>>> “wire directionality was TWENTY-FIVE years ago!” <<<

Just a few years out on that one Geoff !!

It was 31 years ago when John Atkinson (then the editor of the British Hi Fi News) was writing about the controversy surrounding the directionality of wires !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

>>> “I do admit the printed label of CDs can affect the sound (there is a simple scientific explanation to that)” <<<

iosiP. I am amazed at the sentence you have used i.e “There is a simple scientific explanation to that” !!!!!!!

If there WAS a simple scientific explanation then there WOULD BE NO CONTROVERSEY !!

The “bits is bits” brigade would then lay down and roll over and accept that, yes, something like that CAN affect the sound of their beloved technology !!!!!!!!!!

You have not thought it through sufficiently. IF there is STILL controversy, then there is so obviously NO simple scientific explanation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

But only after you tell me the reason why it works for LP labels and other stuff.
Is this fair enough?

iosiP wrote:

Just say that snake oil and deception also came a long way during the last decade.
N.B. Except for wire directionality, which I find legit.

I'm sure you're just being a typical paranoid audiophile. Like natives on remote jungle isles, audiophiles are a bit superstitious.

A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. - Arthur C. Clarke

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

geoff said

">>> “wire directionality was TWENTY-FIVE years ago!” <<<

then may

Just a few years out on that one Geoff !!

It was 31 years ago when John Atkinson (then the editor of the British Hi Fi News) was writing about the controversy surrounding the directionality of wires !!"
_______________________

Actually if you check your audio and electric history journals wire direction has been studied since the early 1900's.

Current flow in cable has not only needed to travel one way, but both and the early audio signal guys worked on designing which cables did better than others in one way signal paths and two way. If you look it up you will see both along with their studies on how to recharge a cable to get it to reverse flow. Pretty interesting studies really. If you do a little digging you can also see audio signal saturation studies. Those are the ones I did myself after reading some good teachings by engineers starting from the 50's. There were quite a few studies on the electric flow and also the audio signal and it's hosts.

Another good place to start today is http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Analytical_Chemistry/Electrochemistry/Voltaic_Cells/Case_Study%3a_Battery_Types/Rechargeable_Batteries

and or Redox

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

With my own experiments I found that cryo treated cable had a harder time recharging than basic cables or heat treated cables. Also stranded was harder to reverse the flow than solid core, but this was only on soild core less than 20 gauge.

Geoff, if you do a real time testing on this be prepared for a long study cause the burnin on cable never ends because of the varying signal that audio gives. people who do the quick A/B/A are really not very in the know on long term changes that take place in the audio signal. Not that A/B/A is a bad thing, but it is only a temporary study at best, as parts reactions to the signal are in a continuum.

Anything in a continuum state is also in constant change.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

I hate to be the one to point it out but everything you wrote is virtually irrelevant to the discussion of wire directionality, at least in the sense we are using the term today in audio and on this thread. Thanks for the lecture, anyway.

By the way I am pretty sure I just set the new world record for low mass systems. Are you ready for this? 10 ounces for the Sony Walkman cassette player and 14 oz for the Sony Walkman CD player. That includes the earphones. Is there like a Tunee Hall of Fame?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

does everyone here think that if you color the label of a vinyl LP, it will change the sound? How is it, specifically, that this could happen? or if you change the color of the shelf? Do I have to smoke something before hearing these changes?

David Harper wrote:

does everyone here think that if you color the label of a vinyl LP, it will change the sound? How is it, specifically, that this could happen? or if you change the color of the shelf? Do I have to smoke something before hearing these changes?

David, David... David. The trick is to cut colored scotch tape into perfect circles and THEN put it on the labels. Not just any scotch tape, Quantum Scotch tape. They are called quantum dots, and quite expensive. They really improve the sound of your high compliance cartridge if you put a Quantum Penny on the headshell, sold seperately for 27.50, not including the penny. But only a pre 1992 penny, by then everyone started using medium compliance MM and low compliance MC's. So the later pennies are copper-non-grata.

Not to be confused with the Quantum Octave line of power filters, designed by actual electrical engineers and marketed by the actually respected accessory company, Nordost until the day finally came when Nordost purchased the already respected company. The original Quantum 8 power line filter is excellent, I know, I have one.

Sorry, I couldn't resist myself.

Michael:

Great post & I continue to be a fan.

No text

I suggest you keep your day job.

You wrote,

"Sorry, I couldn't resist myself."

Congratulations, that was almost an actual sentence.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
We do Artificial Atoms Right

>>> “May, I promise to tell you the reason
But only after you tell me the reason why it works for LP labels and other stuff.
Is this fair enough?” <<<

iosiP.

I did a reply to you yesterday but it seems that it never 'got through' correctly !!

I will make another attempt later.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

David Harper wrote:

does everyone here think that if you color the label of a vinyl LP, it will change the sound? How is it, specifically, that this could happen? or if you change the color of the shelf? Do I have to smoke something before hearing these changes?

Actually back when I had my big vinyl rig I got good results using the PWB Chunky Violet Pen around the outer edge of the records. This is the same violet pen I use around the outer edge of CDs for my Sony Walkman CD player. If you don't have a PWB violet pen you can substitute an ordinary Sharpie CHISEL TIP purple pen. Four one inch stripes at N, E, W, and S around the outer edge will be OK, no need to color the entire circumference. Coloring the CD outer edge purple (violet) is just one of the techniques for coloring CDs in the article I linked to over on Tweaks Forum a couple days ago. In case you missed it, here it is again:

http://machinadynamica.com/machina23.htm

See, all you have to do is ask.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

>>> “May, I promise to tell you the reason

But only after you tell me the reason why it works for LP labels and other stuff.

Is this fair enough?” <<<

I don’t have a simple scientific explanation only an explanation arrived at from considerable listening experience. However, YOU are claiming that there is a “simple scientific explanation”.

>>> “I do admit the printed label of CDs can affect the sound (there is a simple scientific explanation to that)” <<<

So I am eagerly looking forward to hearing your ‘simple scientific explanation’.

What I suggest as an explanation is that it is us (human beings) who are doing the reacting – to the coloured printing on the label side of CDs, to the coloured printing on the labels of LPs, to the coloured printing on the actual LP record outer covers etc and to the various different colours of and on things in the listening environment and NOT that the actual audio signal is doing the reacting and that it is OUR reaction which changes how we resolve the musical information !!

I would refer you to so many people’s reactions after applying certain chemicals to these SAME coloured areas and getting similar improvements in the sound as one can get by applying certain colours. Very similar descriptions to the description given by Greg Weaver in his article on the effect of the UltraBit Platinum-Plus chemical.

Please see my reply to Michael Green in Tweakers section under the heading “Being Fair”.

Greg’s description after using the UltraBit Platinum-Plus chemical.:-

>>> “And talk about enhanced spatial performance! Post treatment reveals more "space" between instruments, and greater "air" around them. We are treated to a more focused soundstage, with greater specificity to images. Staging is typically slightly wider, deeper, and taller, with heightened "illumination" of the rear left and right corners of the soundstage. The result is an overall perspective that is more honest, more faithful to reality, with better focus and more realistically sized.” <<<

And, in Greg’s article, he refers to the chemical ALSO being effective when applied to LPs.

>>> “Greg quotes from the producer of the “UltraBit Platinum-Plus” liquid - “George has created the descriptive phrase "Optical Impedance Matching" treatment or OIM for short, to describe how UltraBit Platinum-Plus™ works.” - implying it is working “optically” !!” <<<

And Greg then goes on to say :-

>>> “But, this liquid is also claimed to be as effective for ‘treating’ LPs !! Which are “NON optical” !! So, how can an “optical” explanation be also used for a similar effect (improvement in the sound) from a NON optical object ??? “ <<<

Precisely !! How can an ‘optical’ explanation be also used for a similar improvement in the sound when exactly the same observation happens from a NON optical object ? If a similar technique is used on both an optical object AND a non optical object and the resulting observation is similar, then the explanation MUST BE a “non optical” explanation.

What you have to be aware of, iosiP, is that similar descriptions of an effect in the sound by using certain chemicals is also given by the use of Nordost’s ECO 3 chemical. That the sound is improved by it’s use on the LABELS of LPs, on the LABEL side of CDs, and on the outer insulation of cables (including AC power cords). The explanation put forward for the Nordost chemical is that it is ‘dealing with’ static. This explanation is then challenged when one can get a similar effect (on the sound) if their chemical is applied to such as a passive AC power, passively dangling from a table lamp, on a table some 20-30 feet away from influencing any audio equipment or audio signal !! “Static” explanation now ???????????

In an earlier reply Michael G said that he thought:-

>>> “The liquid treatments were a form of dampening” <<<

Yet another, different, explanation being put forward for the effect of chemicals on “sound”.

I would STILL suggest, iosiP, that there isn’t a “SIMPLE scientific explanation” as you believe !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

I think that this is where too much is lost in that the notion that we can "fix it later" so just add up the tracks and pack it up. I can even hear that if you stay first generation of a well recorded performance redbook sounds very nice. Once you start "fixing it" with EQ, compression, etc. all bets are off. I know their gear is the best and their ADDA's beyond reproach, but it is still less than the original. Plus, too much is done at 2448 which isn't really an improvement to me.

Things are getting better and I can usually hear if Sterling Sound has done the mastering. My wife has a favorite artist whose first album I had a hard time understanding her lyrics, but the second one, mastered by Ted Jensen, was so good my wife could even hear it. She is not a audiophile, but even she had to admit that great engineering can make all the difference.

I don't think I'd want to be known as the Cosmo Kramer of audio. Cassettes? Really?

And exactly how do you conclude cassettes are a Cosmo Kramer product? Woman's intuition?

:-)

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Very funny, pretty boy. But since you're the Big Liar here I can't say I can blame you too much for such snarky comments. They are your calling card of late. What else can you say. Nothing. You are kind of the Newman of the group, the inept loud one. Heh, heh

Very funny, pretty boy. But since you're the Big Liar here I can't say I can blame you too much for such snarky comments. They are your calling card of late. What else can you say? You are the Newman of the group, the inept loud one. Heh, heh

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7266.html

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7290.html

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7291.html

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7275.html

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7012.html

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/isolation/messages/7014.html

Of course, there's more...

Geoffy writes:

"Take a cable with a black jacket and listen to it so younger [sic] an idea what it sounds like. Then wrap the outside of the black jacket say 1/4 the length with WHITE electrical tape. Listen to the cable again. You should be able to hear the sound is better with the white tape around the jacket."

Go back to http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_m... and read where you went wrong here.

Are you smarter than a 5th Grader, Geoffy?

Nope.

ChrisS, is it true you severely injured your nose when Michael turned right suddenly while out for a morning stroll?

A tear.

Tootles,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

...all over yourself!

Go home.

Sleep it off.

Everybody else can read all about you.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Machina-Dynamica/Falls-Church-Maryland-22042/Machina-Dynamica-False-claims-about-electronic-enhancement-products-Falls-Church-Maryland-286484

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Who's trolling who? And who's stalking who? Did someone piss in your Wheaties? Try to stay on topic, I know it's difficult for you.

Nice stalking with you. When you have something of any import to say just tap me on the shoulder.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Secret handshake? One assumes it's the handshake used car salesmen use at used car salesmen conventions. Or maybe the handshake of the Branch Davidians. Oh, well, in any case those who are incapable of learning are condemned to reliving the past. Good luck in your quest for mediocrity. And yeah, I totally get your whole winning customers over by aggressively over complimenting them Schtick.

Ralph Waldo Emerson — ‘A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

MG--you have said in previous posts that your only listening room is 9x9 and yet you have a 25-foot soundstage by actual measurement. How is this possible? How can you measure an illusion? As for what you said about engineers in 1969 building 25-foot stages into pop music albums, I've read about a thousand articles from those engineers which said that, sadly, most pop music is glorified mono and pan-potted across a stage BETWEEN the speakers. If you place your speakers two hundred feet apart, I guess you can call it a two-hundred foot stage, but if your room is 9x9 you can' do that. Maximum stage is 9 feet. The more I read your posts the more I'm convinced that you are simply reproducing the inside of a car. No corners, just rounded edges, speakers on the extreme right and left, sound enveloping the driver side to side, front to back and overhead. That's what the corner reflectors do, take away the corners so the music goes everywhere, which it didn't do when the engineer laid it down. I get a kick out my car stereo, but I wouldn't want to listen to it on a daily basis. Every stage I've heard musicians play on was in front of me and only in front, and extended from the left wall to the right. The only time I hear music go over my head and behind me is in a movie theater watching a computer-generated action flick. Please don't tell me you've heard string quartets hunched around a microphone within a span of eight feet produce a 25-foot stage. If so, maybe something is wrong with YOUR setup.

All:

I can personally validate this general statement:

When an audio system is designed very well, and the room it is contained within is also designed specifically with the intent of playing back audio, then in a, say, 9' wide room, with again properly placed two channel stereo speakers, NOT 5.1, one actually can PERCEIVE a significantly wider and deeper and sometimes even higher soundstage than the physical room dimensions.

I can personally vouch for this even on my relatively modest British "mid-fi" system in a room NOT specifically tuned for audio; but with carefully chosen audio components and very careful speaker placement. My speakers are exactly 7' apart...yet on many recordings, I can PERCEIVE music 4 feet outside R and outside L of the physical placement of my speakers. Also, I can perceive a forward projection and a backward projection further than the physical constraint of my rear wall behind the speakers; and certainly in front of the speaker grills/baffles.

The human mind is an intriguing thing indeed....and I am certain many an audiophile would back up these fairly basic and direct statements.

"Perception is reality."
--Lee Atwater, Political Consultant and Strategist

Respectfully,

Ron

All:

I saw a few posts on this thread stating a valid, formal and yet claimed to be elegantly "simple" scientific explanation regarding the printed label of CD's having a direct correlation to the audio signal. Let's hear it!

Curioser and Curioser..

Ron

>>> cd labels and audio quality

All:

I saw a few posts on this thread stating a valid, formal and yet claimed to be elegantly "simple" scientific explanation regarding the printed label of CD's having a direct correlation to the audio signal. Let's hear it!
Curioser and Curioser..” <<<

Hi Ron,

There have been a few explanations put forward for the effect of the colours etc on the printed side of CDs.

You are asking for a “simple scientific” explanation !! IF there was/is a “simple scientific” explanation, there would be no controversy !! I have said this to Michael many times.

People’s observations have been that ‘treating’ the label side of CDs gives them an improvement in the sound, but as yet there has not been an explanation which has satisfied everyone. So, as I also keep saying to Michael. There are STILL questions, on a shelf, awaiting answers !!

We, ourselves, were aware that colours are a problem - re sound – over 30 years ago, before we ever owned a CD player or any CDs.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

Mystery solved! It was Costin who opined that there's a simple scientific explanation why the CD label can affect the sound. Unfortunately he didn't actually say what that simple scientific explanation is.

Costin opined a while back on this thread,

"May, unfounded extrapolation is always bad! I do admit the printed label of CDs can affect the sound (there is a simple scientific explanation to that)..... but when you extrapolate to LPs or the room you're mixing different things and the result is less than credible. Of course, if you can explain your findings I will be happy to hear you do it."

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Here are a few explanations why the CD label can affect the sound off the top of my head. Agree/disagree? Are they elegant?

1. The color of the ink on the label influences the scattered laser light inside the transport compartment thereby affecting the way the physical data is read.

2. The static electrical charge on the surface of the CD builds up during play as the CD spins. Neutralizing the static charge with ionizer or anti static spray improves the sound therefore one can conclude the static charge is not good for the sound, no?

3. The label is out of round as is the entire CD in many cases. This out of round condition makes the CD wobble during play and therefore affects the sound!you know! since the physical data is nanoscale, so wobbling makes the servo mechanism work overtime.

4. The ink used in making the graphics on the label is slightly magnetic. Demagnetizing the CD improves the sound so one could reasonably conclude that a magnetic label is not good for the sound, no?

5. Placing a Morphic Message Label over the COMPACT DIGITAL AUDIO DISC logo on the CD improves the sound. Therefore one can possibly conclude that the logo ITSELF is bad for the sound, no? Yes, I know, it might be a damping effect, but that we can easily eliminate from possible explanations, no? The same logic also holds for other words and symbols on the CD label, such as RCA, MADE IN USA, SONY, the Columbia EYE symbol, etc.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green wrote:

Every source that has ever come down the production line has it's own unique makeup and sound. This is why MGA/RoomTune recommends having tunable audio systems able to play the wide range of variables.

Visit us on TuneLand http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/ and see the answers others have found and are finding in real time.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune
http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/

While your tenacity at trolling for new recruits here is exemplary, your post as often the case is waay off topic. Sometimes it's best not to say anything. At least that's what Einstein advised.

Tootles,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

You sure can talk some shit, Mask Man. I cannot actually remember when in all of your rambling you got the bizarre idea in your head that May and I are the same person and that we conduct tests together, or that anyone who expresses disagreement with you must be your enemy, but like a lot of what you claim and what you appear to believe is almost like your own personal bizarre fantasy. Maybe all of this audio Nervosa, all of the getting up and tuning the whole room after every record and wanting to listen to music 24 hours a day has finally taken it's toll. It's like the siege mentally associated with the Nixon White House and Jim Jones at Jonestown and the Branch Davidians.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

Michael, you said :-

>>> “Challenging me, May ? You talk to me using words without practicing their meaning. I on the other hand "engage" in the practice of their meaning. The whole idea of a challenge is to engage in the contest of doing.” <<<

It is not a contest, Michael. It is about everyone getting people to obtain the very best sound from their equipment and choice of music. And I have explained, repeatedly, just WHY I challenge you and WHICH points I challenge you on. I challenge you on your repeated claims that YOUR answer is THE answer, that YOUR method is THE method and that YOUR truth is THE truth !!! The best way for people to get the best sound is for them to use whatever suits THEM from both ‘fixed’ and ‘variable’ techniques.

>>> “Or others have a different level they wish to take their hobby to than you and May do,” <<<

AGAIN with the presumptions, Michael. The level I wish people to take their hobby is NOT restricted by just variable techniques!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I believe BOTH variable AND fixed techniques should be described to them !!

I KNOW that you and your tunees will gain success with many of your recommendations – they can’t fail to do so because I agree with your comment (below) that people’s equipment and listening environment HAVE a lot more to offer than anyone has ever realised.

>>> “and realizing their equipment and environments have a lot more to offer than they previously thought or experienced.” <<<

But, your variable tuning method is NOT the ONLY answer, nor is it the ONLY method, nor is it, in any way, THE truth !!

You don’t have THE answer to exactly what the person who wants a specific effect from Dvorak’s New World does. Yes, you can say “Try A and see of it gives you the effect you wish for. If trying A does not give you the effect you wish for, then try B. If trying B does not give you the effect you wish for, then try C. If trying C does not give you the effect you wish for, then try D. If trying D does not give you the effect you wish for, then try E.

If they DO GET the effect they wish for from Dvorak’s New World after trying E, then you appear to be correct, and they are happy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! However, when desiring a specific and probably a different effect from (say) Ravel’s Bolero, maybe E does not do it for them, so you suggest trying F or even going back to trying A, B, C or D again !!!!! So, after various attempts, they might achieve the specific effects they wish for, then, yes, your recommendations could be claimed as a success.

I will quote from your own words to illustrate my point. You say :-

>>> “Re : Using Tuning Blocks!

I would recommend reading up on when and why they are used by some of the members up here. I for example change their positioning anytime I want a presentation change. For example if my drums are sounding tight but I want more air and body I will adjust for that. The key to this is to get use to the sound of your blocks and come up with your own voicing plans based on the sound they are giving you at the time of listening. You might find (I do) that they sound great with 4 on some recordings and the next you might favor 3. I basically learn the sound of each block I use and then as I'm listening make any change accordingly.” <<<

You constantly claim to have THE answer. You don’t, Michael !!!!

Regarding such as colours, you say :-

>>> “Hook up a light dimmer in a room, and have several colors of bulbs there. Choose a color and start slowly from the bottom of the scale of brightness and look at how the colors in the room change from barely on to full. Big difference Notice too, that every color cast a different change sceme. The room reacts to each color in different ways.” <<<

The room DOES NOT REACT to each color in different ways. The room itself does NOT have any colour preference or reaction !!

Yes, different colours in the room create differences in the sound but it is NOT the room reacting !!! So, NO, Michael, you don’t have the answers to everything that is going on with sound !!!

You haven’t answered what a colour is affecting to then affect the sound.

You haven’t answered what the presence of the Schuman Resonance in the listening environment is affecting to then affect the sound.

You haven’t answered what different chemicals are doing, in the listening room, to then affect the sound.

I have said before and I will repeat again. There are STILL questions, on the shelf, awaiting answers.
Questions starting with “What on earth is going on re this, that, that and that?”

What you DO know is that one can try A and get a change in the sound. That you can try B, C, D, E, F, etc and gets changes in the sound every time. But you don’t have all the answers to the questions HOW? WHY? And WHAT is going on?

>>> “Challenging me, May ? You talk to me using words without practicing their meaning. I on the other hand "engage" in the practice of their meaning. The whole idea of a challenge is to engage in the contest of doing.

So far for two years I have seen you and geoff "do" nothing but avoid a challenge.
May & geoff, if you expect people to take your words seriously, you must first understand and be willing to be
"a part of" “ <<<

Re the subject of “doing”.

I am following, with interest, what Ron is attempting to do with his (the) transformer. I see you are discouraging him from going down the Mu Metal and cork route. I hope he posts photos of his results with the transformer just like someone else (called ‘sonic’) has done on your site.

I have no doubt that Ron will achieve changes in his sound, whatever he ends up doing and I would like to make clear that I have no problems which whatever are his results if he is happy with them but whilst he is trying to achieve results with the transformer he is being encouraged (or rather discouraged from doing other things) to walk past, to swerve around, to trip over other things which are as much a problem – on his way to ‘treating’ the transformer !!

For example. From his photos of the innards of his equipment there must be 16 plus capacitors and resistors !! ALL 16 plus capacitors and resistors are a problem and need ‘dealing with’!! There must also be many empty (unused) sockets at the back of his equipment. ALL are a problem and are adversely affecting the sound !!

YES, Michael. Transformers ARE a problem. But, really, what are you offering the numerous people who DON’T want to remove the transformer from the equipment, DON’T want to stand it on wooden blocks outside the equipment, DON’T want to place further wooden blocks on top of it (as illustrated by ‘sonic’) ? Surely, you would have to offer them a ‘treatment’ which allowed them to keep the transformer inside the equipment ? Surely that ‘treatment’ would then remain a ‘fixed’ treatment because people would not want to keep going into their equipment to alter this ‘treatment’ for each different recording ?

Ditto the capacitors and resistors !!! Ditto the empty (unused) sockets !!!

Take the problem of the empty (unused) sockets. They are not a variable problem – to be ‘treated’ for some recordings and not ‘treated’ for other recordings. They are a problem – full stop – for all recordings !!! So, any ‘treatment’ would be fixed – done and left !!

Far from me “not doing anything”, I posted recently on this forum that one can experiment, for themselves, by applying pieces of sticking plaster over each empty (unused) socket, listen for a short time to a piece of music, get used to that sound, then remove the pieces of sticking plaster and see if one can listen again with the same pleasure. If they find that they cannot listen now with the same pleasure, then they know now that something has to be done with the empty (unused) sockets.

If something is a problem, then it is problem and if it is a fixed problem, then it is a fixed problem and requires a ‘fixed’ solution.

To use another example. Yes, the person called ‘sonic’ may be able to change his sound by rearranging an array of tuning blocks along his concrete window sill but if he does not know to ‘treat’ such as the capacitors and resistors in his equipment or to ‘treat’ such as the empty (unused) sockets in his equipment, then he will be working with such problems still remaining in the background !! I see that he HAS attempted to ‘treat’ the components with what he refers to as ‘space cones’ but I also see that you have been referring to those as ‘acting as antenna’ and been somewhat discouraging about such ‘fixed’ tweaks !!!

I do appreciate, on your site, that you try to be as helpful to people as you can but I see your helpfulness as concentrating only on the products YOU produce and a general pooh poohing of other solutions, especially if it might entail any solution being ‘left fixed’ !!!

If one can cryogenically freeze CDs and change the sound, then there is a problem associated with CDs. If one can apply a demagnetiser to CDs and change the sound, then there is a problem associated with CDs. If one can apply a chemical to the label side of CDs, then there is a problem associated with CDs If one can apply a colour to the edge of CDs and change the sound, then there is a problem associated with CDs.
NOT to be ignored !!!!!

And I also suggested in an earlier posting that people try the experiment of placing a plain piece of paper under one of the four feet of a piece of equipment. Something which we have recommended for over 20 years !!

In 2015, Michael, I see you are suggesting the same thing :-

>>> “Sometimes even putting something as thin as a piece of paper can be enough to make this charge go away.” <<<

We ARE still “doing” Michael. But I prefer not to abuse the goodwill extended by Stereophile in allowing manufacturers to participate in their Chat forum !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don’t see other manufacturers push, push, push their products as much as you do on the Stereophile forum. I know you do this because you believe you have THE answer, that you have THE method and that you have THE truth. You don’t, Michael. You only have some solutions – only some !! Just like everyone else !!

THAT is why I challenge you !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May:

I missed your post about plaster...

I am intrigued.. Could you please take a moment and explain how to do it and the exact material? Or just provide a link to your chat.

Kind Regards,

Ron

>>> “I missed your post about plaster...
I am intrigued.. Could you please take a moment and explain how to do it and the exact material? Or just provide a link to your chat “ <<<

Hi Ron. My posting is copied below (from late December 2014 or early January 2015):-

>>> “Heading ‘Another Subject’.

Now let me bring in another subject which relates to ‘sound’ and to gaining good sound.

Peter and I discovered, some time back, that holes and empty sockets were a problem regarding getting good sound. Others in the audio industry, completely independently, also began to report the same thing. They had found that they could improve the sound by either taping over the holes and empty sockets or inserting dummy (i.e. passive) plugs into the empty sockets of audio equipment.

One explanation put forward was that electromagnetism was escaping from the empty (unused) sockets and interfering with ………………..what ?

Another explanation put forward was that RF was entering the equipment, via these empty sockets, and causing mayhem to the audio signal.

But placing sticking plaster over empty sockets and holes cannot keep out RF. RF can go through brick walls !! And yet the sound WAS improved by doing such seemingly ridiculous things !!

Neither of those explanations can, however, explain that doing exactly the same technique on ALL holes in the listening room and with ALL empty sockets – even empty (unused) sockets in passive electronic items in the room, gives similar improvements in the sound !!!

So, just what is going on ???? You see, Michael, yet MORE questions requiring answers.

Now, Michael. If one places sticking plaster over empty (unused) sockets and over holes and gains an improvement in the sound, then surely this sticking plaster (or dummy plugs) would then be left in place ? I.e a FIXED ‘tweak’.

The sticking plaster or dummy plugs would not be left in place for a particular recording so as to have expansive treble but removed for another recording to try to get more detail from the drum section. I.e a Variable ‘tweak’.

If the technique of blocking empty sockets and holes gives an improvement in the sound, then that is what it does !!! And one therefore uses that technique first and get that problem dealt with BEFORE going on to try to gain further improvements using other techniques.

So simple an experiment for people to try for themselves !!!

So, as I say, BOTH ‘fixed’ and ‘variable’ techniques should be used in tandem.

Next maybe we will look at such a device as the Shakti Stone and where that comes in the scheme of things audio and good sound !!!!” <<<

Since I wrote that Ron I noticed a reference to something which Nordost was introducing at a recent Hi Fi Show. I think it was called something like QV2 device and was intended to insert into free AC sockets. Although many other people have reported just inserting such as passive phono plugs into their unused phono sockets and gaining improvements in their sound !!

I admit I was being slightly facetious in using the term sticking plaster – meaning the usual medical sticking plaster ones applies to cuts etc !! Although that CAN be used – separate pieces for each empty (unused) socket for experimental purposes, or, of course, normal insulation tape.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.