The full posting I have submitted is not being shown in it's entirety and I don't know why.   It is no longer than any other.

Regards,

May Belt,

Still having difficulty.

Regards,

May Belt.

As far as I can recall, the last time Jason reported from a Hi Fi Show, he referred to the poor sound from many of the demonstration rooms - as he has done again this time.

>>> “I had a talk with Simaudio's Lionel Goodfield about possible room interactions. Lionel explained that they had found the 12' high ceilinged room impossibly bright and prone to major echo. After many hours of experimentation, they opted for really thick black drapes, an unusual firing angle for the speakers, and ASC Tube Traps to tone things down on top. But despite everything they did, I'm afraid they couldn't totally come to term with the room.

As you'll read from several discussions of room sound in subsequent stories from AXPONA, it's clear that when exhibitors return to the Westin O'Hare next year on the last weekend of April, they'll be better prepared to address the room anomalies that are peculiar to every show I've attended in a hotel environment.” <<<

Last time he reported, Jason referred to a room which had been ‘treated’ successfully with the tiny ARC devices and this very mention triggered such abusive and aggressive responses that many of them had to be removed by John Atkinson.

Poor sound at Hi FI shows has been reported, to my knowledge and experience, for over 30 years and, in my personal opinion, it still does not seem to be being addressed with enough professionalism by the very audio industry involved.

The subject of ‘tuning’ equipment etc is being discussed elsewhere but when the very equipment can be left ‘untuned’ but with the listening room ‘treated’ and the ‘sound’ improved, this surely means that the improvements heard after ‘treatment’ must have been ALREADY presented into the room - by that very ‘untuned’ equipment !!  

Improvements in the sound described as one, more or all of the following :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

That does not mean that further ‘tuning’ of the equipment would not produce even better sound, what it means is that there is already a wealth of musical information available, in the room, which is not being heard (resolved) correctly.

Geoff Kait has listed elsewhere some of those ‘treatments’ which can provide those ‘sound improvements’:-

>>> “a plethora of new tuning devices such as Schumann frequency generators, Less-loss Blackbody, tiny little bowl acoustic resonators, a while bunch of things from Acoustic Revive including crystals for vibration control, far out stuff from Synergistic Research (Tesla Coil), extremely cool stuff from Audio Magic like their liquid filled Super Fuse and Pulse Gen ZX, both of which I own.  I won't even get into all the various and sundry CD treatments, perhaps especially the ones addressing mold release compound.

There are many ways to skin a cat but one thing is certain -  if you don't at least try to skin the cat and are listening to stock, off the shelf components and CDs you have about as much chance at discovering audio Nirvana (and hearing the ambient information of the hall as recorded) as a camel has of passing through the eye of a needle.” <<<

Geoff is also correct when he says that if one is only listening to ‘off the shelf components and CDs’, then one will never be aware of just what greater musical enjoyment is available.

Elsewhere, someone else commented :-

>>> “I want my system to reproduce what ever is on the source material with as little change from it as possible. That is what the "High Fidelity" reproduction of music is supposed to be about. Lest it be forgotten, the term High Fidelity is a shortening of the phrase, "To reproduce with a high degree of fidelity to the original".” <<<

The question I would ask them is “How do you really KNOW what exactly IS on the source (i.e CD)    If you have never tried some of the so called ‘tweaks’. ?  

Tweaks such as :-

Croygenically freezing CDs,

Applying a demagnetiser to LPs and CDs.

Applying a particular chemical to the label side of CDs and to the labels of LPs.

Marking the extreme edge of CDs with a particuclar colour.

Because once you have tried, and heard one, more or all of the following improvements from such ‘tweaks’:-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

Then you will begin to realise that you had NOT been hearing (correctly resolving) all the musical information which had been available, on the source, all the time !!

Regards,

May Belt.

PWB Electronics.

>>> “Audiophiles have been tuning and tweaking for as long as I've been aware of the "High End."” <<<

I agree, Catch 22.    I also agree that :-

>>> “It's not new, cutting edge or something that seasoned audiophiles haven't been exposed to.” <<<

So, why is not something being done, far more seriously, by audio professionals, about the poor sound reported at Hi Fi Shows if so called ‘tweaking’ has been known about and practiced for as long as you and I are aware of ?

And why, when such as Jason Victor Serinus has taken the trouble in the past to report, from Hi Fi Shows, about ‘tweaks/devices’ which CAN give improvements in the sound, is his reporting met with such attacking responses ?

Regards,

May Belt,

PWB Electronics.

>>> “But for instance, take the time to swap out some cables or other 'tweeks', allow attendees the opportunity to compare & you may accomplished something.” <<<

Wkhanna.    It has been done before.   John Atkinson commented on his experience of hearing Ted Denney’s tiny ART devices in and out of the demonstration room at a previous Hi Fi Show.

>>> “Ted offered to remove the ART devices so I could hear if the sound got worse, but it was already past the Show’s closing time on the final day. And in any case, I had heard that demonstration last year. I’ll let Shakespeare sum it up: “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” And mine, it seems.” <<<

However, wkhanna, what you are asking for is really something which exhibitors would not be too happy in doing.   Let me picture the scene for you.

At a Hi Fi Show, on set-up day you have the exhibitor (manufacturer/distributor) installing the equipment they are wishing to demonstrate to the buying public.

They set-up their (say) $10,000 turntable/CD player, their (say) $10,000 amplifier, their (say) $20,000 loudspeaker system but the sound is harsh, aggressive and shouty.  Much worse sound than they were expecting from their excellently engineered equipment !!    They therefore decide to install many of (such as) Ted Denney’s tiny ART devices around the room and listen again.   Now they have much improved sound, giving them one, more or all of the following improvements in the sound :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

What you are wanting the exhibitor (manufacturer/distributor) to do is that after the members of the public have been listening to the good sound for some time, that the ART devices are then removed.   But this would mean that the harsh, aggressive and shouty sound would be back – from the very $10,000 turntable/CD player, from the very $10,000 amplifier, from the very $20,000 loudspeaker system which the exhibitor are trying to sell !!!!!!!!!!!

The exhibitor is wanting to sell THEIR equipment and not other people’s ‘room tweaks’ !!

Regards,

May Belt,

PWB Electronics.

To post again what was deleted over the weekend during the “updating of the site platform”.
******
Hello Bill (wkhanna).
>>> “Why couldn't they set up their own room with a simple, affordable, mid-level system in order to demonstrate their product?” <<<
Ted Denney did just that !! With his Synergistic devices. Using a Bose Radio !!
See Jason Victor Serinus report from the RMAF 2013 Hi Fi Show. Synergistic Research’s HFT and FEQ Transform Bose Wave Radio
>>> “With up to 75 rooms to cover on multiple floors of the Marriott’s tower, I decided to check out Synergistic Research’s much-heralded new products before the show officially began. Inventor Ted Denney decided to dem his new babies, not with the expected megabuck system, but rather with a Bose radio. Positioned atop one of his Tranquility Bases, used as shelves on a Solid Tech rack, the radio played a vocal track by Anne Vada and Aki Fukakura as Denney demonstrated the cumulative effects of his tiny aluminum passive HFTs (High Frequency Transducers, $299/5 pack), active FEQ (Frequency Equalizer, $750), and Tranquility Bases. (In the photo, Ted is pointing to the HFT affixed to the front of the radio.)
My initial impression, with everything in the system, was that despite the radio’s glaring limitations, the room-filling size and depth of the soundstage were pretty amazing. As Denney progressively removed the 20 HFTs he had positioned around the room (including two on the front and back of the radio, and one on his Synergistic Research active FireWire cable), then the FEQ which rested on a table behind the equipment rack, and finally the Tranquility Bases, the soundstage shrank, bass lost impact, music became localized in the radio, and, most important, the listening experience became less compelling.
Activating just the Tranquility Bases made the bass more solid and the picture more dimensional. Even with just two out of the 20 HFTs returned to the front and back of the Bose radio, sonic depth increased. The more HFTs Denney added—there are five levels of treatment, each comprised of five HFTs—the larger and more room-filling the soundstage became. With everything restored, percussion seemed to be coming from all over the place, color increased, and the three-dimensional illusion was pretty uncanny. “ <<<
Then read the numerous comments after Jason’s report !! Some of the comments were so attacking and vitriolic that John Atkinson had to delete them.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/synergistic-research%E2%80%99s-hft-and-feq-transform-bose-wave-radio
Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

I use the Synergistic ART devices as an example because of what they imply. They are the devices I have seen referred to the most as improving the sound at Hi Fi Shows and the descriptions of those improvements in the sound have been provided by people who I have respect for.
Such as the description by Jason Victor Serinus :-
>>> “Even with just two out of the 20 HFTs returned to the front and back of the Bose radio, sonic depth increased. The more HFTs Denney added—there are five levels of treatment, each comprised of five HFTs—the larger and more room-filling the soundstage became. With everything restored, percussion seemed to be coming from all over the place, color increased, and the three-dimensional illusion was pretty uncanny. “ <<<
And such as the description by John Atkinson :-
>>> “When I reported in our report from the 2009 RMAF that I perceived a degradation when Ted Denney of cable manufacturer Synergistic Research removed his tiny ART devices from the room, it triggered a debate that raged not just in the comments following that report but also in our website forum right up to today. The fact is that these small metal bowls are too small to have a significant effect on the acoustics of a room at frequencies below 10kHz or so, yet they seem to improve the accuracy and stability of stereo imaging and even tighten up the sounds of bass instruments.
If such devices as the tiny Synergistic ART devices and such as the Schumann Resonance device, when introduced into the room can give the improvements in the sound which have been experienced by many people, then the implications have to be seriously considered !! “ <<<
Another example I use regularly as a general example is a description of musical information i.e.
A recording of an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World.
For example. If, after introducing such as the tiny Synergistic devices or the Schumann resonance device into the listening room (or demonstration room at a Hi Fi Show) and one can then hear improvements in the sound of one, more or all of the following :-
>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

Then this means that that further information must have been there, in the room, all the time but had not been resolved correctly !!
Back to my example of the orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World. You cannot add MORE musical score to what is already encoded on the source. So if one can hear (better resolve) more information after adding the tiny Synergistic devices or the Schumann Resonance device into the listening environment, then that further information MUST HAVE been there, in the listening environment, all the time.
Further meaning that the equipment (which had not been ‘tuned’ or ‘tweaked’ in any way) MUST have already presented that further information into the room – but that that further information had not been resolved correctly until the positioning of the tiny Synergistic devices or the Schumann resonance device in the room !!!
I have also heard various designers and manufacturers of Hi Fi equipment make exactly the same comment as Geoff Kait referred to - i.e -
>>> "Our customers feel that tweaks are a little unfair and they would rather be sure they are hearing the pure sound of the speakers and other components and cables." <<<
Do these designers and manufacturers seriously believe that their potential customers, at Hi Fi Shows, are REALLY hearing the ‘pure sound’ of the speakers and other components ?
Or, are the many reporters, visiting the Hi Fi Shows correct when they describe one room after another as having quite ‘poor’ and disappointing sound from what would normally be regarded as excellently designed and made equipment ?
What I am trying to point out is that such as the tiny Synergistic devices and the Schumann Resonance device are pointing out that there is ‘something going on’, in various listening environments which needs to be investigated far more seriously than is being done at present.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

iosiP wrote:-

>>> “So most resonators, absorbers, diffusers and the like do work, and it's rather simple to explain how.” <<<

If it IS so simple to explain how most resonators work, then would you please do so, then many researchers and interested others, who have been struggling to understand for quite some time, can then pack their bags and go home and have a well deserved rest !!

IF it is understood (as you make out), then there should be NO controversy. The fact that there IS a controversy raging over the effect of such resonators as the tiny ART devices surely points to the fact that ALL is NOT understood !!!

I would suggest that if anyone was capable of understanding, it would be such as John Atkinson. So, I would also suggest that if John A has problems in understanding, then your belief that “it is rather simple to explain how” is showing some ignorance of what is really ‘going on’ !!

To quote John A :-

>>> “When I reported in our report from the 2009 RMAF that I perceived a degradation when Ted Denney of cable manufacturer Synergistic Research removed his tiny ART devices from the room, it triggered a debate that raged not just in the comments following that report but also in our website forum right up to today. The fact is that these small metal bowls are too small to have a significant effect on the acoustics of a room at frequencies below 10kHz or so, yet they seem to improve the accuracy and stability of stereo imaging and even tighten up the sounds of bass instruments. It is a mystery, therefore, how these devices can work. I have conjectured that perhaps they have an effect on the listener’s state of mind rather than the acoustics, but if so, then I don’t comprehend how that effect can be both repeatable and demonstrable.” <<<

And on other resonator devices, John A said :-

>>> “The Shun Mook Mpingo discs divide me straight down the middle: I can’t see why they have any effect; yet I have heard them make an improvement. But while I can think of no mechanism by which the Mpingo discs can work their magic, that doesn’t mean any effect must be non-existent. I am not so arrogant as to suppose that the only things that can happen are those that I can imagine (Those who declare that, unless they can think of a mechanism for something happening, it can’t happen, are presuming knowledge of all that was known, is known, and is still to be known. That they actually possess such knowledge seems unlikely). I will not allow my skepticism to interfere with the joy I get from my music.” <<<

Are you claiming, iosiP, that ALL IS known ?

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

Michael. I think what Geoff Kait said earlier puts the really poor sound at many Hi Fi Shows in context.
>>> “I recall the head fellow at the Burmeister room, when asked if he would like to hear the latest tweak, replied in near perfect English, "We don't do tweaks here." I don't know if it's actually true or not, but I heard that the owner of Deja Vu Audio in McClean, VA, who has apparently recently dispensed used many tweaks in his showrooms, stated, "Our customers feel that tweaks are a little unfair and they would rather be sure they are hearing the pure sound of the speakers and other components and cables." <<<
The comments made by the two designers and manufacturers is, unfortunately, quite a general attitude amongst many members of the audio industry. As though using techniques to ‘deal with’ adverse conditions could be seen as a betrayal of the work they have put into their designs and expertise. When in actual fact, potential customers are NOT hearing just what wealth of information COULD BE experienced from the well designed and well made equipment.

Your comment Michael.

>>> “The audio signal has far more music content that the average audiophile listener is hearing,” <<<

I would agree with that statement but there are at LEAST four separate and yet interconnected areas which should be looked at equally and given equal consideration.

1) You have the source – the CD. If one can ‘treat’ the CD by applying a demagnetiser, or by cryogenically freezing it, or by applying a particular chemical to the label side, or by applying a colour to the outer edge and gain an improvement in the sound – an improvement in the sound described as one, more or all of the following :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

Then this means that when this further information is heard, then it MUST have been on the CD in the first place, MUST have been handled perfectly adequately by “untuned” equipment, where NO control of vibrations has taken place, and must have been introduced into the listening environment by the loudspeakers – and into a listening environment which has NOT been ‘treated’. So, Michael, improvements in the sound can be achieved without ANY ‘tuning’ taking place.

Now we come to:-
2).

You then have the equipment. This equipment can, yes, be ‘tuned’, and improvements in the sound can be heard, WITHOUT the CD being ‘treated’, WITHOUT vibration problems being ‘dealt’ with, and WITHOUT any devices being introduced into the listening room. Improvements in the sound being described as one, more or all of the following :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

3) You have the equipment. This equipment can have vibrations ‘dealt’ with, and improvements in the sound can be heard, WITHOUT the CD being ‘treated’, WITHOUT other things being ‘tuned’, and WITHOUT any devices being introduced into the listening room. Improvements in the sound being described as one, more or all of the following :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

4) You then have the listening environment. You can introduce into the listening room such as the tiny ART devices, or the Schumann Resonance device, or the Less Loss devices, or the Stein Music devices and improvements in the sound can be heard. WITHOUT the CD being ‘treated’. WITHOUT things being ‘tuned’, and WITHOUT vibration problems being ‘dealt’ with. Improvements in the sound being described as one, more or all of the following :-

>>> “Dynamics, clarity, palpable presence, excitement, definition, air, decay, extension, articulation, less distortion, louder, quieter, 3D soundstage, natural, rich, texture, warm, fast, transmission, timbre, immersion, space, tactile, engagement, propulsion, ease, etc… everything is there in abundance… everything is here.” <<<

Meaning that the further information now being ‘heard’ MUST have been there, available, in the room all the time – but not previously being resolved correctly !!!!!!!!

Concentrating on one area (tuning) as though it is not extremely important to extract as much of the information already encoded on the CD (source) as possible – means that there will still be further information available from the CD (source) which is not there for the further ‘tuning’ process to make use of.

>>> “The audio signal has far more music content that the average audiophile listener is hearing,” <<<

Again, I agree with that comment and I would add to that.

“Not only has the audio signal far more music content that the average audiophile is hearing but there is also far more musical information, having ALREADY been presented in the room by the loudspeakers, WITHOUT any ‘treatment to the CD, WITHOUT any ‘tuning’ being done, WITHOUT any vibration problems being ‘dealt with’ – but that that further musical information is just not being resolved correctly.”

Which such as the introduction of the tiny ART devices, the Less Loss devices, the Stein Music devices and the Schumann resonance device into the listening environment are showing !!!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

>>> “This quote is from a review of the Stein Music Harmoniser from positive feedback and has no relevance to how you are using it” <<<

Toledo. Yes I know where that paragraph came from.

When I have used that quote before I have acknowledged where I got it from. I have also stated, in the past, that the words in that quote were SO descriptive and actually said everything I wanted to convey that I hoped I would be forgiven for using those very words AS specifically written by someone else.

My aim is to try to convey the improvements heard when certain techniques and/or devices are used and the words are descriptive words from the English language and have every relevance when describing improvements in the sound which people have heard!!!!!!!

And I DO say “one, more or all” of those words describe the improvements in the sound which people report.
Here are some more descriptive words from the English language which can be substituted for the words used in the paragraph I quoted – if you don’t like me using the words which were printed in positive feedback online. And they will make exactly the point I have been trying to make !!

Heard a more dimensional soundstage.

Improved low end that sounded tighter and richer.

Improved smoothness, detail and bass definition, not to mention greater soundstage and three-dimentionality.

Greater sense of air and bloom seemed to surround the instruments.

More life and vibrancy.

More Natural texture.

The decay structure of individual notes was cleaner and clearer.

Stereo focus and image uniformity were improved.

The music’s dynamics, rhythm and timing were significantly improved.

Improvements in the sound as an audible decrease in glare and an increase in apparent soundstage size, both width and depth.

Improvements noted are better air, sparkle, transparency, openness, imaging, soundstaging, naturalness and musicality.

Wow, that was amazing. The soundstage has just opened up.

***********

Toledo. Are there enough descriptive words there, from the English language, to enable you not to miss the point I was trying to convey ?? Do you understand now, that that paragraph I used said everything I wanted to say but said it much quicker and extremely well ??

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

Hello Toledo,

Yes, the paragraph I quoted was from a review of the Stein Music device. So, that is a very good point from which to carry this forward.

The descriptive paragraph which the journalist used shows that AFTER the Stein Music device was introduced into the listening environment, more of the musical information was being ‘better resolved’.

Reasoning this out means that the ‘more information’ MUST HAVE ALREADY been in the room before the Stein Music device had been introduced – but not being resolved (heard) correctly before.
So, if the musical information encoded on the CD being played was of an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World, there is no way (within current audio understanding) that the Stein Music device, after being introduced into the room, could influence how the information was being extracted from the CD.

There is no way (within current audio understanding) that the Stein Music device, after being introduced into the room, could influence the audio signal travelling through the audio equipment. So, this means that the ‘more information being resolved’ AFTER the Stein Music device had been introduced into the room MUST HAVE ALREADY been there, in the room, all the time.

There is no way (within current audio understanding) that the Stein Music device can add ADDITIONAL musical score to Dvorak’s New World, over and above what was originally encoded on the CD. So, what the journalist heard (resolved better) after the Stein Music device had been introduced into the room must have been on the CD, must have already been ‘handled’ perfectly OK by the audio equipment, and must have already been presented into the room by the loudspeakers.

I will now quote another paragraph by the same journalist, from the same article in Positive Feedback Online :-

>>> “Which leads to… has Science explained everything? And is everything explainable by Science? I would say no, perhaps not… or at very least not yet. Science is an evolving discipline of knowledge… new discoveries… new ways of looking at or defining what we know and experience around us.” <<<

And, whatever I have described regarding the Stein Music device applies equally to the effect of the other devices I mentioned earlier i.e. such as the Less Loss devices, the Schumann Resonance device and the tiny ART devices when introduced into the listening room.

Again, that new paragraph I have just quoted says, in a nutshell, the words I would also wish to use. Good descriptive words from the English language.

Year after year attendees experience (and describe) poor sound at Hi Fi Shows, AND I might add, at many Hi Fi dealers showrooms.

I challenge therefore exhibitors, designers, manufacturers, importers of Hi Fi equipment, who have the belief structure of “We don’t do Tweaks” or “We want our potential customers to be sure that they are hearing the pure sound of our speakers and other components and cables." Are potential customers REALLY hearing, correctly, just what their design/equipment can produce ?

Are potential customers really hearing what Joe Blogg’s amplifier is capable of ? Are potential customers really hearing what Bill Brown’s loudspeakers are capable of ? Are potential customers really hearing what Jack Smith’s cables are capable of ?

I think not.

Again, reasoning it out. You can’t continue to blame hotel room acoustics when identical rooms, in the same hotel, can be ‘treated’ with such devices as the Stein Music devices, the Less Loss devices, the Schumann Resonance device and the tiny ART devices and GOOD sound produced – better sound than identical hotel rooms without those devices !!!!!!!!!!!

To be very simplistic. By introducing the devices I have mentioned into the listening environment you can’t (within current audio understanding) hear such as better separation of musical instruments or hear the sustain of instrument strings which you had not heard previously without that information was already present in the room and was already encoded on the CD.

You say :-

>>> “The audiophile community is influenced in large part by reviewers findings and quotes - too much IMO” <<<

I am aware that this is quite a general outlook amongst many in the world of audio but without the reviewers/audio journalists describing their listening experiences, unfortunately one is then left with such an example as one particular professional member of the world of audio, during a public talk, stated that he believed that all the different descriptions of changes in the sound from numerous so called ‘tweaks’ are merely from the different positions of a person’s ears when the listener invariably moves position during listening !!!

And again, on the particular subject of the Stein Music device reviewed in Positive Feedback Online, and in comparison with that journalist’s positive results we have the following comment after Jason Victor Serinus’ positive coverage of the Stein Music Harmonizers at a Hi Fi Show.

>>> “Interesting?

Nah. It's just another dalliance brought forth by the mentally ill for the mentally ill and which does nothing more than saddle this industry with yet further embarrassment.

That Stereophile of all publications should brand it as "intriguing" in their show report is truly sad.” <<<

Without audio journalists reporting their experiences, however unusual, we would be just left with rigid, blinkered attitudes – as though ALL is already known and there is nothing new to learn.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.