At the risk of oversimplifying, some people seem to be driven by the desire to feel as if they have it all figured out. Which necessarily means that anyone who doesn't agree doesn't (have it all figured out). In which case, what could be better than spending ones time on hi-fi forums arguing for the superiority of your point of view? Where else would anyone listen, let alone respond to such nonsense?

Quote:

Watch out for that butter! You know, there's a product called "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter" but I'll be darned if I can believe it's not butter! I gotta go to the butter forums and set those dolts straight.

I just want to add, I feel your pain.

Did Ethan just use a nom de plume and write Stereophile about cancelling his subscription in the May issue?

That was not me! But I agree it sure sounded like me.

--Ethan

Quote:
Watch out for that butter! You know, there's a product called "I Can't Believe It's Not Butter" but I'll be darned if I can believe it's not butter! I gotta go to the butter forums and set those dolts straight.

I just want to add, I feel your pain.

My mother used to keep her teeth in a can that said "I can't believe it's not butter". Seriously.

AlexO you got me. I have nothing. I'm plum(b) commentless.

Take your teeth and go sit in the corner, quietly.

Yes. A great Non-sequitur, if there ever was one.

Usually, that's my job.

Quote:
I will send the CD-R to Ethan and let him describe what he hears or doesn't hear to the rest of you ... Every skeptic who's sat down and listened to a 'before and after' agrees IT WORKS ... IT'S EASY TO HEAR THE DIFFERENCE ON ANY CD PLAYER.

The CD arrived - thanks John! - and I just listened very carefully to several different section pairs on both Wave files. I imported the tracks side by side into SONAR, the DAW program I use, and aligned them in time to the same samples starting at an arbitrary place about 2 minutes in. Then I set the track Solo buttons so I could toggle cleanly from one file to the other with a single mouse click. I listened fairly loudly through my large speakers and also through headphones.

I don't know how Mikey defines "easy to hear the difference" but I heard no difference. Nothing, not even a little. The samples also looked more or less identical when they were in sync. (Though that doesn't necessarily mean anything because graphical views of waveforms are usually less than 16 bits.)

I also tried to null the two files, but as expected that didn't work because of turntable wow and other timing differences between plays. All I got was the hollow sound of comb filtering as the two tracks drifted in and out of sync. I thought it was interesting that the timing errors didn't average out. When I aligned the two files to start at the same place, one file ended 10,500 samples later than the other, or about 1/4 second off. I'm sure this also affects the pitch of the music, though maybe not enough to notice. I can't help but mention that it kills me when analog fans fret over digital jitter that nobody can hear, yet give a pass to analog wow and flutter that is literally 1,000 times worse. But I digress.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reasons anyone would think they hear a difference between these files are expectation (belief) and of course comb filtering caused by room acoustics.

Anyone who believes they hear a difference, please tell me the start and end times as mm:ss so I can listen carefully to those places too. In the mean time, it's clear to me that the whole notion of "demagnetizing" LP records is not based in reality.

--Ethan

Quote:
I can't help but mention that it kills me when analog fans fret over digital jitter that nobody can hear, yet give a pass to analog wow and flutter that is literally 1,000 times worse. But I digress.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reasons anyone would think they hear a difference between these files are expectation (belief) and of course comb filtering caused by room acoustics.

Anyone who believes they hear a difference, please tell me the start and end times as mm:ss so I can listen carefully to those places too. In the mean time, it's clear to me that the whole notion of "demagnetizing" LP records is not based in reality.

--Ethan

Completely different function and outcome on the jitter vs wow and flutter.

Jitter is inherently disturbing to the very nature or method of -and highly disturbing to the correct operation of- the human hearing function.

Wow and flutter is completely complementary and sympathetic with/to the human hearing function/action.

Big difference. Measurement means nothing without logic and humans tied to it and it's analysis.

Quote:

As far as I'm concerned, the only reasons anyone would think they hear a difference between these files are expectation (belief) and of course comb filtering caused by room acoustics.

Ethan-

For the record I believed the difference as heard on the CD-R to be pretty small.

If someone did only ONE back and forth comb filter might be an explanation but I did a NUMBER of A-B comparisons over a couple of days and the differences held so comb filter as the source of the difference is out. So only two explanations are possible, there is an audible difference or it's all in my head. I believe it's the former, you'll be content to believe the latter.

Quote:
So only two explanations are possible, there is an audible difference or it's all in my head.

It's easy enough to prove this one way or the other! All you have to do is show that you can identify which file is which without knowing which you're listening to. If you can do that nine times out of ten, I'll absolutely believe you. Until then, well, you know.

--Ethan

9 out of 10 is a pretty high bar. I'd say that if someone could do so at least 7 out of 10 times on 3 different occasions that would be pretty definitive.

Look, either you can hear it or you can't. Either the difference is obvious to everyone or it's not. If the best someone can get is seven times out of ten, then clearly it's not worth $2,000 to "demagnetize" your LPs. Which is the entire point of this thread. I'm sure even the most ardent believer would agree with that!

Versus a DUP-style system that everyone can pick out 100 times out of 100 - tons of very clean power, great loudspeakers, but with normal wires and no silly "tweak" products.

--Ethan

Quote:
9 out of 10 is a pretty high bar. I'd say that if someone could do so at least 7 out of 10 times on 3 different occasions that would be pretty definitive.

I thought Ethan was letting you off easy.

Would you say that you were 70% certain the new piece of gear you liked sounded different from previous gear?

I'd want 100% performance when someone says something like "order of magnitude improvement in detail," or "like svereal veils being lifted," or "night and day improvement"....

Superlatives like those should imply something beyond a rather low percentage chance of being able to identify a model in question, seventy percent likelihood of identification is terrible!

Imagine: "The Sansoochie Model 6969 was so good, I could tell it apart from the Hardon Carton model 70% of the time."

Ouch!

"Look, either you can hear it or you can't."

Exactly. And you couldn't. Hmmm....that reminds me, one of these times I'll post the 4 Reasons Why Audiophiles Can't Hear a Tweak or Report the Effect is Too Subtle. (Buddha, are you listening, bro'?)

Buddha-

What were the conclusions of your listening tests?

What I heard on the CD was a small difference, so I think 70% or higher over three separate occasions would be pretty respectable and would at the very least show that something was going on there. Again the difference heard in those files on my system were subtle so 9 out of 10 would be incredible to me.

I heard little to no difference either, so I'm in the "it's all in your head" camp.

"I heard little to no difference either, so I'm in the "it's all in your head" camp."

Gosh, I did not see that coming.

Quote:
Buddha-

What were the conclusions of your listening tests?

What I heard on the CD was a small difference, so I think 70% or higher over three separate occasions would be pretty respectable and would at the very least show that something was going on there. Again the difference heard in those files on my system were subtle so 9 out of 10 would be incredible to me.

70% might be fair, I was mostly commenting on the jump to the language someone may use in the context of the results.

It's fun to consider where we are on the certainty scale.

A baseball player can be only 30% certain that he'll get a hit, and he'll be a star.

If I said, "I am 70% certain the person I'm having sex with is my wife," I'd be spending all my Hi Fi cash on alimony.

I really just meant to be commenting on where on the spectrum we want our 'certainty' to be, and how we describe it.

I hope it didn't sound flame like.

Actually, I posted my impressions some time ago. You can scroll up and read my initial post.

A few questions about DUPs system:

1. As far as I know, DUP does not use any room treatment. I don

Thanks.. i wuz just pulling your chain, anyway. Better late than never I always say.

Superlative post, Mr. Lavorgna!

Quote:
As far as I know, DUP does not use any room treatment. I don

I read the listening test Ethan did with interest, and I don't know what to make of the fact that no differences were perceived. I heard differences in the CD demag files FC posted, so I would have thought LP demag would be just as noticeable. It would be great if someone who has the files Mr. Frehmer posted could convert them to mp3 (if you can convert them to WAV you can convert them to MP3), rename them, and then put them up on this site: http://savefile.com/, so I and anyone can download them. I am talking about renaming them so that the original before & after files are not identifiable. I would like to listen to them blind, to see if I can hear anything between them. (Even better would be 4 mp3's: 1 after file and 3 copies of the before file). That would be the only meaningful way to tell if these files are any more or less distinguishable than FC's files.

Alternatively, if Ethan could try downloading (again) the CD demagnetization files that Fresh Clip posted in the CD Demagnetization thread, and see if he can hear differences with them, I can maybe get a better idea of what differences, if any, can be perceived from Mr. Frehmer's LP demagnetization files.

Michael,

Even though the question was addressed to Ethan, I would like to answer some of these, although I'm not quite sure what this has to do with comparing demagnetized files.

Quote:
A few questions about DUPs system:

1. As far as I know, DUP does not use any room treatment. I don

Hey AlexO, Are you responding in an official capacity? As Ethan

Quote:

When I aligned the two files to start at the same place, one file ended 10,500 samples later than the other, or about 1/4 second off. I'm sure this also affects the pitch of the music, though maybe not enough to notice. I can't help but mention that it kills me when analog fans fret over digital jitter that nobody can hear, yet give a pass to analog wow and flutter that is literally 1,000 times worse.

Ethan, how long were the files?

1/4 second over what period of time?

You say, "I'm sure this also affects the pitch of the music."

I'd like to check the math and see what degree of pitch change you are sure that is happening. Maybe now we can get down to an objective measurment for how much pitch change you are concerned over.

Thanks for the info, if you dare!

Then, can I beg a copy of the CD?

Thank you, Mr. Buddha. Inquiring minds want to know!

On a personal note, I'm still indebted to your liquid Vegas hospitality and would like to repay that debt over cocktails in NYC. Soon?

Quote:
A few questions about DUPs system:

I just used that as an example of something that actually makes a real difference. Versus "demagnetizing" LP records which makes no difference. Whether DUP should have bass traps is irrelevant. Whether he used a DBT test to pick his speakers is irrelevant. What is missing here, logically, is that DBT is needed only to prove if something subtle can indeed be identified reliably. Nobody needs a DBT to tell that DUP's system beats Jan's system every day of the week. And I don't even have to hear both systems to know that! Just knowing the power available and frequency response specs - and a dose of common sense - tells me all I need to know.

Quote:
His speakers cost roughly $15/16,000 which clearly puts them in the 'expectation bias' league. Do you think he was swayed by price?

Yes, probably. As I posted the other day, the difference between $16,000 (pair) Revels and $900 Mackie 624s (pair) was minor. Though the Revels go lower in frequency and probably can play louder.

--Ethan

Quote:
Ethan, how long were the files?

Five minutes, 41 seconds.

Quote:
1/4 second over what period of time?

Over the full 5:41 length.

Quote:
I'd like to check the math and see what degree of pitch change you are sure that is happening. Maybe now we can get down to an objective measurment for how much pitch change you are concerned over.

As I already said, I doubt the pitch change is audible. But it's easy to see, and 1,000 times worst than the cheapest POS motherboard sound card.

Quote:
Then, can I beg a copy of the CD?

Sure. Email me from my web site www.ethanwiner.com with your mailing address and I'll send it to you.

Also worth mentioning: Even though turntable timing errors prevented the two files from nulling, I could still tell they're basically the same. When two identical sound sources are offset in time a very small amount, you get the hollow sound of comb filtering. If the sounds are not the same they won't cancel to create the nulls. I definitely heard the hollow sound, but it kept swooshing in and out due to the timing errors. So I'm confident the demagnetizer did nothing. The real question now is why some people think they heard a difference.

--Ethan

Quote:
Exactly. And you couldn't.

As I wrote earlier: "Anyone who believes they hear a difference, please tell me the start and end times as mm:ss so I can listen carefully to those places too."

Until you do that Geoff, you're just a load of hot air. Put up or shut up, okay? Thank you.

--Ethan

Quote:
Just knowing the power available and frequency response specs

What is the power available from my amplifiers? What is the sensitivity spec for my speakers? What is the frequency response of my speakers? Please cite your references. As you say, be as specific as possible. Tell me what amplifiers and what speakers I own and use. What pre amp and source do I use? Just what are the dimensions of my rooom?

Tell me, since you are willing to spend your time looking into my personal life to find these details you should know all of this.

If you are unable to do this, you are a fraud, a liar and a very sick child.

I assume Winer has me on ignore so he can cowardly insult me without ever seeing a response. Would someone please copy this and post it where he will see it?

Post deleted by sasaudio

Quote:
Also interesting is that your U47 mic preamp which you so vehemently defend has worse specs than Jan's system,

Thank you so much! Why don't you do the same as I asked of Winer before you start using my system as your reference without either of you knowing a damn thing about my system?

Quote:

Quote:
Exactly. And you couldn't.

As I wrote earlier: "Anyone who believes they hear a difference, please tell me the start and end times as mm:ss so I can listen carefully to those places too."

Until you do that Geoff, you're just a load of hot air. Put up or shut up, okay? Thank you.

--Ethan

Speaking of "put up", as I also wrote earlier (in this thread), if you put up your files at the site I listed, I will be glad to give them a listen (in mp3 format, to make it quicker and easier for all around - and without identifying the files, to help eliminate prejudices). I don't know if I can hear any further into them than you can, but if I hear differences, I'll state where. If you can't or do not wish to, I will have to presume that the effect does not carry well over to "digitization". Because I did hear the effect live a few weeks ago, and it was not so subtle.

Thank you so much! Why don't you do the same as I asked of Winer before you start using my system as your reference without either of you knowing a damn thing about my system?

It wasn't meant that way Jan. That is why I deleted it and am reposting. I saw that the wording could be taken the wrong way. My apologies.

My post was meant to show that while Winer attacks your system, Winer's own U47 mic preamp, which he so vehemently defends, frequency response is very very poor, much worse than a 12ax7 tube, less than 20khz on a good day. And certainly not as good as your system. Your system was not meant to be defamed. Just how winer plays games in order to mislead the public yet again.

And of course dup's system with the speakers in the corners which renders the specs useless since the bass is so efficiently coupled by the "horn load". On top of that dup was/is running a equalizer and two preamps in series before the amps. That is right folks, you read right, but winer thinks that is a better system.

Take care.

Per Jan's request this one time.

Quote:
What is the power available from my amplifiers? What is the sensitivity spec for my speakers? What is the frequency response of my speakers? Please cite your references. As you say, be as specific as possible. Tell me what amplifiers and what speakers I own and use. What pre amp and source do I use? Just what are the dimensions of my rooom?

Tell me, since you are willing to spend your time looking into my personal life to find these details you should know all of this.

If you are unable to do this, you are a fraud, a liar and a very sick child.

I assume Winer has me on ignore so he can cowardly insult me without ever seeing a response. Would someone please copy this and post it where he will see it?

Hi Michael,

The reason I replied about DUP's system is because I heard it and I heard the new Focus HD, so I felt I was in a position to answer your questions. I didn't realize they were trick questions, so I'm sorry for jumping in and spoiling all the fun

Then copy and paste my post where whiner can see it and must answer it. If whiner wants to play games, let him answer for his games.

If he can't answer what I've posted but wants to stand behind his insults while keeping me on ignore, then he is a worthless POS! I'm very tired of this BS from a child such as whiner!

I see. You were just making the point that a $20,000+ system makes a bigger difference to listeners than a $2,000 vinyl tweak that according to you doesn

No, AlexO they were not meant to be trick questions, just questions for Ethan in an attempt to follow his logic from post to post. But based on yours and Ethan

5:41.

341 seconds.

1/4 second discrepancy.

0.07% variation.

Now, you said this, and I quote: "I'm sure this also affects the pitch of the music, though maybe not enough to notice."

You are sure this affects the pitch, which is correct.

A 0.07% (seven one-hundredths of one percent) difference!

Glad to see you so concerned about this sort of subtlety!

"Maybe not enough to notice," I also made note of your thought that a 0.07% change in pitch is only 'maybe not enough to notice.'

Your concern over 0.07% pitch differences is joyfully noted!

Surely, that must be the last straw for vinyl. The spike through it's heart.

Quote:
Winer's own U47 mic preamp, which he so vehemently defends, frequency response is very very poor, much worse than a 12ax7 tube, less than 20khz on a good day. And certainly not as good as your system.

I'm quite certain that Stephen Mejias warned you to stop insulting me at the risk of being banned permanently. Stephen?

As for my U47 mod, I never "vehemently defended" it. Rather, I put it out as a viable option when the proper replacement tube can't be found. What's so pathetic about your post is you never heard that microphone, and you never measured its response, yet here you are proclaiming it to have inferior sound. WTF?

Even more pathetic is you picked on that one simple design repeatedly as "proof" of my incompetence, while ignoring dozens of other far more sophisticated designs on my web site. Tell you what dood, email me the schematic for one of your more cherished designs, and I'll run it by my expert engineer friend and post his comments here. Deal?

--Ethan

Quote:
if you put up your files at the site I listed

What files? I don't have any files for this. The files being discussed were Mikey's, and kindly sent to me by John Atkinson on a CDR. Perhaps you should ask him to send you a CDR too.

--Ethan

Quote:
0.07% variation.

I didn't check your math but that sounds about right. Your point?

Quote:
Glad to see you so concerned about this sort of subtlety!

Why does it bother you that as an aside I pointed out how much worse vinyl timing errors are compared to CDs? Do you refute that? And does it bother you just as much when hi-fi writers blather on about the audibility of jitter? Anyway, I did not actually hear the pitch errors, but I definitely noticed the LP ticks and pops. That totally ruined the listening experience for me!

--Ethan

The files that are on the CD-R. You can't extract them, convert to mp3 and put them up so others can have a listen?

Quote:

Quote:
if you put up your files at the site I listed

What files? I don't have any files for this. The files being discussed were Mikey's, and kindly sent to me by John Atkinson on a CDR. Perhaps you should ask him to send you a CDR too.

--Ethan

Quote:
I'm quite certain that Stephen Mejias warned you to stop insulting me at the risk of being banned permanently. Stephen?

Stephen?

Quote:
The files that are on the CD-R. You can't extract them, convert to mp3 and put them up so others can have a listen?

Well, I guess I could do that but I'm not sure of the value. I'm not willing to host ~120 MB times some unknown number of downloads on my site. And MP3 files are lossy compressed, so any fine details might be hidden. And besides, I'd much rather invite you here for a visit in person so I can see if you can tell which file that I pick is playing.

So email me from my site to set it up, and come on down any time!

--Ethan