequencies in the first place.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/fringes/fringes.html
http://dagogo.com/SynergisticART.html
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/acousticsystem/resonators.html

Boy,I had to go back some to find a decent post but you and Steven to seem to fit 1 or 2 in every 7-10 pages. I've been looking for comparisons between the Acoustic System and the Acoustic ART System and I had many of my questions answered in just 2 posts. It's a damn shame to have to do so much sifting thru the trash tho. Anyways Ted, regarding using your resonators in a room that's already using conventional acoustic products, what's your thoughts on how well your ART System would work in that envirement or is it even an issue at all? Thanks.

Cheers,
Robin

es347
es347's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Feb 9 2006 - 10:58am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)


Quote:
"Besides, I'm not trying to convince anyone that they shouldn't invest their hard earned $$ in this stuff"

Yeah, right. Just an open minded skeptic, eh? (cough, cough)

You need to do something about that cough. It could be ( fill in the blank).

tomjtx
tomjtx's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 12 2006 - 2:53pm
Re: Synergistics Research Acoustic ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:

Quote:
RG,
No similar reports but then our two products are very different. For one my resonators are more massive- think matchbox toy car to a Mac Truck. Because of this we can treat an average room with 2 or 3 resonators (one or two Gravatron Satellites and one Bass Station) with a complete treatment of 5 to 6 resonators (one Vibratron, one Bass Station, two Magnitron Satellites and one or two Gravatron Satellites). On top of this, Frank's resonators are made from precious metals so they are much smaller compared to my resonators and this not only necessitates more resonators to effectively treat a room, it also means Frank's resonators operate at much higher frequencies. Frank's resonators do not have the same multiple frequency resonance patterns of the Acoustic ART System so you end up needing multiple resonators (I believe Srajan's room has over 30 of Franks resonators), of different materials (gold, gold special, silver, platinum and copper) to get an ideal acoustic balance- this can take several weeks of trial and error (and several thousands of dollars) to achieve since there is no set way of determining which of Franks resonators will be needed to effectively balance a room. Since my resonators resonate at multiple frequencies, their is no need for additional resonators aside from treating key pressure points in a room to create a desirable acoustic balance- again this means less resonators and better performance at a fraction of the price. We also have patents pending using magnets to contour the activation and decay properties of our resonators as well as a new resonator shape- The Vibratron. This is the reason you see round magnets atop the Vibratron (two large gold and four small silver magnets)- you can actually tune the Vibratron with magnets (simply play with the number of gold and silver magnets atop the Vibratorn) and this in turn tunes the other Satellite resonators in a room without the need for multiple resonators of different materials with different resonance frequencies to acoustically balance a room.

Lastly I think if Marja, Henk, and Srajan are sensitive to Frank's resonators, they may also be sensitive to Wi Fi and many other forms of high frequency emissions but again, my resonators do not operate at such high frequencies in the first place.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/fringes/fringes.html
http://dagogo.com/SynergisticART.html
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/acousticsystem/resonators.html

Boy,I had to go back some to find a decent post but you and Steven to seem to fit 1 or 2 in every 7-10 pages. I've been looking for comparisons between the Acoustic System and the Acoustic ART System and I had many of my questions answered in just 2 posts. It's a damn shame to have to do so much sifting thru the trash tho. Anyways Ted, regarding using your resonators in a room that's already using conventional acoustic products, what's your thoughts on how well your ART System would work in that envirement or is it even an issue at all? Thanks.

Cheers,
Robin

I thought you weren't going to repeat yourself.

BTW, it's obvious you are a troll.

And with that, I'll put you on ignore with the rest of the loons

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
I wish no one would call them "singing" bowls as that gives them a bad connotation imo.

That is the colloquial name applied to the Tibetan Bowls, a product of Tibet which is manufactured and sold by Tibetans. I didn't make it up and it has no connotation name-wise to the ART product other than one inspired the other and they both resonate.

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:

Quote:
I wish no one would call them "singing" bowls as that gives them a bad connotation imo.

That is the colloquial name applied to the Tibetan Bowls, a product of Tibet which is manufactured and sold by Tibetans. I didn't make it up and it has no connotation name-wise to the ART product other than one inspired the other and they both resonate.

Thanks Jan. I was just thinking that someone not knowing about the bowls might misinterpret the term the wrong way.

Take care and thanks.

---------

As far as Fresh clip,


Quote:
These ART system devices are a similar gimmick with no explanation of how they work or any supporting data.

So he rewrote the laws of physics?? Pretty obvious you either did not read my previous post for the explanation and even if you did not, you really do not understand even basic physics. A similar application of changing Q of metals materials (to very low values) has been used in speaker drivers for years. The lower the Q, the less efficient (more energy absorbed). This is easily applied to other applications and shapes as it is basic physics.


Quote:
Power cables are a prime example. The AC waveform going into your HiFi PSU is totally isolated from the amplifier circitry by dint of being converted from AC to DC power.

First, unless the amplifier is operated in class A, the current demands change, including AC current. This can change the AC voltage applied to the transformer, both primary and secondary, since all wiring has resistance, especially in power transformers. This changing AC is then changed into DC. The changing AC will modulate the DC voltages unless you know of a perfect power supply.

Secondly, RF will not be rectified by simple low frequency typical diodes. They pass through. Electrolytic capacitors will also not filter out RF perfectly because of internal inductance. Also try studying a basic thevenin equivalent circuit. It might also help to perform some actual experiments.

----------

Tomjtx,

Quote:
BTW, it's obvious you are a troll.

Really, because he pointed out valid posts/explanations backed up by basic physics. Also kinda interesting that while you blast us and ART, you were pushing a compeitor's products in another string just a week or two ago. Seems to me Fresh Clip as well.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)

Your lame attempt at a clever comeback would undoubtedly have had a better chance of success had you used the correct word. But you get an E for effort.

es347
es347's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Feb 9 2006 - 10:58am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?(why Mr. Winer isnt liked)


Quote:
Your lame attempt at a clever comeback would undoubtedly have had a better chance of success had you used the correct word. But you get an E for effort.

Hey he gave me an E. Not bad.

Stephen Scharf
Stephen Scharf's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 19 2008 - 9:36pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Boy, folks here can really get into it with each other. This reminds me of the behavior of folks who ride VFRs with gear-driven cams or VTEC.

Once again, could we please stay on-topic, please?

Personally, I find the fact that the ART bowls are "hand-tuned" via analysis with a spectrum analyzer prior to quenching to be correctly functional to be of specific interest. This must mean that the steeel has to have very, very specific properties at the alloy level. It would be nice to know what specific continuous data variable is being measured, but that may be proprietary, as I am sure that SR has IP filed on ART.

Regardless, Ted, it sounds like DOE (Design of Experiments) could be of help in optimizing the "pass rate" of the steel for ART.

Frank S
Frank S's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jan 2 2009 - 2:01pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:

Personally, I find the fact that the ART bowls are "hand-tuned" via analysis with a spectrum analyzer prior to quenching to be correctly functional to be of specific interest. This must mean that the steeel has to have very, very specific properties at the alloy level. It would be nice to know what specific continuous data variable is being measured, but that may be proprietary, as I am sure that SR has IP filed on ART.

Since this is my first post on this forum I'd just like to say that Stephen and I have met so he can vouch that I'm not a troll. Secondly, I'm skeptical about the ART system but open to the fact that they do "something" in the way of altering the acoustics in one's room.
I've read through this thread and the thread on another forum, countless posts on this subject in all, yet no real response as to how this system contributes in the way the manufacturer claims it to.
Now Stephen mentions that the ART bowls are "hand-tuned" via analysis with a spectrum analyzer prior to quenching
This is something I'd like to know more about. I've been in the business of manufacturing for over 30 years and am familiar with various surface treatment processes so I'd be very interested in hearing more about this quenching process.

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
Boy, folks here can really get into it with each other. This reminds me of the behavior of folks who ride VFRs with gear-driven cams or VTEC.

Once again, could we please stay on-topic, please?

Personally, I find the fact that the ART bowls are "hand-tuned" via analysis with a spectrum analyzer prior to quenching to be correctly functional to be of specific interest. This must mean that the steeel has to have very, very specific properties at the alloy level. It would be nice to know what specific continuous data variable is being measured, but that may be proprietary, as I am sure that SR has IP filed on ART.

Regardless, Ted, it sounds like DOE (Design of Experiments) could be of help in optimizing the "pass rate" of the steel for ART.

I agree Stephen. I was addressing how designing the bowls required actual physics and also addressing those who claim to know physics but do not, but are more interested in bashing the competition. Plus they tried to insert some other incorrect comments pertaining to electronics. I too, am waiting for more information.

Now back to our regularly scheduled subject.

Take care Stephen.

Ps. I agree, Frank and Satfrat are not trolls.

satfrat
satfrat's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 23 2008 - 9:45pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Thanks Steve, I don't want to come off as a troll, in fact this is the 1st time I've ever been called a troll and I can understand why. Someone coming in with only a few posts, all negative, I would probably make the same call myself. But regardless of what anyone thinks of me, my only concern is to learn more about resonators, their function, their interaction within a room, there interaction in a room that's already heavily treated with conventional products, etc. If I react badly, I would sugest you all go back and review all 37 pages and ask yourself how would you react if this was your first time at Stereophile and you wanted to find out more about the Acoustic ART System and/or the Acoustic System but instead of useful info, you found this. My reaction has been spelled out, I'll try not to dwell on it so hopefully I can shake the "Troll" label.

Moving on,,,, is Ted already heading to CES and not available to answer some questions? Can anyone else with ART System knowledge answer my question about how these Resonators would react or better yet "interact" in a highly acoustically treated room?

FWIW, I have products from 8 different acoustic company's, 2 of which have been in the past on the "hitlist" of Real Traps , of which I own a Real Traps Soffit Plant Stand and a cutup Real Traps Soffit that I used to build an oak subwoofer stand. I have no issues and very good results with all of my acoustic treatment products in my smallish 11' x 17' x 7' room which I feel has been expanded acoustically from my efforts. But I'm always interested in new things, new ideas and I'm a firm believer of making up my own mind after gaining experience with a product, not after listening to internet chatter. in other words, I try and keep an open mind on things and ideas that I myself have no hands on experience with. But once I've had sufficant time with a product and feel I've got something to say, then I have no problem expressing my thoughts on what I feel I've heard or didn't hear. If everyone practiced this, I think a whole lot of this back and forth BS would be avoided and you'd end up with a sharing of opinions from product owners or product returners. Either way, everyone would have an experienced opinion to share instead of simply shooting from the hip.
Thanks for your time.
Cheers,
Robin

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

At this time I have no personal experience with the ART's system, just the Tibetan Bowls. But from everything I have been able to piece together from the various manufacturers of alternative room treatments, they all seem to be in agreement that too much fiberglass will deaden the room sound. "Conventional" treatments are broadband in nature and that means dampening a problematic frequency region will also affect several octaves above and below that target range. It's very difficult with absorption systems to hit the right balance of dead enough/alive enough. There are, however, some rooms that must have some dampening devices. For the most part I would say the alternative treatments should be placed in a live room and then add fiberglass only as needed or move to other treatment systems such as resonators and diffusors that do not absorb and deaden the sound in the room.

Hopefully, Ted will address this more completely when he has a regular schedule.

P.S. - I think your comments have been of value to this thread since a few posters here do have monetary investments in competitive products for the ART's systems clients.

Benonymous
Benonymous's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 12 2006 - 7:22pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:

First, unless the amplifier is operated in class A, the current demands change, including AC current. This can change the AC voltage applied to the transformer, both primary and secondary, since all wiring has resistance, especially in power transformers. This changing AC is then changed into DC. The changing AC will modulate the DC voltages unless you know of a perfect power supply.

Secondly, RF will not be rectified by simple low frequency typical diodes. They pass through. Electrolytic capacitors will also not filter out RF perfectly because of internal inductance. Also try studying a basic thevenin equivalent circuit. It might also help to perform some actual experiments.

Simply Brilliant!

Unless you have a 'class A' amplifier, you must have a twenty pound AC mains cable that cost a thousand dollars!

Listen, if your power amp is pulling the voltages around on your mains transformer, especially on the primary, it has smoothing capacitors of an insufficient size. If this is the case with the PSU in your Hi Fi Jan you should return it to the manufacturer with a stern letter of complaint.

And what, pray tell, does RF have to do with the situation??? Can you hear RF Jan? If you can, you're a freak! OOP, sorry, you're an audiophile, of course you can hear RF.... Why would you want it rectified anyway, rectifying equals demodulation, you'll have the local AM station spoiling your latest Ben Sidran disc. Assuming the PSU has a role to play in filtering RF out of the DC power to the amplifier. How in the hell does the mains cable have any part in the process? It is a passive component in every sense of the word, especially at 110/240V 50/60Hz.

Experiments are unnecessary. I have been building and repairing power supplies for over 20 years, I know what they have in them and what they need to be an effective source of DC for an electronic amplifier.

BONNNNNGGGGG......TINGGG.....ZINGGGGG.......BOINGGGG....binggg

Your Singing Bowls are calling Jan......

Better do what they tell you...

(cue Twilight Zone theme)

satfrat
satfrat's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 23 2008 - 9:45pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Thanks for the info Jan, it's appreciated. I agree about having too much obsorption in a room. I look for depth, not death. LOL Instead of obsorption on my 1st reflection locations I use Furutech Room Tuning Panels, diffusion panels actually, both on my walls and ceiling. For fiberglass products, I'm using the 2 real Traps Soffit's and 2 GIK Table Traps. I do use a lot of 8th Nerve Adapt Rectangles on all the wall & ceiling edges. I use ASC Cinema Panels & Cathedral Sound panels on the rear wall along with a few Acoutic Revive Acoustic panels on the ceiling. Even with all this, my room is not even close to being deaden. In fact it's just the opposite. But then again I incorporate a number of products that add to the depthness the soundstage like many Bybees and the Acoustic Revive RR-77. But this ART Ssytem has peaked my interest even tho I could never afford them, it doesn't lessen my desire to learn more about them, to talk with those who have either auditioned them or actually own them. And I'm interested in how the ART system will intereact with other forns of acoustic treatement and not just fiberglass based room treatment but diffusers and bass traps.
I'll be popping back from time to time, picking thru the BS and hoping to find the informative posts.

Cheers,
Robin

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Let's start w/ the premise (humor me) that acoustic resonators, such as those discussed in this thread, dissipate unwanted energies in the room. By unwanted energies I mean reflected waves and standing waves (that interfer with the primary signal) - i.e., Comb Filter effects. Assuming (for the moment) that is indeed the case, wouldn't it be highly desirable to identify Optimum Locations for acoustic resonators with high accuracy, considering acoustic peaks in the room (relative to average pressure) are often quite localized?

Approximate locations for resonators can be determined by ear if one is willing to spend the time, but a Sound Pressure Meter (along with appropriate test frequency) is much less time consuming and considerably more accurate. And Light Years ahead of arbitrary placement.

This holds true for Room Lenses, Tube Traps, even Brilliant Pebbles.

Cheers

Stephen Scharf
Stephen Scharf's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 19 2008 - 9:36pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Yes, if you go back and read through the posts (granted, there are a lot), the ART bowls have to placed a precise locations in the room to be effective. At Music Lovers in Bezerkeley, there is tape on the wall that marks precisely where the wooden bits go that support the bowls. It appeared that the SR rep who set them up knew where to place them; and it wouldn't surprise me at all that some metrology was used to do this. I keep getting this impression that the folks that think ART is a crock think that SR is developing this system just on the fly, w/o using any discipline, metrology or data-gathering protocol in designing, manufacturing, optimizing, and implementing this system, and my informed guess is that that is pretty far from the truth. It's very time-consuming, unproductive, and expensive for a business to develop functionality of a manufactured product these days simply by trial and error alone AND remain in business.

Also, reading the posts in here I am still struck by the single-minded thinking that is evident here; that there is only ONE way to solve a particular problem. As someone who teaches Design for Six Sigma, I can tell you that that is simply not the case with respect to acheiving functionality.

Let's take, for example, listening rooms. A number of members have indicated that they have a (sometimes large) number of tube traps, damping panels, wall muffs, ceiling scarves, etc., set up in their listening room, implying that this is necessary to get the ideal behavior in a listening room. I spent the better part of a day at a good friend's house who had a custom listening room built when his house was built, and there are virtually no tube traps, acoustic panels, Sonex, Acoustic Revive bits, and his listening room (as well as his living room, I might add) sounds fantastic. The walls are untreated expect for a beautiful large modern art painting on the rear wall behind the speakers, there is wall to wall carpeting on the floor, two chairs and a padded bench that runs along part of the rear wall. The room IS asymmetrically shaped though. Why does it sound so good? Because the room itself was designed to be good in this respect. This is a classic example of good design not needing "band-aids".

As far as I recall, there's no Sonex or tube traps in Carnegie Hall or the Musikverein.

Ted_D
Ted_D's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jul 8 2007 - 11:55am
Re: Synergistics Research Acoustic ART-real sonic improvements?

How to set up the Acoustic ART System is covered on our website however here goes:

Placing the point source resonator - The Vibratron is placed on the front wall behind your main speakers. Experiment with placement between 4 and 6 feet above the height of the floor. If a painting, video screen or other object prevents you from using this location, mount the Vibratron below the obstruction but as close to the ideal location as possible. You can then place a Gravatron Satellite above the obstruction to approximate the ideal Vibratron placement. This will raise vertical image placement to natural levels and smooth out high frequencies in your system should practical concerns force a less then ideal Vibratron placement. For entry level Acoustic ART installations substitute a Gravitron Satellite for the Vibratron and follow the above set up guidelines.

Specially developed mid-range tuning magnets are included with the Vibratron and are used to integrate the Vibratron with your room. Try experimenting by placing all of the magnets atop the Vibratron. You should hear a noticeable increase in mid-range liquidity and warmth. Now remove them completely and listen for a lift in high frequency extension. Finally, experiment with different combinations of large gold magnets and the smaller silver magnets until the desired combination is found.

Placing the Bass Station - The Bass Station should be placed directly below the Vibratron approximately three to twelve inches out from the front wall with its dispersion baffle obstructing your view of its resonator satellite. The baffle is engineered to direct the bass resonators dispersion pattern along the front wall and away from the rest of the room. The Bass Station may also be placed on the floor behind a rack or piece of furniture just below the Vibratron. This will not hinder the Bass Station's performance. If necessary the Bass Station can be positioned in front of the equipment rack or furniture directly below the Vibratron and in between your main speakers.

Razor sharp patent pending Stilettos are included with the Bass Station to couple the characteristics of its bass resonator to the floor. Simply screw the Stilettos into the Bass Station for noticeably tighter low frequencies and precise image placement. If you have carpeted floors, be certain you press down hard on the Bass Station so its razor sharp Stilettos make solid contact with the floor.

First order reflection point - Magnetron Satellites are used to control first order reflection points along a side-wall for improved image focus, a wider soundstage, and smoother high frequencies. When setting up Magnetron Satellites have a friend move a mirror along the side-wall between your listening position and the speakers. While sitting in your listening chair, look for the reflection of your speaker

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Online
Last seen: 1 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

"At Music Lovers in Bezerkeley, there is tape on the wall that marks precisely where the wooden bits go that support the bowls. It appeared that the SR rep who set them up knew where to place them; and it wouldn't surprise me at all that some metrology was used to do this

Yes, I imagine you're most likely right about that..

:-)

satfrat
satfrat's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 23 2008 - 9:45pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
Let's take, for example, listening rooms. A number of members have indicated that they have a (sometimes large) number of tube traps, damping panels, wall muffs, ceiling scarves, etc., set up in their listening room, implying that this is necessary to get the ideal behavior in a listening room. I spent the better part of a day at a good friend's house who had a custom listening room built when his house was built, and there are virtually no tube traps, acoustic panels, Sonex, Acoustic Revive bits, and his listening room (as well as his living room, I might add) sounds fantastic. The walls are untreated expect for a beautiful large modern art painting on the rear wall behind the speakers, there is wall to wall carpeting on the floor, two chairs and a padded bench that runs along part of the rear wall. The room IS asymmetrically shaped though. Why does it sound so good? Because the room itself was designed to be good in this respect. This is a classic example of good design not needing "band-aids".

As far as I recall, there's no Sonex or tube traps in Carnegie Hall or the Musikverein.

Really Steven,, I couldn't disagree more with your bandaid statement from what i've experienced with my own sitution. I would agree that NOT having a professional with sound equipment come in, do tests and treat a room according to the testing is in fact bandaid room treating. But many folks don't have the means to do things by the letter, but instead have to trust their ears while trying to learn the best way they can how to properly install room treatment and try to percieve if any improvement of their efforts have been realized. If not satisfied that the sound stage has indeed improved, the room treatment goes back. 30 days should be enough time to figure that out to ones satisfaction.

In my case, my room sounded great when I first set up my high end gear, I had no issues that I felt were serious. But with each piece of treatment I got, the 8th Nerve Rectangles being the first, my sound stage started to expand while the imaging started to clean up. Echos disappeared. Sound stage depth seened to double in size with the Furutech diffussers on the walls & ceiling. With the Real Trap Soffits, the Cathedral Sound Panels and the Gif Table Traps, my bass cleaned up & tightened up while better integrating with my loudspeakers. All in all, I can't disagree more with your blanket statement that conventional room treatment is unneccassary.

But can it all be replaced with resonators, specifically SR's Acoustic ART System? I dunno. Can the ART system coexist with conventional room treatment or is it "my way or the highway" with each path of room treatment? Dunno that either. I'll probably never find out either as I can't really afford 3K room treatment and I won't BS my way into auditioning something with no intention of purchasing it. But my Achilles Heel is I'm curious. It's surprising that more folks wouldn't be curious about things they don't understand instead of just dismissing it totally with added ridicule. I'm not jumping on either bandwagon path here,,,,understand that! I can only express what i know from what I've heard, from the products I've tried,, with my gear and in my room, nothing more and nothing less.

Thank you Ted for taking the time to fully explain the installation process. I'm sure you have a lot on your plate with the upcoming CES, all the planning and interaction with other busineses involved, so I just want to thank you for your time.

Benonymous
Benonymous's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Dec 12 2006 - 7:22pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
Has nothing to do with directly hearing RF Fresh clip. It adds noise to the signal. Ever hear a radio station through your stereo system? That is because of rectification effects.

Sorry sasaudio, I have never heard any AM radio coming through any of the Amps I have owned. Two NAD's and currently a Denon. Gee they must have been designed by alchemists! No demodulated RF twittering away in the background to ruin the enjoyment of my latest Mrs Mills compilation.
You must be helping to dispense the kool-aid sasaudio. I would have thought that after around oh... 1960's to now that's nearly 50 years of professional electronic engineers designing PSU's for audio amplifiers, just about every name brand amp you could name would have a low noise/ripple design. Anything that's been added in """High End""" (multiple inverted commas intended) would be mere puffery to help sell an overpriced product to a gullible sucker.
As you are a professional designer, have you ever listened to the mains supply to see if there is any measurable RF? Got any figures, spec an traces? It would appear that a set of overhead power lines would be an awesome longwire antenna, especially for AM radio. But you don't demodulate the AM envelope with a bridge rectifier do you....

Back to the ART resonators. I'm indebted to Ted for doing a nice cut and paste on his placement instructions. A few questions.

What is the science behind the placement?

How are the instructions altered to suit different rooms?

How can a room be assessed without measurement?

How can I be sure, once the devices are placed, that they are working optimally?

Cheers.

FC.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
Back to the ART resonators. I'm indebted to Ted for doing a nice cut and paste on his placement instructions. A few questions.

What is the science behind the placement?How are the instructions altered to suit different rooms?How can a room be assessed without measurement?How can I be sure, once the devices are placed, that they are working optimally?

OOOOOOOH,OOOOH,OOOOOOOH,TEACHER,TEACHER,I HAVE A QUESTION,I HAVE A QUESTION!OOOOOOH,OOOOOOH,OOOOOOOH!

How,huh?How?Tell me,tell me.How?I haven't been paying attention.How,huh?Tell me.

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 months 1 week ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:

Quote:
Has nothing to do with directly hearing RF Fresh clip. It adds noise to the signal. Ever hear a radio station through your stereo system? That is because of rectification effects.

Sorry sasaudio, I have never heard any AM radio coming through any of the Amps I have owned. Two NAD's and currently a Denon. Gee they must have been designed by alchemists! No demodulated RF twittering away in the background to ruin the enjoyment of my latest Mrs Mills compilation.
You must be helping to dispense the kool-aid sasaudio. I would have thought that after around oh... 1960's to now that's nearly 50 years of professional electronic engineers designing PSU's for audio amplifiers, just about every name brand amp you could name would have a low noise/ripple design. Anything that's been added in """High End""" (multiple inverted commas intended) would be mere puffery to help sell an overpriced product to a gullible sucker.
As you are a professional designer, have you ever listened to the mains supply to see if there is any measurable RF? Got any figures, spec an traces? It would appear that a set of overhead power lines would be an awesome longwire antenna, especially for AM radio. But you don't demodulate the AM envelope with a bridge rectifier do you....

As a kid, I heard RF problems in equipment. And yes, one can measure RF in power supplies, esp if one lives near high power stations. But RF is everywhere.

You see Fresh Clip, there are no perfect grounds for RF as the ground wires themselves become antennas. And detection occurs at tube grids, gates etc. That is why power supply noise and RF rejection is necessary. All do not live 100 miles from TV and radio stations.

I do not have the means of .gif/.jpg files from my oscilloscope unless a digital camera might work. I may have to borrow one. Interesting that my little oscilloscope probe easily picks up radio/tv rf etc unless shielded properly.

Take care.

Ted_D
Ted_D's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jul 8 2007 - 11:55am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Fresh Clip,
Much of what is being discussed has become circular.

I hope you don't mind but I will give you another cut and past from a post I made back in November at AudioCircle.

http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=61258.80


Quote:
The Acoustic ART System deals with acoustics in a way that is very different from conventional room treatments. I did not state nor do I mean to imply that they are the same- far from it. A room treated with traditional acoustic dampening sounds darker and its imaging is contained in and around its speakers far more then the room that is left relatively "live" and treated with the Acoustic ART System. Where as the former sounds like a very nice hi-fi, the later sounds more holographic, more you-are-there.

The problem with measurements are two fold- one they reduce the experience to the abstract (though some would argue the opposite) and two they get away from the experience. As far as I am concerned, if you do not trust your ears then why bother? For example, if one set of measurements shows one outcome while another set of measurements shows another, then the decision as to which approach is best is based more on how a person values one set of measurements, and less about the actual experience. At the end of the day any benefit that can be derived from a pair of cables, speakers, amplifiers, or any component in a system must boil down to the experience and not solely on a set of measurements. At least with the Acoustic ART System you have a very easy to set up experiment and the proof is in the pudding. Because the system is easy to set up and its benefits are so plainly demonstrable, we offer a no risk audition through our dealers (as we do with all Synergistic Research products) for anyone wanting to experience the Acoustic ART System first hand.

As for people who do not trust their ears, or who selectively choose to apply any benefits to a placebo effect with some components, and not others, they are entitled to their opinion. I build products for people who wish to improve the performance of their systems with any decision to buy, or not to buy, based on the experience of my product through a no pressure, live in-home audition . To me, this seems the most relaxed and meaningful way to assess any audio component.

Some of you will understand my point of view, others will not.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc

As to placement of the ART System, it is based on known acoustic pressure points. The confusion seems to stem from the false idea people have that the Acoustic ART System works in the same way as traditional acoustical dampening. Read through the set up instructions for the Acoustic ART System- you will see that the Magnatron Satellites are placed at the first order reflection point which is room, speaker, and listening position dependent as is the placement of the Vibratron and Gravitron Satellite. Further tuning to match a room as well as personal taste is accomplished through experimenting with small magnets placed atop the Vibratron.

This is not a "studio in a box" solution.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

Ted_D
Ted_D's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Jul 8 2007 - 11:55am
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Robin (satfrat),
You do not need to invest in the entire Acoustic ART System to enjoy its benefits. In your system you could experiment with one Gravitron Satellite as the point source resonator with the rest of your acoustic treatments intact. Simply substitute a Gravitron Satellite for the Vibratron and follow the Vibratron's placement instructions. You could latter add two Magnetron Satellites to the first order reflection points for further benefits.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

Stephen Scharf
Stephen Scharf's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 19 2008 - 9:36pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?


Quote:
Fresh Clip,
Much of what is being discussed has become circular.

[SNIP]

The confusion seems to stem from the false idea people have that the Acoustic ART System works in the same way as traditional acoustical dampening. Read through the set up instructions for the Acoustic ART System- you will see that the Magnatron Satellites are placed at the first order reflection point which is room, speaker, and listening position dependent as is the placement of the Vibratron and Gravitron Satellite. Further tuning to match a room as well as personal taste is accomplished through experimenting with small magnets placed atop the Vibratron.

This is not a "studio in a box" solution.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

Quite right, ART does not work at all in the same way as acoustic damping materials. I've been trying to make this point repeatedly since the beginning of this thread, but it is clear that many folks think functionality can only be achieved one way; it is this behavior that is causing this thread to become circular.

Personally, I think this thread has run it's course; I certainly never thought it would stretch to forty pages and over 300 replies when I started it. 'Course a lot of that was folks getting off-topic and getting into it with one another; which apparently, has happened on a number of other discussion threads.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

SS, I'm curious about your demonstration. Since this was at a dealer's showroom, were there just a single pair of speakers in the room or just one set of speakers that were always used for the ART demonstration? I ask since multiple speakers used in the demo would also result in multiple first reflection points and multiple pressure zones within the same room.

Stephen Scharf
Stephen Scharf's picture
Offline
Last seen: 10 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Nov 19 2008 - 9:36pm
Re: ART-real sonic improvements?

Hi Jan,

The only speakers in the room were Sonus-Faber Amati's. No slouch, if you ask me.

Pages

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading