Oh, I suggest if you download the files, cut them onto a CD-R and listen to them on your HiFi. Obviously, this will most closely resemble the methodology of KBK's initial "experiment"

Quote:
Oh, I suggest if you download the files, cut them onto a CD-R and listen to them on your HiFi. Obviously, this will most closely resemble the methodology of KBK's initial "experiment"

How so? KBK did not use CD-R's for his experiment. He used store purchased commercial copies of two different CD's;

Quote:
I used Tracy Chapman's first album and The Mavericks: 'Music for All Occasions' for this test.

Burning a CD-R is not a bit perfect transfer. Each transfer will have its own signature.

Even if it were a perfect copy, which it is not, should the CD-R be demagnetized before the transfer or after? Or both? Or neither?

If the theory we are testing is a change in the physical shape of the pits and flats within the metalic layer of a commercial CD, how would this be tested on a CD-R?

Quote:
CD-R works by replacing the aluminum layer in a normal CD with an organic dye compound. This compound is normally reflective, but when the laser focuses on a spot and heats it to a certain temperature, it "burns" the dye, causing it to darken. When you want to retrieve the data you wrote to the CD-R, the laser moves back over the disc and thinks that each burnt spot is a bump.

If the copy is not perfect and the process of demagnetization as suggested by KBK would not be effective, what exactly would we be "testing" with this next "theory test" of your's, FC?

Quote:
Obviously, this will most closely resemble the methodology of KBK's initial "experiment"

So you agree your testing procedure did not come close to resembling KBK's methods therefore it was not a true test of KBK's methods. Which would make this statement incorrect;

Quote:
I have actually gone to the trouble of conducting a real test with a control subject.

Can you tell us whether you used CD-R's in your "test"? Wouldn't that make it impossible to disprove KBK's theory?

--------------------------

Quote:
"Is it so difficult to hear an opinion that doesn't agree with your own?"

Quote:
This will not show up in the kinds of measurements you are doing.

They will only show up with the use of a 'Miller Jitter Analyzer' type of device/software used on the bit output of the laser mechanism of a given CD sled or Sled's output.

What I heard..tells me that it will correlate to a quite high jitter frequency, and will be tied directly to the disc word/bit read rate/frequency.

Quote:
"Does that mean that if he produced a speaker that measured right but sounded wrong, he wouldn't change it? 'I would question the measurement in that case and refine my methodology.'"

Why question anything once you've found the answer you knew was there all along?

-------------------------------

Quote:
"Is it so difficult to hear an opinion that doesn't agree with your own?"

Quote:
What is it that we need to discover about an audio signal? What is left to be discovered? Are there parts of an audio signal that cannot be measured? Which parts? From where I stand, test and measurement equipment exists in sufficient purpose and diversity to absolutely pull apart and measure any signal either in the electrical or acoustic domain and give you a number for the most minute amplitude or slice of time. Even in complex listening environments, the technology exists to map every null, every reflection, every nuance of a room.

How much averaging does the program do to the signal? Is one going to see a .01, .1db change on the graph?? A capacitor's DA and internal ESR. Show me the measured differences between capacitors and explain how it correlates to the sound.

Hearing no difference could be caused by the musical selection, too full room acoustics, equipment/system, self suggestion before hand just like those who claim to hear differences. It works both ways.

I am who I am, KBK. I know exactly who I care to be and I slide forward and back on an ever changing path, somedays better and some days not so much. If you are never uncomfortable with your own opinion, then you have never had a bug up your ass. That's life as I understand it.

One of the inherent problems with the forum is everyone reads what is on their computer screen with their own bias in place and not that of the person posting. Actually, my last post was meant for FC and not you. I think you stated your position quite clearly and quite well. It is FC I find unwilling to change his measurements to reflect a different reality. Sorry if the "re:" threw you off.

However, there's no need to defend me, we are, after all, each of our own opinion. One member a while back got pissed when I agreed with him but with certain exceptions. That ended his "defense" of me. But I've never asked anyone to defend me, just defend what you personally believe and allow the rest of us to deal with that alone. I didn't come to this forum to join a partisan group even though it seems that's how this is working out. I came to discuss those things I find interesting, hopefully to learn something new and possibly offer what I believe to someone else.

I can agree with both your opinion of CD demagnetization and May's opinion of what is at work here though I don't feel you are in total agreement with each other. I can even appreciate Michigan J.Frog's posts and geoff's as well and a handful of others who I find interesting.

I can let Buddha hear what he wants to hear despite not caring to be held accountable for what Ethan cannot seem to hear. I don't come here to defend anyone else or to have anyone else defend my opinions unless they happen to agree with me on one or another point. Then, hopefully, they would defend what they believe to be true, not simply parrot what someone else has put in their head. Please, feel free to question me but don't tell me you don't want to hear my opinion.

What bothers me is when people wall themself off from another opinion and talk only to themself. We are all "difficult" in our own way, KBK, surely you realize that. If you come to a public place and do not expect to find someone who can be "difficult" or of another opinion, you are not living in the real world.

I'm not asking you to look for other answers, you seem quite capable of that on your own. I would hope you are open to considering your answer might not be the only answer. On the other hand, another thing that bothers me is when someone looks only for an answer they have already decided is there, an answer that must fit into what they already know and an answer that does not look at what might be but only at what cannot exist. As May can tell you, the more you narrow your view, the more likely something will occur that is beyond your vision. If you're not prepared to see the alternatives, then you are not prepared to be wrong on occasion. I'm not afraid of being wrong, just not willing to allow someone else to tell me I'm wrong because I don't suit their narrowed viewpoint.

You bring your attributes to the forum, KBK and I bring my own. May brings something entirely unlike either of us as will geoff. Each of us is a mix of opinions and viewpoints, questions and experiences. In some ways you are closer to Ethan than you are to May IMO. I don't say that to pidgeon hole you as this or that, just as a matter of opinion about certain views I assume you hold. Other complex opinions and personalities exist and they are all what make up the community of this forum. Off this forum I talk to all of my neighbors in the real world community. Some I agree with and some I do not on various issues. But not talking and not listening to what is being said becomes the only sure way I know to never understand another opinion.

Don't take this personally, KBK, because it's not meant that way but everyone gets to decide whether they want to be the bug or the ass. The bug can always change its position.

"The reason for our ongoing tests was to find out why copying of pressed CD to CD-R in 99.9% of all cases sounded from just better to very much better. It worked out that by way of measurements, this could not be explained. Bits were indeed bits. In a resultant article, more details were revealed on the how and why of CD-R copies."

The quote above is last paragraph of the piece from 6 Moons Review I posted the other day. That paragraph, if true, appears to put the kybosh on ANY experiment (including demagnetization) that employs copying CD to CD-R where listening tests are involved. If you see what I mean.

One last tid bit - this from follow-up article on ripping CD to CD-R alluded to in paragraph above:

"Then black CD-Rs entered the market. Those are made of colored polycarbonate with a reflective layer of silver. These were at first intended for the video game market. Sony's Play Station games arrived on black CDs and were considered cool. Soon music lovers started to use black CD-Rs and next to the notably improved musicality of expertly ripped and burned CDs, it appeared that black blanks added even further performance gains though a bit-by-bit comparison does not show any differences."

This is either scary or downright hilarious! SAS has drifted off into capacitor land and KBK has invoked the "Miller Jitter Analyzer" So I looked for a reference to this analyzer and found a very helpful article on the Stereophile site.

http://www.stereophile.com/features/1208jitter/index.html

It's got GRAPHS!!!!!!! Measurements and figures! I nearly choked on my corn flakes!

When can we see the traces from your treated disc KBK? Or do we have to take your ears as our reference analyzer?

In addition to that, the article mentions 0.1dB as a significant difference in the noise floor or some effect of jitter/sidebands. 0.1dB? Really, we don't have humans doing these listening tests we have androids with superhuman perceptions! If I'd only realised this from the beginning I could have saved myself so much time!

And, for the record KBK, I didn't try to "set you straight" on anything with your gimmick, liquid cables other than to call you on your outrageous claims that "the laws of physics will have to be rewritten" In the end, you and your mates have released a cable ono the market that has to be shipped as 'Hazmat' and until the "reviewer" at 6moons completes his thorough listening tests we wont know if we're all about to float off into outer space as the law of gravity is repealed.

Now, who has tested their ears? If the disc you made has all the tracks on it and one has the unmeasurable changes, you should have all picked it by now.

OH NOES I forgot! The error correction and the thingumajig in line with the watsit, combined with the effect of the hoojamaflip will have cancelled out any of the changes and all of the tracks will now be identical.

Nobody got any listening tests to offer?

Nobody?.......

Anybody.......

The silence here is lower than the noise floor on a $100,000 pre-amp.

"Anyone have a test for me to do?"

Here's a one for you, it's a doozy. Take ALL telephone books out of the house or apartment, put them, say, on the back porch. But before removing them listen carefuly to a 2 or 3 favorite recordings, i.e., ones you commonly use for test purposes. After the phone books have been removed from premises, listen to the same tracks again. If in doubt about the results, bring phone books back inside and repeat.

This experiment tests the validity of the premise that "information fields" affect the sound.

Quote:
"Anyone have a test for me to do?"

Here's a one for you, it's a doozy. Take ALL telephone books out of the house or apartment, put them, say, on the back porch. But before removing them listen carefuly to a 2 or 3 favorite recordings, i.e., ones you commonly use for test purposes. After the phone books have been removed from premises, listen to the same tracks again. If in doubt about the results, bring phone books back inside and repeat.

This experiment tests the validity of the premise that "information fields" affect the sound.

Yes.

Although, start with just your dictionary.

You should also try it with your encyclopedia, computer, and any reference texts. Fiction books are less significiant.

You can also compare a blank hard drive to one with data on it.

To keep it pure, have a friend either take the dictionary out, or not, and see if you can tell the difference with blind listening!

Quote:

Here's a one for you, it's a doozy. Take ALL telephone books out of the house or apartment, put them, say, on the back porch. But before removing them listen carefuly to a 2 or 3 favorite recordings, i.e., ones you commonly use for test purposes. After the phone books have been removed from premises, listen to the same tracks again. If in doubt about the results, bring phone books back inside and repeat.

This experiment tests the validity of the premise that "information fields" affect the sound.

So finally a bit of background on how you developed your products Geoff. Thanks for the insight.

Mind you don't trip over that phone book...

What's with the downer attitude, Mr. Sunshine? Ain't you got no more curiosity left? Nathan and Buddha must be rubbing off on ya, mate.

Quote:
What's with the downer attitude, Mr. Sunshine? Ain't you got no more curiosity left? Nathan and Buddha must be rubbing off on ya, mate.

Me?

FY, mate!

I'm the one who is opposed to your close minded approach to the physics of magnetizing CD's and laser light settling down the air in a room.

As soon as it isn't your sales schtick, you go right into your own rule book telling people their tweaks don't work.

You're just stuck in the box, dude.

Free your mind.

I think May is rubbing off on you. "Things can only work one way, MY way!"

'Fraid not.

As someone here is prone to say, ROTFLMAO!

Broken threads broken springs
Broken idols broken heads
People sleeping in broken beds
Ain't no use jiving
Ain't no use joking
Everything is broken.

Broken hands on broken ploughs
Broken treaties broken vows
Broken pipes broken tools
People bending broken rules
Hound dog howling bullfrog croaking
Everything is broken.

So, other than Geoff turning into the Amazing Randi when we aren't discussing his specific products...

I was reading about different woods for another project, and there is some pretty big wood to wood variation regarding mineral content.

Several minerals, not just iron.

Has anyone experimented with demagnetizing their wood shelves or the wood cabinets of their gear?

How about the effect of speaker magnets on the wood of the cabinet?

Some woods can have upwards of .5% metallic mineral content. The amounts involved with a simple wood shelf would SCREAM compared to the amount in an LP or CD.

There are ceramics aficionados who do glazing with fires stoked by certain kinds of woods to get certain colors. One guy who is known for his unique colors uses a certain type of wood known for its high iron content.

He also notices tree to tree variability.

"Almost all things in nature have iron content. The green that you see in my pottery is the iron content in wood ash. Different kinds of wood have different quantities of iron, so each produces a different color. Even trees of the same species but taken from different areas will produce different results. I found this most interesting, so naturally I gravitated towards working with ash."

Maybe that's why I prefer damped glass shelves instead of wood.

Anybody with a bulk demagnetizer that could try this trick on speakers cabinets or wood shelves?

I won't even think about the wood framing or walls of our listening rooms!

FC: "Nobody got any listening tests to offer?
Nobody?.......
Anybody.......
The silence here is lower than the noise floor on a $100,000 pre-amp. "

Phonny! You know I'm always good for a tweak idea, for those who are sincere about trying to improve their sound, and are not just the usual armchair audiophiles I run into on web forums. Speaking of which, I have been doing a great deal of that myself lately, with my sound going on a very wild rollercoaster ride, into places I hadn't seen before. It doesn't always go where I want or expect it to go, but I always end up learning something new anyway, so it's all good. Needless to say, none of that is for "Stereophile" consumption (not knocking Stereophile, as most people aren't ready to deal with that kind of tweaking). But ok, here's a quick and accessible tweak you can try (assuming you can get past the fact that you don't understand how it can work, at least for the 2 min. it takes to do it):

Place the smallest, tiniest dab of toothpaste on your pinky. Shmear it on the Compact Disc logo of a commercial CD you own, and keep shmearing until it vanishes into the surface. Then place this CD back in the jewel case it came in (you do not need to play the CD). See if you find any change or improvement in the sound of your system. (As with ALL tweaks, don't forget to listen carefully to your system before initiating the tweak). If you want to A/B the tweak 'cos you're not sure, just take the CD out of the room.

BTW, I only read the last page of this thread, not the preceding 40. So I hope there isn't going to be a quiz later...

About your audio test: I like tests, so I thought I'd give it a shot. But I have no idea what its about, or what I'm supposed to be testing! You did not mention this in your post that contains the links (and I have not been following the thread, so I didn't see where it might have been). I did not burn them on a CD-R as you suggested. Didn't want to bother and didn't see any reason to. I simply listened to about 30sec of each file on my computer (through a pair of $20 headphones, plugged into its speakers), using the VLC player.

Before I give you my response, keep in mind that the download took so long, it was 5 in the morning when all 4 were in and I finally took the test (and my eyes were burning!), but I wanted to get it over with before the next day. The only one I could say was clearly different from the rest was the one called "Jeff" (so if 1 is supposed to be different, then that's my guess). It had more depth, a larger soundstage, and the rest of all that audiophile hooha. I don't know why, but while Tango/Cash were pretty similar to each other, "Mutt" seemed a cut above in quality in comparison. I mean even though "Jeff" was clearly superior to the other 3 in resolution, there were times when I preferred Mutt's tonal balance. Now, do I get a prize if I guess what you did to create the differences? ;-)

BTW, while I encourage testing, I'd like to say, the next time you do something like this, you should consider not posting .WAV's, okay. They are way too large, eat up people's bandwidth and time; particularly when your host only allows one file to be d/led at a time; and there's over 200 megs to d/l. In the past, when I have put similar audio test files up on forums or my site for people to take the Pepsi challenge, I usually offered both .wav's and compressed files (ie. mp3's or oggs), for people to choose their poison (relative to their abilities), and in general, to encourage them to try to understand audio more and talk about it less.

"... and I have tried to shine
in the darkness
entertaining vanities
in vain..."

"Deeper than love"
Antony & The Johnsons

Buddha: "Has anyone experimented with demagnetizing their wood shelves or the wood cabinets of their gear?"

Nay. Demagnetizing is for lamers and tards. Magnetizing is where the cognoscenti hang out. And yeah, apart from the last couple of years, I've done some audio-related experiments in magnetics just this week, with some success. The interesting thing about magnets, is they can improve sound and degrade sound. Usually the latter, unfortunately. There was no better evidence for me, than when I removed all the video and audio tapes from my listening room, a few years ago.

Can't say I have worked with wood, but I have done experiments on diverse materials; plastics, paper, water, etc. I believe everything, including our bodies, is affected by magnetism, and perhaps demagnetism.

"How about the effect of speaker magnets on the wood of the cabinet?"

Yes. I predict it will degrade your sound. Easy enough to test, isn't it. You could always try an Aspirin instead.

Quote:
Buddha: "Has anyone experimented with demagnetizing their wood shelves or the wood cabinets of their gear?"

Nay. Demagnetizing is for lamers and tards. Magnetizing is where the cognoscenti hang out. And yeah, apart from the last couple of years, I've done some audio-related experiments in magnetics just this week, with some success. The interesting thing about magnets, is they can improve sound and degrade sound. Usually the latter, unfortunately. There was no better evidence for me, than when I removed all the video and audio tapes from my listening room, a few years ago.

Can't say I have worked with wood, but I have done experiments on diverse materials; plastics, paper, water, etc. I believe everything, including our bodies, is affected by magnetism, and perhaps demagnetism.

"How about the effect of speaker magnets on the wood of the cabinet?"

Yes. I predict it will degrade your sound. Easy enough to test, isn't it. You could always try an Aspirin instead.

Hey!

I was thinking all this over recently and of the speakers I currently spend the most time with, none have wood behind the most important drivers.

I either have planar, open baffle, aluminum baffle, or wood cabinet open behind the mid/treble drivers.

Other than a stray woofer here and there, I am woodless behind my drivers.

As to your comment about 'tards,' nobody else here seems interested in magnetizing. We went through that on some of the earlier pages. Ah, well.

Buddha: I think I found what you were talking about, when you said you guys were talking about magnetizing CD's....

In this fashion, with sufficient pretreament (sorry, it's proprietary. I could be assassinated, to my own detriment, for even having told you this much) and storage conditions, I have created a new CD state wherein it becomes a magnetic monopole and seems to remain free of either magnetism or demagnetism - a magnetic-independent CD state, even if those horrible inks are left on it.

I anyone would care to give it a spin, I'll sell them based on my time spent (charged out at minimun wage, since I can multitask) and you can see for youself.

Alternatively, you could consider doing what Frank S did in this thread. Simply post 2 (or 4) mp3's, where one file is an extraction of the magnetically treated CD, and the other (s) is an extraction done before treating the CD. This will just be a one time thing for you, and give everyone here a chance to listen and see if they can hear the treatment.

If you do this, I will be game to doing something similar using my own magnetic treatment on a CD. Assuming the tests are positive (the differences can be heard), we could then compare to see which of us has the more effective treatment. Which might be interesting because from what you described, what you're doing with the magnets is very different. Mind, it only takes me 30 seconds, not a week, to improve the sound of my CD's with my method. But I don't mind waiting for your result.

Buddha: It would be interesting to see if the analog output from a CD player is different after whatever treatment one applied.

Not that it can be done to satisfy anybody.

True dat. Still.... 'Member the Freeze Test I did on AA? Where I posted extractions of a "frozen" CD, before and after "freezing", for group analysis and testing? In all cases, they were the exact same file. Either EAC extractions off of the same CD, or copies of those extractions. And yet... the results that were coming in were interesting (to me, anyway). People had analyzed those files every which way but loose. They FC'ed the files, used waveform software, did MD5 checksum analyses on them, and good old-fashioned listening to samples. Not only were some hearing differences in the files under subjective testing, but on objective terms, despite the checksums and bit-level comparisons matching, the waveform analyses were showing differences. For files simply copied within the Windows environment, that should have rung alarm bells in the "bits iz bits!" crowd.

Especially since as I had mentioned at the beginning of it, that test was inspired by my suggestion to one of the members on another discussion site, to freeze their mp4 player. Which they not only did and found subjective differences, but objective ones as well after they put the output of the player through waveform software. Now had the jackass jackbooted mods of AA not destroyed all the contributions in a fell swoop, we might have finally been able to get somewhere with all of this "bits iz bits" nonsense, when the dust had settled. While I had never expected these sorts of treatments to be measurable, I'm ready to be proven wrong.

Jan: I see people who perceive the improvements rendered by Belt devices trying to rationalize the "why" along conventional lines of reasoning which keeps them limited to their already existing knowledge even when they have to stretch their existing knowledge to its limits trying to fit answers into their comfortable known world.

Having done as many tests as I have on friends and such, I know this all too well. How people react to Belt's devices tells me a lot about them; and where they think they're talking about the tweak, they're really talking about themselves. Given those that hear differences, some people don't care to know how it works, some people ask me, and some people tell me how it works. Those that tell me how it works are always the most entertaining. One audiophile friend (but one who barely knows what Stereophile is and certainly never heard of Belt), after clearly hearing the improvements from applying Cream Electret to his CD, described the tweak's operating principle thusly: "it reacts with ions in the air". I didn't have the heart to tell him I could have applied the treatment on another floor of the house, leaving the treated CD on that floor, and it would have still affected the sound in the floor below.

For most people, it's a process, and a slow one at that, to learn and accept entirely new beliefs. Paradoxically, in this respect, the more educated you are, the harder it will often be. Because you will always be drawing on what you have learned, and believe, to try to understand what you don't know, and find hard to believe and/or understand. So for example, you know what ions are, you understand that, and it is one of the beliefs you have come to invest in, which holds credibility to you. It makes it easier to apply that belief, one you do understand, to help make sense of something you don't understand. I can describe this as a chasm between what you know, and what you don't. Some find themselves having to leap over the chasm, leaving behind what they knew, and are in a sense, fearful of doing that.

With advanced audio, on the fringes and the vanguard of audio science (Beltism in particular), it takes a long time before people can get to a point of enlightenment. To where they can finally say with the conviction that only comes from *true knowledge* (reg. tm.), that they are pretty sure they don't know how it works. Until then, there's bound to be a lot of stumbling, bumbling, fumbling, and fits thrown. The "fits" will inevitably include someone waving their "credentials" in your face while trying to shout you down, pretending to speak on behalf of the scientific community while they dismiss the entire concept of empirical evidence, and every single thing that doesn't conform to the unflinching beliefs of what they already think they know, is dismissed as "imagination" on your part. Or that of the hundreds or thousands of others hearing the same differences. I say, just grab a beer and some popcorn, and watch 'em play it out.

Thanks for taking the time to do the listening test Frog. I said I'd post the treated waveform after four responses so you may never know which one is the treated track. Some of the tweakers here obviously can't trust their ears enough to give it a shot.

Also, the topic of this thread comes from page one, post one by KBK. He stated that by using a hand held de-magnetizer on a CD he was familiar with wrought various "improvements" and floated the possibility that the magnetic field had inductively heated the 55uM layer of aluminium and altered the edges of the pits. He asserted later, that the improvement was due to reduced jitter which he had measured with his ears (remarkable!).

I attempted to replicate his experiment but in a totally non-audiophile manner. I had a control disk. The files you listened to were from those two disks one file was from the treated disk and the other three from the untreated one.

One of our greatest tweak defenders has remained silent and even KBK has, as yet failed to make his guess/assessment.

I'm not holding my breath.

Lastly, I posted uncompressed WAV files so that our golden eared ones couldn't gripe that the psychoacoustic algorithm had destroyed any chance of them using their highly trained auditory skills to detect the treated track.

Holy crap!

I missed the files!

I won't be at my home computer for a couple weeks. I will go back through the thread and look then.

Apologies.

Quote:
One of our greatest tweak defenders has remained silent and even KBK has, as yet failed to make his guess/assessment.

How would you know whether any of the "tweak defenders" have made a guess/assessment since you have all of the suspected "tweak defenders" on permanent "ignore"?

Ooooooooohhhhhhhh, you've been cheating on the "ignore" feature again, haven't you, FC?

What a man of conviction you are!

As for me, your files screw with my computer and I'm not in the mood to crash everything just to play your game.

You might say I'm jumping late into this thread. On the other hand you might say I discovered "CD demagnetizing" so I have been a silent early arrival. Back in the late-Eighties the crew and I were all rah-rah over tape demagnetizers from Rat Shack and Benjamin. I even had Joe (Mr. B) over for a demo! There was no question among any of us that the damn things reduced the enharmonic trash that so disfigures CD sound.

Then I started writing about the phenomenon in my column for Positive Feedback, back when it was a print-only publication. Later (c. 1996) Stereophile published a longish letter from me on the topic; I don't find it in the archives here but maybe I'll try to get it online.

But to what end? History is repeating itself here before our very eyes. The very same (specious, if I may say) arguments are being thrown against it by all the usual suspects: Those who will not listen. It has become quite tiresome.

How tiresome? I started reading every message in this thread, then skipped every other page, then every fourth, then... so I may have missed some good material. Nor did I see anything that addressed my own P.O.V., viz., that what's happening is not "demagnetizing" rather "decoulombizing". I have no research to back that up, but whenever I treat a CD with destatic fluid I obtain just about the same sonic results.

Should I have patented this as a novel application?

Lately I have graduated from tape demagnetizers to two specialty devices: the Walker Talisman and Brian Kyle's Music Gun.

"The Hottest Tweak in Town" http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue38/cj_diary.htm

http://blog.stereophile.com/rmaf2008/the_music_gun/

I would be happy to answer any questions from whomsoever's mind is not made up already.

clark

Thanks for taking the time to do the listening test Frog. I said I'd post the treated waveform after four responses so you may never know which one is the treated track.

Oh come on! Not fair! If I'm the only one brave enough to have taken the test and after I posted my results, there was nothing but crickets chirping til a week after, then there's obviously little chance you're going to meet your planned quota. I stayed up til 5 in the morning, wasting both time and bandwidth (yeah, I gotta pay for my bandwidth now because my ISP meters it!), and wouldn't have done so if I thought it might be wasted effort. You could at least PM or email me whether my guess is right or wrong, without telling me what the real answer is. Of course, if my result was wrong, I would still not know. And if I was right, I wouldn't tell anyone that, until your quota is met. That way everyone is happy!

Some of the tweakers here obviously can't trust their ears enough to give it a shot.

So what else is new! I know all too well how hard it is to get armchair audiophiles to do more than hang out on audiophile forums and talk audio politics, after having put up a similar type of listening test challenge on an audio forum, long before yours (where it was like pulling teeth to get anyone interested in taking a listening test!).

So where's my friend Ethan "I gots PRO ears and you don't!" Whiner when you (finally) need him? I know he was in this thread *before* you put up your listening test challenge. Does someone need to offer him $100 bucks before he'll take the test?!

I attempted to replicate his experiment but in a totally non-audiophile manner. I had a control disk. The files you listened to were from those two disks one file was from the treated disk and the other three from the untreated one.

One of our greatest tweak defenders has remained silent and even KBK has, as yet failed to make his guess/assessment.

I'm not holding my breath.

Lastly, I posted uncompressed WAV files so that our golden eared ones couldn't gripe that the psychoacoustic algorithm had destroyed any chance of them using their highly trained auditory skills to detect the treated track.

Yeah I figured why you did that, and its true uncompressed WAVs will give you a better chance, but I think the differences I heard were easily enough that mp3's should yield the same results.

I also guessed this was testing demagnetization of a CD. I find it funny that this thread called "CD Demagnetizers" seems to have taken a turn for the worse, right after you posted this test! Everyone seems to have been scared away, as soon as they were asked to take a blind test on the theme of whether a CD demagnetizer might have an effect. Does that mean they would rather just argue intellectually/politically about why it won't or will have an effect? Does it mean they were scared by the size of the files you posted? (If so, my suggestion of posting mp3 versions would fix that). Does it mean they simply don't have the time to take the test (but do somehow have the time to continue reading and posting on Stereophile?) Or does it just mean they all coincidentally lost interest in the subject, at the exact time that we might have actually gotten somewhere with these arguments?

So FC, will we ever know the answers to these burning questions?!

JAN: I've heard of waves crashing against rocks, but I don't think I've ever heard of WAVs crashing a computer. This is a standard file that most any computer should be able to play. If you are able to take the test and wish to, perhaps you can explain what is happening (ie. what "screw with my computer" means), and I might be able to help with that.

Clark, thanks for your input. For now can you just provide more information regarding "decoulombizing"?

Frog, this seems to be a problem with my (relatively) new computer and its Vista 64bit system. I had to replace my XP unit this fall and I didn't even know there was such a thing as Vista 64bit. When I asked if there would be any problems transferring my old software to the new computer I was told theer wouldn't be any problems at all. Well, I've had nothing but problems ever since.

It seems there is not much software that accomodates 64bit, it's all designed for 32bit, so whenever I downloaded old software the computer would crash and the only way around it was a complete system restore. I got very tired during the first few weeks of constantly reloading software not knowing which addition was going to cause the whole thing to crumble. As of right now, I've stopped adding software to my computer until I'm certain it is compatible with the Vista 64bit platform.

I'll go back and see if I can find the post for the dowloads and give it one more shot. I'm just very wary of anything that asks me to add more software to my computer just for this test. If I remember correctly, that was where I stopped the last time I tried this particular download. Burning these files to a CD might be another issue even after they are in my computuer.

I hate Vista 64bit!

If I run into problems, I'll send you a PM and see what we can work out. I had this same problem with a file ncdrawl had placed on the forum last week and he redid the file to another format that worked with a bit of finagling in this end.

I realize this is a bit Off-Topic, but since I asked... My answer is yeah, you shouldn't have installed Vista 64. It's not ready for prime time. I did my research on that before opting for Vista 32. I figured by the time the hardware and software makes the 64-bit operating system a viability, there'll be a new OS to take its place. And I was (as usual, sigh) right. Vista 32 has enough problems as it is, and it makes no sense to me to continue with a crippled system. So I'd say, speaking in general terms, your best bet is to ditch V64 in favor of V32. (Thankfully, my Vista32 problems have been minimal. Mainly just microphone gain problems remain permanent under my V32 system).

But WAVs should run on V64, there are no special 64-bit versions of such files. So I don't know why you say Vista requires special software to play WAV files. Don't know what you're using that won't play WAVs, but I'm currently using VLC media player for music and video (free, open source and widely available), and it's reported to work under Vista 64. Sure, you can PM me if you want some help sorting it out.

PM sent Frog.

Yep, I wish someone had told me that before I bought the computer. But, like I said, I didn't know there was a 32bit and a 64bit (and higher from what I understand) and the salesperson never mentioned it, he just said it was Vista. And I've come to the conclusion Vista 64bit will be replaced before sufficient software becomes available for it.

I hate Vista 64bit!

I'll try those files again tonight.

Windows 7 32 and 64 bit is comming out next year, and in time will supplant Vista 32 and 64 bit. And there is no "higher" than Vista 64 bit. Vista 64 bit should have no problems playing wave files at all. It may lack some driver support, but that is about it. And there is sufficient software out there now, it runs 32 bit software, but there aren't many 64 bit programs yet.

How do I know? I was a CTP Beta Tester for Microsoft USA for Vista 32 and Vista 64, as I am for Windows 7, and ran Vista 64 from Beta 1 to the Gold version without too many problems.

BTW, Windows 7 looks like it will be the best Microsoft Operating System yet.

Quote:
TW, Windows 7 looks like it will be the best Microsoft Operating System yet.

Gee, thanks.

OK, there's one file downloaded and set in place on Media Player. That only took a couple of hours and a few dozen tries. Now when I go to download the next file, the software tells me I have exceded the allowable amount of information for a free download. It wants cash for a premium download or else I'll have to wait for some unknown amount of time before I can try again. Everytime I try to download these files I get a screen telling me Windows cannot open the file. Then the isp throws a fit and I have to use Task Master to close the connection and start over again. This is about the tenth time I've tried this with the same results.

Ya'know? It kinda figures FC would pick the friggin' most difficult software he could find. Couldn't this have been a bit simpler and still done the job?

Quote:

Quote:
TW, Windows 7 looks like it will be the best Microsoft Operating System yet.

Gee, thanks.

You are welcome.

Looks like I might get all four files transfered in about a week's time from the way this has gone so far.

Thanks alot, FC!

Frog, you're sure there is something to hear when I finally get these files downloaded and copied? I'm not interested in a long drawn out game where there is nothing to be heard and FC has just screwed with us. As it stands it looks like I'll have to copy each file to a separate disc and then make a compilation from the four separate discs to have everything on one for easy comparison.

Well this is a new message I've not seen before;

Quote:
You are currently downloading too many files at once. Multiple simultaneous downloads are only permitted for Premium Members.

Makes sense since I haven't been able to download anything this morning and nothing was being downloaded when this message appeared. And I keep getting the screen that says my isp cannot open the file.

Would somebody please whack FC upside the head for me? This is bullshit!

Quote:
Sorry, there are currently no free download slots available on this server.

Please try again later, or you can upgrade to FileFactory Premium below for instant access.

I hate FC even more than I hate Vista 64bit!

>>Frog, you're sure there is something to hear when I finally get these files downloaded and copied? I'm not interested in a long drawn out game where there is nothing to be heard and FC has just screwed with us. <<

?? Yes, I am sure there is something to hear (it's classical music), and no, Jan, FC isn't screwing with anyone (it took me less than 2 hours to d/l all 4 files). I think you are just feeling the effects of dealing with FileFactory, the file host service he's put them on. Many file hosts are the same way, today. Something does kind of seem a bit screwy on my end, because I responded to all of this yesterday, and I see today my message never showed up. Anyway, what I suggested is that you ask FC to transfer the files to http://savefile.com That is one of the services I used last year for posting my audio tests, and it's a lot easier, and no waiting.

>>As it stands it looks like I'll have to copy each file to a separate disc and then make a compilation from the four separate discs to have everything on one for easy comparison. <<

You don't have to worry about burning them at all - and there is no reason to do so for this test, other than wanting to listen to them in a different format, or different system. Just listen to them on Media Player.

>>You are currently downloading too many files at once. Multiple simultaneous downloads are only permitted for Premium Members.<<

This is because you are trying to download more than one of FC's files at a time. As I suggested in email, you have to wait until your download is completed before moving on to the next file. After the download is completed, you have to wait about 10 or 15 minutes I think, before you can download another file (this is to encourage downloaders to pay for their service, of course). You should see the exact amount of time you need to wait at the top of the screen, in the pink box. Refresh the page if you don't. ***NOTE BENE***: After you have waited the 15 minutes, or whatever the amount of time necessary before it will release the file to you, you have to manually click the download link (IIRC). It will not start the download automatically, so this would explain why it didn't download the next day.

As for a screen where your ISP will not open the file, or "it throws a fit", I don't know what that means. You'll have to be more specific about the error message. The ISP is your Internet Service Provider. It shouldn't have anything to do with you opening files that are on your computer system. As for the error message where "Windows cannot open the file", that normally occurs when a file isn't associated with a program. This should not occur if you have Windows Media Player installed, as the program should have already associated .WAV files with it. If this is still occurring, try opening the folder that contains the file (in a small window), then Windows Media Player in another window, and drag the file over to WMP. WMP plays WAV files, no doubt about that. You can also right click a file, select "Open With", and choose the program to associate it with, so it will open with that program in the future. If you're simply not sure where your browser downloads its files to, let me know the name of your browser.

>>Sorry, there are currently no free download slots available on this server.<<

I believe this is just telling you to have patience and wait (about 15 minutes, as I wrote), before you can click the download link to allow another download. See comments above.

Everything finally downloaded.

Thanks again, FC!

Everything has been copied to a CD-R. Each file has it's own disc. When I try to make a compilation disc Media Player places "Mutt" in the library but when I try to then place "Jeff" in the library "Mutt" is renamed
"Jeff".

I guess that shows there really is no difference in these files, eh?

Anyway, that means I'm not certain which file I would be listening to on a compilation disc.

So, with four individual CD-R's to listen to, I would also pick "Jeff" as the treated file. It has less hardness to the string sound, more ambience overall and more presence to the performance. The differences are to me with this particular selection not huge, less than what I would expect from a CD cleaner.

I don't know what's going on with "Mutt", overall and more specifically starting at approximately 2:30 into the file it doesn't sound identical to any of the other files. Otherwise, it is more like the other two, "Cash" and "Tango", which appear to me to be identical, than it is to "Jeff".

Well, I'm glad you finally got all those problems sorted out. More or less. You should try the Deep Burner link I gave you, if you continue to have problems with Media Player burns. I also found Mutt didn't sound like the other files, but closer to Cash/Tango, which appeared pretty much identitical. Ok, it looks like we need 2 more willing participants before FC will announce the real test results. Again, where's Ethan "Pro Golden Ears" Winer when you need him? That brave man who never turns down a challenge....

"Yoo-hoo, Ethan.... I see a $100 bill with your name on it...."

Quote:
"Yoo-hoo, Ethan.... I see a $100 bill with your name on it...."

Please send it to the address on my web site:

www.ethanwiner.com

BTW, was there a question in there?

--Ethan

Quote:
You should try the Deep Burner link I gave you, if you continue to have problems with Media Player burns.

I'll take a look at that software. Actually, I haven't had that many problems with the current version of MP, for what I need it seems to be sufficient. Though I did have a problem with ncdrawl's FLAC file. It's the other software that has crashed the computer that has frustrated me. My old Nero and DVD Shrink just don't want to work with this 64bit crap and their only solution is a premium download with a yearly fee.

I tried a few other CD copying programs but they weren't as simple and quick as Nero. The DVD copying software is a circle jerk!

At the moment I've got a half dozen or so software programs on a USB flash drive that I don't want to install on the computer but I can use them when I need them. I've got a back up hard drive that makes booting up nearly impossible when its connected to the computer. I have a screen that shows up whenever I power up or power down the computer that says files are missing. No one can solve that without a complete system restore. I use Yahoo for a browser but its working off Internet Explorer which will just lock up without warning a few times a week.

If everyone had this many problems that apparently cannot be resolved when the Atari 400 hit the market, we'd all still be using IBM Selectrics and snail mail.

You'd really give Winer money to not listen to the files because he already knows he won't hear anything?!

Quote:
Please send it to the address on my web site:

www.ethanwiner.com

How do you know that's his real name?

Quote:

Quote:
"Yoo-hoo, Ethan.... I see a $100 bill with your name on it...."

Please send it to the address on my web site:

www.ethanwiner.com

BTW, was there a question in there?

--Ethan

Oh come on, does everything have to be explained to you?! I took FC's listening challenge at the end of this thread. Jan has now taken it. We need 2 more people to take the challenge, before FC will publish the results. Since you participated in this thread earlier and shown interest in the subject, why haven't you taken the test yet? Is it because you can't find "Fresh Clip's" listing in the Yellow Pages? D/l the files and take the test!

Are you talking about the "Jeff Mutt Cash Tango" files? I just tried to download the first one, but it said there are no free "download slots" available. I'll try again once or twice, but I have no idea what this is supposed to prove. This is a test of demagnetizing a CD, yes? I already know the answer, but I'll run FC (Windows file compare utility) and/or do a null test anyway if it makes you all warm and fuzzy to have my participation.

--Ethan

>>I'll take a look at that software. Actually, I haven't had that many problems with the current version of MP, for what I need it seems to be sufficient. Though I did have a problem with ncdrawl's FLAC file. It's the other software that has crashed the computer that has frustrated me. My old Nero and DVD Shrink just don't want to work with this 64bit crap and their only solution is a premium download with a yearly fee. I tried a few other CD copying programs but they weren't as simple and quick as Nero. The DVD copying software is a circle jerk!<<

Deep Burner is simpler and quicker than Nero. It just isn't as powerful. As I said, I don't use Windows Media Player, but I don't think it plays FLAC files, at least not natively. I use Foobar2000 for that, and you can also use WinAmp I'm sure.

>>At the moment I've got a half dozen or so software programs on a USB flash drive that I don't want to install on the computer but I can use them when I need them. I've got a back up hard drive that makes booting up nearly impossible when its connected to the computer. I have a screen that shows up whenever I power up or power down the computer that says files are missing. No one can solve that without a complete system restore. I use Yahoo for a browser but its working off Internet Explorer which will just lock up without warning a few times a week. <<

I use Google's browser, but I didn't know Yahoo had one. Stop using it. That may be why your browser is locking up. In general, it sounds like you have a crippled system and you're putting band aids on your Vista 64 system to avoid fixing the real problem. Which is that you're running Vista 64. If you have system files missing, at the very least it probably requires a reinstall, not just a system restore. As I recall, its pretty much impossible to do a repair restore with Vista, of any flavour. Given all the problems you're encountering under V64, you might as well buy a Mac. Or install Ubuntu. But I'd recommend you just go back to XP. You can make it look like Vista, and it'll run anything you give it today.

>>If everyone had this many problems that apparently cannot be resolved when the Atari 400 hit the market, we'd all still be using IBM Selectrics and snail mail.<<

Atari 400? Sweet! I used to have a Timex Sinclair. Talk about "problems", you had to program that in order to "compute" anything. "Problems" and "computers" have always been synonymous. I've never experienced one without the other. And yeah, I used to work on a Mac. I saw so many "bomb" symbols, I thought it was designed by terrorists.

>>You'd really give Winer money to not listen to the files because he already knows he won't hear anything?!<<

No, but I think he deserves $100 if he does get it right. Why? Because I doubt he could hear the difference between a door squeak and a marching band. As my daddy always used to say since as far back as I can remember, "People who can't hear, buy Pioneer."

Are you talking about the "Jeff Mutt Cash Tango" files? I just tried to download the first one, but it said there are no free "download slots" available.

Next to that it also says "Please try again later". You are downloading at a time when servers are most busy. Try downloading at a time when they're not. As I've said to Jan, you have to wait about 15 min. between each file, and click the link when your waiting time is up. You can only d/l one file at a time.

I'll try again once or twice, but I have no idea what this is supposed to prove. This is a test of demagnetizing a CD, yes? I already know the answer, but I'll run FC (Windows file compare utility) and/or do a null test anyway if it makes you all warm and fuzzy to have my participation.

What is this supposed to prove? It's a test to see whether CD demagnetizing has an effect. What do you mean you "already know the answer"? Has FreshClip given you the answer? If he hasn't, then no, you don't know the answer. You have your biases and your prejudices, of that I'm sure, but then, don't we all.

I just want FC to get his quota of 4 test participants, so we can conclude this test, and this thread, and maybe get somewhere on the subject. You're supposed to -listen- to the files, by the way, as we did, and identify them via subjective listening. Are you not able to do that? If you want to FC them or MD5 them or null test them or do a waveform analysis or put them under an electron microscope and/or thru a wood chipper, that's fine if you want to waste your time doing that, in --addition to the subjective analysis--. But nevertheless, you are at least expected to -listen- to them, as the rest of us have done, and give your opinion as to which is the demagnetized CD, based on your listening tests. FreshClip will then compile the results of our listening tests and tell us where we stand, in relation to which file represents the demagged CD.