Hello Bill (wkhanna).

>>> “I am just saying that we hear with more than just our ears.
We hear with our mind, too.
Our mind will influence what we 'think' we hear.

I am an engineer by trade. I work within the realm of nature as explained & defined by the repeatable results obtained through repeated experimentation.
But I also know there are still many things that have no explanation, yet. And there are many we think we have explained that will someday be proven false.” <<<

Can I stay with that theme (i.e of you being an engineer and therefore with specific technical knowledge) and refer you to a comment made by John Atkinson some 5 years ago.

John Atkinson’s comment during the open Stereophile debate at the Montreal 2009 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 !!” <<<

I am sure that everyone would acknowledge that John A also has considerable technical knowledge, so when John A makes the comment that things can happen (in the world of audio) which ‘blows his mind and which doesn’t fit the world view”, then there must be ‘something else going on’ which warrants serious investigation.

The reason why I decided to stay with the ‘you being an engineer’ bit is because when someone tries a technique which creates an improvement in the sound, and one has technical and engineering knowledge, then one KNOWS if it could be ‘having any effect on the audio signal, or having an effect on the room’s acoustic air pressure waves’, and if the conclusion is that it can’t BUT STILL creates an improvement in the sound, then it points to there being an observation with NO explanation. SO – an explanation has to be sought. If one knows both (i.e that it can’t be having a technical effect but yet has improved the sound significantly) then one knows that more investigation is needed.

So, when you, Bill, say:-

>>> “But I also know there are still many things that have no explanation, yet” <<<

Then this can extend the discussion further. Because there is already an acknowledgement that “there are still many things that have no explanation, yet”.

>>> “To achieve the second part, one must actively get involved in their own system. You don’t just go out buy authenticity. You mine for it, you work for it. You must pay your dues. You must discover it all on your own. Sometimes it is as simple as swapping a cable. But it has to be the right cable. Or maybe just the right room treatments. Maybe, through trial and error, you come upon a series of changes which unleashes that very last bit of ‘realness’. Sometimes, it could take a major overhaul. But V rarely does good sound, authentic sound, just happen all on its own.” <<<

I couldn’t agree more !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

>>> “May, would you please explain
How putting two pictures of myself in the freezer improves the listening experience?
BTW, I did it - since it doesn't entail any costs - and heard no difference whatsoever. Now I might be deaf, but I doubt it, so please explain the underlying physical phenomena.” <<<

iosiP

I don’t know why you can’t hear the effect of your photo in the freezer when others can. Just like I don’t know why you could not hear a tweak which your friend could hear. Just like I don’t know why you could not hear the presence of a CD plastic case, in the room, have an adverse effect on the sound, when others can.

If you can’t hear any difference, then ANY explanation I might put forward is not going to improve that situation. And, if I gave you an explanation which you could accept and THEN you heard an improvement in the sound, then that would immediately be put down to ‘autosuggestion’ !!

>>> “So if a friend comes by and I put his photos in the freezer then he would listen to a better soundstage, better dynamics, better you-name-it, but I wouldn't (since my photos are not in he freezer).
Now let me see: is there extra information "in the room" (to use May Belt's parlance) or not? If yes, how comes I cannot hear it (sorry - "resolve" it)? If no, how comes my friend can hear it? Does it mean the changes (whatever these are) are not affecting the information in the room, but only the person's capacity to "resolve" it?” <<<

If you put photos of your friend in the freezer but not your photos and he was in the listening room with you, not only would the sound be better for him but for YOU also !! Because we (human beings) are sensitive to changes taking place within anyone who is in the room with us.

For example. If someone in the room tells a lie (or even thinks a lie) then the sound will be worse for everyone in the room – not only for the person telling the lie !!!

Yes, there IS extra information “in the room” which people are not resolving and this is why I gave examples of people’s experiences of the effect of some of the ‘room’ devices – I gave those examples as CLUES pointing to exactly that. None of the ‘room’ devices I listed could be having an effect on the audio signal travelling through the audio system. Nor could they be adding additional musical score to the musical score of Dvorak’s New World already encoded on the disc. Nor could they be adding another half of an orchestra to the orchestra already encoded on the disc – so the information giving enhanced musical information of enlarged soundstage, better clarity, better separation of musical instruments etc, etc of Dvorak’s New World after the devices have been introduced into the room MUST HAVE BEEN THERE, in the room, all the time !!! But, as I describe, just not being resolved correctly previously !!

Yes, the changes (however these are described) are NOT affecting the actual information already in the room but are having an effect on the way we (human beings) resolve complex information.

I suggest you read Carol Clark’s experiences in Positive Feedback Online under “Adventures in Cryogenics” in PFO back issues:-

>>> “Okay, skeptics, don’t dismiss this until you try it. Freezing your photograph costs you nothing but the loss of looking at the pictures, since they’ll have to stay in the freezer forever. It costs nothing, and the results are stunning. I tried it because I was sceptical, and my photos have been in the freezer ever since.” <<<

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

Geoff,

I assume the answer was yes, that some prompting was done to highlight there was a difference.

Did you hear a difference also.

In all the answers you have provided I don't see where anyone independently arrived at the conclusion that a change occurred or I'm not sure a change occurred.

The power of suggestion, as you are aware, is extremely powerful. The desire to please and also the desire to not feel stupid that they can not hear something cannot be discounted so readily. Not to mention the mood of the listener and other factors. Given this was a family member, I would say this effect would be magnified.

Absolutely right on the money. And I think the hobbyist many times gets too hung up on thinking they have the real thing. There can't be 250 thousand real things running around out there for one recording. With 250,000 audiophiles all having a different sound, I think we get a little carried away with raising our hands proclaiming to be the one system that is right (I'm not saying your doing that Bill). I'm saying there is probably some of that in all of us. Somewhere we still are loosing that connect that every recording is different and every system portrays that recording differently. We can't as end users make the rules. The rules are all ready made. Every recording is different, and every system setup is different sounding. We have playback systems, that's all folks. Trying to say that they are a real snap shot of a recording is not reality.

If I sarted posting pictures of studio live rooms on here you guys would notice something right off the bat. Your soundstages are not nearly big enough to be playing those spaces and mic patterns. Not even close. The control rooms at the studios are not even playing back the whole picture.

The audiophile hobby has made a playback picture, a box called the soundstage. The typical size of this stage is no where near the actually size of a recorded soundstage. There's a ton more space on that recording. I know you guys are use to that certain size, but that's not all the info. This hobby started with people sitting around a living room listening to stereo separation. It grew into a hobby that setup the speakers so there was a picture. Two guys started magazines talking about this picture. They and others set two speakers up infront and you in some type of triangle. In most cases you get a frontal soundstage, a little off to the sides and once in a great while sound coming in front of the speakers. That's not what is on the recording. That's part of what is on the recording as told by the speaker room interface. You sit far field you get one picture, mid field another, nearfield another, extreme another, and headphones yet another. All different. It's a choice your making. The microphone and mixing console could care less which you choose. I happen to believe that a true soundstage goes the same distance in all directions, but that's me and my picture.

I think when people get too got up in these absolutes they are only being accurate for themselves. The guy in with the mic hears it different from the guy in the control room, same goes for the mastering room and the end user. It's a hobby about listening to an image. Shape it, bend it, squeeze it, open it, it's an image. The more you open it up the more you will see. The more you squeeze the more focused on a smaller part you will see. It's pretty simple.

distortion, that's another chapter

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

I assume the answer was yes, that some prompting was done to highlight there was a difference.

Did you hear a difference also.

In all the answers you have provided I don't see where anyone independently arrived at the conclusion that a change occurred or I'm not sure a change occurred.

The power of suggestion, as you are aware, is extremely powerful. The desire to please and also the desire to not feel stupid that they can not hear something cannot be discounted so readily. Not to mention the mood of the listener and other factors. Given this was a family member, I would say this effect would be magnified.

Dunno where you got the idea I prompted him. Of course there is such a thing as the power of suggestion, geez, everyone knows that. But acknowledging that unfortunately doesn't explain the photos in the freezer tweak. In fact, you might not be aware there's such a thing as the reverse expectation bias, a psychological effect that can occur when someone expects a weird tweak, for example, NOT to work. In that case the tweak, which might otherwise work for most people, will be perceived NOT to work. If skeptics' argument that all tweaks or devices they cannot explain are simply psychological I'm afraid audiophiles' lot would be set back about twenty years. Is that the direction you'd like to go? Let's work together on something, let's make a list of all the audiophile tweaks that give you heartburn, the ones that really get your goat. OK?

The more I think about, with respect to the photos in the freezer tweak,I suspect you might be the victim of the Bandwagon Effect.

Do you think I am not skeptical, too? Do you not think I would have ready proven that the photos in the freezer tweak works before I show it to someone else. Hint: it helps to be able to LISTEN. I wouldn't expect the dude under the bridge to be able to hear it necessarily.

BTW I don't think I ever saw your guesses why audiophiles sometimes don't hear certain tweaks.

Family is more easily psyched out? Interesting theory.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Toledo wrote,

"The power of suggestion, as you are aware, is extremely powerful."

To assist you in your apparent quest to be the Uber Skeptic capable of slaying the dragons of outrageous tweaks I submit for your consideration the following list of cognitive biases and other psychological excuses you can throw around at your discretion whenever these sorts of discussions pop up.

List if Cognitive Biases

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Geoff,

You certainly do try to make your point the hard way ( with an extra order of sarcasm ), but, never answer questions directly.

So let's summarize ... You are basically relying on the fact that you cannot prove a negative to support your theories. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof

Let's take a poll of how many people have heard this effect versus those that have not.

So I am accurate in that you wish to lump in this so called tweak with other well known tweaks and establish an argument foundation on that?

toledo wrote:

Geoff,

You certainly do try to make your point the hard way, but, never answer questions directly.

So let's summarize ... You are basically relying on the fact that you cannot prove a negative to support your theories. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof

Let's take a poll of how many people have heard this effect versus those that have not.

So I am accurate in that you wish to lump in this so called tweak with other well known tweaks and establish an argument foundation on that?

OK, fair enough. No, I don't rely on the fact you can't prove a negative to support my contention.

Take a poll? Yeah, right. You might take a poll whether anyone has ever heard of it, maybe. Why, are you volunteering to try the photos in the freezer tweak?

No, I am not lumping the photos in the freezer tweak with other well known tweaks and establish an argument foundation. I suspect you misread my post. I am comparing the photos in the freezer tweak with other debatable or preposterous tweaks like the Tice Clock, Mpingo disc, Schumann frequency generator, SteinMusic Harmonizer, Lessloss Blackbody, Shakti Stone, VPI Brick, crystals, WA Quantum Chips, tiny little bowl resonators, things of that nature. Oops, plume forgot the Teleportation Tweak!

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Yes we don't know how the "debatable and preposterous tweaks" you are mentioning work, but at least in theory they may (not sure about the Quantum Chips, though). And you know why? Simply because they are physically connected to the ambient where music is reproduced (the listening room). Even the Tice Clock may apply, since it is connected to the equipment through the power supply.
Now tell me how putting photos in the freezer can interact with the listening environment?
N.B. The above phrase was a question, so I am waiting for an answer.

Quote:

No, I don't rely on the fact you can't prove a negative to support my contention.

Prove it ;)

wkhanna wrote:

I realize everyone loves chasing Geoff all over the forum……

…..just as much as he loves playing the mechanical bunny that runs the rail at a dog track….
…..but maybe we could try to limit OT conversation in my thread?

If not, that’s OK, too.
I have pretty thick skin, especially when it comes to the lack of practicing proper etiquette on the internet.

Oh...ever mind.......carry on, gents......

That's tellin' 'em! Hey, speaking of your thread what's become of your little mu metal and cork project? You know, we're all counting on you....

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamo

Quote:

That's tellin' 'em!

Settle down there Thumper .. Let's keep the thumping down to a minimum on other peoples threads 'kay and life will be good.

But I don't hold my breath, 'cause I know you have nothing to say...

My cure for keeping things on track and I hope this helps, is I'm going to copy Geoff's comments that I wish to reply to and move them to his thread so they don't take away from others topics. I think this might be a help but we will see.

Sorry to take up space with this announcement but I think in time this might work to keep things a little more on target.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hey bill,

Any further progress on the MU metal and cork experiment? I can completely relate to the exceptional time management capabilities of my bride ;)

wkhanna wrote:

......no further progress at this moment.

Multiple family functions, yard tending, preparations for our annual 4th of July party, mountain biking & a 55 hour per week work schedule......I am sure most of you understand.

I appreciate the interest V much, however.

We also have Capital Audiofest coming up shortly.
My local band of audio nerds & I are already booked at the Sheraton Silver Spring Hotel for Friday & Saturday 25, 26 July coming up in a few weeks, too.
Getting three entire days to spend on nothing but audio with my 'Dawgs' at The Wife's consent is a once a year occurrence requiring much penance to be paid.

But as I said earlier, fear not.....slow work takes only time.

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please -

That's OK, we understand.

:-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

I'm working on using the cork and mu metal in my audiophile PC case (to start with).

I also have an extra amp laying around in my system that I'm going to add the cork and mu metal to. Bill was very nice and bought me my own set. I plan to help Bill when he has time, but he's not lying to you guys, he hasn't had any time. I got to hang out with him on the 4th and that was the first I had seen him in a couple months.

Everyone is busy!

I'd like to get my NAD M51 done up as well...but it's still under warranty so I'm not sure if I want to do it to that (yet). I have the computer, amp, and a couple other things I can start with to see what I get. :)

Hi Dan, this is Dan right?

Do you have the same front end as Bill plus a CD Player? Reason I'm asking is, everytime I have compared a CD to a CD copy, and a CD to a file it sounds different. I have had a few people do this test for me and all of them have come out the same.

Do you hear a difference or do you hear things sounding the same as each other? Thanks.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Yes good memory it is Dan! Sorry I haven't posted much around here, been way too busy at work. :/

No, my CDP is a modified Cambridge Audio 840c CDP that I used to use in the system and it's in a second system upstairs. I'd just bring it back down and hook it up.

Mine differs in I have a PSAudio P10 to regenerate my power and have BlackSands Audio Violet Z1 MKII power cords on all the equipment.

I built Bill's music server so it's similar. I have a full done up Audio PC running Windows Server 2012 in core mode with HighEnd-AudioPC's Audiophile Optimizer on it. I run Foobar2000 in Kernel Streaming. I have LVPS power supply to the machine (105w), with a sata power filter on the SSD to minimize the noise from it. I also use Paul Pang Studios USB3 Audiophile grade USB card. I output over a Wireworld Silver Starlight to the iFi USB Power module that then go across another WW Silver Starlight to a Musical Fidelity V-Link 192 which goes to my NAD M51 via AES/BU. I am looking at Audiophilleo to replace the V-Link when funds allow. I then connect my M51 directly to my modified Rotel RB-1090 amp over AES/BU. I then have biwired connections to my B&W 802Di speakers.

Bill's and my system sound very similar all in all, at least to the point where we have all the same characteristics. Since I've been friends with Bill we have each brought our systems closer to a "single" sounding system as I would pull aspects from his system into mine and vice versa.

Hi Dan

When you get a chance (no hurry) will you describe how the sources sound different from each other using the same piece of music? What I'm hunting for is CD vs Copy vs File.

Thanks no rush just trying to reference what you guys are hearing against what we do.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

The short version, the DAC has the most to do with any of it. However, a close second is the transport (or transportation for that matter).

When I do any comparison, I test things a multitude of ways...

1) Playing off my CDP through my pre out to the speakers (not balanced)
2) Playing through the CDP, outputted (digitally) to my NAD M51, directly connected to the amp and out to the speakers (balanced)
3) Playing from my Win2k12+ Audiophile Optimizer from Foobar2000 (KS) to CDP, through my pre out to the speakers (not balanced)
4) Playing from my Win2k12+ Audiophile Optimizer from Foobar2000 (KS) to NAD M51, directly connected to the amp and out to the speakers (balanced)
5) Playing directly from the CD via Win2k12+ Audiophile Optimizer from Foobar2000 (KS) to CDP, through my pre out to the speakers (not balanced)
6) Playing directly from the CD via Win2k12+ Audiophile Optimizer from Foobar2000 (KS) to NAD M51, directly connected to the amp and out to the speakers (balanced)

Those are the main ways I go to make sure I can go the same route via different sources, plus it gives me a balanced vs unbalanced route.

For me, back when I started using Computer audio, I could not match the output I could get from a cd via my Cambridge Audio 840c cdp. It was just always better. As I've dived more into the computer audio, understanding more of what causes the issues with lesser quality output... I've made significant strides on the audio quality side of things. The journey has been long with as much tweaking as anyone on the analog side does with Tubes, tables, preamps, tone arms, cartridges, etc.

For me now, I can say with having all the different paths to play through, I've noticed that a good transport (in a good cdp) can make all the difference. This will give you a high quality sound with very little work. However, with some work on the computer side of things, you can rip that same disc down and output it an make it sound better than just playing the disc. For me it happened about a year and a half ago when I upgraded my output on the computer side with my Musical Fidelity V-Link 192. That's when I could officially state that, at that point, the scales tipped in favor of the computer side of things. And this was just playing with the standard Foobar2000 on a windows 7 machine. Not with all the vast amounts of tweaks I've made since.

It got to the point that ripping the CD to my server and playing it through my media PC gives me far better detail, dynamics, and soundstaging that I have since removed my CDP from the system (it's in the secondary system now).

This even goes from ripping the cd with my cheap laptop CDP (via dbPoweramp)... but most times I use a firmware modded Asus DVD-RW drive that rips cds very accurately.

As for CD vs copy... I've not noticed any difference to be honest. That's even with ripping at 1x speed and writing at 1x as well. To me they sound exactly the same during playback, UNLESS the original is scratched up a lot and there can be points where the copy will sound better. However, if you are copying the scratched up disc and trying to get better, that's very debatable, you might you might not get better than the scratched disc. That would all depend on how good the drive is at reading scratched discs. I've gone to the point where I used my car protectant Zaino on the discs to fill in the scratches to read the disc properly (it works).

But for my over all standpoint, you can make the computer file sound better than the original CD when played back through the same system (same dac/signal path). I think it has a lot to do with being able to really tweak the timing of the signal and making it more precise.

I'm now looking at even better power supplies with even lower noise levels than what I have in my system currently (which is a PicoPSU) because I really believe that can make a lot of differences (I've heard it).

So the moral is, if you want to spend the time, money, and testing, it's definitely possible to get better sound through science... ha ha.

Hi Dan, thanks for the info.

Have you ever worked on players of less mass? I see your player comes in at 18.7 lbs. I start with Players that are 1 lb and change. just wondering if you have gone that route and with what players if you have, thanks.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hi Bill & Dan

I looked up the 340c and it was 10 times the weight of my mod player. The weight of the Rotel was 9. I've tuned both units, but I was talking about low mass like around the 1 lb weight and not 10 lbs. 10 lbs as you can see in comparison is a monster compared to the ones I mod.

The soundstage with my low mass units cast a good 2 to 3 times the size compared to the 340 or 930. The stage size of the Cambridge units are smaller than the Rotel. The Rotel 855 had the biggest soundstage of any of the Rotel models once tuned, but still were fairly small as compared to super low mass units.

I mod the bigger players as well but have far more success in size and detail with the super low mass ones. It would be interesting to see what Dan would do to one of these little guys.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Well, hell, most of the weight is in the transformer, so not really very surprising that lightweight components like CD players sound better. The large transformer, due to its high flux density, is one of the worst things ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting audiophile public. It affects anything and everything in its field - wires, capacitors, flat ribbon connectors, CD transport, etc. The larger players would also have many more semiconductor chips, all of which generate tons of RFI. Look like Roman Candles. Nobody likes RFI, right? Sorry for the interruption. You are now being returned to your normal broadcasting channel.

Geoff Kait
Machina Erotica

Hi Bill

If it's ok, let me give a few threads on this to give the models and background.

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t168-magnavox-dvd-player
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t146-tuning-the-magnavox-dvd-player
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t4-michael-s-system
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t169-hiend001-s-system
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t35-old-tunee-newer-system
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t90-drewster-s-room
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t226-toledo-s-system

The lastest unit which I am now burning in is from Walmart. The older version you can still find on line. If you guys do get into it I'll give you the sonic break down on both and you can see which one you might want to play with. These units cost pennies and as you read you will see them replacing many setups. I don't want to list a bunch of names that this unit tuned has beatup on because I don't want to make friends mad, but if I'm using it as my reference you can guess.

I would love to get involved with seeing you guys play with these and give your feedback. It takes almost nothing to get them to the first stage of listenablitiy.

This could be a lot of fun and maybe bring us all to a closer understanding of our individual views.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hi Geoff

"Well, hell, most of the weight is in the transformer, so not really very surprising that lightweight components like CD players sound better. The large transformer, due to its high flux density, is one of the worst things ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting audiophile public. It affects anything and everything in its field - wires, capacitors, flat ribbon connectors, CD transport, etc. The larger players would also have many more semiconductor chips, all of which generate tons of RFI. Look like Roman Candles. Nobody likes RFI, right?"

This is perhaps the best post I have seen from you, thanks !

As you and I are a little different in our approach, we both see the problem loud and clear and this is of such importance that it is shocking that our industry has not made the efforts to deal with this. It's almost like they have no idea these effects are talking place. There are two different ways to look at this. One is to deal with it at the source, and the other is to open the component up to let the fields mingle. I prefer the second obviously, but what you and I can both agree on is if these guys are not treating this and just having the fields floating around inside of metal chassis or even heavier plastic ones, they are doomed.

very good post! and I hope we get a chance to talk about how to treat these from both of our perspectives

But let me say this, if listeners are out there and haven't addressed this yet, it's very likely they haven't truly heard digital.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

"Well, hell, most of the weight is in the transformer, so not really very surprising that lightweight components like CD players sound better. The large transformer, due to its high flux density, is one of the worst things ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting audiophile public. It affects anything and everything in its field - wires, capacitors, flat ribbon connectors, CD transport, etc. The larger players would also have many more semiconductor chips, all of which generate tons of RFI. Look like Roman Candles. Nobody likes RFI, right?"

This is perhaps the best post I have seen from you, thanks !

As you and I are a little different in our approach, we both see the problem loud and clear and this is of such importance that it is shocking that our industry has not made the efforts to deal with this. It's almost like they have no idea these effects are talking place. There are two different ways to look at this. One is to deal with it at the source, and the other is to open the component up to let the fields mingle. I prefer the second obviously, but what you and I can both agree on is if these guys are not treating this and just having the fields floating around inside of metal chassis or even heavier plastic ones, they are doomed.

very good post! and I hope we get a chance to talk about how to treat these from both of our perspectives

But let me say this, if listeners are out there and haven't addressed this yet, it's very likely they haven't truly heard digital.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

The industry has no idea what's going on. Even the modders have a limited idea what's going on. It's like they all stopped looking into what they were doing ten or twenty years ago. It's the same mentality that produced the Challenger disaster in1986 -- the NASA managers were not engineers and there was a big schism between the two cultures and mentalities. The engineers told the managers there were serious issues with the O-rings in the seals of the solid rocket boosters and the managers chose not to listen. There are a great many things inherently wrong with ALL CD players as I have pointed out a bunch of times. The large magnetic fields and high intensity RF interference being generated by the transformer and semiconductor chips, respectively, are only two of the issues. But those two issues alone are sufficient to prevent ANY player from being ANYWHERE NEAR state of the art.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

wkhanna wrote:

OK, let me try this again.....

Michael,

What CD player(s) are you using?

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please –

Did I interrupt your concentration? I thought he answered your question already and quite thoroughly. Moving right along...

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

Hi Bill

Their in the links if that's ok. I wouldn't want anyone to think that I use these "stock" so I'm reluctant to just post name brands for that reason. When you go to the threads you will see the Maggie and FUNAI don't stay stock for long.

thanks

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hi Bill & Dan

LOL, sounds like me. Sometimes it's good to be slow. Great thing about music is it has no timelines.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

wkhanna wrote:

...may be my new user ID.

Some interesting preliminary results which Dan & I had concerning Mu metal & cork testing are coming soon.

Bill - on the Hill
Practicing Curmudgeon & Audio Snob
- just an “ON” switch, Please –

I am on the edge of my seat. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

But, what I want to know...

Has your wife been giving you "those" kinda looks? You know, the kind of looks that display a deep sense of concern and worry about your mental health? Or just the kind that says, "Get that shit off my dining room table."

Hi Bill

Thanks for the pics. This helped a lot to see where the product started and where you went with it. It would be great now if we could reference a piece of music with you so we could listen on our systems and compare the sound.

thanks

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Love equipment pics .. Can never get my fill of them.

You've been holding out on us..you are a modder at heart ... Nice clean job.

Extra points awarded for the choice of beer...one of my favorites ;)

Have you had a chance to play with the tension of the circuit board screws? Are they as tight as original without the cork. You can play with them to have some fun.

Hi Toledo

I know right?

Your, probably saying the same thing I am "don't put chassis back on", but that's life. but for the heck of it sometime go chassis-less and adjust those screws and see what happens. The cork is a little more dampening then I like but your using so little that it might be a really good transfer.

Also having transformers next to main parts is such a big no no, not sure why designers keep doing it.

enjoy the new sound

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green wrote:

Hi Toledo

I know right?

Your, probably saying the same thing I am "don't put chassis back on", but that's life. but for the heck of it sometime go chassis-less and adjust those screws and see what happens. The cork is a little more dampening then I like but your using so little that it might be a really good transfer.

Also having transformers next to main parts is such a big no no, not sure why designers keep doing it.

enjoy the new sound

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Damage control to the rescue! Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica