You are here

Log in or register to post comments
geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Freezing and Morphic Resonance

Michael, don't mean to jump on your thread but maybe all this stuff about freezing and cryo and Morphic Resonance are actually intimately and inexorably interrelated. And I don't mean to be messianic or mysterious but the Photos in the Freezer Tweak, you know, one that sends grown audiophiles shrieking into the cellar, demonstrates that something is going on with cryo and freezing that Is not even on the radar for Cryo Labs, NASA, DARPA, MIT, AES or advanced audiophiles. Let me explain. What the Photos in the Freezer Tweak demonstrates is that it is NOT the temperature per sec that produces the effect of improving the sound. The effect of the PITF Tweak is heard immediately, even before the photos have a chance to reach -20 F. There is some evidence that the PITF Tweak will work at great distances, another hint that perhaps temperatures per se are not the answer, at least not the only answer. We already know from experience that freezing at normal home freezer temperatures changes the sound, no? Temperatures that are only as low as around -20 F. This in itself suggests that cryo temperatures - that are about 300 F LOWER than that - might NOT be required. It also suggests that perhaps it is not temperature per se that is involved in whatever is happening to the CD. Try freezing an audio cassette sometime. The sound of a cassette is also changed by freezing, yet the explanations that apply to freezing CDs don't seem to apply to cassettes, if you see what I'm driving at. I have asked this before and I ll ask again, if cryo temperatures are so important in achieving the max effect why hasn't someone thought to offer liquid Hydrogen Cryo treatment. Liquid Hydrogen would produce much lower temperatures than liquid Nitrogen? Next up, let's discuss what happens when you freeze a book, OK? I know, WTF, right?

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Okie dokie

Hi Geoff

I see where your going thanks.

To me it makes perfect sense that a cassette would change in sound by freezing it. Had it happen, and also had it happen when I ran tapes as a kid. I use to be a tape runner long ago for cassette and reel to reel. I could (back then) tell if the tapes were drove in or flown in. BTW same thing happens with CD's if shipped in the cold.

BTW, I'm almost ready to do my listening test on the CD that was froozen and now for the last while has been slow baked.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

David Harper
David Harper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 14 hours ago
Joined: Aug 7 2014 - 2:23pm
How and why?

the reason the sound changes after freezing, or changing the surface, or coloring the edge of the disc,or applying a chemical to the cables is because you imagine it did.
Its like when Christians are convinced that God is in control of their lives.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
takes a lot more

David, to be honest it takes a lot more imagination and wishful thinking to believe heavy over built expensive audio products out do the simple ones, than it does to do listening tests on physical changes.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Been on vacation, did I miss something?

Wasn't someone supposed to write about his listening tests of untreated vs. fully-treated CDs?
I undersatnd the "much-improved" CD got back to the owner... And the conclusions are?

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
dynamic thread

Hi Costin

That was on the dynamic range thread with Bill & Dan.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Yep, except that Bill provided no results

And I was thinking that from August 1 to August 9 there would be time to write at least "it shines" od "it sucks".

David Harper
David Harper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 14 hours ago
Joined: Aug 7 2014 - 2:23pm
listening tests

Michael, yes,I agree. and I should have begun my post with "IMO" The problem is, listening tests are so subjective as to render their conclusions highly suspect. I was an audiophile thirty years ago. At that time, a group of audiophiles were told they were listening to 20 thousand dollars worth of stereo equipment,(Mark Levinson,Linn-Sondek,etc.) after they listened, they all proceeded to bloviate at length on the sonic excellence and transparency.
It was then revealed to them that they had actually been listening to a 200 dollar Pioneer receiver and a
100 dollar belt-driven Kenwood turntable. They were furious. I believe it was Julian Hirsch who contrived this,
but I'm not sure, it was a long time ago.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Oopsy Daisy!

Double post. Disregard.

GK
Machina Dramatica

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Ah, the old religion ploy. Well played.
David Harper wrote:

the reason the sound changes after freezing, or changing the surface, or coloring the edge of the disc,or applying a chemical to the cables is because you imagine it did.
Its like when Christians are convinced that God is in control of their lives.

I actually wouldn't be very surprised if a well set up Pioneer system could outperform a generic high end set up.
As far as being fooled goes it does happen. No surprise there. We observe our surroundings, our reality through our senses, that is all we have to go on, no? We guage a system's performance on what we hear and compare it to some ideal top notch sound we have in our heads somewhere, maybe a memory of a truly top notch system, who knows. Perhaps a false ideal of what we *imagine* a great system should sound like. Are we not men? We are Devo.

If Audio Nirvana did not exist Man would have to invent it. - old audiophile expression

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
same page

Hi David

Well we are on the same page (I think) than. I don't buy into the ladder climb of high end audio. I did, and loaded up 5 stores worth of it. I do believe high end started to go in a good direction until it hit the wall in the 90's. That wall being components at any cost (based on marketing) and loosing sight of what makes a system sound good. Now I see exactly what you are describing and honestly I'm loving audio systems now because the mass production world has come so far and are building some fantastic sounding products. Products that cost almost nothing and when setup seriously considering the whole of a system, sound like a dream. If you go here http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ you'll see what I'm talking about and a whole different breed of hobbyist.

The great sounding simple system has always been there but audiophiles tend to chase something that isn't as real as they have been led to believe, or they jumped in without learning some of the fundamentals, that being you have to make all parts equal.

As far as hearing differences though that really isn't that hard to do and anyone who has spent time and continues to practice listening can tell differences and this goes way beyond taste. Taste is tuning into once you have found it and know how to control your system. Problem I would say is 95% of the audiophiles have never found it, and most look in the wrong places.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Yes Michael, you nailed it

How many "high-end" products are just repackaged mass-market stock? How far can this scam go, if the Lexicon "OPPO in a box" fraud did almost get unnoticed? Or the (in)famous Compli player from Theta Digital (a simply repackaged OPPO - at least they removed the original case, which cannot be said about Lexicon).
Yes people buy BS based on brand but do not think that CD transports are only built by (less than a) handful of manufacturers, DAC chips by another few, and generally speaking there is a ton of standardization in the field. And this is why I only trust manufacturers that do their own research and offer proprietary solution: otherwise I would buy a $500 component and pay $2500 extra for the nice CNC-machined case and once-famous name (now owned by a joint venture from China).

David Harper
David Harper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 14 hours ago
Joined: Aug 7 2014 - 2:23pm
recording quality

my experience has been that the determining factor in how good a system sounds is the quality of the recording.
I realize you guys already knew this. A really good recording will sound great, no matter what we play it on, and
a shitty one will sound shitty even when played on 20,000 dollars worth of equipment. I just bought a Denon AVR-X1100W receiver and a Marantz UD5007 SACD/Blu-ray player. I realize they don't qualify as audiophile equipment, but I like them anyway. I bi-amped my Polk RTi4 speakers,and they never sounded this good.

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 5 days ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
David Harper wrote:
David Harper wrote:

my experience has been that the determining factor in how good a system sounds is the quality of the recording.
I realize you guys already knew this. A really good recording will sound great, no matter what we play it on, and
a shitty one will sound shitty even when played on 20,000 dollars worth of equipment.

Most of us already know this. But, not all of us.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
as people learn more

As people learn about how to make a system play more music that problem goes away greatly.

I think this year there has only been one maybe two recordings I've shelved, and those were because I was too lazy to uncover their particular set of values. I'm one of the guys Catch is talking about. I give the recordings more credit than the systems.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
warming them up

I wanted to give the latest results and conclusions from my point of view.

I've taken my time with the listening I have been doing so I can be fairly clear about my findings. I will be cautious about using freezing as part of any CD treatment (if ever). At last listen the CD that was freeze treated did not come back to life, the holes did not fill in. They might in time and I'm leaving that door open but up till now they haven't, not even with a heat up. Now with the heat treatment there was a nice result, space, warmth and dynamic range improved. The midrange came into focus more and gave a sense of "real", real in the sense of what many vinyl guys like during the best part of a side. There is a pitch correctness that happens.

As a side test, I've started to "preheat" some of my CD's now before playing them and have to say comparing a cold start to a slight heating is interesting. Is it as big as heat treating the parts? No, but still not bad. However after doing this it makes me wonder if treating might create some life expectancy problems, and that is not something I want to mess with, so my heat treatments with CD's are going to be slight.

Going through this with the different materials over the last while is making me think about what may be going on. I did a little reading on cryo again and it looks like most of the time this is used to make materials stronger. The interesting part is, on some materials the mechanical structure shrinks and on others expands. This tells me that the treatment is not a "fix all" type of thing. Temp treating needs to be looked at on a material and case by case basis. The more I thought and read a word popped into my head, thresholds. By working with materials I have become aware of the goldilocks syndrome. Materials respond accordiing to their vibratory (resonance) correctness. As with musical instruments there is a correct size, shape and conditions that gives that instrument a particular sound at that moment of being played. The same thing is going on with the materials being used in any practice that depends on vibration for it's delivery or strengh. When you think about it, there are not a lot of things in our world that don't depend on vibrations. Personally since I am on a rotating planet I can't think of anything that doesn't have movement, or tone attached to it.

This isn't anything new for this camper, and is a big part of why I question the over building of components and other parts of the audio chain. There comes a point where things are over built and problems happen that are just as bad as underbuilding. But the thing that we need to be looking at is what is too much and too little. Once this is found then the right type of treatment can be found and applied to get the best out of that material. A treatment that I believe should not limit the vibrations, but allows them to be at the perfect state for that particular setting and use.

For those of you who have been reading me and think I'm digging away at the industries choices in building products let me put your minds at ease, you bet I am and inch by inch you will one by one make the discovery too. This hobby has made products that are too heavy to fly. It has also made products that are more in line with the passing and amplifying of the audio signal that sound far better than the over built. How long will it take for the industry to move in a more correct direction? As long as it takes for the listener to try a couple of things. Things that will set them on a new path. No way around it, just the time it takes for minds to get out of the dark.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Michael, if you remember I wrote
iosiP wrote:

Technically speaking a CD is a sandwich of poly-carbonate - aluminium (or silver, or gold) - poly-carbonate- lacquer (paint). When frozen, all these different materials contract differently and due to the extreme thinness of the reflective layer I expect it to develop micro-fissures that cannot do any good in the reading process.

Of course Geoff tried to turn this into a funny thing and to avoid discussing the real problems (but doesn't he always use this method when left without an answer?).
So now you have it: what may be good for a homogeneous material (a wire or a gun barrel) is not necessarily good for a composite structure.
And what about tubes, you may ask? Well, tubes are designed to sustain temperature differentials, CDs are not!

Costin

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Lots to do around the house?
iosiP wrote:
iosiP wrote:

Technically speaking a CD is a sandwich of poly-carbonate - aluminium (or silver, or gold) - poly-carbonate- lacquer (paint). When frozen, all these different materials contract differently and due to the extreme thinness of the reflective layer I expect it to develop micro-fissures that cannot do any good in the reading process.

Of course Geoff tried to turn this into a funny thing and to avoid discussing the real problems (but doesn't he always use this method when left without an answer?).
So now you have it: what may be good for a homogeneous material (a wire or a gun barrel) is not necessarily good for a composite structure.
And what about tubes, you may ask? Well, tubes are designed to sustain temperature differentials, CDs are not!

Costin

What ever happened to evidence and proof? Say, weren't you the one who volunteered to provide electron microscope evidence of micro fissures? I'm guessing your wife must have found a lot of things for you to do around the house. Tee hee Speaking of non homogeneous things that are routinely cryo'd, how about capacitors, speaker drivers, electron tubes? The CD metal layer is a sputtered-on ultra thin, sometimes transparent layer of aluminum, gold, etc. If there were problems with expansion and contraction wouldn't the metal layer just peel off the poly layer? Lol. Are we to assume your micro fissures explanation applies to the home freezer treating of CDs, too? A big problem for the micro fissures skeptics of course is the rather simple observation that the data embedded on the metal layer is nanoscale, you know, on the order of 10-9 meters, so any "micro fissures" in either the metal layer or the polycarbonate layer would most likely produce so many errors as to shut the whole thing down before it had a chance to make any sound.

For those keeping score it's cryo naysayers 11, cryo believers 12,980.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Case by case

Hi Costin

I would say after my testing that this is without a doubt a case by case type of thing. I could also see where composites might have a much tougher time.

Geoff, I know your making for fun, but I wouldn't say 11 vs 12,980 as a blanket statement. In looking at other types of sites that talk about cryo, I'm seeing more not liking it to those who do. This may be do to a negative nature on the web in general (I don't know), but when I see someone being more serious I see that the split is closer to even or leaning toward non-cryo than it is pro-cryo.

Cryo is not a, must have / everything have, type of thing from my reading and own testing. I would even go as far to say "I'm not sure I like it on audio cables and parts period". I'm sure a lot of people might like the effect but there's something there from a listening point of view that is not sitting well with me, even on the other parts and pieces other than CD's. The more I'm listening to the other stuff I've treated I'm picking up on something that can best be described as "sterile" going on with the treatment. If I can describe this with words I would say the difference is sterile vs flowing. The non-freeze parts and pieces have more of a freedom than do the frozen goods.

I have a fresh production run of speakers coming to me soon so this will give me a chance to hear this on drivers as well. But obviously because I test this on one driver this means nothing when there are thousands of drivers out there to listen to. Blanket statements though may not work on this topic though from what I am hearing.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
A controversy the likes of which the world has never seen
michael green wrote:

Hi Costin

I would say after my testing that this is without a doubt a case by case type of thing. I could also see where composites might have a much tougher time.

Geoff, I know your making for fun, but I wouldn't say 11 vs 12,980 as a blanket statement. In looking at other types of sites that talk about cryo, I'm seeing more not liking it to those who do. This may be do to a negative nature on the web in general (I don't know), but when I see someone being more serious I see that the split is closer to even or leaning toward non-cryo than it is pro-cryo.

Cryo is not a, must have / everything have, type of thing from my reading and own testing. I would even go as far to say "I'm not sure I like it on audio cables and parts period". I'm sure a lot of people might like the effect but there's something there from a listening point of view that is not sitting well with me, even on the other parts and pieces other than CD's. The more I'm listening to the other stuff I've treated I'm picking up on something that can best be described as "sterile" going on with the treatment. If I can describe this with words I would say the difference is sterile vs flowing. The non-freeze parts and pieces have more of a freedom than do the frozen goods.

I have a fresh production run of speakers coming to me soon so this will give me a chance to hear this on drivers as well. But obviously because I test this on one driver this means nothing when there are thousands of drivers out there to listen to. Blanket statements though may not work on this topic though from what I am hearing.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Gosh, just when I thought there wouldn't be another high and audio controvery along comes cryo. You'll have to forgive me but I don't put too much stock in ANYTHING I hear people say about audio, one way or t'other. As my old boss at NASA was fond of saying, never get behind anyone 100%.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
that's why we have ears

What makes this hobby great is the listening. This is also where the proof comes in.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Geoff, you mean 11 that really tested

Vs. 12,980 that are just saying?

How comes Bill does not post his findings? Is it because he found the ultra-treated CD fared worst than the regular one, and he doesn't want to rain on your parade? Still waiting for the test results, but something tells me you'll dismiss them as being just a one man's test. Obviously, there is no way to make you stand to reason: you won't accept the truth even if i hit you with a hammer. Now may I ask you to provide some "scientific" facts from those who tested the cryo-ed CDs and liked them?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Bill doesn't want to hurt my feelings? Interesting theory...
iosiP wrote:

Vs. 12,980 that are just saying?

How comes Bill does not post his findings? Is it because he found the ultra-treated CD fared worst than the regular one, and he doesn't want to rain on your parade? Still waiting for the test results, but something tells me you'll dismiss them as being just a one man's test. Obviously, there is no way to make you stand to reason: you won't accept the truth even if i hit you with a hammer. Now may I ask you to provide some "scientific" facts from those who tested the cryo-ed CDs and liked them?

Bill doesn't want to rain on my parade? That's a weird theory coming from the person who is supposed to provide electron microscope evidence of micro fissures. All talk, no walk. I hate to judge too hastily but it certainly appears Bill is a lot like you, he'd rather pontificate from the comfort of his easy chair than actually get his hands dirty. As for micro fissures I just showed you that they are much too big to be the explanation for CDs. In fact, they are a MILLION TIMES TOO BIG! HEL-LOOO!

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Why argue if you don't know?

The decoder/interpolator in a CD player can cope with gaps as large as 1 - 2mm (see the Pierre Verany test CD). Yes there is strong error correction, redundancy and the like, but at some point the interpolator will kick in and replace missing data with "guesstimates", which - guess what? - results in exactly the feeling that Michel, me and others had. Sure, there are people who would mistake this for "clarity" and "resolution", but then that's their business.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Is listening actually proof?
michael green wrote:

What makes this hobby great is the listening. This is also where the proof comes in.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

It's a bit of a sticky wicket to make the general statement that listening is proof. The reason I say that is because that is exactly what The Amazing Randi says about high end audio controversies, that listening is proof. Controversies like the Intelligent Chip and expensive high end cables like the PEAR cables. The Amazing Randi offered $1 Million dollars if anyone could pass a controlled double blind listening test for these audiophile things. The presumption of course being that audiophiles get hornswaggled by charlatans who prey on naive young hobbyists, or that all cables sound the same, or fill in the blank. So when some poor schmuck doesn't pass the Million Dollar Challenge the presumption is that, well, the listener failed to hear it so it doesn't work or the expensive cables are not any better than Monster Cables. See the problem with listening being the proof? I WOULD be comfortable with saying listening is EVIDENCE but not PROOF. Like your experience with cryo and freezing. It's another data point, like anyone's, nothing's less and nothing more. It is evidence, but not proof. Everyone can't be right, otherwise we would all hear and report the same thing. Things are far more complicated. There are differences in hearing, differences in systems, people sometimes just don't follow directions. And sometimes there are hidden or not so hidden agendas. Like The Amazing Randi, who sees a spoon bender behind every tree.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
don't know, but I do know

Don't know who The Amazing Randi is, but I do know what an expert listener is, what they listen for, how they listen to, and very important who they listen with. An expert at listening will spot things that the average guy will never pick up on or know what to look for, for example space. An expert can see and hear when something is being squeezed, omitted or shifted in pitch. They know the difference between assumed detail and layering info, between hollow and halo. A good listener knows how to take a recording and place themselves in side of it, or make the necessary adjustments to shape the soundstage to any desired placement.

I can tell if someone is an expert or not by the way they talk about music. There are certain things that we pick up along the way that can only be experienced, and when experienced comes the knowledge and wisdom. Someone who is creating chatter may have the power to persuade, but that doesn't make him or her a refined listener.

One of the things that tips me off to someone who can give proof is if I see them able to shape their system or any system around a recording. To me they're not an expert unless they have gotten to the place where they realize all recordings are different and they have learned how to get the most out of each. This takes experience and knowing, and the guy who sits there saying his system can tell a good or bad recording is not one I would use as someone to produce proof.

Proof to an expert means something completely different than audiophile club proof, or reviewer indorsement proof, or measuring proof. Proof in the audio world is not what is talked about but what can be repeated. It's not something said it's something done and knowing how to do.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
I'll be waiting by the phone
iosiP wrote:

The decoder/interpolator in a CD player can cope with gaps as large as 1 - 2mm (see the Pierre Verany test CD). Yes there is strong error correction, redundancy and the like, but at some point the interpolator will kick in and replace missing data with "guesstimates", which - guess what? - results in exactly the feeling that Michel, me and others had. Sure, there are people who would mistake this for "clarity" and "resolution", but then that's their business.

Next you're going to tell me that the home freezer causes micro fissures, and that you and Michael are positive because you both hear it. Lots of laughs!

Still no electron microscope images, eh? We're waiting....zzzzzzzzzzzz

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
don't know, but I do know

>>> “Don't know who The Amazing Randi is” <<<

Where on earth have you been, Michael ? In a different section you refer to Stereophile ‘saying this’, ‘saying that’, but you seem to have missed the whole saga around Michael Fremer’s bout with James Randi. You say you are involved in ‘treating’ cables but you seem to have missed the very ‘cable’ controversy between Michael and James Randi. Surely knowing what is ‘going on’ in the long running ‘cables sound different’ controversy is quite essential ?

And, Michael Fremer’s brush with James Randi is only one of many audio related matters involving James Randi !! So, for you not to know who James Randi is, is remarkable given that you say you have been involved in the audio industry for very many years.

>>> “but I do know what an expert listener is, what they listen for, how they listen to, and very important who they listen with. An expert at listening will spot things that the average guy will never pick up on or know what to look for, for example space. An expert can see and hear when something is being squeezed, omitted or shifted in pitch. They know the difference between assumed detail and layering info, between hollow and halo.” <<<

NOW, this IS getting interesting !! Your description fits Peter and me extremely well.

>>> “I can tell if someone is an expert or not by the way they talk about music. There are certain things that we pick up along the way that can only be experienced, and when experienced comes the knowledge and wisdom. Someone who is creating chatter may have the power to persuade, but that doesn't make him or her a refined listener.” <<<

Ditto !!

Experts in ‘listening’, in my book, are also people who when they ‘spot’ anomalies, i.e things which happen with ‘sound’ and which need investigating because their very presence challenge conventional electronic and acoustic theories, they HAVE to investigate. They actually can’t “move on” because ‘anomalies’ show that ‘there is something going on’ which affects ‘sound’ !! AND, if one is seriously and professionally involved in audio, then ANYTHING which affects sound requires investigating. When I questioned you about ‘anomalies’, and how you investigate such happenings, your general answer was :-

>>> “and the "why it happened" doesn't matter as much as tuning and moving on, but in each case we do talk about what happened and explore the technical and explanations to the degree the listener likes us to.” <<<

OF COURSE the “why it happened” DOES matter. If you don’t explore and try to find explanations as to why anomalies appear, how on earth can one progress with knowing what one is doing ?
What governs “talking about” and “exploring explanations” should NOT be confined to “the degree the listener likes us to” but should be irrespective of what the listener likes and should be an intense desire to ‘get to the bottom of what is going on ”.

A GOOD listener and designer of audio equipment would NEVER say that they do something “to a degree the listener likes us to “ !!!!!!

>>> “To me they're not an expert unless they have gotten to the place where they realize all recordings are different and they have learned how to get the most out of each. This takes experience and knowing, and the guy who sits there saying his system can tell a good or bad recording is not one I would use as someone to produce proof.” <<<

I agree. And I agree with your general outlook that the majority of people are not getting (hearing) just what their Hi Fi system is capable of producing – whoever designed and made it and however much it cost.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
a little too busy

May said

"Where on earth have you been, Michael ? In a different section you refer to Stereophile ‘saying this’, ‘saying that’, but you seem to have missed the whole saga around Michael Fremer’s bout with James Randi. You say you are involved in ‘treating’ cables but you seem to have missed the very ‘cable’ controversy between Michael and James Randi. Surely knowing what is ‘going on’ in the long running ‘cables sound different’ controversy is quite essential ?"

mg

Essential for who? I've been busy tuning.

May

And, Michael Fremer’s brush with James Randi is only one of many audio related matters involving James Randi !! So, for you not to know who James Randi is, is remarkable given that you say you have been involved in the audio industry for very many years.

mg

Oops! I'm not really up on audiophile gossip and debates I'm afraid. I do what I do and that pretty much fills my time.

May

NOW, this IS getting interesting !! Your description fits Peter and me extremely well.

mg

groovy! let's put that to the test

May

Experts in ‘listening’, in my book, are also people who when they ‘spot’ anomalies, i.e things which happen with ‘sound’ and which need investigating because their very presence challenge conventional electronic and acoustic theories, they HAVE to investigate. They actually can’t “move on” because ‘anomalies’ show that ‘there is something going on’ which affects ‘sound’ !! AND, if one is seriously and professionally involved in audio, then ANYTHING which affects sound requires investigating. When I questioned you about ‘anomalies’, and how you investigate such happenings, your general answer was :-

>>> “and the "why it happened" doesn't matter as much as tuning and moving on, but in each case we do talk about what happened and explore the technical and explanations to the degree the listener likes us to.” <<<

mg

Haven't posted much on TuneLand have you LOL.

May

OF COURSE the “why it happened” DOES matter. If you don’t explore and try to find explanations as to why anomalies appear, how on earth can one progress with knowing what one is doing ?
What governs “talking about” and “exploring explanations” should NOT be confined to “the degree the listener likes us to” but should be irrespective of what the listener likes and should be an intense desire to ‘get to the bottom of what is going on ”.

mg

May, why is it you haven't been starting any threads on here? And I haven't once seen you reference a recording. I have a forum that references all day long and around the world. What's the name of yours and Peter's forum again? Want to see my investigating http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ and www.tuneland.info . People come from all over the place to ask questions about what we do there. Many say it's the most informative listeners site they have read, a break from the talk and more on the walk of listening.

May

A GOOD listener and designer of audio equipment would NEVER say that they do something “to a degree the listener likes us to “ !!!!!!

mg

I just did :)

Maybe you, Peter and I can do some listening together some day. Honestly May, I'm not really into audiophile ego posturing. I have my particular gifts and talents and use them to help the recording, concert and playback industry to the best of my ability. This whole jousting thing I find boring and see that it's something many of you like to do here. That's cool for you, and I'm glad you enjoy it, but it really doesn't help the guy sitting in his listening chair thinking "my cymbals are too dead, and I would like to adjust the depth on my drums 3 more feet". Or the engineer who says "I want the attack to be up front, and two more layered halos, first one full and plump and the back one dull and direct", or the hall engineer saying "my bass is lost in the first 50 feet can you make it project to the rear of the room evenly?". May, this is what I do and I do it all day or spend my time finding the answers to make it happen. If this type of approach doesn't suite you and you feel the need to say "a good listener would NEVER" it doesn't look good on you to those of us who are music makers. You guys walk around saying "clue this and that" like you have this secret that no one else has. This is so boring to the guy who knows his system and his music already and the studio hand who knows his live room forward and back. I'm a little past May Belt challenging me I would say wouldn't you? If you and Peter or Geoff or anyone wants to do testing together let me know, but if your not looking into want I do or how or why when it's there in black and white this "jousting" looks a little less than profitable. Is this as far as you want our relationship to go? Do you and Peter have some knowledge that I have been missing, well tell me. Start a thread and tell me, I'm into learning. So far I haven't seen you guys do anything that tuning can't do, but we're all ears, and as you have seen I did some of yours and Geoff's suggestions and reported on them.

So to be fair to you Peter and myself, why don't we reference a piece of music together on this forum and you share how you make it sound good and I'll do the same. This talking though is starting to make me yawn. Certainly you would like to show your listening skills for us all to see.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.

Author still TBD!

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
I liked this one

All quick, very natural, and captured on vinyl. It’s so hard to explain on paper, you’ll just have to find the records and listen for yourself (because I truly believe — honest — that writing about music is, as Martin Mull put it, like dancing about architecture).

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
You don't know what you don't know

Michael wrote,

"Do you and Peter have some knowledge that I have been missing, well tell me. Start a thread and tell me, I'm into learning. So far I haven't seen you guys do anything that tuning can't do, but we're all ears, and as you have seen I did some of yours and Geoff's suggestions and reported on them."

Of course no one has knowledge you don't have. Now you're just being silly.

Logical Fallacy No. 27: Me and my homeboys never heard of it so it doesn't exist.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

PS: Stovepiping, Stovepiping, Stovepiping, Stovepiping, yeah! Love that song.....

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
here's the thing

Hi Geoff

here's the thing

People who are designers and serious listeners should be working together not playing games. If they/we have a disagreement it should be taken up in the listening and not turned into audio circles which only turns people off not on.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Further studies

Hi Listeners

I have been taking my time with the CD treatments that are being talked about here and have come to some conclusions. Testing will go on forever but I have done enough now to point out some interesting results.

It's taken me a while to talk to some of my listening friends so I didn't come off like this is me against the world or that it was the other designers against the world. With these results I invite the reviewers and hobbyist alike to explore this with me and see if these points are infact valid.

As you have read on this thread I have found that the freezing takes away from the whole signal being played. This is fairly common in our industry so no surprise. The signal "is" the signal, and our systems, as much as we love them, do not play it all. I'm not going to rehash the posts writen earlier. Our findings are what they are. I do however want to move a little further into treating the CD's. I say CD's because I'm not actively treating vinyl.

I have brought back out my treated CD's and made new ones and put them into action. As I sit here listening something is becoming obvious to me. The CD's stock have as much music on them as they can have. If you add anything to the physical disc itself you are not going to add more music. I had to think about this as I listened.

Why did some things become seemingly more focused, but with the loss of content? The answer is really pretty simple. With the audio signal, if you add to you are taking away. I have been doing my own testing on a couple of CD's and at times if I wasn't paying attention I would swear that the sound cleaned up, but after listening more closely I would always find gaps in the recordings. This brings me to an important part. If someone has a system that is out of balance acoustically or mechanically or even electrically, they might do treatments to a CD and because of there being less content it would appear that the CD was doing more of something, but in reality the listener was hearing less, but focusing in on that less.

These additives are not adding more music at all, they are dampening what is already there. In some systems that are producing a less than life like performance it may not matter or even be a plus by cleaning up some fundimentals while cutting back on the harmonics. Not all the harmonics but the ones that are giving the size and body.

This would explain the results with the equipment creams and finishes as well. Different treatments will flavor the existing signal, mostly through dampening the resonant characters of the materials. I don't want to suggest this is bad for everyone cause most hobbyist are not making equals out of the electric, mechanic and acoustic and need to find that balance. What I'm saying though is this is being done through the taking away of the signal and not adding to it.

There is talk on here that something needs to be done with the CD's and LP's to bring out more of the signal down stream. The source already has all that it will carry, and (at least in the case of the CD) adding more reduces the amount of content, not the other way around.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 22 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Ah, the old bits is bits routine

That's weird, I suppose all the the twenty of so CD treatments must be employing the placebo effect. Instead of guessing, for good reading on CD fluids and sprays, check out Clark Johnsen's article Lotions Eleven that was published some years ago in Positive Feedback Online. I guess this has all the makings of another he said she said debate and demands for proof. In defense of CD treatments they should be evaluated one at a time and not lumped all together. Some things make you bigger some things make you small, the things that Mother gives you don't do anything at all. By the way, the cream you refer to, is that the Belt's cream? Cause of it is, that particular CD treatment is independent of the signal anywhere in the system, including in the CD player. Alas, your anti tweak stance is looking more and more like just another Strawman Argument.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Further studies

>>> “This would explain the results with the equipment creams and finishes as well. Different treatments will flavor the existing signal, mostly through dampening the resonant characters of the materials.” <<<

I have implied before that you don’t have a good workable understanding as to what ‘is going on’. I am going to imply that even more strongly now. You say that you are only talking about CDs – that you’re not including vinyl. THAT is a major problem because you seem to be ignoring anomalies – and what those anomalies are telling you – correction – should be telling you.

You say that different ‘treatments’ are ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials”. The SAME chemical applied to the label side of a CD and the SAME chemical applied to the labels of LPs give a similar improvement in the sound. How on earth can a chemical, on the labels, “flavour” the existing signal on an LP. The anomaly of this SAME effect on the sound from an LP gives you clues. CLUES which you don’t seem to want to address. To add yet another anomaly. If you have a video cassette in a PASSIVE video player, passively sitting on a shelf in your listening room – not connected to the audio system, not even connected to the AC supply, just sitting there, passively. If you apply the same chemical to the plastic video cassette case and place it back in the passive video machine, sitting passively on a shelf – you will get an identical and further improvement in the sound as you had with the ‘treated’ CD. Explain THAT with your “‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials” explanation. There IS NO signal travelling through the video cassette – it is PASSIVE.

You can apply a colour (the best colour in our opinion is purple/violet) to the outer edge of a CD and gain an improvement in the sound but you can ALSO apply the SAME colour to the edge of an LP and get an identical improvement in the sound !! A colour, added to LPs as well as CDs, cannot possibly be ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’ !! Similarly, as I have described above. You can apply the same colour to the edges of the passive plastic video cassette, in the passive video player, sitting passively on the shelf in your listening room and gain an identical improvement in the sound !!!

There IS NO signal going through the passive video cassette or through the passive video player so your explanation of ‘flavouring the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’ – no longer holds water.
Then, with the demagnetising process. This process is NOT adding something – NOT ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’. The demagnetising process is correcting something which is already adverse.

>>> “There is talk here that something needs to be done with the CD's and LP's to bring out more of the signal down stream. The source already has all that it will carry, and (at least in the case of the CD) adding more reduces the amount of content, not the other way around.” <<<

Again, Michael, applying a chemical to the label side of CDs and to the labels of LPs is NOT reducing the amount of content on the CDs or LPs !!!!!!

>>> “The CD's stock have as much music on them as they can have. If you add anything to the physical disc itself you are not going to add more music. I had to think about this as I listened.” <<<

Of course one cannot add additional musical score of Dvorak’s New World to what is already on the disc. One cannot add more violin players, or more trumpeters over and above what is already encoded on the disc. But what CAN happen is because of adverse things happening whilst spinning the discs (both LPs and CDs) we (human beings) are not able to RESOLVE correctly the ALL information that IS available on the disc !!!!!!!!!!!!! And, more of that already encoded information CAN BE resolved better with many of the treatments people have used and described over some 30 years !!

Are you actually saying to such as John Atkinson and Michael Fremer when describing the improvements they heard after demagnetising that what was happening was that ‘something’ was ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’ ?

Is that the explanation you are giving to all the many thousands of people who ‘demagnetise’ CDs, LPs, cables, etc ??

To quote Clark Johnsen from the discussion in Stereophile Forum :-

>>> “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. “ <<<

One of the many who you are trying to say that what they are all hearing is :-

The ‘flavouring’ of the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’

What I think is happening Michael is that you have dug yourself into a hole by previously STRONGLY stating that you prefer to use ‘untreated’ discs and correct any problems later by various types of ‘tuning’. You will not now be able ever to describe any ‘treatment’ YOU have found, which when applied to actual CDs, improves the sound – because that would show all who say that CDs have a problem (or problems) which need correcting to be right and to have been right all along !!

However, where we ALL agree is that people are NOT hearing (resolving) all the information available to them – either from the actual discs or from their audio equipment or from their listening environment.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
what hole?

Hi May, could you explain the hole please?

I am about being open and doing, so if there is a hole being dug you should point it out and I would be happy to explore it.

May said

"What I think is happening Michael is that you have dug yourself into a hole by previously STRONGLY stating that you prefer to use ‘untreated’ discs and correct any problems later by various types of ‘tuning’. You will not now be able ever to describe any ‘treatment’ YOU have found, which when applied to actual CDs, improves the sound – because that would show all who say that CDs have a problem (or problems) which need correcting to be right and to have been right all along !!"

mg

I for the record, I would and do love to explore things that make improvements. That's what we do. At the same time a change is not necessarily an improvement, it's a change, and when you say May, that these are improvements I don't see or hear them that way, again necessarily.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
workable understanding

May, don't let your ego get the best of you. You should get to know someone before making these types of statements.

May said

"I have implied before that you don’t have a good workable understanding as to what ‘is going on’. I am going to imply that even more strongly now. You say that you are only talking about CDs – that you’re not including vinyl. THAT is a major problem because you seem to be ignoring anomalies – and what those anomalies are telling you – correction – should be telling you.

You say that different ‘treatments’ are ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials”. The SAME chemical applied to the label side of a CD and the SAME chemical applied to the labels of LPs give a similar improvement in the sound. How on earth can a chemical, on the labels, “flavour” the existing signal on an LP. The anomaly of this SAME effect on the sound from an LP gives you clues. CLUES which you don’t seem to want to address. To add yet another anomaly. If you have a video cassette in a PASSIVE video player, passively sitting on a shelf in your listening room – not connected to the audio system, not even connected to the AC supply, just sitting there, passively. If you apply the same chemical to the plastic video cassette case and place it back in the passive video machine, sitting passively on a shelf – you will get an identical and further improvement in the sound as you had with the ‘treated’ CD. Explain THAT with your “‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials” explanation. There IS NO signal travelling through the video cassette – it is PASSIVE."

mg

Nothing is passive! I thought you & Peter knew physics? I thought you & Peter knew energy? Why would you call something passive May that is making a difference, not necessarily an improvement, but a difference to the sound? May this is something we talk about on Tuneland http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ in great detail. Again your trying to school the schooled :) sounds to me like maybe it is you and Peter who don't have the workable understanding and end up debating instead of listening and showing people how and what your listening on and to.

don't try to school someone who has a forum on these topics May, unless your prepared

If something is making a difference in the sound it is not passive, but part of the signal. I'm a little shocked by your statement of the video player being passive May. There are a lot of listeners reading this you do know? If they read you are saying something contributes to the sound and turn around and say it is passive, in the sense that it doesn't have the ability to be a part of the energy in the room or other components that looks weak. If your attempting to tell Me (anyone studied up) that treating the player with anything is making an improvement, then you need to be ability to say the specific improvement that goes beyond saying better May, this again looks weak. For example my extreme listeners wouldn't even have a "passive" video player in their rooms. They would only have things in their rooms that were being used as part of the setup. Also if the player were going to be in the room there are tons, literally tons, of ways to make it change the sound of the system. This is basic working understanding to a Tunee May.

May, you keep coming at us as if you have something new or we have not done or understand but every time you do we keep seeing that you and Peter are offering us nothing we haven't already explored. I wish you would show us something new, but it's not happening and you trying to school or tell us about these clues are things we have figured out and dealt with long ago.

We offer you the chance to show us your system, or forum, or review your product, or come listen with us, but the only thing your doing May is talking and trying to paint a picture that you guys have a higher understanding of something. If you do then show us and the rest of the world but quit talking about it, and do it.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
demagging

May said

"Of course one cannot add additional musical score of Dvorak’s New World to what is already on the disc. One cannot add more violin players, or more trumpeters over and above what is already encoded on the disc. But what CAN happen is because of adverse things happening whilst spinning the discs (both LPs and CDs) we (human beings) are not able to RESOLVE correctly the ALL information that IS available on the disc !!!!!!!!!!!!! And, more of that already encoded information CAN BE resolved better with many of the treatments people have used and described over some 30 years !!

Are you actually saying to such as John Atkinson and Michael Fremer when describing the improvements they heard after demagnetising that what was happening was that ‘something’ was ‘flavouring’ the existing signal – through dampening the resonant characteristics of the materials’ ?

Is that the explanation you are giving to all the many thousands of people who ‘demagnetise’ CDs, LPs, cables, etc ??"

mg

Why would I say that May? I demag.

I also have no problem with CD treatment if someone wants to do that. I'm only sharing my research and findings.

You also mentioned the vinyl. The only reason I am not commenting on it is I would want to redo my testing in real time as to be accurate. I wouldn't feel comfortable explaining the findings without having a setup reflecting what I am saying that I can go to for listening while writing. Vinyl is a different physical animal than a CD and I wouldn't want to mix the two.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Workable understanding

Michael. Your heading was a good one i.e “Workable understanding”.

>>> “If something is making a difference in the sound it is not passive, but part of the signal. I'm a little shocked by your statement of the video player being passive May. There are a lot of listeners reading this you do know? If they read you are saying something contributes to the sound and turn around and say it is passive,” <<<

ALL engineers call a component which is not carrying a signal a PASSIVE component. It is there, in the system, but is not carrying a signal until it is needed to. As in a component in a pre-amplifier which WOULD/COULD handle the signal from the tuner when needed to! If there is no tuner connected, then it does nothing until required to. In engineering terms – it is a PASSIVE component. The word PASSIVE differentiates from actively carrying a signal. Martin Colloms in the UK did an excellent article on PASSIVE components in audio equipment and their effect on the sound and he, like anyone else has to, had to use the word PASSIVE in order to make sure that people did not confuse components which carry the signal with components which are PASSIVE i e NO signal !!! So, the PASSIVE video player which is not carrying an audio signal is a PASSIVE item in engineering terms. However, it IS there, in the room, and therefore contributing to the problem of the ‘sound’ of the audio.

However, Michael , you are stating that the passive video player, in the room is “PART OF THE SIGNAL”. It is this word SIGNAL which you keep using which I keep reacting to. Do you mean that the passive video player is having an effect on ‘the audio SIGNAL’ travelling through the audio system ? If the passive video player is having an effect on the sound, then it is having an effect on the SOUND – not on the audio signal. Or are you saying that it IS affecting the actual audio signal travelling through the audio system ? Or are you referring to the passive video player affecting the actual audio signal because of any vibrations it could be causing by being in the room ? Or, are you referring to the ACOUSTICS of the sound in the room as THE SIGNAL ? That the passive video player is affecting the acoustics – carrying the musical information – and therefore affecting the SIGNAL (the acoustics) ?

My definition of the word PASSIVE – in the world of audio – is something not carrying an audio signal. Now, I have ALSO said repeatedly that EVERYTHING in the listening environment is a problem with regards to getting excellent sound. So, Yes, the passive video player, by just being present in the room, IS contributing to the SOUND OF THE MUSIC. I repeat – to the SOUND – i.e to the musical information !! As is the PASSIVE central heating radiator. As are the PASSIVE electric lights. As are the PASSIVE light switches. As are all the PASSIVE CD discs lined up on the storage shelves. As are the many PASSIVE remote controls belonging to various items of equipment, even though that equipment may not be in use. Quite NORMAL in the general domestic listening room !!

>>> “For example my extreme listeners wouldn't even have a "passive" video player in their rooms. They would only have things in their rooms that were being used as part of the setup. Also if the player were going to be in the room there are tons, literally tons, of ways to make it change the sound of the system. This is basic working understanding to a Tunee May.” <<<

Yes, I agree that there are tons of ways to ‘treat’ the video player to make it change the sound of the system. BUT, Michael, you have now changed your terminology to “changing the SOUND” of the system by ‘treating the video player’ – not changing the SIGNAL of the system. Will you please make your mind up. Instead of giving me a lecture on what might or might not “affect the signal”, please enlighten us on what you actually mean by the use of the word SIGNAL !! As in your “the video player is part of the signal “. Is it “part of the signal” nor isn’t it ?

>>> “school or tell us about these clues are things we have figured out and dealt with long ago” <<<

Michael, you say you have already ‘figured out’ the clues I keep referring to. So, tell us your conclusions as to how or why the Schumann Resonance device can ‘change’ the sound. How applying a certain chemical can ‘change’ the sound. How numerous and different crystals, in the listening room, can change the sound.

You also say that YOU “demag” in one sentence and, in another sentence you say “about these clues are things we have figured out and dealt with long ago”.

Did you miss the lengthy (well over 30 pages) discussion on the Stereophile Forum on the subject of demagnetising ? The whole range of discussion (with many audio professionals participating) ranged from Ethan Winer (a manufacturer of room acoustic products) who implied fraud on the manufacturer of a demagnetiser to John Atkinson and Michael Fremer who had reported HEARING the beneficial effect. No-one had a definitive answer as to WHY this treatment could change the sound. So, Michael, as you say that you have ‘figured it out and dealt with the subject long ago” perhaps you could put the whole matter to rest by telling us all YOUR “figuring out” !!

>>> “Vinyl is a different physical animal than a CD and I wouldn't want to mix the two.” <<<

Yes, they are different PHYSICAL animals but the effect of applying a chemical to BOTH is an IDENTICAL effect. So, if the effect is identical, then they ARE mixed !!!!!!!!!

The effect of applying a demagnetiser to BOTH gives a similar effect on the sound – so if the effect is identical, then they ARE mixed !!! Or, Michael, are you saying that there could be TWO different explanations for the same application and for the same result ?

So, can we get to a “Workable understanding” and we might be able to progress further.

You said earlier :-

>>> “Geoff and May. I’m really not your enemy, I'm really not.” <<<

I don’t regard you as an enemy, Michael. I also know that the things you have tried and heard improvements in the sound with, you have done from experimentation. And NOT from just reading the conventional electronic and acoustic text books either – but from observing what happens to the sound. I fully understand because Peter and I have been down exactly the same paths of discovery.

>>> “as a collective of all the things I've been able to do and be a part of I have found that there is yet another chapter to this hobby. It's the tuning part.” <<<

Yes, I understand. But what is the tuning doing ? Yes, it is altering the ‘sound’ and you would not be doing it if it did not give you the improvements in the sound you are looking for. But you are all over the place. One minute you say you are ‘tuning’ by altering the SIGNAL. The next minute you say you are ‘tuning’ by dealing with VIBRATIONS and yet more VIBRATIONS (as you keep pointing out forcibly) VIBRATIONS are everywhere. You seem to want everything to be explained by the concept of ‘dealing with vibrations’. Then you are dealing with acoustics – with your own acoustic products. That is THREE explanations for starters. On the Audio Asylum site there is someone who has probably done as many (if not even more) listening experiments as you have and HE has ‘dealing with RF’ as the explanation for most of the changes in the sound he can make. That is now FOUR different explanations for ‘changes’ to the sound. But, not one of those can explain the effect on the sound by such as the Schumann Resonance device. One of the anomalies I keep talking about, Michael. One of the clues !!!!

Which of your ‘dealing with the signal’, ‘dealing with vibrations’, dealing with ‘acoustics’ and the other person’s ‘dealing with RF’ explanations cover the fact that the Schumann Resonance device affects the SOUND ?

>>> “or tell us about these clues are things we have figured out and dealt with long ago” <<<

You say “they are things you have figured out and dealt with long ago”. Pray tell us the result of your ‘figuring out’.

>>> “May, you keep coming at us as if you have something new or we have not done or understand but every time you do we keep seeing that you and Peter are offering us nothing we haven't already explored. I wish you would show us something new, but it's not happening and you trying to school or tell us about these clues are things we have figured out and dealt with long ago.” <<<

You understand the Schumann Resonance device do you, Michael ?

You say you do !! And that I can’t tell you anything you have not already explored.

Regards,
May Belt
PWB Electronics.

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 5 days ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
I've always thought of "passive"

To mean a component that doesn't introduce a gain stage into the signal path. I've never thought of it in terms that preclude it from being IN the signal path. That would seem to suggest a tweak as opposed to a passive component.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Passive ???

>>> “I've always thought of "passive"

To mean a component that doesn't introduce a gain stage into the signal path. I've never thought of it in terms that preclude it from being IN the signal path. That would seem to suggest a tweak as opposed to a passive component.” <<<

So, Catch 22. What would you call components which are wired into the circuit of a pre-amplifier – waiting, in position, for a tuner to be connected, waiting, in position, for a CD player to be connected (when only a vinyl record player is being used) so that they are available to ‘handle’ the signal from the tuner when a tuner is connected, so that they are available to ‘handle’ the signal from a CD player when a CD player is connected ? An Active component (carrying an actual audio signal when there IS NO input to that particular component) or a Passive component – waiting patiently for something being connected so that they can do the job they have been inserted for ?

A tweak or a passive component ? A TWEAK ???????????? Surely not ?

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

Catch22
Catch22's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 5 days ago
Joined: Nov 21 2010 - 1:58pm
I see your point

I'm thinking in terms of things like passive preamps that do enter the signal path, though certainly not every part of it at all times.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
all explained on TuneLand

Hi May

Gonna have to shortcut here, sorry. All these things are explained on TuneLand http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ . As far as reading the articles, we are pretty busy working with clients and I personally only have time to read up on the stereophile debates when someone points to them and they fit into something we're doing. Keep in mind that where most companies have a few SKUs of products we have hundreds, and that keeps things pretty busy. Saying this though, when time permits I find the articles interesting, but enjoy more reading about people tuning in real time and feel that I need to make those folks the priority.

In reading this last posting of yours I didn't see anything that you haven't already said, or anything new that I need to look at. Don't mean to be dismissive but I already covered the Schumann Resonance device, and the other products that have been mentioned here.

On the passive thing. I don't look at anything as being passive that has an affect on the system. I'm not talking about a passive component as such.

May you said "You say you do !! And that I can’t tell you anything you have not already explored.". May, I wish you wouldn't do this type of thing. I understand by reading your posts that you enjoy schooling people but I wish you would turn it down a little, cause it looks and feels bad to me, and I don't want to keep rehashing my resume. I have an entire forum that covers all this stuff, and it does it in a friendly way, so as much as I like being here some of this Geoff and May spin type of stuff gets really old.

It's obvious that you and Geoff wish to be known as people with answers and that if someone else comes into play it apparently gets you guys juices flowing. But May if your going to ask questions then you need to be polite enough to look at the answers givin so the person your talking to doesn't have to keep repeating themself.

I really am trying to be patient, but things you are bringing up are old news for me and to me it feels like I'm putting you down by saying that, and I don't like feeling this way toward you or anyone. But please understand that if I say "we have covered this" I'm not saying it to hear myself talk. I'm saying it because we have. If you say you and Peter have been down the same path, I'm cool with that and can move on. I think you need to be able to do the same.

I think you and Geoff should school the people who need it, and make your points and results known the best you can, but if someone comes along who has also done these things with different results, it's a big world and is what it is. And if you and Geoff were really serious about challenging the "Tune" you would have gone to the "Tune" TuneLand and do it and not been trying to school us on here. It looks defensive to me and not a true desire to explore the things we do or say. Almost like grandstanding, instead of discusing.

What we do is simple and I'll say it again. We open up the energy and tune it in. The tools we do this with are here http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/f7-mga-roomtune-products . I'm here on stereophile to share tuning and to encourage listeners to move toward more of a variable approach to their systems. I'm not here to go off on some cosmic space adventure, or to paint pictures other than what we do and how we do it, and then invite people do it with us. You and Geoff have mention other tools and methods and I have tried them and retried some of them again here and gave my results. "I did this and here's what it sounded like"

It's pretty simple stuff to me and I don't want to waste my time or anyone else's on side tracks that we have covered years ago and moved on from. It gets old May, and even older when I can see that you and Geoff keep knocking on the same door with the same stuff. Please believe me when I say I'm not trying to be mean, but it gets to be like the same magazine salesman coming to your door telling you to subscribe to the same magazine over and over. The technologies you guys are doing are yours and Toledo and myself and all the Tunees are fine with that, but we tune and are here to not talk about fixed things but variable, two different trains May. You don't need to keep telling us to jump on yours, we get it, but you need to accept if we are saying we have been able to do what you do through tuning there comes a point where you either need to try tuning and find out for yourself or deal with the fact that we truly have.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
All explained on Tuneland

>>> “On the passive thing. I don't look at anything as being passive that has an affect on the system. I'm not talking about a passive component as such.” <<<

Now you have changed your terminology again !!

Just TWO days ago you were saying that something passive is “part of the SIGNAL”.

>>> “If something is making a difference in the sound it is not passive, but part of the signal.” <<<

THAT is why I challenged you. I was not challenging the changes you can make with your ‘tuning’ techniques – I was challenging your generalisation of something like a passive video player “being part of the SIGNAL”.

NOW you have changed it to “having an effect on the SYSTEM”.

I agree. THAT is the point I was trying to make. It has an effect on the SOUND – not on what is generally known as the signal !!

>>> “Don't mean to be dismissive but I already covered the Schumann Resonance device, and the other products that have been mentioned here.” <<<

I don’t see anything on your internet site about your ‘covering the Schumann Resonance device’.

>>> “But May if your going to ask questions then you need to be polite enough to look at the answers givin so the person your talking to doesn't have to keep repeating themself.” <<<

I would love to if I could find them on your site.

>>> “But please understand that if I say "we have covered this" I'm not saying it to hear myself talk. I'm saying it because we have.” <<<

Honestly, I have tried to find them !! Although I do admit that my SEARCHING skills via computer are not my best skills. Perhaps you could help by giving me the link. I AM specially interested in YOUR take of the effect on the sound of the Schumann Resonance device !!!

>>> “You don't need to keep telling us to jump on yours, we get it, but you need to accept if we are saying we have been able to do what you do through tuning there comes a point where you either need to try tuning and find out for yourself or deal with the fact that we truly have.” <<<

Really ??? You can do exactly what we do through ‘tuning’, can you ?? THAT is some mighty claim. Never mind being able to do ‘what we do through tuning’. Please explain how you are doing the same thing as the Schumann Resonance device – by ‘tuning’. If you don’t want to explain it via this forum, then could you give me the link on your home page ?

Regards,
May Belt
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
answering May

Hi May

If you sense a change in the terminology, it's probably a wording thing and has nothing to do with us. You might want to go back and review. Sorry if my writing skills lack. Sometimes when I read my own posts on TuneLand it makes me laugh at my lack of putting into words what I'm doing. I think I'm one of those that writes in the moment and with the words that make sense to me, not thinking that someone else has to interpret them. (part of being me) You see I see those two comments as being part of the same thing. You are seeing them as two different things it seems. Not sure I can help you with that.

However I have said enough times here and on TuneLand that "everything is a part of everything else" so that should be clear enough. Also "everything affects everything else". If you want to make a different interpretation there's not much I can do about this, except once more invite you to share more about your listening and systems and finding a common ground.

Also May, because you think something is a "general" meaning doesn't really mean much to those who are not holding to some of the same values as the audiophile community does. We look at signal as "signal", this would include all the energy from all three parts of audio acoustical, mechanical and electrical. Again something that is covered in detail on TuneLand.

May, I did cover the device but also said I don't like naming products by name that I don't recommend the results of. I try to be more polite about the naming and talk more about the effect I find. You and Geoff promote this product so I'm cool with that and don't want to rain on audio products. I'm sure people use these and like them and that's fine by us.

You bring up your search skills. There's a lot to read on TuneLand and I can't find the all of everything myself lol. I do feel though that it's important to have a TuneLand in this industry so that people who wish to ask things about tuning or share their experiences have a place to do this in the right environment.

for example

When you make comments of things that I say here, two statements that you feel conflict. On here you say that I'm changing my terminology again, we wouldn't do that on TuneLand. If someone has a question about the meaning of something we work together till we come to the understanding. There's no need for term or any other type of jousting on http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ cause we are working together for the common goal.

you said

Really ??? You can do exactly what we do through ‘tuning’, can you ?? THAT is some mighty claim. Never mind being able to do ‘what we do through tuning’. Please explain how you are doing the same thing as the Schumann Resonance device – by ‘tuning’. If you don’t want to explain it via this forum, then could you give me the link on your home page ?

mg

I'll do better than that and start a thread just for you and Geoff on TuneLand.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, one simple question

If the component is 100% passive, i.e. not even plugged into the wall outlet, what difference does it make if it is a VCR or a box of electronic parts (or even a jewelry box, for that matter)?

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
TuneLand answers

Hi Stereophile

here's the link I said I would provide for those who wish to ask questions of TuneLand on TuneLand

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t256-tuneland-answers

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 1 week ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Answer to a simple question

>>> “If the component is 100% passive, i.e. not even plugged into the wall outlet, what difference does it make if it is a VCR or a box of electronic parts (or even a jewelry box, for that matter)?” <<<

If it is 100% passive, it doesn’t make any difference whether the item is a VCR or a mirror, or a central heating radiator or a light fitting or even a jewelry box.

Michael had challenged my use of the word PASSIVE in relation to something just sitting on a shelf and he followed that challenge with the words:-

>>> “If something is making a difference in the sound it is not passive, but part of the signal.” <<<

To which I challenged him on his use of the terminology “part of the signal” describing a passive object.

Now YOU have had to use the word PASSIVE (i.e 100% passive) to distinguish something not being active. You see the problem ?

Michael actually answered that ‘it is not passive, it is part of the signal’ !!

Michael has NOW answered that when he uses the word “signal”, he means “to include all the energy from all the three parts of audio acoustical, mechanical and electrical”

>>> “to those who are not holding to some of the same values as the audiophile community does. We look at signal as "signal", this would include all the energy from all three parts of audio acoustical, mechanical and electrical.” <<<

So, to come back to YOUR query. A 100% passive mirror, or a 100% central heating radiator, in the listening room, is passive in your’s and my book, but in Michael’s meaning it is passive, yes, but >>>”He looks at signal as "signal", this would include all the energy from all three parts of audio acoustical, mechanical and electrical.” <<<

I completely agree that everything, in the listening environment, is involved in the listening experience but, it is still debatable whether you or I would say the descriptive words “it is part of the signal”. Would you in relation to such as the jewelry box ?

What then happens if people want to actually talk about ‘something affecting the actual audio signal traveling through the audio equipment’ ? Is that the ‘signal’ ?

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
May said

May said

What then happens if people want to actually talk about ‘something affecting the actual audio signal traveling through the audio equipment’ ? Is that the ‘signal’ ?

mg

It's all the signal, everything affects everything else.

May, I'm not challenging your word passive, so don't pull me into a word debate please, this is a web your spinning that has nothing to do with me and everything to do with your needs for what ever reason.

again

Hi Stereophile

here's the link I said I would provide for those who wish to ask questions of TuneLand on TuneLand

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t256-tuneland-answers

michael green
MGA/Roomtune

Pages

  • X