You are here

Log in or register to post comments
michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
BINGO

Right on the money Toledo! We sit on this side why? Because we are doing. They would be on the same side if they "did". None of us tunees say this to be mean, we say this to be a help.

How many times do we see men hanging on to something for dear life without trying lol. All signs point to it being better on the other side but they can't get themselves to budge. I've sat in many living rooms with audiophiles almost crying before finally accepting the truth. Once they deal with it in their pride zone they become happy campers or walk away from the hobby cause they lost some sort of battle that they were having within themselves. Has nothing to do with the sound a lot of times. Every rational person would welcome better sound. These guys don't realize we at one time were sitting in their very seat with a CD or Vinyl or FM or Tape wondering why is this sounding so bad. Not one audiophile has avoided this, not one.

I have put on now over 10 CD's on the poor rated list and all of them sounded find.

How about the reviews with me and Tom Miiler (TAS), these were done way before the compression issue. We together tuned "The Final Cut" and "Selling England by the Pound" after the review panned them. Those reviews were reversed after we tuned. This has been going on for a long time. I did the same thing at Guy Lemcoe's place Les Linton's. Did this with J Gordon at a show, Frank up at Harry's place. Gary Reber's when we fixed the cymbals, Mark's (in terms of music) and on and on. So I see nothing here but some stuck guys.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
catch I hope

Catch, tell me how your system plays the music faithfully please? And all the others that sound different aren't?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 23 hours ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
I most certainly do NOT have a system with those capabilities

But, I realize that I don't and still enjoy it for what it does do well.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
So why?

Hi Catch so why do you down the tune? Isn't it obvious that we are reaching higher levels of listening?

Also would you call, The Rise And Fall Of Ziggy Stardust And The Spiders From Mars [DVD-A 24/48 Additional Tracks AC3 Multichannel Stereo Downmix] an audiophile recording?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 23 hours ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
I'm not "downing" anything

It's like I've said all along, people find different aspects of sound reproduction to be more or less important for them to connect with the music.

As for the "higher levels of listening" thing, that's really hard to say. On the one hand, I respect people with a lot of experience and application of that experience in real world conditions. On the other hand, I can't quite appreciate "higher levels of listening" by people who can't hear "Modern Times" for what it is...a really, really, really bad recording. So, in that regard, I'm not willing to make any leap of faith on that one except to say that sorta goes back to my basic premise of each of us having our own perception of what constitutes "good sound."

I don't have Ziggy Stardust and really couldn't express an opinion on it. I'm not much of a Bowie fan and so I don't have any of his stuff.

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Stuckness!

Hi Michael,
Very true, what characterizes many of these people is their "stuckness". What I find of interest is not so much what they say, but their personalities and what may be underlying the way they are.

Tunees talk, listen, experience, and share. Tunees are part of a large community that enjoy all aspects of this fun hobby of audio and the music culture at large. The stuck people are all on their own.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Yep

Yep, there's some pretty stuck audiophiles out there.

But thanks to them I'll have to make some phone calls to my friends. According to their DRBS, "dark side of the moon" on mp3 is as dynamic as Mobile Fidelity and SACD. Oh, and same with "wish you were here". Now isn't that somethin.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

wkhanna
wkhanna's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 6 days ago
Joined: Jul 13 2007 - 1:46pm
Apples & Oranges…Forests & Trees…

As I have stated often here, DR database is only ONE tool used to evaluate the quality of production of music.
It does no more than determine the total decibel range of the master used to make a specific album release.
It is NOT a panacea for determining the absolute quality of any recording.

An mp3 can possess a high DR value, but the Bitrate (resolution) of the mp3 you reference is only 320.
Where as the Bitrate for the average Redbook CD is easily double the mp3 value.
Any system, from an Ifone to one that is ‘tuned’ would easily display the difference in sound quality.

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please –

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Signal measurements

Say, didn't JJ the inventor of mp3 once grace these very fora? I seem to recall getting into some discussions with JJ here, some real doozies. Anywho, here's something that popped up in a cursory search of cyberspace, eveything you never wanted to know about measuring audio signals...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_system_measurements

Of course, the problems arise when one tries to figure out how in the heck you're supposed to measure such beloved characteristics of the audio signal as liquidness, soundstage, musicality, propulsiveness, naturalness, transparency, slam, pace and rhythm, pop, coherence, air and things of that nature.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

wkhanna
wkhanna's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 6 days ago
Joined: Jul 13 2007 - 1:46pm
Ah Yes….the endless Sisyphus conundrum….

The debate of subjective vs objective purest continues ad nauseam.
The late J Gordon Holt did more to champion the music lover than just about anyone, IMNSHO.

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please –

wkhanna
wkhanna's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 6 days ago
Joined: Jul 13 2007 - 1:46pm
Citations.....

Geoff,
As quoted from your link:

“Dynamic range refers to the ratio of maximum to minimum loudness in a given signal source (e.g., music or programme material), and this measurement also quantifies the maximum dynamic range an audio system can carry. This is the ratio (usually expressed in dB) between the noise floor of the device with no signal and the maximum signal (usually a sine wave) that can be output at a specified (low) distortion level.

Since the early 1990s it has been recommended by several authorities including the Audio Engineering Society that measurements of dynamic range be made with an audio signal present. This avoids questionable measurements based on the use of blank media, or muting circuits.”

This is what the DRM app does.

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please –

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
listening

This is why listening is always the best test. Data testing should be looked at for what it is and not an excuse not to like something or like it. While the testing spins are going on I'm doing my own listening test and hopefully they'll be helpful.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
the walls of the stage

This last week I've begun some listening tests as a result of trying some freezing treatments. I want to walk slowly here because I don't want to do anything that will perminantly cause the soundstage to not reach out as far. I'm all about the big stage "real space/real size" which I believe is the foundation of this hobby.

This week I tested one amplifier and next month have 3 more on the way to take apart and find what makes the stage shrink and grow. You might be surprised if you start this adventure on your own to find there is usually a far bigger soundstage to be had by finding the parts that have physical constraints of the mechainics of the component.

If you pay attention to the soundstage while a system is playing you will notice that as the component warms up the stage grows. If the component gets too warm you will see the edge of the stage start to get fuzzy, but if the component reaches a nice consistant state of burnin it will continue to grow as long as you wish to keep the CD on repeat.

In the past I have done this same test but wanted to do this in real time so it is fresh. Nothing like talking about something that is happening right in front of you.

My tests this time around are being done on both solidstate and tubes, from ten watts to 200. Some will have the transformer intact and some with it out board, including one amp that has the whole power supply out board.

I'm looking forward to giving some listening results over the next while and hope you enjoy it as much as I do when doing this.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
some results

Hi Listeners

If you have followed some of the other threads on freezing you will see my results. Basically the freezing didn't go so well. Some might like it but for those who are going after bigger, life like soundstages this might not be for you. Heat treating goes a lot further in the area of dynamic range and staging.

I have in front of me some equipment and more on the way and have been doing some listening tests. So far, true to past tests, when setting the products free from tension the stage is opening up. On amplifiers I have made sure that none of the wires going from the transformers to the boards or other places are touching each other. In each case this was like a whole new amp being born. Guitars went from flat and 2D to full body with far more impact and intent. It's really shocking to see how shut down a stock piece of equipment is until you start moving the parts that are causing stage collapse.

While doing the opening up testing by organizing the wires I have brought in some transformer treatments to see what will happen to the sound after applying them. First off, it is remarkable how tunable the transformer is. You might think that it is just sitting there creating power, but I want to tell you the fields created are huge and the bigger this transformer is the more expansive the fields are. From my findings on this recent testing so far and comparing notes from the past, transformers don't like to be closed in, and they don't like hanging out with other parts. I can understand that amp designers have a desire to put them in the same chassis with the other parts but I need to raise a flag here. Your not doing the music any favors by crowding these huge field makers in with other parts trying to do their jobs. It might look impressive and the designers might be flooding you with their ability to create their audio spins on this, but their not sitting where I am with their products.

I started a thread here on "Build vs Sound" and I'm sure many of you might be thinking of your audio equipment as being music tanks that will hold up to anything. You see these precision pieces of marvel and think that has something to do with sound, but if you have a huge electromagnetic power plant sitting inches away from a capacitor you have a potentual problem that is causing (in most cases) a soundstage collapse. I have over the years moved hundreds of transformers away from their counterparts and heard the same thing every time. I've also seen hundreds of people do the same thing with the same results. Transformers too close to parts is a stage shrinker that plagues audio reproduction and always has. This is why now and in the future you are going to see transformers getting smaller and smaller. Electromagnetic field distortion is a big proplem.

you have 3 ways of dealing with this problem

One is to dampen (shield) the transformer

Two move the transformer away from the other parts and tune it

Three have a better ratio in size vs output of the transformer with the other parts

For me dampening and shielding is out. Don't like the sound at all! The smaller transformer designs I have been listening to sound much better than the huge ones in my book and this gets rid of a lot of problems. The spacing thing with tuning is by far the best though. A combo of smaller transformers and spacing will open up your soundstage dramatically. The music becomes a lot more life like and liquid. And the dynamic range will have you turning down your volume control.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 23 hours ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
Very valid points

I think a lot of manufacturers mistakenly eschew seperate power supplies and transformer chasis because of the cost associated with doing it and the belief that audiophiles want a standard size chasis and the simplicity of one box.

This is where the boutique manufacturers, while lacking in name recognition, can afford to offer differential with better sonics over their corporate counterparts. I love trying out the little guys and personally think that is going to be the future of High End audio. Relying on the big names and reputations hasn't meant anything to me in a lot of years.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Transformers

Michael wrote,

"For me dampening and shielding is out. Don't like the sound at all! The smaller transformer designs I have been listening to sound much better than the huge ones in my book and this gets rid of a lot of problems. The spacing thing with tuning is by far the best though. A combo of smaller transformers and spacing will open up your soundstage dramatically. The music becomes a lot more life like and liquid. And the dynamic range will have you turning down your volume control."

I have had rather spectacular results isolating the rather large toroidal transformers in my humble headphone set-up and absorbing the magnetic field it produces. In fact I must say this is one of the more important issues I've run across recently. I suspect that your results might possibly be a reflection of HOW you apply damping materials and techniques as well as HOW you try to shield the transformer. HINT the shielding material should ideally have high permeability. You cannot simply place the transformer in an aluminum or steel hat box, it won't work. The magnetic field is like a virus. It MUST be stopped!! Not to mention the vibration it produces, you know, what with the 60 cycle hum and all. As I already pointed out somewhere on these fora one perfectly good explanation why you prefer lightweight components is the plain fact that the larger the transformer is inside the heavier the component and the bigger the magnetic field it produces and the more powerful the vibration it produces. But you can't just arbitrarily damp with any old thing you have lying around. Frankly most things prevent energy from getting out of the system or resonate back into the system. Instead of a ticket to audio Nirvana it's a one way ticket to Palookaville. If it were that easy everyone could do it and we'd all look like geniuses. I won't even mention the problem with the magnetic field that is produced when current runs through a power cord or interconnect. I'll save that one for another time.

One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all

Cheers, Geoff Kait, Machina Dramtica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Dampening

Hi Geoff

We followed several different formulas, that were recommended to us by audiophile companies and other shielding manufacturers, but the problem we ran into every time was stage collapse and a dulling, rubbery type of sound. What I ended up doing was to build a field tester that I could use to see how far away from the transformer one can get before the collapse happens, or a positive.

The transformer was separated from the other parts which opened up the stage a ton. The transformers sat on a pedestal. We had different pedestals because the transformers had different characters. All of the components were just outside of the room to the rear laid out on a huge platform. You can see simalar platforms on TuneLand where we did other tests. We did not find that the transformers liked materials around them at all. From our experience they wanted to breathe and mingle with the areas environment. Doing things to close them in caused an odd phasing sound and then collapse.

let me describe the collapse though

If you did a quick before and after the shield transformer sounded tighter in some frequency ranges, but if you listened further you could hear that other parts of the recording were really screwed up, size shunk stage collapsed and halos became darkened and compressed. With the shielded transformers the string sections became rubber sounding and after a while fatiguing. We tried as I said several ways to shield and talked to the manufacturers and other tweaks while we were doing this to see if we were doing something wrong, but were told we were doing things correctly. We're not into half baked cause if it's a good thing we want to share it, but the opened transformers sounded better all the way around to us. Again size made a big difference. When we took the transformers and would set them back inside their chassis you could hear the soundstage shrink, like someone put the sound in a closet. Take it out again and it would open up. With the dampening we got that rubber sound every time, shut down like the chassis did but a dullness too, like the sound of an over built drive that is moving odd. Not snappy but weirdly sluggish.

I have open transformers in front of me now and if someone has a product they want me to try, send it and I'll be happy to report.

I also want to make a comment about the 60 cycle hum.

No one wants to hear their system hum, but you also need to realize why that hum is there. It's the natural resonant response to the current passing through. You can lesson the hum by placing the part on a dissipating assembly, but if you stop the natural dissipation of this vibration you are going to hear the audio signal suffer.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
more on the topic of less

Over the long and winding road of the last year and a half I have been attempting to draw more of a straight, or should I say "sherical" line. Two people who have become hitchhikers of sorts have been traveling along. I'm not even quite sure as if they know me at all, I take my business seriously and usually leave no stone unturned.

I have been pointing to the fact that a lot of tweaks that on first listen or five, give the appearence of what some call "improvements" or "better" to reveal later that it wasn't so much an improvement but a focusing in on particulars while leaving some on the cutting room floor.

here are two articles to read

http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/505awsi/index.html

and

http://forum.stereophile.com/content/chips-chumps-letters-july-2005

I think it's time to clear up the mystery.

If you've been reading my threads or visit TuneLand you will hear me talking about the incredible amount of info that is on a recorded code. The challenge for the playback system in mating with that code is a far bigger task than has really been made clear. You can visit a thousand audiophile system and hear a thousand audiophile soundstages. Although I respect Harry's quest for "the absolute sound" even he would have agreed it has never been found, or at least this is what he told me. With all of these audiophile system sounds, we have spent our time telling the next guy that he might be wrong and we are right. Our system is the reference. And as that might be good for our well being, I'd like to give another twist or maybe truth to this.

Setting aside the debate over distortion (what is it exactly), what if everyone was right? What if there is so much info on a recording, we never get to hear it all? Go back to what I said earlier in the thread. Why if a recorded space is 25x25 (or whatever) are we hearing a 10x5x8 soundstage? What I'm saying is there is far more there than we think.

I have spent a lifetime making huge soundstages and as these stages are filled in, I find info that wasn't there before. You've experienced this tons of times "I never heard that before" moments. Now lets apply this to "fixed" tweaks. You sit down to a piece of music, listen a while, then apply a tweak. Immediately you are pulled torward what is different. Is it better? Well that's the question isn't it. Many times you read a review or posts saying it is. But is this really what happened? Brain studies tell us maybe not.

Sit in a room and get a general feel for the looks and Vibe (the way you feel) in that space. Relax, get comfortable with it. Now out of the blue a tennis ball is thrown into the room. Your attention went immediately to that tennis ball and lost focus with your view and your feeling about the room. During the next while, you will not view the room, or feel the room as the same. Your mind and body is off adopting the new experience. No matter what you do your focus has gone from the "whole" to the "change". Take that ball out of the room, and the room will still look and feel different to you, why? The change made you more attentive and now your mind is saying "wonder what other change may happen, I'd better watch for it". Your brain is in a completely different mode than it was earlier, and it's making your eyes, ears and all the other sensor on high alert. Same room and everything has changed. We can get into all the energy stuff that your body gives off but lets keep it simple, you have been re-wired.

now lets back up

Lets do the same thing, only this time leave the ball in the room. Can you see behind the ball? No. Is the room original? No. If you don't take that ball back out of the room will the room be original? No. The room has permanently changed.

I'm not here to say if you like the room better or worse, with or without the ball. What I'm saying is you added something to the original source. For some it will sit better because it is different and for others it ruined the original. For some it might make the original more pleasant, but you will never see behind that ball again if you leave it there.

Are you guys following me? An additive is an additive. You might like it or you might not, but it's not the original. In fact it has covered up part of the original.

there's no mystery in tweaks, only learning curves

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 23 hours ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
That might be your best post ever

That gets to the heart of what May has been saying. Common ground has been found!

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
common ground

If I find out common ground was this easy, I'm gonna kick myself lol. And maybe take everyone out for steak.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 4 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Not yet common ground

>>> “That gets to the heart of what May has been saying. Common ground has been found!” <<<

Sorry Catch22, common ground with Michael has not yet been achieved yet. Let me explain further.

Michael is referring to adding things, in the listening environment, and therefore changing the sound. His presumption (as you will see below) is that adding things is a no no because, in his opinion, you are altering the original.

>>> “An additive is an additive. You might like it or you might not, but it's not the original.” <<<

My approach (and understanding from considerable experience) is as follows – and I will use examples to show my logical approach:-

If one adds A into the room and one gains an improvement in the sound, then there must have been something adverse happening before A was introduced !!

For example. If one places some wooden blocks under equipment and gets an improvement in the sound, then BEFORE doing that, there must have been something adverse happening which one was not aware of until one did……

If one supports interconnect cables etc on wooden blocks and one gets an improvement in the sound, then there must have been something adverse happening BEFORE doing such, which one was not aware of before doing……..

If one places different sized cushions (acoustic pads) in corners and on walls and one gets an improvement in the sound, then there must have been something adverse happening BEFORE doing so.

If one repositions such as a transformer outside the equipment and one gets an improvement in the sound, then there must have been something adverse happening BEFORE doing so.

Even Michael admits (at times) that there can be a “potential problem that is causing a sound stage collapse” !!!

>>> “You see these precision pieces of marvel and think that has something to do with sound, but if you have a huge electromagnetic power plant sitting inches away from a capacitor you have a potentual problem that is causing (in most cases) a soundstage collapse. I have over the years moved hundreds of transformers away from their counterparts and heard the same thing every time. I've also seen hundreds of people do the same thing with the same results. Transformers too close to parts is a stage shrinker that plagues audio reproduction and always has.” <<<

So, having found that doing certain things A, B, C, D E, can improve the sound, then BEFORE doing those things, there must have been something adverse happening.

By doing certain things you don’t ADD more musical instrument players to the orchestra actually recorded. You don’t ADD more musical score to Dvorak’s New World over and above what is on the recording. What I say, constantly, is that when one hearing improvements in the sound one is reducing adverse conditions.

Let me give one actual example.

If someone (say a reviewer) owns a Joe Bloggs Evolution Mark 2 amplifier and is used to listening to it as well as to a favourite recording. The reviewer then places a Shakti Stone device on top of this amplifier and then listens to the same recording – and hears an improvement in the sound – better separation of musical instruments, better height, better depth, better soundstage etc !!

The Shakti Stone device is NOT adding extra musicians, NOT adding more musical score to the recording. So, the Shakti Stone device must be reducing an existing adverse effect !!! And when the reviewer removed the Shakti Stone device, the improvements he had obtained were gone !!

If you take the explanation given by the producers of the Shakti Stone device that it is ‘dealing’ with a stray electromagnetic field created by the very equipment it is placed on, then this also implies ‘dealing with an existing adverse situation’.

But, it is an addition in Michael G’s eyes !!

>>> “An additive is an additive. You might like it or you might not, but it's not the original.” <<<

And therefore not to be entertained as acceptable !!!

What I have said repeatedly is that when people realise (discover) that there are so many ‘adverse’ things happening in the listening environment, each experience raises the questions. WHAT is causing those adverse conditions. WHERE are those adverse conditions affecting the musical information. And HOW are they affecting the musical information.

Then. HOW can one deal with those adverse conditions ?

What I say, repeatedly, is that different people (very many of those people seriously involved in the audio industry) have discovered various methods and so many of those methods (tweaks ??) are valid !!!!!

But, as I also say repeatedly, is that there are STILL very many questions not answered – still sitting on a shelf awaiting answers.

This is one of the points where I am in disagreement with Michael. Because Michael claims that he has :-

>>> “Done the questions and got the answers”. <<<

>>> “These questions have been explored and answered “ <<<

>>> “I’m glad I’m on this side of the questions and not back on the asking side anymore.”<<<

>>> “not only have I explored this topic, but I have also explored it with a fair degree of depth as to how it relates to audio.” <<<

So, Catch22, whereas Michael says – don’t add because it is not the original :-

>>> “An additive is an additive. You might like it or you might not, but it's not the original.” <<<

I say that the original (listening situation - without any treatments – fixed or variable) is already adverse !!!!!!!!!!! I.e. that the modern environment is already adverse for us (human beings) !!

And that is why everything in this modern environment has an effect on the sound, why everything affects everything else and why (as many people have discovered) they have not been resolving correctly all the musical information (already available on the recording) – until they did certain things !!!!!

Adding things is NOT a no no if they are reducing an adverse situation !!!

Michael wants people to believe that the things HE recommends being added to the listening environment to ‘improve the sound’ are therefore OK but the things which other people have added or recommended should be added to the listening environment to ‘improve the sound’ are NOT OK. So, as I say repeatedly, Michael ‘knocks other people’s things’ when he can get the opportunity.

I say that other people’s experiences give so many CLUES of adverse conditions that they should be seriously considered and not ‘knocked’.

Which takes us back to the subject of the Schumann Resonance device. One has to explain HOW it affects the musical information, Where it affects the musical information. And it does not make any difference whether many people have heard improvements in their sound from using it or whether Michael claims his sound was worse when using it, the questions I pose of HOW and WHERE is it affecting the musical information covers both experiences.

And, therefore, answers have to be found.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 4 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Addition

Hello Catch22,

Where Michael and I DO have agreement is that everything in the listening environment affects everything else and that everything in the listening environment affects the sound (the musical information).

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
LOL

So much for common ground and that steak dinner :)

May said

"So, Catch22, whereas Michael says – don’t add because it is not the original :-"

mg

But May, michael doesn't say this does he? Michael doesn't say "don't do". Michael says "it's a choice among thousands". It's not my job to make a listeners choice for them. It's my job to find ways for each listener to have a method that allows them to mate the recorded code to the playback system and environment.

may

"I say that the original (listening situation - without any treatments – fixed or variable) is already adverse !!!!!!!!!!! I.e. that the modern environment is already adverse for us (human beings) !!"

mg

Michael doesn't say adverse, mg says "out of tune".

may

"And that is why everything in this modern environment has an effect on the sound, why everything affects everything else and why (as many people have discovered) they have not been resolving correctly all the musical information (already available on the recording) – until they did certain things !!!!!"

mg

Your generalizing again, as well as saying must haves, which is not the case. Why did you leave out my post in your answer may? Why did you leave out the parts about the size of recordings? As well why do you never talk about the audio code? You talk about things being broken and you have the tools to fix it, but you don't say what that fix is. That fix is puting energy in-tune so different parts of the recording can be seen more clearly. And that recorded code info is so much that there are many ways to look at the same recording, which is what the hobby is. The system is not broken may. All the frequencies from 1-through the highest wave able to be in this space is there. It's all there waiting to be tuned one way or another, and as it is the listener can see the music from as many different angles as he chooses, or as he has the skill to tune. Simple musical math may.

may

"Adding things is NOT a no no if they are reducing an adverse situation !!!"

mg

Who said they were, may? If a person wants to add something to make a change that's what all of this is about. Hearing more or less of any particular part of the info from whatever point of view a person wants to.

may

"Michael wants people to believe that the things HE recommends being added to the listening environment to ‘improve the sound’ are therefore OK but the things which other people have added or recommended should be added to the listening environment to ‘improve the sound’ are NOT OK. So, as I say repeatedly, Michael ‘knocks other people’s things’ when he can get the opportunity."

mg

It's unfortunate that you see one designers excitement for his or hers design and methods as a put down to others. But those are the glasses you choose to wear.

may

"I say that other people’s experiences give so many CLUES of adverse conditions that they should be seriously considered and not ‘knocked’."

mg

Everyone has a voice and own learning curve to discovery. I stay pretty tight to the fundamental forces, physics and the tuning of variables. Not a knock on others, just a comfort zone on our practicle application within the method of tuning. It's simple really May. If you can't buy it, make it. There are tons of products out there and we suggest as we always have, explore what feels right to you.

may

"Which takes us back to the subject of the Schumann Resonance device. One has to explain HOW it affects the musical information, Where it affects the musical information. And it does not make any difference whether many people have heard improvements in their sound from using it or whether Michael claims his sound was worse when using it, the questions I pose of HOW and WHERE is it affecting the musical information covers both experiences"

mg

My suggestion is to go back to the SR thread, and try to figure out what your still not getting.

may

"And, therefore, answers have to be found."

mg

I think we get the point that you have not found the answers to your questions, but this really has no reflection on others and their personal journeys. If I could make a suggestion. Maybe you should try to look at your questions from the point of view of being in or out of tune instead of being broken needing to have that one "fix". I think your hang up is being so into your philosophy, that you are more into prooving a point that no one knows, and it's keeping you from seeing the progress made on the answers themselves. Your spending so much effort and time on making that point that your overlooking a completely different scenario or even set of scenarios. May your trying to proove that others have not found the answers more than looking at the answers that have been found.

The concept of out-of-tune vs in-tune holds the answers you seek, and this is the hang up for you. I have suggested many times that if you want these answers your going to need to engage in "doing" instead of talking it through.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 4 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
No steak dinner yet !!

Michael. I was presuming that Catch22 had been struggling, trying to work out why I challenge you so much. And that he had been looking for areas where we might have some common ground.

Logically, to many people, it does not make sense to them that if YOU are correct in what you say (and what YOU understand what must be happening), why should I be challenging you !!

The areas where we agree are :-

We both agree that there is a wealth of musical information, already on the recording and that most of that musical information has already been presented into the room but which we are not hearing (resolving correctly) because of ………………………

You say that much of what is going on in the listening environment is NOT allowing the correct “tuning” of this musical information and that you have to do A and B and C and D and E etc to ‘tune’ this information correctly.

I see it differently. That the very modern environment is the culprit. That what we introduce into our modern listening environment causes adverse (to us) conditions. Yes, RF interference and electromagnetic interference CAN affect the actual audio signal on many occasions but the very fact that RF, electromagnetic, microwave energy, etc. etc is actually present IN the listening environment is the cause of much of the problems regarding resolving the complex musical information. This is what I refer to as adverse conditions existing already – and whatever we do which gains improvements in the sound is going some way to alleviate those adverse conditions.

You say that what you have discovered – re your ‘tuning’ methods is ‘to tune in’ the musical information but that what other people have discovered (other so called tweaks) is not ‘correct tuning’ !!!!!

I say that what other people have discovered and which make improvements in the sound i.e. allowing more of the musical information to be better resolved, in most situations are going some way to alleviate the existing adverse conditions.

Just a few examples are :-

Cryogenic freezing of CDs.
Applying a demagnetiser to CDs and LPs.
Applying certain chemicals to CDs.
Applying certain colours to CDs.

And so on.

I say that if so many people have heard these things give them improvements in the sound (allowing them to resolve more of the musical information) then before applying those treatments there must have been a problem with the CDs in the first place !! One cannot ADD more musicians, ADD more musical score with such treatments, so those treatments must be alleviating existing adverse problems !!

You, however, have said that “You don’t have a problem with CDs”.

I believe that one has to take so many people’s experiences (of being able to ‘treat’ the actual CD and gain improvements in the sound – and by using such diverse treatments) seriously !!

>>> “Michael doesn’t say adverse, mg says "out of tune".” <<<

So, Michael. You actually discourage people ‘treating’ CDs because the treatments are “fixed” treatments. S

So, are you saying that Untreated CDs are “in tune” and don’t require any actual treating - in themselves - and that the very many people who hear improvements in the sound after carrying out the CD treatments I described are mistaken in their experiences ????

>>> “Your spending so much effort and time on making that point that your overlooking a completely different scenario or even set of scenarios. May your trying to proove that others have not found the answers more than looking at the answers that have been found.

The concept of out-of-tune vs in-tune holds the answers you seek, and this is the hang up for you. I have suggested many times that if you want these answers your going to need to engage in "doing" instead of talking it through. “ <<<

I have been looking at your different scenario or set of scenarios i.e ‘out of tune vs in tune’ but it does not give the answers to all of other people’s experiences.

Yes, I agree, you can CHANGE the sound by doing all the things you describe. I have never challenged you on the improvements in the sound you can make. But EVERY answer you give of ‘tuning in’ does not fit all experiences – hence the anomalies I have referred to in the past. And if the ‘tuning in’ explanation does not fit ALL changes in the sound, then the question “What on earth is going on” has NOT been answered !!!!

Bending, squeezing, shoving, pushing all people’s experiences into your explanation of ‘out of tune vs in-tune’ is not THE answer. If it was THE answer, there would be no controversy surrounding what produces good sound.
You have claimed your answer is THE answer, your method is THE method and your truth is THE truth.

I say that many questions have not yet been answered, many are still on the shelf awaiting answers !!!!

As I have said before. If one does not ask the questions and one believes that one knows that all the changes made in the sound are because of being ‘in tune or out of tune’ and one does not investigate the anomalies, then one can swerve past, stroll past, run past – on the way to do some particular ‘tuning’ technique – and miss areas or certain things which can be causing the adverse conditions in the first place.

One example. Has someone been out and bought a collection of LPs (from a sale at a record store), quickly looked through them and then left them leaning up against the shelving unit to play later that day ? That evening they stroll into the listening room and carry out further ‘tuning’ techniques before settling down to listen – not realising that they had earlier introduced more adverse conditions by leaving the LPs leaning up against the shelving unit !!!!!!!!!!!!!

That was the point I was trying to make to Ron earlier. Yes, he might realise that such as the venetian blind might be a problem – regarding acoustic matters (reflective or absorbent) - but does he realise that the venetian blind pull cord is also a problem ??? Or the different upholstery materials, or the different plastic materials in the room, and where does he keep his selection of LPs ? That the very outer sleeve of every LP in the room is a problem ? So, Ron would be walking past all those problems – on the way to placing wooden blocks under his audio equipment !!! I have no problem at all with Ron trying wooden blocks under his equipment but does he know of peculiar odd and even rules in nature ? Does he know to try 3 instead of 4 blocks, or 5 instead of 4 ? Does he know to tie Reef knots in cables instead of any other knot – not even a Granny knot ??? Does he know to tie only ONE Reef knot and not two ? Or three but not two ? I am presuming that he has a remote control in the room (for his TV). Does he know that that remote control is a problem – as is the battery in that remote control !!!!

Michael. I don’t have any problems with the various advice you give to Ron or anyone else re the things you yourself have discovered will improve the sound.

My problem is when you deliberately choose to ‘knock’ (downplay for want of another word) other people’s findings and experiences. And claim that your answer is THE answer, that your method is THE method and that your truth is THE truth !!!

All of a sudden I see you are now suggesting to Ron that he tries the ‘freezing’ technique. After pooh poohing it at every opportunity in the past. !!!

In the early 1980’s, unknowlingly but parallel with Ed Meitner’s cryogenic freezing discoveries, Peter and I have been advocating that people can try for themselves the simpler freezing method using their own domestic deep freezer. Most of our work (and findings) were published in the UK (and overseas) Hi Fi Magazines during the late 1980s and early 1990s !!

I can challenge you Michael because I know my subject. I don’t challenge you on the things you have discovered can affect the sound. I challenge you on your claim that your answer is THE answer, that your method is THE method and that your truth is THE truth.

Regards,
May Belt
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Let's go listen!

May

It seems at this point this will go on forever, and I would rather be listening.

It doesn't appear you are interested in listening with us, so for now I'm going to move on. If you would like to take this up again on TuneLand we can do so, but this has turned into something that I don't feel will ever end. I leave it up to you to draw your own conclusions.

As for me, without you being willing to make this a two way street, I don't see the use in going further.

thanks for the chat, but it's time I do what I do, and not burn anymore time on what appears to be one big spin

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
"Draw your own conclusions"
michael green wrote:

May

It seems at this point this will go on forever, and I would rather be listening.

It doesn't appear you are interested in listening with us, so for now I'm going to move on. If you would like to take this up again on TuneLand we can do so, but this has turned into something that I don't feel will ever end. I leave it up to you to draw your own conclusions.

As for me, without you being willing to make this a two way street, I don't see the use in going further.

thanks for the chat, but it's time I do what I do, and not burn anymore time on what appears to be one big spin

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/[/quote]

Draw our own conclusions? OK, my conclusion is your a passive aggressive and or have an attention deficit disorder. What would you keep inviting me and or May over to Tunnelland in one breath and attack us in the other breath? I've seen enough passive aggressive personalities on the internet to last a lifetime. And speaking of spins, and just for For the record I think TunnelLand is one big spin, spun by a spider who can't remember one post to the next.

Finally, you wrote,

"it doesn't appear you are interested in listening with us."

Bingo!

Tootles,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Geoffy, Geoffy!
geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Oh, you mean people like you?

Yes, wherever I go there are people like you. Funny, ain't it? Like looking at yourself in the mirror, eh? Lol

It's a good thing you're on Michael's team. ;-)

Cheerios,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Like Flies To Shit

Although you prefer Dung Beetles.

You've been a loner for awhile, haven't you!

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Yes, People Are Calling You Out, Geoffy!

Some are polite.

Many are not.

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Get Help...

Go to a group, Geoffy, where someone might understand and accept you.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Actually

Actually the attacks are created by geoff, about geoff and have nothing to do with the rest of us in audio, both as professionals and hobby doers.

Anyone who would call an invite to go listen to music an attack, would be someone I would think is probably not in the hobby of listening at all. There are I'm sure many agendas to any hobby, but removing one-self from the actual event and publically declaring themselves as authorities is extremely questionable.

Not so much attacks on anyone, but more the question geoff, why are you even here? How can you have talks on listening without listeners?

Sorry that you have made these forums as you say "passive aggressive", but I would say that at least most of the real listeners here are pretty much over you, and would enjoy getting back to the hobby and the discussions that are productive. I as well others have given you plenty of space to explain yourself and with that you have built your own MO and reputation.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Yapping Princess

Michael, you've become all bark and no bite of late. Wassup with that?

ChrisS, am I correct in assuming you have a turd in your pocket?

 photo photo_50_zpslqtcys5w.jpg

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

ChrisS
ChrisS's picture
Offline
Last seen: 24 min 27 sec ago
Joined: Mar 6 2006 - 8:42pm
Geoffy, you were...

...bullied as a kid, weren't you?

Hasn't stopped, has it?

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Wassup with that?

Hi Geoff

It's called clients and projects. It's building season in the states so there's a lot of room build-outs. Plus classes just let out so the schools are doing their band rooms and such before the fall sessions start up. Have to squeeze the most out of our time, so we'll let you promote us a little more here.

have a nice evening

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Question
michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

It's called clients and projects. It's building season in the states so there's a lot of room build-outs. Plus classes just let out so the schools are doing their band rooms and such before the fall sessions start up. Have to squeeze the most out of our time, so we'll let you promote us a little more here.

have a nice evening

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/[/quote]

Question. Do have an English translation for that post? I assume as always you're just doing a lot of Pro Audio projects. If you think I'm promoting you here you must be high.

ChrisS: are you high? Did someone spike your puppy chow?

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
thanks for asking!

Hi Geoff

This week I'm working on 120sq feet, 420sq feet and 800sq feet private listening rooms, thanks. Two of them full builds. http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t52-the-tunable-room

We have 3 wood crews working at present. Two here and one in Wisconsin.

geoff says

"If you think I'm promoting you here you must be high."

mg

Promotion comes in the strangest ways on the Stereophile Forum. I thought some of these threads would have painful results, from all the trolling you provide, but somehow the opposite effect is happening. I mentioned this before and it's still true. Listeners are comparing variable tuning vs plug & play and having their eyes opened to how much more music there is to be heard through tuning the vibratory code.

on another note

For those who enjoy people talking about and "doing" listening, Tuneland is being read as a music reference, and cool hang-out. So as readers continue to grow over on TuneLand, some of the thanks must go to you, as the other side of the fence guy. Your creating wars, we're creating dance partners. Your buying up mass produced cassettes to play on your reference portable cassette Sony Walkman tape players, and we're designing and building Reference Listening Rooms.

It's a good deal for us! Thank you listeners!

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Happy to oblige

You keep using the argument that somehow cassettes and portable cassette players are not high end enough for you, yet the whole portable and low mass idea is what you yourself advocate. I'm am pretty sure you're probably just jealous because I outdid you. My entire system only weighs 10 ounces! Hel-looo! I got your low mass system right here! See the irony? Besides, if someone says he cannot hear the superiority of cassettes over CDs I suspect he's lying or deaf. Or both. Have you had your hearing checked recently?

You use the word reference a lot. Just like a lot of audio manufacturers. Reference monitors, reference cartridge, reference DAC, whatever. Reference is as reference does. Reference to what? There is no such thing as an absolute sound. There is no standard for the pinnacle of success in audio. It's been overdone to death. It's just a word, you know, like when YOU use the word science or scientific I take into account you are cruising along with only a couple of technical courses under your belt. Whereas my education is deep and wide in science. See what I mean jelly bean?

But you can get where I am too. This is the real reference, not some made up thing. Come on up, the air is fine. Lol All you need to do is get rid of your transformers all together. Get rid of all your power cords. Get off the house AC. Get rid of your interconnects. Get rid of all those capacitors. Get rid of the fuses. Get rid of all the wiring and cabling, half of which is installed backwards. And get rid of the room! See what it's like not to have obsessive compulsive disorder. It's a better way to listen.

Run silent, run deep.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 11 hours ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Geoff, I have a problem here

I won't comment your choice of sources, I only tell you that I listened to all kinds of headphones, from dynamic to planar-magnetic to electrostatic and from earbuds to circumaural, superaural, closed back, open back, from $15 to $3000... the only thing I haven't tried are custom-made earbuds based on my ears' shape.
Well none of them ever gave me the "real thing" feeling I get from a good speaker-based system! Oh yes, I got (close to) that feeling once, using a pair of Ultrasone Edition 10 fed by a SPL Phonitor 2 dedicated amp with cross-bleed and spatial simulation.
Besides, any headphone I tried made me feel uncomfortable in the long run, so I decided to get off that path (you do not wear a helmet while attending a concert, do you?).

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Yes, I know you have a problem here

If you had tried the headphones I am using, the ones I recommend using, the Sony vintage ultralights, you would not be making the statements you just made. Not to mention I am using the portables, Hel-looo! and the portables IN AND OF THEMSELVES, just inherently, account for much of the REALISTIC sound, you know, what with the absence of House AC power! power cords, fuses, interconnects, transformers, capacitors up the wazoo, etc. Maybe you were not paying close attention to my posts here on Stereophile lo these past eight months or so describing in excruciating detail the advantages of lightweight headphones and potable players, Ooops, Freudian slip, I mean PORTABLE PLAYERS. ;-). These concepts are independent of price of equipment and headphones.

If it was that easy everybody could do it. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Sony vintage ultralights!

Hi geoff, not saying that the ultralights are not your personal cats meow, but I hope your not refering to what you show in your pictures.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
What's the matter, you suddenly don't like low mass?

Yes, those are Sony ultralights in the pictures I show of my portable cassette player and portable CD player. The Ultralights employ neodymium magnets and tip the scales at less than one ounce. What's the matter, not low mass enough for you? Direct injection of pure sound to the brain. Remember they always said listening to more and more expensive systems would lead to the harder stuff. Well, this is the harder stuff! You would be listening 23 hours a day, my fluffy haired friend. That Tuning Empire you built, well, you might as well just throw it away. Maybe have a big yard sale. Time to ditch all those cables, power cords, fuses, wires, capacitors, transformers, speakers. And you can rent out the listening rooms to college students.

 photo photo_51_zpstqeazkxg.jpg

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Parody or serious?

Geoff:

I am truthfully sometimes confused by your replies....

So I have the following simple questions to ask so that I know where you are coming from and how to reply...

1. Are you honestly recommending the sony headphones as pictured as your honest favorite, including over, for example, headphones from the likes of Audeze or Sennheiser?
2. Are you sincerely insisting to your ears you achieve better sonics through these sony headphones and from what I can tell a 1980's era portable tape player than your previous room full of pretty high-end audiophile gear from what I have read here in these forums?

If you are not intentionally just trying to rock the boat with parody, which I actually think is funny, then you are stating that in fact you honestly believe this "low mass" system as you like to refer to it, in your opinion, far outweighs *any* audiophile rack system with speakers? And that your main theory is baed on the principle of "low mass" systems...those that are by design lightweight and do not carry the burden of AC voltage, transforms, mass, etc?

Respectfully,

Ron

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Huh?!
rrstesiak wrote:

Geoff:

I am truthfully sometimes confused by your replies....

So I have the following simple questions to ask so that I know where you are coming from and how to reply...

1. Are you honestly recommending the sony headphones as pictured as your honest favorite, including over, for example, headphones from the likes of Audeze or Sennheiser?
2. Are you sincerely insisting to your ears you achieve better sonics through these sony headphones and from what I can tell a 1980's era portable tape player than your previous room full of pretty high-end audiophile gear from what I have read here in these forums?

If you are not intentionally just trying to rock the boat with parody, which I actually think is funny, then you are stating that in fact you honestly believe this "low mass" system as you like to refer to it, in your opinion, far outweighs *any* audiophile rack system with speakers? And that your main theory is baed on the principle of "low mass" systems...those that are by design lightweight and do not carry the burden of AC voltage, transforms, mass, etc?

Respectfully,

Ron

No, of course I'm not saying the Sony Ultralight headphones are better than high end headphones. Where did you get that idea? I am also not claiming that my current portable systems are better in all respects than any of my previous systems. I am saying the portables are better in certain respects and certainly less expensive, take up less real estate and easier to maintain. I realize it's popluar in some circle to suspect I'm just putting everyone on, but that's not really true. I do admit I do enjoy putting people on sometimes. Lol But not in this case. To bring you up to speed I use the examples of portable players with lightweight headphones to demonstrate that inexpensive systems can be very musical and actually superior in certain important respects to high end systems for a number of reasons, including absence of transformers that produce distortion via the toxic magnetic fields they produce, the absence of fuses, wiring, many large capacitors, absence of house AC, power cords, interconnects. I also use my cassette player and Sony lightweight headphones to demonstrate the inherent superiority of tape vs digital, I.e., even a cheap old Sony Walkman can demonstrate this to anyone with ears. Is this a proof of concept? Yes, I think it is. This portable player concept is more or less the same general idea that Michael Green refers to as a low mass system, it's just that I acknowledge that while it's true it has low mass it's not the mass that is the issue but all the reasons I listed a couple sentences ago.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
We do Artificial Atoms Right

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Reply to Geoff

Geoff:

Thank you for clarifying; and I really do appreciate your well written and honest reply. It is, in fact what I had hoped and I completely agree with your approach and appreciate its merits. Most importantly, I appreciate that you qualified it so that it really does represent it as a compelling argument and supports your reputation as a knowledgeable and experienced listener.

As to the now incorrect conclusion I thought you were statng the sony headphones were the best in your opinion, the source of my thinking was this statement from another listener:

iosiP wrote:

I won't comment your choice of sources, I only tell you that I listened to all kinds of headphones, from dynamic to planar-magnetic to electrostatic and from earbuds to circumaural, superaural, closed back, open back, from $15 to $3000... the only thing I haven't tried are custom-made earbuds based on my ears' shape.
Well none of them ever gave me the "real thing" feeling I get from a good speaker-based system! Oh yes, I got (close to) that feeling once, using a pair of Ultrasone Edition 10 fed by a SPL Phonitor 2 dedicated amp with cross-bleed and spatial simulation.
Besides, any headphone I tried made me feel uncomfortable in the long run, so I decided to get off that path (you do not wear a helmet while attending a concert, do you?).

And as you didn't reply to the gentleman, I assumed you also agreed that the sony headphones were the best in your opinion over *any* others in your experience.

Sorry for the rambling and the miscommunication.. but I am glad we resolved the misunderstanding and I look forward to many more intellectual debates as well as observations and experiences with audiophile gear in all shapes and sizes and with open minds.

Best Regards,

Ron

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Huh? (Again)
rrstesiak wrote:

Geoff:

Thank you for clarifying; and I really do appreciate your well written and honest reply. It is, in fact what I had hoped and I completely agree with your approach and appreciate its merits. Most importantly, I appreciate that you qualified it so that it really does represent it as a compelling argument and supports your reputation as a knowledgeable and experienced listener.

As to the now incorrect conclusion I thought you were statng the sony headphones were the best in your opinion, the source of my thinking was this statement from another listener:

iosiP wrote:

I won't comment your choice of sources, I only tell you that I listened to all kinds of headphones, from dynamic to planar-magnetic to electrostatic and from earbuds to circumaural, superaural, closed back, open back, from $15 to $3000... the only thing I haven't tried are custom-made earbuds based on my ears' shape.
Well none of them ever gave me the "real thing" feeling I get from a good speaker-based system! Oh yes, I got (close to) that feeling once, using a pair of Ultrasone Edition 10 fed by a SPL Phonitor 2 dedicated amp with cross-bleed and spatial simulation.
Besides, any headphone I tried made me feel uncomfortable in the long run, so I decided to get off that path (you do not wear a helmet while attending a concert, do you?).

And as you didn't reply to the gentleman, I assumed you also agreed that the sony headphones were the best in your opinion over *any* others in your experience.

Sorry for the rambling and the miscommunication.. but I am glad we resolved the misunderstanding and I look forward to many more intellectual debates as well as observations and experiences with audiophile gear in all shapes and sizes and with open minds.

Best Regards,

Ron

I suspect iosiP never tried the sony lightweights which are extremely comfortable. Again why would I say or intimate that the Sonys were superior sonically to other headphones or earphones?

By the way, just to keep this whole discussion on the up and up, I did respond to the gentleman's comments. How did you miss that?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 26 min ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
reply to Geoff

Geoff:

We have no further misunderstandings to my account - thank you again for just clarifying your position and I look forward to more discussion on new tropics.

Respectfully,

Ron

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Low Mass

To answer the question of Low Mass.

I love working with low mass audio components, but it's not just the high or low mass. I like products that I can make variable enough to tune in the recorded code on any particular piece of music.

to geoff

Thanks for posting the pic above and explaination. Yeah I can't do these. They're extremely irritating for me to wear more than a couple of minutes and I don't like the sound at all. Virtually no stage to speak of, and artificial sounding over all. Again that's me, and I understand they have impressed you. I'm glad to see you write your statement, that you weren't serious about these cause this was something that was concerning for me and others about your abilities. Still not sure why you dumped your High End Headphone system for these, but to each their own. Also a little surprised you put this in the main part of the forum instead of a more casual note in Headphones. One last thing that confuses me a little. On your website you took off the pic you had just put up of your high end system, with pics of portable players with these types of headsets. You also wrote that these were the replacement on your thread, why? You've painted the picture of your self as a guy with a few portable cassette players headsets and moving away from High End and in-room systems.

If you have been doing both, and the portables are just a side issue to prove a point, why are you selling them on your site and audiogon as a high end product? I'm sorry, but for myself I feel like I've wasted my time considering your points of view as part of the same hobby that most of the people here are in. Saying your portables are in the same camp as an in-room or better headphone system, and then saying a year later "just kidding" is a pretty big waste of our time, wouldn't you say?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 min 50 sec ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Nice try

Assuming your telling the truth which actually I don't believe you are. Why would you start now? How could they be uncomfortable? They weigh less than one ounce and just barely touch the ears, you silly goose. What's irritating is your continued lying. And you wonder why I won't send any of my products to you for evaluation. Lol

Is it true when you lie your pants really are on fire?

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 25 min 38 sec ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
come on geoffy

Take a happy pill and enjoy the hobby dude.

It's a beautiful day, the sun is shining and the music is playing. So I don't like the sound or feel of earphones, no biggie. Not the end of the world.

michael green
MGA/Roomtune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

Pages

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