| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
I was talkin' 'bout you, amigo.
I think there's joy that can be found in Cerwin Vegas!
With the "Stunning Stocking" tweak, of course.
Kait..what were those tweak suggestions of yours? something about the picture and freezer... im not being a dick, DaDa, im being serious. I will print it out this time, I promise.
I am drunk and feeling tweaky
How's Tweaky doing? I dated her once. She did too much crank.
I am convinced these articles are not for me, as someone (I don't recall who) asked for them
To put just a little more wood on the fire, I will be the first to list my humble equipment, and mention some of my tweaks.
TT:
Luxman PD121 w/ Fidelity Research FR54 arm, Denon DL103 Pick-up, Platter Matter, Nagaoka RC-410 record clamp. The TT itself is heavily damped inside, as 7lbs of damping material has been added into the hollow spaces. The TT is isolated from the shelf with two "sausages" of soft gel to make it "float". The arm has been equipped with Moerch Silver Litz. The base has been damped and isolated from the deck. The DL103 has been isolated from the headshell with a piece of damping foam. The stylus has been filed, so that most of the unnecessary material of the tip is gone. New Audio Note IC from TT to phono stage is planned in the near future. Ferrite ring on power cable.
CD/DVD-player:
Thule Spirit DVA150B digit II (24/192). Fully balanced. The CDP has been isolated from the shelf with Nano Pads (Sticky gel-like rubber). The cover of the transport has been damped. IC is Vincent High End XLR (shielded). Power cable is Vincent High End (earthed).
Amp:
Thule Spirit IA150B (Fully balanced) (Measured S/N ratio: 117dB). Isolated from the shelf with foam rubber. Power cable is Vincent High End.
MC/phono stage:
Holfi Vitalus. IC is Tara Labs RSC Axiom. Ferrite ring on power cable.
Speakers:
Dynaudio DM2/7. Standing on marble slabs, and isolated from these with Nano Pads. Marble slab is isolated from underlying material with mouse pad foam rubber. Cables: Supra Ply 3.4/S.
Subwoofer:
Audio Pro Egosub (150W). Isolated from the floor with special foam, and lifted 9" off the floor. Y-Cable is Hama HTL. I'm planning to replace that with a Supra cable soon. Also planning to have a heavy power cable mounted in the near future.
The speakers and the subwoofer have around 13 lbs of weight on top of them.
DIY bass traps in all 4 corners of the listening room. Diffraction and damping material behind/to the sides of the speakers.
Reef knot tweak under test on IC from CDP to AMP.
My room is 16' x 12' x 7', fairly heavily damped, with hand knitted carpets almost all over the floor, lots of furniture and plants. Listening distance is 2/3rds into the room with ear height slightly below tweeters. Speakers along short wall.
The power goes through a 3 x 15AWG wire, with 13 Amp fuses in the box.
I guess that's about it
Oh, I almost forgot: I am experimenting with an added (reverse) magnet behind my tweeters!
Hmmmmmmmmm.........
It has already been explained to you before Buddha, when you went on the "insistence" path some time ago.
It is irrelevant what Hi Fi equipment we are listening to, and working with, at any given time. Our equipment changes, because we have to try different equipment, because we have to see if our techniques work with all manner of different equipment. Listing ONE set of equipment, which is being used on ONE specific day, of ONE specific month, of ONE specific year, in ONE specific listening environment is pointless - just in order to satisfy someone's else's demands. Just to satisfy someone who has thought up a way they think they can 'score' points if they keep insisting, over and over again !!
For example. If we have a technique for 'treating' transformers, then that technique has to be assessed on numerous transformers in numerous types of equipment and be seen (be heard)
to be effective generally and not just on one particular set of equipment !!
The WHOLE point of so called 'tweaks' (or techniques) for improving sound is that they should be effective in NUMEROUS and completely DIFFERENT locations, using DIFFERENT equipment, listening to DIFFERENT music, being listened to by DIFFERENT people, at DIFFERENT times !!!!!!!!!!!
But you know all this Buddha, I have told you this before !!!!!!!!!!!!!
My description of our work schedule hardly points to people who "don't actually have any gear" !!!!!!!!!
As Jan says :-
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
Context, Mr. Mejias?
Some kinda "tone", eh?
I'm going to assume a personal email to Buddha will be going out in the AM. Yes?
Or, as you did with me, you might address this right here on the forum in public view.
And then send him an email - like you did with me.
I don't want to disappoint you, Freako, but I don't think your system or your "tweaks" are of any interest to the intentions of Boooodha!
http://theadvancedaudiophile.110mb.com/free-tweaks/index.html
The original discussion started OK but is now, unfortunately, degenerating and going in yet another, seemingly inevitable, downward spiral !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is it REALLY NOT possible for there to be a continuing intelligent discussion ?
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
I suspect it's quite possible that some folks who claim to be open minded are actually not quite as open minded as they might like to think, without mentioning any names. In order for there to be any semblance of discussion there must be more acceptance of what others say, even if there is strong disagreement. I also detect from, time to time, that folks jump to conclusions far too quickly and attack too easily in some cases. Subtlety or humor can easily be missed or misinterpreted in the heat of battle - esp. on the internet. Defensive of one's point of view is a little different from defensiveness, which is often interpreted as hostility. There are usually two sides to every story. There are ways to point out the defficiency in someone's logic or statements, if one wishes, without bashing his head in. Both sides can coexist without these constant blowups, hopefully. This IS supposed to be fun, right?
And nothing says "mature, respectful and thoughtful" like whining to the moderator. Stephen, Stephen, Stephen, Buddha's PICKING ON ME!!!!
And what a nice thread this has turned into
Being "found out" in this case means that eno-Buddha (ain't-no-Buddha?) has at last realized the truth. But glad to find I'm intelligible -- something we should all strive to be.
As for my own alleged "can't and won't", I can't see any responses to my half-dozen error-findings... and probably won't either!
clark
Yeah, haul out the heavy artillery. OoooooF!
The system is real, and has been for well over forty years. And why would anyone want to discuss, or hear me discuss, something that didn't work for me? Not only that, but my written reports of audio goings-on almost always include a variety of systems and different peoples' reactions, some of them negative. I do not shirk my duty to tell the truth.
This may surprise someone such as yourself, but folks actually come to me. I neither need to buy upfront nor arrange. Of course if it pleases me I do buy, if it's within my budget.
I'll put up $1200 or a bottle of '67 Ch. d'Yquem. Bet's on!
Oooooh! Another fusillade from the Boood's heavy artillery. Take cover everyone!
Not lately, but three (well-)paid articles in the past and numerous letters were printed.
Now back to the lies. But since Big, Big B seems always so interested in the topic, what happened was that the mod of a non-audio board got himself worked up about my views and unilaterally banned me (no Bored action). Here's my account, which y'all may enjoy:
THE REAL REASONS FOR BEING BANNED FROM OUTSIDE
1) The moderator there, like a pretentious Princeton paladin (but I repeat myself... twice), an attorney who has such a loose grasp on evidentiary principles that he must rely on hearsay reports from two vile antagonists to establish in his mind a lie about yours truly, summarily dismissed me. (Notice that Outside is not an audio board, on all of which I remain accepted as the writer I am, not the dealer this Outside moderator fantasizes me to be.)
Moreover, when a few people like Ray Kimber, Alan Kafton and Bruce Kendall wrote in defense of my legitimate status, he e-mailed at least one of them with a request (more like a demand) to withdraw his post -- this is on e-record, in my files. That's what I call, pursuit with a vengeance.
Why? Because I spoke my mind plainly and never descended into the potty-mouthedness and foulness of the folks he seems to enjoy associating most with. And you people know who you are: j thunders.
2) I've banned me myself there as well; my mental state is more composed, not seeing that filth and trash every day.
3) Besides, the invective hurled at me elsehere is at least equally ineffective:
"You nasty sneering little git!"
"You're just a fucking troll." "You are bigoted." "Pathetic." "You half-wit."
"...all the unbelievable garbage spewed out from you over the years, I would probably want to call you a FASCIST."
"Your childish mocking opinion."
Back to the Brooder:
Looks like a bad case of ----- envy. The Boo-hoodha is absolutely green with it!
For the record, I have always disclosed the system on which I audition things -- I just never write about how something sounds on mine.
clark
I thought so. It hasn't always worked out that way.
So you think I just missed the subtle humor in ...
If I cared enough I'd post that picture of DeNiro and Lewis you like so much.
I see you missed the "context".
Oh, well, at least you didn't whine about wanting dup back.
Best wishes...
As expected, a perfect three for three.
I get you.
And as expected from you !!!!!
And this is AFTER I had given a good, and intelligent explanation why it would be meaningless (because it would add nothing whatsoever to the discussion) to list any items of equipment being used at any one particular time, when such information might then be completely out of date within two weeks !!!! I will repeat again. It would be pointless, using the same equipment, for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years, when researching numerous techniques for improving sound, when the whole idea of 'such techniques' is for other people to improve THEIR sound, using THEIR own and different equipment, listening to THEIR own and different choice of music, in THEIR own and different listening environment !!!
As I have asked. Does a discussion really HAVE to degenerate so ? Is it REALLY me "not listing any equipment we might be using at any given time" the reason for the downward spiral of the discussion.?? Are you suggesting, Buddha, that the discussion just cannot go forward until that equipment is named, OR, could it possibly be because of some OTHER reason ?
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
*Yawn* at least you kept the length of your post and number of !!!!!!!!!!!!!! down to a minimum this time. I realy don't see the problem with listing of equipment but some people DO make an issue about it on and on and on when asked to describe it.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Is my polite way of showing exasperation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.
If I were you I'd think seriously about getting your money back. You appear to be at least two paradigms behind the power curve.
I thought you created tweaks that treat the listening environment and not the gear, May.
Does the Magic Paper Clip or the Coffee Table Creamer now affect the gear?
Remember, you are all about enhancing the sound that is already in the room.
Comparing lots of gear, eh? Honestly?
Any variation between gear for your tweaks?
Very good point.
The Synergistics' site seems to go in this direction, especially when it refers to tempering to a specific hardness.
Remember, I was asking Geoff what he thought.
I understand that your hypothesis of operation is that if there is no listener there is no change in the sound
Are there Belt devices that are universal (they affect everyone) and others that are not?
As a gay friend of mine once commented, "If it was a choice, like ice cream, don't you think I would have chosen vanilla?"
Yes and no.
No individual needs to experience everything for that thing to be true. Most of what we know and learn comes from others. This is why a discussion and sharing of ideas has value.
You are right however in that we learn some things by experiencing.
I'm not willing to tie up $3,000.00 for a trial of the Acoustic ART products and, as I previously explained, I feel it is unfair to Synergistics to expect them to send me the product for experimentation when it is exceedingly unlikely that I will buy it. The reason it is unlikely is that for this kind of money the improvement of sound would have to be spectacular.
Have you tried the Acoustic ART products?
Has anyone here other than Mr. Atkinson, Mr. Serinus and clarkjohnson?
Very cool.
Not at all.
You provide a nice free list of things that can be tried on your website. Also, your offer of free samples is generous.
The mere fact that you also sell products does not make the offer any less gracious - it is offered without strings and lets people experiment and try.
Yes, I have. Not only tried it but... I was more than impressed enough to buy the full system. I have heard exactly what "$3,000" worth of fiberglass room treatment does to my sound. It's not pretty. The acoustic art is pretty. I now consider it an essential ingredient of any good system, and wouldn't think about listening to my system any longer without it. If I had put the same money into a component upgrade, I know it would have not brought the same joy. If you believe that most of what we learn comes from others, then maybe when I have some time, I'll post a review of my acoustic art kit here. Which, I don't know, might help put things in better perspective.
Knowing something about a reviewer's or developer's system tells one something about what she/he finds important in reproduced sound and how he/she is going about getting this sound.
It also can provide a common ground starting point if one is particularly familiar with the equipment or type of equipment.
In the context of "tweak development" I'm not sure it matters, especially in May's case as Belt devices change the listener. Perhaps there should be an MMPI posted for the Belts and for each of us to see if we are compatible with their products.
I do find odd however that the three asked about their systems will not say what they are currently listening to as a reference. What's the harm in disclosing?
(And yes, I will tell you what I have but I don't think anyone cares).
So list your equipment. It might help put things in better perspective for me.
And I don't think anyone listing their equipment in this context should be necessary. Listing equipment is useful if you're trying to decide whether the system someone else has is as good as what you have based on your own personal biases. Isn't that essentially what we all do when we read a reviewer's reference components list? Yes, I might find I prefer AD as a reveiwer and his writing and thus his system coincides with my priorities but, if I've not heard his specific pre amplifier, what does it all matter unless I'm considering buying that particular pre amplifier? If you've not heard "X" amplifier but only read about someone else's reaction to it, you are operating with third hand information channelled through what that reviewer thought was important. This is at the heart of Stereophile's Recommended Components listings, trust your ears and not ours.
I doubt all but a very few have actually heard my amplifiers and certainly no one but those I've invivited into my home have heard exactly how my amplifiers perform with the modifications I've added and only then in the conext of the rest of the system I've assembled (tweaks and adjustments included) and in my room. So what's the point of listing what I use? Just to have someone decide they don't like my choice and their own is better? I like it, that's all you need to know from an individual.
The Jimmy Hughes article I mentioned stirred a lot of controversy not because of what he said but because, I suspect, of what he said it about. He was using a Yamaha A400 integrated amplifier and claimed to be hearing the best sound he had ever achieved in his room. Now, I've sold the Yamaha 400 amplifier and while not terrible I know of no one I was working with who believed it capable of the best sound possible. None of us would have even thought of comparing it to our top components after hearing it in lesser comparisons. In a world where higher prices are expected to provide audible gains what would be the effect of a $400 integrated amplifier besting the best?
Consider now, what if someone here had read that article and duplicated JH's experiment? Quite poissibly they might still feel their A400 was producing sound quality that exceded most other products at any price. Who would believe them when they saw an inexpensive, low powered, twenty five year old, mass market amplifier in a system? As Freako said, he would be upset after spending $8k on his components. Would he likely believe a A400 amp to be worthy of such praise? Probably not. Then everything else that person said would be placed in the context of their thinking a cheap Japanese amplifer from the 1980's is better than what I own.
How does that produce anything other than (mostly ego driven) dismissal amongst the participants of this thread?
As May has said many times when the demand has been used over and over as a sledgehammer (and by one individual), this is simply a dodge to stop discussion not to advance it.
Yes, transparency is a good thing. Especially from manufacturers and "reviewers."
Watch and see who is able to disclose their audio equipment in a hobby whose foundation is audio equipment.
Ethan listed his gear....and the same sales-people who now continue to refuse to disclose their equipment savaged him for having a piece of gear they did not consider adequately revealing.
Criticize, but not disclose. Yeah, that's credible.
Booodha!, why not just stay on topic?
Read the title to this thread. It is not, "I'm revealing what components I own just to please Buddha".
Stay on topic or you loose all of your "credibility".
Jan, look at the header above your post....what's it say?
"Controversial Discussions."
I'd say "reviewers" and sales people who are unwilling to discuss their sonic references on an audio gear forum would fit the description.
That statement comports well with my own experience. For instance, sending a piece of gear out to be upgraded (or modded) has never IMO given my system the boost that my own efforts at tweaking (which long ago I began calling "fine tuning") provide.
When I mess around with my car the same way, are there people screaming NO NO NO!?
And when I pour my wine into differently-shaped glasses and detect noticeable differences, am I required to provide "proof" to skeptics?
Amid their din however lies this constant, pleasant truth: I am enjoying my system, my car and my wine better with (usually) minimal investment.
clark
That statement comports well with my own experience. For instance, sending a piece of gear out to be upgraded (or modded) has never IMO given my system the boost that my own efforts at tweaking (which long ago I began calling "fine tuning") provide.
When I mess around with my car the same way, are there people screaming NO NO NO!?
When I pour my wine into differently-shaped glasses and detect noticeable differences, am I required to provide "proof" to skeptics?
Amid their din of denial however lies this constant, pleasant truth: I am enjoying my system, my car and my wine far better with (usually) minimal investment.
clark
Then you would be wrong.
Just what will a listing of components accomplish in your view? Particularly from someone who might have numerous components which could be configured in absurdly high numbers of ways. Have you heard each component they might own in order to discern what you think of that component? In each system configuration?
Why do you want this so badly that you have been on this binge now for several years and always in threads which deal with untraditional thinking? Why do you only demand this of those members who are on the opposite side of the topic from you? What other reason could there be than it's just another naysayer demand (DBT's, ABX's, measurements, more measurements, specific measurements one individual demands, etc, etc, etc.) that stalls conversation on the real topic of the thread?
You been told "no" repeatedly, why persist? Why can't you accept that answer and move on with a discussion of the topic? Why? And, while we're on "why", why is it every weekend - every weekend! - during such threads you begin to insult every person who disagrees with you? What is it that gets into you or that you get into that makes you do this every time?
I guess you didn't get the memo, either. Color me shocked. Knowledge of the brand names of the components is by no means any help in establishing the level of sound quality of the system. So you think all speakers sound the same in all systems and all rooms? I guess there are no audiophiles nearby, so you could test my hypothesis? Have you never been to an audio show in your life?
Strictly a Strawman Argument. One for the ages. How would you know what a system sounds like unless you had ALL the components in the system and ALL the tweaks and had an identical room, were not all thumbs?...well, you see where I'm going with this....
Good one! Yuk, yuk, yuk.
All three have answered already, numerous times. Don't be such a troll.
Don't be shy, if it will make you fell better knock yourself out.
I think some people might be scared that others will find their systems inferiour, which is why I listed my inferiour system. (Which btw provides lots of joy)
If not, you haven't tweaked it yet and, no, careful waxing is not a tweak
Just about everything that is an auto tweak is controversial, from oiled air filters, to nitrogen fill in tires, etc. (A new cam, rockers, a blower etc. is not a tweak but a mod.)
Nope. Buy and enjoy what you want. But please try to describe your experience and why you think it is happening when asked.
The expectations of manufacturers of tweaks are different however. I do expect that they provide a good description of what a product does and how it does it. "Trust me" doesn't get one very far in this context. (But a solid, no questions money-back trial period goes a good way.)
On the topic of glasses, Reidel at least used to explain the operation of its glass designs. They may still. For example, their single malt glass places the liquor on the tip of one's tongue (where sweet receptors are located) bringing out the inherent sweetness of a good whiskey.
However, unlike some sellers of audio tweaks, Reidel never claimed that their glasses converted the experience of drinking a $13/bottle Shiraz into a $90/bottle experience.
Cool!
It looks great in the pictures.
Exceedingly impressive.
I'd like this and would appreciate your effort in doing so.
You think Clark would reveal which wines and which glasses, or is that top secret, as well?
I wonder if he had a new glass in a box waiting to be opened, he may have already noticed its effect?
I fully agree and don't claim otherwise. I am not stating anything to the contrary.
Rather, knowledge of reviewers systems can provide context, just as knowing what music they are using. As I stated, it "tells one something about what she/he finds important in reproduced sound." For example, when a listener of a single driver speaker, low powered amp uses the term "slam" he means something different than someone listening to big Wilson's powered by monstrous SS monoblocks.
However, as stated "In the context of 'tweak development' I'm not sure it matters, especially in May's case as Belt devices change the listener." It might if a tweak distributor is stating that the tweak is good at improving a specific characteristic.
Sorry to have offended. I was just making the observation that it seems to be an odd subject on which to exhibit such sensitivity - especially by those heavily involved with audio.
I am curious however. Post or PM me the links to previous disclosures and I will be happy to rely on these.
This productively moves the discussion forward exactly how?
Geoff, I have been very respectful of your ideas and statements. Knock it off or I will tell Stephen on you!
The expectations of manufacturers of tweaks are different however. I do expect that they provide a good description of what a product does and how it does it. "Trust me" doesn't get one very far in this context. (But a solid, no questions money-back trial period goes a good way.)
Huh!!?? I'm just curious, do you live in a shack in the boondocks somewhere? Who doesn't give a 30 day money back trial period? Can you give even one example? I thought not.
"Trust me?" Noone says that either. You need to get out more. Are you making this up as you go?
"No Questions?" Ha Ha! Do you mean like, "Why are you trying to return this tweak and get your money back, you cheap bastard!?"
Agreed, so why does needing to know brand names figure so prominently in things like being able to hear differences between cables, or the presence of a tweak?
You are quite comfortable with the notion that people need to know all the parameters present for evaluating the performance of a tweak, but comfortable again in stating that knowing brand names is not important.
Your comment promotes the importance of blind listening, Geoff.
Someone piss in your Wheaties this morning?
I just pointed out that money-back trial periods are good and go a long way.
That is, I'm on your side on this one.
Sheesh.
You didn't respond to this. Since you feel it is not being a troll to post the same demand or the same insult a thousand times over, maybe I'll just post this each time you ignore it until you decide to move on with the topic of the thread.
Just what will a listing of components accomplish in your view? Particularly from someone who might have numerous components which could be configured in absurdly high numbers of ways. Have you heard each component they might own in order to discern what you think of that component? In each system configuration?
Why do you want this so badly that you have been on this binge now for several years and always in threads which deal with untraditional thinking? Why do you only demand this of those members who are on the opposite side of the topic from you? What other reason could there be than it's just another naysayer demand (DBT's, ABX's, measurements, more measurements, specific measurements one individual demands, etc, etc, etc.) that stalls conversation on the real topic of the thread?
You been told "no" repeatedly, why persist? Why can't you accept that answer and move on with a discussion of the topic? Why? And, while we're on "why", why is it every weekend - every weekend! - during such threads you begin to insult every person who disagrees with you? What is it that gets into you or that you get into that makes you do this every time?
How many times have I heard that line when I know it's not true?
This is not "controversial". Could we please get back to the main topic?
Pages