Michael, I hate to judge before all the facts are in but I have a sneaking suspicion that Tuners would not be quite so FRUSTRATED with the sound that they are inclined to Tune EVERY SINGLE RECORDING to a separate set of requirements when it would be MUCH EASIER TO ADDRESS the ROOT CAUSE of the problems. The problems from a philosophical point of view are that if you have to adjust the system for each recording to maximize its sonics then you have probably focused in on a LOCAL MAXIMUM. I think Tuners would be much more likely to locate or discover the ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM if they subscribed to what May and I have been describing ALL ALONG. It is certainly NOT TRUE that we haven't answered your Question, how would we tune each reccrding? As I recently wrote in my paper, "What's Wrong with CDs and Why do they Sound so Horrible?" there are at least 10 Reasons why CDs sound thin, two dimensional, irritating, like paper mâché, compressed, rolled off, bass shy and just plain boring. This is not an indictment against any one particular CD, it's an indictment against the WHOLE PLAYBACK SYSTEM - this is the ROOT CAUSE of the problems we all hear with the music. And without address the problems in loved with READING THE DATA ON THE DISC the degradation to the sound will be transmitted upstream, no doubt about it. The most logical way to deal with these problems with the sound is attack the ROOT CAUSE, which means that you guys are going to have to roll up your sleeves and get busy with your Morphic Housekeeping, which is May's bailiwick, and get busy with all the things that affect our sound that aren't related to the audio system at all - not to house power, the acoustic signal in the room or the signal in the cables. Otherwise you will be lost sheep. It's a sad fact of life that Beltism, all this business with Morphic Fields and mind matter interaction is not amenable to TUNING. And get busy addressing vibration isolation, resonance control, addressing the magnetic field generated by the transformer, address RFI/EMI generated by semiconductor chips, address background scattered laser light that is producing errors in the data, and other INHERENT PROBLEMS in the whole playback system. Orherwise you will be lost sheep, out somewhere on the mountain trail, but a long way from the top of the mountain.

Link to What's Wromg with CDs? Article,

http://machinadynamica.com/machina35.htm

No matter how much you have in the end you could have had even more if you had started out with more in the beginning.

From the 50s TV show Outer Limits:

First lines of each episode: "There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your television set. You are about to participate in a great adventure. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to – The Outer Limits."

;-)

Geoff Kait,
Machina Dynamica

Thank you for your reply Michael. I hope we are now on a more balanced exchange of views. Our intention is not to attack each other but to further knowledge and experience.

I understand where you are coming from. I fully understand that you can achieve different sounds – better sounds – by doing many of the things you outline in your ‘tuning’ techniques. I DO NOT challenge any of your observations on the differences in sound you achieve and describe.

>>> “But May, if we try something and find it to not head in the direction we find useful for us, please don't take it as an attack. We don't take it as an attack when someone likes your stuff. We take it as a choice and nothing more or less. If someone does Nordost as part of their formula, that's fine with us.” <<<

I don’t take it as an attack Michael.

The point I have been trying to make all along, Michael, is that if “someone does Nordost as part of their formula”, i.e. applying a chemical to the label side of CDs and to the labels of LPs, then it should NOT be laid to one side as “fine with YOU” !!!! Because, in the world of audio, it SHOULD NOT be changing the sound at all. And, if it DOES change the sound, (which it does), then this should ‘knock anyone (who is seriously involved in audio) back on their heels ‘. And, therefore, the subject has to be addressed.

Applying a chemical to the label side of a CD or to the labels to LPs cannot be altering the 0s and 1s encoded on the CDs. It cannot be affecting ‘jitter’. It cannot be affecting vibrations. But it DOES affect the sound !!!!!!!!! In which case, one HAS to seriously address that issue. And ALL the other issues which can change the sound of CDs and LPs at the source - when they begin to be played. Before one even looks at what material the CD player (or LP player) sits on or what is inside the CD player etc. etc.

Applying such as a demagnetiser to CDs and LPs brings up exactly the same issue. It was such an experience which prompted John Atkinson to say, at a public discussion at a Montreal Hi Fi show :-

>>> “There are things that boggle my mind in High End audio. There are things that I would like to think I understand (from a technical and engineering point of view) and then something happens which literally blows my mind and it doesn’t fit the world view. Such as during the trip which Stephen and I did to Michael’s house !!” <<<

And Michael Fremer’s response to someone on this very Stereophile Forum:-

>>> “But more importantly, why don't you trust your ears???????

I trusted mine when I heard what the Furutech did, despite my utter cynicism about it (which is why it sat on the floor for 3 months before I tried it).

What I heard was so obvious, so repeatable, so clear, it was like "is that the Empire State Building?" Not "I'd better do an A/B/X to prove it really is the Empire State Building" (I know that analogy is not valid). The point is, not one skeptic---and I'm talking recording engineers, mastering engineers whose names you know, and the editor of the magazine have all heard the difference....the only reason. The only reason you wrote what's above is because you haven't experienced it. Because had you, even if you don't trust your own ears (or your own eyes I guess), this is an easily heard, easily repeatable phenomenon. It's a HUGH difference.” <<<

Michael, the point I have been trying to make all along is that as SOON as you heard anything (any treatment) change the sound of a CD, YOU should have also been saying:-

>>> “There are things that boggle my mind in High End audio. There are things that I would like to think I understand (from a technical and engineering point of view) and then something happens which literally blows my mind and it doesn’t fit the world view. “ <<<

It does not make any difference whether the change in the sound was better or worse. If NEITHER change should happen, then one is faced with a problem. A problem which will not go away – no matter what else one can do later in the audio system and listening environment.

I fully appreciate that afterwards, after doing any such treatment as demagnetising one can STILL do numerous things (to use your word ‘tuning’) to both the equipment and to the listening environment. I am not disputing that. But to casually say “Oh it’s fine with me if others want to ‘do the Nordost thing as part of their formula”, or “Oh it’s fine with me if others want to ‘do the demagnetising thing as part of their formula” is dodging the whole issue.

It is like me saying “Oh, it’s fine with me if some other people want to treat the transformers in the equipment if that is part of their formula” but I prefer to gain more control of the sound by ‘leaving the transformer alone and treat other things in the environment”.

It would be completely wrong of me to discount (ignore/evade) ‘treating transformers’ because I understand that EVERYTHING has to be included - treating CDs and LPs, treating transformers, capacitors, resistors, printed circuit boards, knobs, cables, equipment supports, stands, everything in the loudspeakers, as well as shelving in the listening room, pictures on the wall, mirrors on the wall, clocks on the wall, and SO on and SO on – the list is endless. As you know as well as I do.

If you know that transformers are a problem and sound better after ‘tuning’, then I am sure YOU would not ignore (bypass) the transformer and leave it untreated and carry on ‘tuning’ other things further along the audio system. If you knew that (say) isolating a transformer gave an improvement in the sound, I am absolutely sure that you would not do different things like isolating a transformer when listening to Dvorak’s New World but would remove that isolation for Beethoven’s 5th.

So, let us have a look at your approach.

>>> “I have answered already in a few places. Because labels are produced in many different ways, I have found that they would need to be treated as individuals. When I put on a recording May, I don't judge it by the recording played before it necessarily. The one before it is quite different in many ways and has it's own set of codes that can be brought out once the vibratory codes get close to mated, but when the new recording is put on this is a new ball game with a whole new set of values. These values can either be left alone or gone after by tuning means. That's what we do. It's not meant to be a put down to anyone, but it is a fact that a system set to only one setting may not bring the new recording to life.” <<<

Labels produced in many different ways. Yes. CDs produced in different ways. Yes. But, I am not talking about a system set to only one setting.

Let us look at basics – general basics. Re demagnetising CDs.
If, as some have suggested, there is some metallic element in the layering construction of the basic CD which could be magnetised – therefore ‘demagnetised’, then YES, different CDs could be variable – but variable only in the DEGREE at which any metallic layer could be magnetised and then demagnetised.

If, as some have suggested, there are metallic paints used in the printing of the label side of CDs, then the LEVEL of the amount of metallic powder of the paint will be variable yes, but only in DEGREES. The basic problem would still exist if ANY of the paint could be magnetised and then demagnetised.

If after demagnetising one can gain improvements, some as described by Michael Fremer as HUGE, then, logically, BEFORE demagnetising there must have been an adverse effect happening – somewhere !!! That adverse effect, therefore, must be on the actual CD and, again logically, one cannot just do nothing, and expect to later recover that adverse effect somewhere else in the audio system or in the listening environment. Again, logically, without doing anything to the CD, one would have the initial problem still remaining whilst, yes, being able to make further improvements in the sound by doing other (what you call ‘tuning’) techniques further in the audio system or listening environment. What I have described does not in any way alter what one can do to gain improvements later, but it still leaves the basic problem back at the CD !!!!! It is that the basic problem could vary but only in it’s DEGREE of adverse effect.

In exactly the same way. If YOU have discovered that transformers are a problem, then you can’t move past that problem and expect to recover something lost by doing something further along the audio system or in the listening environment.

>>> “But May, if we try something and find it to not head in the direction we find useful for us, please don't take it as an attack.” <<<

To put it into a nutshell and to exaggerate somewhat but only to make an important point.

It is like there being a problem (as in the past) with a pick up cartridge picking up the rumble of the turntable motor and someone saying “Oh, I don’t make turntables so I prefer not to deal with that problem -I can adjust for that later in my pre-amplifier and amplifier designs and I prefer to concentrate in those particular areas”.

If you, Michael, have (hypothetically) made discovery after discovery as to how and what to do with your pre-amplifier and amplifier designs to gain more and more improvements in their sound, then fine. Just don’t sideline other basic and earlier (earlier to the pre-amplifier and amplifier) problem areas.
Probably that was not the best example to use because there is a conventional explanation as to why a cartridge could be picking up the rumble of a turntable motor. Whereas there are no conventional explanations as to why applying a chemical to the labels of CDs and LPs or demagnetising CDs and LPs can give improvements in their sound !!!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green wrote:

Hi Guys

I wanted to confirm that the products we did in our testing were indeed May's, Geoff's and Nordost among many others. I didn't want to speak out of turn about treating the Cd's. I wish I would have kept better records now but after talking with and hearing from the others I feel pretty confident that all the basis were covered, however I'm happy to do the testing again.

As far as what John, Michael and others you guys have mentioned, as much as I appreciate their comments I know they are using stock components and have not gone nearly as far as we have to the signals source. Meaning they have not removed all the system's fat. I would also say that looking at Geoff's he has not either. His component is completely intact. As far as May, we'll only know this when we see her system.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Well, Michael, those are excellent Strawman arguments. There has been no proof that taking the component apart has any influence at all on the sound. Not to mention the potential for creating a dangerous situation for the average audiophile. Just because you are determined to "remove all the fat" as you say doesn't prove anything about regarding the advantage of such an extreme tactic. I have already made it quite clear I am not a disciple of Tuning, so why would you suspect I would be performing any of your Tuning rituals? I could just as easily say you have not gone nearly far enough with treating CDs, treating transformers, addressing scattered background laser light, coloring your CDs, suspending all cabling, ignoring the directionality of wire and fuses, ignoring the polarity of the system and that of CDs, or far enough with isolating components, or are using treated clocks in the room.

As far as "those guys" using any of my products in your testing I would also be quite interested as I am not aware of selling any products for such purposes or to anyone connected with your enterprise, for that matter. As far as guessing the state of my components you're just shooting blanks in the dark, like we've seen with your guessing that my headphone amp was sitting on one of my dampers and overlooking or dismissing the springs in my headphone iso stand. This is all very strange, if you don't mind my saying so too much, this whole my way or the highway attitude.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Hey Geoff,

"There has been no proof that taking the component apart has any influence at all on the sound."

Why is it that proof is needed when discussing tuning concepts but listening results are valid for clocks, cd treatments, scattered light etc... and your other meta physical, Morphic Resonance tweaks.

toledo wrote:

Hey Geoff,

"There has been no proof that taking the component apart has any influence at all on the sound."

Why is it that proof is needed when discussing tuning concepts but listening results are valid for clocks, cd treatments, scattered light etc... and your other meta physical, Morphic Resonance tweaks.

I never claimed that I have proof or that there is proof for any of my products, metaphysical or otherwise. Proof is a hard thing to come by for just about any audio device or cable, etc., don't you think? But listening is accepted as evidence, you know, evidence pro or con as the case may be. You understand the difference between proof and evidence, right? If you like I can post the Wikipedia page....:-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Geoff,

Do you need a wiki link on reading comprehension techniques?

Did I say you claimed you have proof of your products effects ... i said listening results are used to validate your claims!

So no proof is needed for your products, yet you require proof for tuning techniques (ie. opening up the chassis or taking the component apart to improve the sound.)

Do you get the double standard. Probably not .. I await the 500 word disparaging response you so love to make or attempt a dismissive "stop whining" remark. I am sure you will be as charming as usual.

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

Do you need a wiki link on reading comprehension techniques?

Did I say you claimed you have proof of your products effects ... i said listening results are used to validate your claims!

So no proof is needed for your products, yet you require proof for tuning techniques (ie. opening up the chassis or taking the component apart to improve the sound.)

Do you get the double standard. Probably not .. I await the 500 word disparaging response you so love to make or attempt a dismissive "stop whining" remark. I am sure you will be as charming as usual.

I suspect we are having a mild mannered semantic argument. When you say validate don't you mean prove? This is why you have to love this hobby, nobody ever agrees on anything. What I am saying is that a person is allowed to voice his opinion on listening results, by all means. And we should not accuse anyone of misrepresenting the facts. However, we are not obligated to generalize his results - whatever they might be - and make some declaration such as the thing works or the thing doesn't work. I'm quite sure you will agree with this. In fact I won't even stay up to see your response. Catch you on the flip side.

By the way, speaking of reading comprehension skill, I did not say I require proof of anyone, in particular for "taking the fat off the component." In fact, I already pointed out the inherent problem with the (heavy) transformer. You probably missed it. You are getting quite savvy with Strawman arguments, you know, putting words in my mouth.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Geoff,

"There has been no proof that taking the component apart has any influence at all on the sound."

First line in your post. Nothing about fat. Pretty clear. I knew I would get spin. Unbelievable.

Geoff, you do realize a lot of people read these posts, don't you that are probably wondering what's with this guy.
No skin off my back.

Michael,

You have the patience of a saint dealing with Geoff. But, I wonder if you will ever get a rational discourse with him. Nothing but spin and deflection.

I think working with May has more potential to discuss her products and ideas and see if they are a good fit for tuning.

I'm not sure I'm understanding the difference between tweaking and tuning. What constitutes a tweak and what constitutes a tune? For example, would placing an Mpingo disc on a cable be a tweak or is it tuning?

>>> “When does a tweak become a tune?

I'm not sure I'm understanding the difference between tweaking and tuning. What constitutes a tweak and what constitutes a tune? For example, would placing an Mpingo disc on a cable be a tweak or is it tuning?” <<<

I think it is very much a matter of terminology and then practice. Using your example of placing a Mpingo disc on a cable.

When someone originally discoveries ‘something which affects the sound’ and then manufactures such as a Mpingo disc, the reaction by so many people professionally involved in the audio industry is either:-

“I heard it improve the sound, I don’t understand quite why it did, but it did. When I placed it on a cable, on an item of audio equipment, on something in the listening room, it ‘gave me better sound - opening up the sound much more”.

The response to this by many ‘professionals in audio’ is to describe it as a ‘tweak’ – to isolate it away from conventional electronic and acoustic theory, because it (such devices) don’t actually make conventional sense. But usually what is called a ‘tweak’ is something which is just ‘done’ and not altered, or is ‘attached to’ and then left – because it HAS improved the sound better than it was before. This is the positive side of the descriptive word “Tweak”.

OR :-

“it can’t possibly have any effect’ – so then the descriptive word “Tweak” becomes used as a derogative (dismissive/negative) word.

I am seeing what Michael G describes as ‘tuning’ is (say hypothetically) placing such as a Mpingo disc on a position on a cable to gain a desired but specific part of the music. But he could then suggest that the Mpingo disc be placed in a different position to achieve a different (desired) effect. Then, in other instances, he could describe placing Mpingo discs on different items in the listening room to achieve other beneficial but specific effects. In other words what he calls “variable” rather than ‘fixed’. That you ‘do this’ to achieve that effect, and you ‘do this’ to achieve that effect, and ‘do this’ if you want to achieve that effect.

To use Michael’s descriptions :-

>>> “I hear the organ play. Now I want to hear it play with more of the room, now I want to focus in on one pipe, now that one pipe but bring in the harmonics that surround that pipe...and on it goes.” <<<

>>> “and if someone becomes good at detecting what parts going out of tune sound like it makes it easy to go to the part of the system that is messing up and get it back intune with everything else.

Tunees get use to listening to parts and the different parts of their systems and after a while can pretty much guess where the tuning needs to happen for a recording to go where they want it to. It's very much like playing in a band, you make adjustments till everything is just right.” <<<

>>> “to give the widest range possible in the adjusting and flavoring department so the listener can tune in the sound they desire or adapt to a recording they may be having problems with.” <<<

>>> “Circuit Boards. The ones I have done have a few treatments and once done are put into a variable setting so the listener can make adjustments.” <<<

So from my knowledge of the audio industry the descriptive word of ‘tweaks’ is given to things which so many people can’t believe can affect ‘sound’.

Even different cables and different AC power cords are regarded as “tweaks”. As are support tables, equipment feet (wooden blocks, cones, spikes), different fuses, etc. They are described as ‘tweaks’ even though they can be variable (as in positioning or removing them) but once fixed, placed, fitted, they are usually left in place and not used as ‘variable’ but more permanent techniques.

Such as the ‘freezing’ technique, the demagnetising technique, colouring the edge of CDs, applying treatments to CDs and LPs, etc are more ‘fixed’ tweaks.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

"There has been no proof that taking the component apart has any influence at all on the sound."

First line in your post. Nothing about fat. Pretty clear. I knew I would get spin. Unbelievable.

Geoff, you do realize a lot of people read these posts, don't you that are probably wondering what's with this guy. No skin off my nose. .

I suspect you are not following the discussion very closely as it was Michael who referred to dismantling the component, you know, reducing mass, as removing the fat. Maybe you should give serious consideration to just dropping out of this thread. Now, if you are still claiming I'm demanding proof from Michale while not providing proof for my own products, I have already answered that accusation: no proof can be obtained by listening tests. Would you like me to draw a picture?

Yes, I realize folks will be reading this thread. That is why I suggest you start keeping a log. So you don't appear like a cheerleader and troll.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

The only way to get to the root cause that you and May talk about is to get to the roots. From a design point of view in this industry or any other you have to take apart to explore, or you have to create. So unless you created the amp your using the only way to see how it responds is to take it down to the core and study the design from the ground up. If your not doing this how would you know how the different parts and pieces are interacting? It appears that your throwing tweaks ontop of stock, and that's not really exploring the signal path.

proof

That's a problem that people have who haven't done. I feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening.

my way or the highway?

How in the world is tuning "my way or the highway"? Tuning is the biggest and oldest musical technology there is. I'm just on board with the most proven technology, and enjoying the ride.

Geoff said

"I have already made it quite clear I am not a disciple of Tuning"

mg

Than your not a real designer or tweak. There's not one designer in this entire industry who doesn't tune, even if it is a fixed voicing.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Well, I actually agree there is a fine line between tuning and tweaking or even modding. But when I use the word Tuning I am actually referring to your whole, uh, program, the TUNELAND suite of tuning things. The overlap between tuning and tweaks even extends to springs. You say tuning, I say tuning out the vibrations. And you remove transformers while I treat transformers, so we both agree on the harm that transformers inherently cause. But I have a few tricks up my sleeve and what exactly I'm doing INSIDE the components, well, that's between me and my hairdresser. ;-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

The only way to get to the root cause that you and May talk about is to get to the roots. From a design point of view in this industry or any other you have to take apart to explore, or you have to create. So unless you created the amp your using the only way to see how it responds is to take it down to the core and study the design from the ground up. If your not doing this how would you know how the different parts and pieces are interacting? It appears that your throwing tweaks ontop of stock, and that's not really exploring the signal path.

proof

That's a problem that people have who haven't done. I feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening.

my way or the highway?

How in the world is tuning "my way or the highway"? Tuning is the biggest and oldest musical technology there is. I'm just on board with the most proven technology, and enjoying the ride.

Geoff said

"I have already made it quite clear I am not a disciple of Tuning"

mg

Than your not a real designer or tweak. There's not one designer in this entire industry who doesn't tune, even if it is a fixed voicing.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

All of the semantics aside, I'm still waiting for an answer from you regarding the use of PWB and Machina Dynamica products in your testing, which you alluded to a couple days ago. If you don't know if you did use them just say you don't know. If you did use them in testing I'd be very curious which ones you're referring to and how you obtained them.

Tuning is the most proven technology? Surely you jest. Haven't you been following the discussion on evidence vs proof? You also say about proof: That's a problem that people have who haven't done. I feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening." Well, I suspect we all feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening (as pompous as that might sound) but that nice warm fuzzy feeling is not to be interpreted as proof. The scientific method doesn't give extra points to warm and fuzzy feelings. You and Toledo are going to drive me to post some long professorial tutorial on evidence and proof. Look out!

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Geoff,

How many times have we said we use listening as our guideline? Hel-lo (to steal one of your favorites)
Listening is what we do and we don't dismiss the ideas of others by stating there is no proof. Sound familiar.

BTW, I am a cheerleader for tuning. It works for me after many years of using traditional high end audio products and not being able to listen to all my music as I would like. Where are your cheerleaders .. Sorry cheap shot.

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

How many times have we said we use listening as our guideline? Hel-lo (to steal one of your favorites)
Listening is what we do and we don't dismiss the ideas of others by stating there is no proof. Sound familiar.

BTW, I am a cheerleader for tuning. It works for me after many years of using traditional high end audio products and not being able to listen to all my music as I would like. Where are your cheerleaders .. Sorry cheap shot.

You said you use listening as a guideline. I agree. It is a guideline. But it's not proof. I knew we'd finally agree on something. Now, don't come back telling me that listening is proof of cryo, freezing, creams, CD treatments, vibration control, vibration isolation, springs, or Tuning. Proof they work or proof they don't work. As long as you're happy I'm happy. ;-). By the way, as it turns out I don't need cheerleaders. As far as your bad experiences go with the industry, and you'll have to pardon me for saying so, but you make it all sound a lot like Scientology.

Rah rah rah sis boom bah

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

One man's Scientology is another man's Morphic Resonance.

Boom Shakalaka boom

toledo wrote:

One man's Scientology is another man's Morphic Resonance.

Boom Shakalaka boom

Hey! No fair hitting below the Belt.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael wrote,

"This is why I talk about isolation the way I do. I've never seen or heard any tool completely separate itself from the mechanics, except for one and it was at a space program demo that I got invited to. What they did was cool. They used regulated air pressure and suspended the objects without touching anything but the air. I can't imagine an audiophile using this LOL, at least not until one is made on a mini scale. So Geoff, when I see springs I still see transfer devices and not de-coupling or isolation (in the complete sense)."

Well, of course anyone can using regulated air pressure to create the illusion of suspension. In fact that is what air bearing tonearms and air bearing platters do. But there are forces involved with the pressurized air so it is not perfect at all, and there is also the air in the room to contend with, you know, through which acoustic vibration is transferred in the room. So, no, the demo you witnessed was not the magic trick you thought you saw. The LIGO experiment, the experiment to detect and observe gravity waves from the Big Bang I mentioned earlier uses MUCH MORE effective and complex engineering than NASA ever contemplated in the demo. There is no such thing as perfect isolation. And all isolation devices are filters. You know, like speaker crossovers are filters. Except that Isolators, like springs and air bladders (under load) are mechanical low pass filters. Make sense?

Michael also wrote,

"I didn't know their names Geoff, as I just am there to listen and tune. And I had to go back to some folks and ask who's products those were that I listened to. I still don't know all the names so sorry if this is not correct. But part of this was using Rainbow Foil, bowls, crystals, creams, bladders, spray treatments, other liquids, rubbery materials, plug in resonators, clock devices (more than one), fuses, cones, springs, demaggers, tube socks and a bunch of other stuff."

So, I'm confused, Michael, why would you mention my products and May's if you were not really involved? You apparently don't even know which of my products was involved, if one even was. How could you even begin to make a judgement about any of those tweaks with all those things in the room? Just curious, that's all.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/advLIGO/scripts/subsystems_sei.shtml

Correct me If I am wrong, but isn't LIGO designed for seismic isolation? Things are a little different for audio applications due to air borne vibrations from playback.

Given the assumption that you can never truly isolate a component from air borne influences or other internal component vibrations, better to have a strategy to use the vibrations as an advantage and open up the system instead of over dampening it. The tuning aspects kicks in later to get the desired result at both the signal and acoustic level.

Discuss at your leisure.

toledo wrote:

http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/advLIGO/scripts/subsystems_sei.shtml

Correct me If I am wrong, but isn't LIGO designed for seismic isolation? Things are a little different for audio applications due to air borne vibrations from playback.

Given the assumption that you can never truly isolate a component from air borne influences or other internal component vibrations, better to have a strategy to use the vibrations as an advantage and open up the system instead of over dampening it. The tuning aspects kicks in later to get the desired result at both the signal and acoustic level.

Discuss at your leisure.

When I use the word isolation I am referring to seismic isolation. Seismic isolation refers to filtering out as best one can the low frequency vibration as well as higher frequency vibration coming up into the component from the floor and building structure. It is the very low frequency vibration that causes the most damage, which is why the airborne vibrations are secondary, but I do not entirely dismiss them. So, we have already gone over what produces the very low frequency vibration that is causing the tonearm to resonate, the cartridge, the platter, the laser assembly in the CD player, the internal wiring, the electronic elements (capacitors, etc.), chassis, etc. The Earth's crust constant motion around 0 to 10 Hz, traffic, wind, wave action near the shore, speaker feedback, footfall, these are the biggest culprits. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Once you isolate your turntable or CD player from seismic isolation you will find (uh, hear) that, eureka!, airborne vibrations must not be that important. Especially in my case, you know, what with the headphone system and all. :-). The way seismic isolation works, since it acts like a low pass filter, is it is less effective for the lowest frequencies of vibration, but gets more effective as the frequency of vibration rises. Thus, a very good iso system with resonant frequency of say 3 Hz will be only about 50% effective at 6 Hz but will be around 99% effective at 20 Hz. I actually have a Dual layer iso system, two layers of heavy masses and two layers of springs, that is a stronger filter than a single layer system, for example. The LIGO iso system, because their requirements are so demanding, incorporate many stages of isolation, and many different types of iso systems to achieve extremely low resonant frequencies and very strong mechanical filters - I.e., very steep dB/octave slopes. Sound familiar? That's because the seismic isolation filter characteristics are analogous to audio, for the speaker electronic filters, you know, which are 6 dB/octave or 12 dB/octave slopes, generally speaking. For audio systems we have the further indignity of having the components themselves produce vibration, you know, things like transformers, CD transport motors, capacitors, turntable platter bearings. It is actually not a particularly good idea to let those vibrations run free, either.

So, actually things are not any different for the LIGO project and audio systems. Both have to isolate the sensitive electronics and optics from the very low frequency vibration, especially in the range 0 to 20 Hz, which as it turns out, is considerably below the capabilities of virtually ALL speakers, which is why airborne vibrations is a secondary concern compared to seismic vibration. This is why, as I showed in some photos of LIGO vertical isolation mass on spring systems, the technique they employ is actually the same one employed for audio systems. I.e., the ubiquitous mass on spring system, the same type found in Vibraplane, my air spring Nimbus platform, Bright Star air bladder system, bicycle inner tube system, tennis ball system, Bungee cord systems, mechanical spring systems like mine, things of that nature.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Geoff said

"Tuning is the most proven technology? Surely you jest. Haven't you been following the discussion on evidence vs proof? You also say about proof: That's a problem that people have who haven't done. I feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening." Well, I suspect we all feel comfortable with our findings and enjoy practicing the science and art of listening (as pompous as that might sound) but that nice warm fuzzy feeling is not to be interpreted as proof. The scientific method doesn't give extra points to warm and fuzzy feelings. You and Toledo are going to drive me to post some long professorial tutorial on evidence and proof. Look out!"

mg

Do it, you should start a thread on proof and how you feel people reach it, why not. That's why this forum is here.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Let me say this about that. Proof is established when a phenomenon behaves the same or is true for all cases. This is why in science there is the idea of repeatability. This repeatability issue was the problem with Cold Fusion, the experiment could not be repeated by other scientists. In the case of Cryoing CDs and freezing CDs, it's the same situation. We have a group that swears up and down that it doesn't work or hurts the sound and another group that says it improves the sound. That situation, lacking repeatability, is why there is no proof, in the scientific sense. Casual listening doesn't really qualify as a scientific experiment, though we might wish to think so, with all the rules for the scientific method adhered to.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael wrote,

"The interesting part of these threads to me is that they all end in a circle. First someone starts with isolation to prove their point, then after back and forths go on forever we end up with the fact that in audio there is really no such thing as isolation."

Michael, you and Toledo have not been paying close attention. The thread started with your questions regarding treating transformers and about my constrained layer damper. Then, after I posted a photo of my headphone amp, you jumped to the conclusion I was resting the amp on my damper. I responded to that by saying that, no, the amp is not resting on the damper, the amp is isolated with high mass (marble) and mechanical springs. That's how we wound up on the subject of isolation. So, the thread isn't really going in a circle it's going in a straight line. Now, I asked the other day, when are we going to get back to the subject of this thread, treating the transformer and how to use constrained layer damping effectively? I am only trying to help you. I assume at some point you two are willing to listen to reason, no?

Geoff Kait,
Machina Dynamica

Michael wrote,

"The interesting part of these threads to me is that they all end in a circle. First someone starts with isolation to prove their point, then after back and forths go on forever we end up with the fact that in audio there is really no such thing as isolation."

Michael, you and Toledo have not been paying close attention. The thread started with your questions regarding treating transformers and about my constrained layer damper. Then, after I posted a photo of my headphone amp, you jumped to the conclusion I was resting the amp on my damper. I responded to that by saying that, no, the amp is not resting on the damper, the amp is isolated with high mass (marble) and mechanical springs. That's how we wound up on the subject of isolation. So, the thread isn't really going in a circle it's going in a straight line. Now, I asked the other day, when are we going to get back to the subject of this thread, treating the transformer and how to use constrained layer damping effectively? I am only trying to help you. I assume at some point you two are willing to listen to reason, no?

This thread seems to be as good as any for illustrating one of my favorite things, the Backfire Effect. I am officially adding the Backfire Effect to my list of cognitive anomalies frequently displayed on audio forums. The Backfire Effect is simply what often happens when a person is confronted with an opposing view, as we have seen in the case of isolation. The Backfire Effect is when a person's belief becomes even stronger in the face of contradictory evidence. This is precisely why you see so few audiophile conversions, as it were, so few people saying things such as, I used to be a power cord naysayer but now Im a power cord believer or, I used to think the whole idea of wire directionality was hogwash but yesterday I reversed my interconnects and wow, I can't believe the difference!

Geoff Kait,
Machina Dynamica

Michael wrote,

"Most of my testing is done by audiophiles, musical instrument makers, audio designers, studio engineers or science dudes who send me things to play with or invite me to their places. I don't make it a point to follow all the goodies out there (too busy) but I do give a good testing to the products that come my way, whether they be a musical instrument tweak, studio, commercial or audiophile. There have been times that I think I get more stuff than the reviewers lol. I guess for some reason I have become a bit of a reviewer for the people using products that don't know how they work or what they really sound like or how to use them. For example you mention your isolation table. I've had over 10 different ones that use air. One of them was a compression table that had hanging spring isolators that were mounted to arms attached to the table. I could draw you a picture of it sometime if you wanted to play with this for your designs. It was pretty cool to be honest, but even it gave a particular flavor to components."

Yes, I'm familiar with the attenuators you're referring to for isolation tables, usually but not always from Newport Corp., the Mothership for commercial isolation products. I have been designing isolation devices for almost twenty years. My, how time flies. My iso systems have been in systems described as the best at the show as well as the best anywhere by high level audio reviewers. I would disagree if I could. As for devices that contain air, they are primarily mass on spring systems, you know, as air is a compressible gas. So air bladders, air springs, bicycle inner tubes, tennis balls, etc. act like springs, just like them. Honest. Air springs even have measurable spring rates just like metal springs. This is why air springs come in different sizes and different internal pressures, since the spring rate is related to the mass of the load on the spring and the resonant frequency desired. The only air contraption that doesn't act like a spring off the top of my head would be those air levitation systems used in floating tonearms and turntable platters - air bearings. One thing we haven't discussed yet, which is also an interesting approach, one which I'm pretty sure you can see the utility of, and that is the magnetic levitation system, mag lev for short. You don't feel like I'm schooling you too much, one hopes. While we're only the subject the Minus K iso device for audiophiles is yet another technology audiophiles use these days, one based on the idea of negative stiffness, capable of achieving sub Hertz performance, a resonant frequency below 1 Hz. I trust, after my long winded explanation you can see the advantage for seismic isolation, no? Maybe Toledo can even if you can't. There are many ways to skin a cat. But leaving the vibrations alone is not one of them. It's has a new age kind of ring to it, what with let the vibrations be free and all that, but this is after all the 21st century. Time to recognize the utility of the technology that is there for seismic isolation. Shucks, if you wish to be cheap about it there is always fishing line, bungee cords, big elastic bands, those Slinky like long springs, imagination rules in the field of seismic isolation. As I said, you are already an isolationist what with the springs and all. We're only having a semantics argument about them. You might say you're a closet isolationist. It's OK to come out now. There is no stigma. ;-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

The issue of the Backfire effect has been brought up a few times as an argument that someone will hold onto their belief even more strongly when presented with contrary evidence.

This effect doesn't tell you much unless the contrary evidence is indisputably true.

Geoff, It could be argued that you are also a victim of this effect in the manner you are attempting to use it in this audio discussion.

Since there is no indisputably true evidence on either side, do you really think it applies?

Most people do not start out tuning ... it generally is found after a long and bumpy road of trying many traditional audiophile techniques. There is a huge after market of tools that are supported by audiophiles and manufacturers are more than willing to provide the "fix" we have all craved to improve our system.

We have tried many of these and have reached the conclusion that less is not more. Bandaid after bandaid has not worked for us.

The point I am making is we have tried some of the things you are suggesting and have informed listening evidence to back our choices not to use them. As new tech is introduced, I am sure we will look into it.

The way I see it, Tuning and tweaking are complementary. We may never agree on vibration control and dampening, but, there is ample room for other shared ideas.

For example we both use springs and see its benefits.

I would suggest you try some tuning techniques to get informed of them which would make for a more productive discussion and identify where both camps can use each others ideas.

You have tried heat treated cds and found some improvements. So maybe we are not crazy after all ;)

Your fearless leader wrote the other day,

"I support a lot of products that fit into our goals. I also am truly happy when someone finds what they want. I don't play those games, and neither do the other tunees. You can intepret this any way you wish."

I interpret it as ye olde not invented here philosophy.

I'm sure I have been guilty of the Backfire Effect at least once, but not since 1987. Besides the Backfire Effect is what is happening right now with the notion on the Tunees' part that damping is somehow equivalent to over damping and that springs are somehow tuning and not isolation. It's like the bizarro world, if you'll pardon me for saying so. I suspect perhaps, I'm I'm being a little dramatic, but a little de programming might be in order. The argument isn't about whether springs are audible it's about what is responsible for it, no? If it looks like denial and walks like denial it's probably denial. I'm only trying to help. If you would appreciate that springs are isolation you could then move forward and select springs of certain spring rates that are tailored to your specific requirements. You do see the logic of that, no? Didn't you ever think to yourself, "hey, that's weird, why does Michael suggest using springs for tuning, that's a weird shape for a tuning thingie." Looking at it another way, if there's one thing that science understands very well, there is no mystery about them at all, it's springs. And that is why you see springs used for vertical isolation in one of the most exacting scientific experiments of all time. Hel-loo!

I am not attacking Tuning per say, only the logic of your positions in some cases. See the difference?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Geoff,

You keep wanting to make this discussion all about springs and isolation, dont ya. Ooh you sense you have a gotcha moment dont cha ;)

I am the one that got you rolling on this when I made a comment about the photo of your amp and the marble/graphite/ceramic it rests on. I stated that you likely enjoy a detailed and focused based on the materials coupled to amp.

Where the jump to isolation began occurred when you apparently felt that the comment I made "infringed" upon your isolation goals since no upward movement of vibrations was possible through the springs.

We all know that the materials touching a component affect the sound irrespective of any isolation and my comment had nothing to do with isolation.

Lets move on, shall we.

How about dampening which was the OP and i'm sure we will have resounding agreement on ;)

I'm pretty sure that Geoff is using "isolation" in the same way that Michael is using "floating" to describe his floor. But, you don't hear anyone jumping on the literal translation of "floating" because it's a stupid argument to make when you know it isn't meant to be totally literal.

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

You keep wanting to make this discussion all about springs and isolation, dont ya. Ooh you sense you have a gotcha moment dont cha ;)

I am the one that got you rolling on this when I made a comment about the photo of your amp and the marble/graphite/ceramic it rests on. I stated that you likely enjoy a detailed and focused based on the materials coupled to amp.

Where the jump to isolation began occurred when you apparently felt that the comment I made "infringed" upon your isolation goals since no upward movement of vibrations was possible through the springs.

We all know that the materials touching a component affect the sound irrespective of any isolation and my comment had nothing to do with isolation.

Lets move on, shall we.

How about dampening which was the OP and i'm sure we will have resounding agreement on ;)

You wrote,

"We all know that the materials touching a component affect the sound irrespective of any isolation and my comment had nothing to do with isolation."

"We all know." Priceless.

By the way, this is the third time I've called for the discussion to get back on track. Actually the OP was the transformer tweak I don't sell and the damper I do sell, to be accurate.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael, I provided a photo and you mistakenly thought the headphone amp was resting on the constrained layer damper even after I told you I use a spring based isolation system. Why on Earth would I give more ammunition to someone who cannot analyze my system correctly? And what of the things in my system you can't see in photos? How pray tell will you analyze them? Are you going to put on a Carnac the Magnificent turban and hold the envelope up to your forehead? I.e., The transformer treatments, the scattered laser light treatments, specialized coloring schemes on CDs and the CD tray, RFI/EMI absorbing materials strategically located inside my Oppo and headphone amp, directional fuses and interconnects, vibration control of capacitors, vibration control of CD transport, silver/gold contact enhancement for all electrical connections including electron tube pins, isolation of all circuit boards and transformers, extensive cancellation of magnetic fields throughout system, dual grounding system, window treatment including my Flying Saucers for Windows, Flying Saucers for Wall Outlets, PWB Cream Electret and PWB labels and Morphic foils, Super Intelligent Chip treated CDs, extensive application of WA Quantum Chips on capacitors, headphones, transformers, etc., tweaked circuit breaker box, to name a few.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael wrote,

"Also when making a building and dealing with the low frequencies, I (nor do the other people I work with) think for one second we are isolating the building from the ground even though the parts we use to align and dissipate the vibrations all have the labels of isolation in their names. There is no true "floating" or "isolation", everything affects everything else, and everything is a part of everything else. How we make them work together is the science of vibration. Not to remove the vibration, but to use it. To put vibration in a working place with all the other vibrations around, harmonizing."

Your new age spirit of everything harmonizing is touching and your use of the expression the "science of vibration" seems sincere enough but perhaps an afternoon in the library will help qualm your fears that isolating vibrations from getting to the electronics will somehow interrupt the free flow of vibrations in the universe and shut down your sound. If vibrations were actually good for the sound wouldn't a shaker table improve the sound? Hmmmmm, a new idea for TuneLand perhaps. If a little vibration is good a lot would be great, no? You could call it Shake and Bake.

Technically you and your homies are missing something. As I've said already, the typical mass on spring isolation system is increasing effective as frequency of the structural vibration rises, so that for a typical iso stand for audio applications the vibrations at say 25 Hz are attenuated by 99.9%. No matter how you dodge and weave it's simply not true that vibration isolation doesn't stop vibrations. Get thee to a library.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael, I hereby award you the Laughing Goat for excessive puffery and plain silliness above the call of duty.

"People wonder why I keep one step away from audiophiles? Your reading why. Over the years I have seen two types, the audiophile and the listener. Listeners are audiophiles of course but there is a happiness about them that the odd engineer-ish audiophile-ish people don't get at all. Listeners become friends who welcome all into their musical enjoyment, audiophiles build these camps and clubs that are like churches on every corner saying they are worshiping the same God but will have nothing to do with each other, because they can't see God any bigger than their personal doctrine. To others they make their doctrine look like the biggest but they end up missing the overall while preaching their overall. You end up seeing all these audio camps with no one breaking through because they can't move in fear of being seen by their clubs members. If they were seen they would be seen as falling from grace and into the darkness. So what they do is try to paint the picture of anyone who is free from the chains of closed mindedness as someone who is a threat to convention. They practice their own form of wichcraft, claiming to save the world and they don't realize the world is already saved. They can tune in the sound they want any time they want to open up and tune in. listeners are doing it everyday and as each one does another begins. No judgement, just a method of opening up and tuning in to what they hear as right. They have others to then explore with and reference together. Something that scares the B-Jesus out of the audiophile churches, who keep talking their doctrine and never show what they are really doing in private. It's all talk and nothing but talk."

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Somebody got your goat, Geoff ;)

It appears you are gun shy about discussing your system since you don’t think you will get a fair shake.

I guess I would be too in the contentious environment that seems to follow you around from forum to forum.
Hmm … do I see a pattern, here?

Since you don’t like photos which show materials and exactly where and how your techniques are applied , lets try it this way to get started.

These are the items you listed that, I assume, are used in your reference headphone system.
Not sure why window treatments are needed for head rig, but you can explain.

It would help us all if you could describe what these are, the materials used, where and how you apply these and describe in listening terms the improvements.

Some are are obvious in their intent, but for completeness I have included them and you can describe your listening impressions.

The reason i ask for materials is you list isolation of circuit boards and transformers which based on prior posts means cork, if i am correct.

transformer treatments
the scattered laser light treatments
specialized coloring schemes on CDs and the CD tray
RFI/EMI absorbing materials strategically located inside my Oppo and headphone amp
directional fuses and interconnects
vibration control of capacitors
vibration control of CD transport
silver/gold contact enhancement for all electrical connections including electron tube pins
isolation of all circuit boards and transformers
extensive cancellation of magnetic fields throughout system
dual grounding system
window treatment including my Flying Saucers for Windows
Flying Saucers for Wall Outlets
PWB Cream Electret and PWB labels and Morphic foils
Super Intelligent Chip treated CDs
extensive application of WA Quantum Chips on capacitors, headphones, transformers, etc.
tweaked circuit breaker box

Also, if anyone else has experience with these techniques, please join in.

Holy Toledo! Let me get this straight. You want me to explain the materials I use in all of my products and
explain how I use them in my system? Shirley, you jest.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Nice deflection there Geoff.

No trade secrets needed. We already know you use glass, cork, marble, graphite, ceramic, etc... That sort of thing.

You know what I'm talking about .. Let's gets some meat on the bone that we can discuss and how your techniques are used and how you use them to voice your system.

toledo wrote:

Nice deflection there Geoff.

No trade secrets needed. We already know you use glass, cork, marble, graphite, ceramic, etc... That sort of thing.

You know what I'm talking about .. Let's gets some meat on the bone that we can discuss and how your techniques are used and how you use them to voice your system.

Here are more materials and tricks that I can reveal. Keep in mind this is all very hush hush and should not go any further than here. Copper for Flying Saucer tweaks (in all rooms), multicolor strobe light for CDs, high carbon steel springs for isolation, African blackwood (Mpingo), viscoelastic material, tourmaline gun negative ions, invisible light absorbing material, color coded permanent inks for coloring CDs, color coded plastic dots for CD tray (Codename Turquoise II), Red X coordinate Pen from PWB, suspensions for cabling, 3M AB5100S, Walker Talisman demag device for CDs and cables, low frequency high permeability alloy for transformers, Tibetan temple bell for tuning all rooms,Teleportation Tweak, Cream Electret for all capacitors and wires, Herbies tube dampers x2 per tube, Quicksilver Gold contact enhancer and Marigo VTS dots. Last but certainly not least the Quantum Clip from PWB.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica