You are here

Log in or register to post comments
michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
and yet lol

May said

"You do not have THE answer to good sound, you do not have THE method for good sound and you do not have THE truth with regards to good sound !!!!!! Which is what you have constantly claimed and which I have constantly challenged."

mg

And yet, the phone rings and the emails come in saying that the listeners have indeed found the answers through tuning their systems.

also

This "method" is the exact "method" for making music.

interesting

Interesting May that the entire music industry counts on tuning, yet you say it is not the answer. How could I ever begin to take any of your long winded challenges serious when you don't even know what tuning is or does?

If you can't appreciate the method used in every musical performance in the world, and since the beginning of music, how could I possibly take you for anything more than a writer with tons of wind? Honestly May, you must do much better and go much "deeper" than this!

Being fair May, if you would have said something that we could have built on, that's exactly what would have happened, as is done on TuneLand, but you have no foundation without listening. Sorry but I have no desire what so ever to read you say the same things without any answers or direction of your own. I do however wish to point listeners to TuneLand where this is what we do, "tune".

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

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, let me give you the answer (the only straw you have)

I would put it in straight engineer's language:
1. The laser is supposed to reflect from the aluminium foil holding the pits and lands.
2. Actually, that foil is so thin it is rather transparent (hold a CD to the light and you'll see this).
3. So yes, the laser also relies on the label part of the CD, which can affect reflection depending on its color.
4. Therefore, coloring the label sound of the CD can improve the sound (the label paint is also - you guessed it - more or less transparent.

Now for the anecdotal facts: all ECM CDs have a grayish label with little black text written on it, so no use to futz with markers. Also, some FIM or Chesky gold CDs have a thick enough reflective foil that you don't need no painting to make them sound their best.

Now is it alles klar, Herr Kommissar?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Got a frog in your pocket?
tmsorosk wrote:

Wow, I think you've out done yourself May. Three long winded posts in 24 minutes, I don't know how anyone can type that fast let alone put any thought into it.

Hey, if you have something you need to get off your chest by all means let 'er rip. But these little drive by pot shots don't do much good. Go ahead, tell us what you really think. We can take it. We're all adults here. Well, except for Chris who I'm pretty sure is about fifteen. For someone who spends so much time on the forum you say rather little. What's up with that? Go head, spill your guts. You'll feel better. Scouts honor.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, you wrote something along the line of

"If tweaks A, B and C don't work for you maybe tweak E or F would" [not an exact quote, mind you, but I can go back and look for your precise wording if I need to].
Yep, none of your free tweaks worked for me nor for two of my buddies (and one is an experienced audio dealer). Now what is it you recommend, start buying your other tweaks and just hope one of them is working? Well, if your free tweaks didn't work may we not assume the principles are all wrong so we don't need to fork out money for tweaks based on the same principles?
So let's resume: your free tweaks provided no change for three experienced audiophiles, but now (all of the clear blue sky) we should hope the paid-for tweaks will blast us out of our listening chairs. And based on what, on your testimonies about extraordinary improvements? Sorry May but I'm skeptical when it comes to praises from the manufacturer: I've yet to see someone stating his/her products make no change whatever (and I'm not talking only audio but most other consumer goods) but still recommend people to buy them. Methink they'll be broke in less than a month (unless, of course, their customers have a wicked sense of humor).

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
I'd settle for....

Shoot I'd settled for people who when making claims would be willing to engage in these changes in a way that was practical. Holy smokes Batman! I've seen audioites avoid and evade with all the trickery that follows, but these go to the top of my spin-list.

How hard is it for someone, in the hobby of listening, to put on a piece of music and say I'm hearing this what are you hearing? It blows my mind that I'm on Stereophile forum and someone will defend their unwillingness to listen and compare. I've never seen, in any industry, people who refuse to do the very event. It's like going to the race track, filling the seats, and the drivers getting up and talking about the race they should be having yet not one person gets in their car. These guys are claiming some weird sense of some kind of victory, without ever going down the track itself. Shocking!

I mean this industry has got to be better than walking down to the dollar store and buying tape to bring back to their apartment and cut up in little pieces, or wrapping the cable in a different color with electric tape. It's got to be better than a designer saying "see it made a difference". Followed by "I don't know why" or "it made a difference when it shouldn't have". Or what's worse (or maybe the most funny), not being able to talk about the changes, reference them, or excepting what others have done with them having different results. Maybe I'm in the wrong hobby, but isn't this one of those that is about making change. I mean the last time I turned the tuning peg on a guitar it changed the sound, and when taking the time to learn the change I could actually put it in tune. The last time I did the same thing with the tuning bolt on one of my speakers the same thing happened. Or platform and again the same thing. I would think that this industry would have been around long enough that some of the basics would be in place, but when the hobby is turned into one big spin no wonder many haven't moved forward.

Has anyone stopped to ask the big question. Why are there so many reading and not posting? Or why are even the number of readers down? I can give you one opinion given to me just this morning. Many of the listeners have already moved to some sort of tuning and out grown these talks. They have moved on to the actual doing of the hobby, and would rather be listening and learning about the art of.

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re Your answer

>>> “I would put it in straight engineer's language:” <<<

I know the “straight engineers’s language”. And what those “straight engineers” are not dealing with are the anomalies !!

The anomalies being:-

Yes, one can apply a colour to the edge of CDs and gain an improvement in the sound – as has been reported by many people !! BUT, one can apply exactly the same colour to the outer edge of an LP and get a similar improvement in the sound. One can apply exactly the same colour to the outer edge of the plastic case of an audio tape and get a similar improvement in the sound !! One can apply exactly the same colour to the end face of the end cap of a fuse and get a similar improvement in the sound !!

What price any explanation to do with a laser beam now ? There IS NO laser beam involved with LPs, audio tapes and fuses !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your original statement was :-

>>> “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.” <<<

You said I was “mixing different things” by bringing in LPs and things happening in the room BUT, Costin, when it is the SAME colour, giving identical improvements in the sound, then it is the same observations from using the same colour.

In any branch of science, when the same observation is made from the same application but on different things, and unexpectedly on different things, then this challenges any explanation dealing with only ONE of the observations !!

Of course the result will challenge credibility !! THIS is science in it’s raw state.

We (the world of audio) are still discovering what affects the ‘sound’, Costin, But in the particular example we have been discussing, there ARE some common denominators. We have the same colour, we have the same human being (the listener) and we have the same attempt to resolve the complexity of music !!!

We start from that point. Not from the point of the “straight engineers” giving their conventional explanation from one observation only or even just from reading the conventional theory text books !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Tweaks A B & C

>>> “May, you wrote something along the line of

"If tweaks A, B and C don't work for you maybe tweak E or F would" [not an exact quote, mind you, but I can go back and look for your precise wording if I need to].” <<<

Firstly. There are many things, in the modern listening environment, which have an effect on the ‘sound’ (on the musical information) – which is the part where Michael and I agree. In fact we both agree that EVERYTHING you do, in the listening environment, can have an effect on the sound. Not DOES have everytime but CAN have – so we recommend that people be aware of such things !!! And, as you yourself (and your friend) have discovered, some colours, in the room, can ‘have an effect’. But, obviously, NOT an effect on the audio signal travelling through the audio system or on the room’s acoustic air pressure waves !! So, let us at the moment say “some colours have an effect” on how people can react to their environment and that their reaction can affect how they resolve the complex musical information.

If one discovers this AND many other things which can affect the ‘sound’ and one is a professional member of the audio community, then one passes this observation on. In exactly a similar way in which Jean Hiraga (the editor of the French Hi Fi Magazine Revue du Son) some 35 years ago reported that he heard different cables ‘sound different’. He reported, to others, and in his magazine, what he had experienced.

We have always made it clear, from Day One, some 30+ years ago, that our devices and techniques are NOT dealing with the signal travelling through the audio system nor are they dealing with the acoustic air pressure waves in the room – that they are ‘dealing with the modern environment’ within which the human being is trying to cope and, whilst trying to cope, tries to also listen to the complexities of music.

In order to try to get people to start becoming aware, we told people of some things they could try, for themselves, free of charge, which we (and I might add others) had found gave improvements in the sound. But, because it is the individual person’s reaction involved we are aware that some things will work for some but not for others – and then, what works really well for some might not be as effective for others. SO, from the variety of things (free tweaks) we list if ONE thing works for someone, then they are at the START of being aware !!!! In exactly the same as with Jean Hiraga’s discovery. If people experimented – from his first article – and tried four different cables but did not hear any differences in them but then tried a fifth cable and HEARD a difference in the sound, then, at THAT point, at the FIFTH cable, THEY were at the START of being aware – that there could be differences in the sound of cables !!!

What you are wanting to do, Costin, is the equivalent of dismissing Jean Hiraga’s experiences because YOU couldn’t hear any differences in (say hypothetically) the first six different cables you tried !!!

>>> “Yep, none of your free tweaks worked for me nor for two of my buddies (and one is an experienced audio dealer). Now what is it you recommend, start buying your other tweaks and just hope one of them is working?” <<<

From DAY ONE, Costin, we have offered a free sample of our basic product – the Rainbow Foil. Obviously if people can’t hear any effect on their sound from trying the sample strips of Rainbow Foil, then they aren’t going to buy a full pack, are they? Or anything else !!! And, again, from DAY ONE a full money back guarantee if any product is returned within 21 days has been available to our customers!!

>>> “So let's resume: your free tweaks provided no change for three experienced audiophiles,” <<<

So, why on earth would the immediate presumption, made by you, based on three people’s experiences of “free suggestions”, be that therefore nothing else we produce would or could be effective ?

>>> “And based on what, on your testimonies about extraordinary improvements? Sorry May but I'm skeptical when it comes to praises from the manufacturer:” <<<

Don’t you realise, Costin, that the praises do not come from us, they come from other reviewers – extending over a period of 30 years !!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
>>> “And yet, the phone rings

>>> “And yet, the phone rings and the emails come in saying that the listeners have indeed found the answers through tuning their systems.
also

This "method" is the exact "method" for making music.” <<<

Why wouldn’t the phone ring and e-mails come in ? I don’t say you haven’t got any answers or any methods – I say you haven’t got THE answer, or THE method or THE truth – which is what you have repeatedly claimed !!!

There ARE other methods for improving the sound !!!!!!!!!!!!

>>> “Interesting May that the entire music industry counts on tuning, yet you say it is not the answer.” <<<

Again with the exaggeration, Michael. The ENTIRE music industry ?????

Wow, I wonder if the ENTIRE music industry actually knows this – I e that YOUR method is THE method ??????

You have used the words “music industry”. With musical instruments, yes, musical instruments have to be ‘tuned’ OR are you trying to link the words “music industry” to also include the “audio industry” ???? So that you can infer that YOUR ‘tuning’ techniques cover EVERYTHING - the music industry AND the audio industry ????????????

>>> “If you can’t appreciate the method used in every musical performance in the world, and since the beginning of music,” <<<

Again, Michael, using the technique of talking about “every musical performance” in an attempt to stretch your techniques – recommended for use in audio matters – as though the whole thing “music industry AND audio world” is one seamless entity – with one set of ‘tuning’ techniques for improving the ‘sound’ of EVERYTHING !! And, then, using that inferred “seamless entity” to suggest that because I challenge YOUR “tuning methods” as the only method of improving the sound of people’s AUDIO, I therefore, by implication, can’t appreciate the method of the tuning of musical instruments in ‘every musical performance’.

You really are something !!!

>>> “I do however wish to point listeners to TuneLand where this is what we do, "tune".” <<<

Let me look (and have others look) at one aspect of what you do and what you recommend. You recommend that people do not use what you call “fixed tweaks”, but to rely on “variable tuning” to ‘fix’ things (soundwise) !!!

Now, Michael. The chemical mixture within the plastic insulation of audio cables can affect the “sound”. Not affect the audio signal travelling through the cable, not affect the vibrations which might be taking place in that cable but nevertheless can “affect the sound” –i.e affect how we (human beings) resolve the musical information !! I repeat, Michael. The chemical mixtures of the outer insulation of audio cables !!

You would recommend that people do NOT apply such as a chemical (say the Nordost ECO3 chemical) to the outer insulation of an audio cable because it is a “Fixed tweak” but to rely instead on such as your Magic Wood Blocks to place underneath that audio cable to ‘prop up’ that cable to do what ??? Deal with any vibrations ??? To ‘variable tune’ ?

To (say hypothetically) use one Magic Wood Block if one wants to emphasise the piano, use two Magic Wood Blocks if one wants to put the trumpets forward, to use three Magic Wood Blocks if one wants to hear more of the walking bass ?? In other words, to ‘variable tune’ the sound !! But, Michael, how do you know what chemical mixtures are in the insulation materials of everyone’s audio cables ? Do you tell them that there is a strong possibility that applying such as Nordost’s ECO 3 chemic al to the outer insulation of the audio cables they are going to use your Magic Wood Blocks underneath could, quite possibly, give them a greater improvement in their sound than relying solely on “variable tuning” with your Magic Wood Blocks under cables ???????

I repeat. There ARE other methods for improving the ‘sound’.

Now, Michael. Before you react again !! I am not saying that your Magic Wood Blocks could not give some improvement in the sound in their own right and even in addition to anything chemically done to the outer insulation of the audio cables resting on them. What I AM saying is that with at LEAST two things going on to do with sound and cables, that if you DON’T ‘treat’ the outer insulation of the existing cables which people already have, then using just a “tuning” technique means that one is juggling with the ‘tuning’ technique whilst having a major problem affecting ‘sound’ NOT dealt with !!

There are many things involved in getting good sound over and above ‘tuning’ techniques.

So, Michael, when you lecture me on “don’t you know about the musical industry May ?”, “Aren’t you aware that “the entire musical industry counts on tuning May”. Be assured Michael that

I AM aware of that AND much more besides !!!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
"You said I was “mixing

"You said I was “mixing different things” by bringing in LPs and things happening in the room BUT, Costin, when it is the SAME colour, giving identical improvements in the sound, then it is the same observations from using the same colour."
Supposing it does! What if it doesn't?

"What you are wanting to do, Costin, is the equivalent of dismissing Jean Hiraga’s experiences because YOU couldn’t hear any differences in (say hypothetically) the first six different cables you tried !!!"
Nope I don't dismiss Jean Hiraga's experience because there were no two cables sounding alike in my system.

"And, as you yourself (and your friend) have discovered, some colours, in the room, can ‘have an effect’. But, obviously, NOT an effect on the audio signal travelling through the audio system or on the room’s acoustic air pressure waves !!"
Of course they do, but only when visible since they affect the mood of the listener. OTOH, hidden applications of colors have no effect whatsoever.

Suppose I have no knowledge of English: how can a foil marked "Safe Hole" (or whatever you want) have a beneficial effect on my subconscious mind?

And so on...

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Ok May

So, go ahead and answer my recorded drum question.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
more tuning & those who "attempt" to make it something it isn't

May said

"You have used the words “music industry”. With musical instruments, yes, musical instruments have to be ‘tuned’ OR are you trying to link the words “music industry” to also include the “audio industry” ???? So that you can infer that YOUR ‘tuning’ techniques cover EVERYTHING - the music industry AND the audio industry ????????????"

mg

There is no such thing as "trying to link", they are one and the same. One of the huge mistakes in high end audio is, many refer to the playback as the audio chain. The audio chain goes all the way back to the instrument and May if you "were" an expert in the "music industry" you would know this.

May said

"Again, Michael, using the technique of talking about “every musical performance” in an attempt to stretch your techniques – recommended for use in audio matters – as though the whole thing “music industry AND audio world” is one seamless entity – with one set of ‘tuning’ techniques for improving the ‘sound’ of EVERYTHING !! And, then, using that inferred “seamless entity” to suggest that because I challenge YOUR “tuning methods” as the only method of improving the sound of people’s AUDIO, I therefore, by implication, can’t appreciate the method of the tuning of musical instruments in ‘every musical performance’."

mg

There is no attempting except for you "attempting" to make tuning look like it is something that it isn't. May, you try to point at tuning as a michael thing when michael is saying just the opposite. This is how I know you indeed have not gone deep enough. I'm sorry, but your spins mean little to me.

Neither geoff or May can answer the recording question cause they honestly don't know how to "tune" the stage.

If you read geoff, he tries to twist the Professional Audio Engineer, Performer, Mastering Engineer, Pro-audio designer, Pro-equipment (recording) as not being a part of the audiophile movement. So let's take a look at that audiophile movement. The "audiophile" was a word made popular by two gentlemen, J Gordon Holt and Harry Pearson. One J Gordon (amateur recorder) who started this magazine that we are talking on now, and the other TAS (the absolute sound) who's goal was to "make the listening sound like live music".

To make an "attempt" to divid the audio chain into anything other than what it is, is like going to the library and separating everything into the chapters and saying none of these belong together to make a book. May's and geoff's "attempts" at audio segregation is only an example of their lack of knowledge concerning the audio chain. Same as May's "attempt" at down playing the word "vibration".

In todays world of technology the words "vibration", "tuning" and "harmonizing" are the cutting edge. Some people are still in the age of "fixed" and do not understand the age of "variable". They treat energies as something to kill or stop, or set in a fixed position, instead of being able to get their minds around the continuum of energy itself. Their approach to technology is a 2D model in a 3D world. May and geoff are good examples of that age. It's good that they have a stake in the historical finding outs of, but they fail to see that the world as well is a continuum. They refer to newer technologies as not being as good as the old vs the rest of the tech world who understands incorporating. They get stuck at the very word technology, and don't get, the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes part. The world moves closer to the variables involved and they pull back to a position of, the world can't move forward without them.

I truly believe that May, not so much geoff, believes there is something that was missed in technology without her involvement, but without her being "involved" in the "doing" of todays world she has built a wall around her of defense. Her challenges have become lost within her word rambling, but it doesn't take much to see that she is at this point only able the voice "you haven't done this yet" which is the battle cry for those still living in the past. Geoff seems to be more of a troll first and an audio twister second.

Because we do live within that continuum, we are only good as innovators, dependent on our latest on going efforts. It's a common case for those not being able to move forward to get stuck in defending the past, and that's what I see both geoff and May doing and not much more. Someone like myself could say "we have been there" and all May or geoff has is a spin or as geoff does, calls me a lier, which honestly is easy enough to prove or not prove.

In the modern world of science, the "arguement" is only one part of the proof, and is usually done after the doing. The modern world has moved from theory to practice. Proof is no longer valid unless it is predictable in practice. Random testing can point to change, but the variables must be accounted for before theory turns into proof, and proof is always able to be put into practice. All the words in the world will not make something true. That goes for my products or anyones.

You who read these threads don't take May's comments about the "michael way" as serious. She is only using this as part of her defense. Tuning is about making predictable practices of change, not someone throwing something in an environment and shouting "IT MADE A CHANGE" followed by turning it into a sellable audio tweak, or worse saying it worked but "I don't understand why" which is May's modo. If something makes a change in the sound it has an explanation for that change. May or geoffy-boy (as we now call him) may not be able to come up with the explanation and not willing to accept anyone elses, but this stuff really has no mystery to it. Her challenges are only here to provoke a response in an "attempt" to keep her relevant. Provoke Syndrome is something you'll find all over forum pages as people try to posture through talking instead of doing the actual practice of. Nothing new just one of the things May and geoff spend much of their time doing.

As for myself I like the idea of practicing audio as my relevance. Being able to use tuning the audio signal as means to revealing the content and shaping the sound based on the original content is a much higher level of listening than a one size fits all fixed sound. Listening comes down to not only finding the content but revealing the different parts to that content. This requires some type of tuning, from plug and play all the way to variable signal processing. I'm not refering to DSP, but manually adjusting the audio signal itself through the method of tuning acoustics, electronics and mechanics. These are the 3 physical parts to audio. This doesn't mean these three are all there is. This is some of what May's problem with me is, and I get it even if she doesn't think so or "attempts" to make it look that way LOL. I look and always have at tuning as a whole (another problem May has with me). But as gets repeated over and over as a troll response to May, tuning is not something owned by me and I license it out. Far from actually. Tuning is about all the variables that have an influence on audio and the person listening to audio.

So as you the listener read through these threads I hope you come away with a better understanding of tuning or even wish to add your own experiences to the tuning community.

Thanks again for taking the time to read my posting.

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

pablolie
pablolie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 8 months ago
Joined: Oct 24 2013 - 11:58am
".. The audio chain goes all

".. The audio chain goes all the way back to the instrument .."

not sure i agree with that. that is the declared ideal, sure. but the best the audio chain can aspire to is to mirror what the sound engineer put together, which hopefully is as close as possible to what the musicians did.

that's the tragic of audio. that is also why, for once, i got upset when about 2 or 3 years ago it got fashionable to declare the Daft Punk album a reference. i was like "sure, the dynamics may be great, but (a) none of the stuff got recorded in the same place, it's all artificially mixed together (b) it's all processed stuff and they use vocoders, there is not a single acoustic reference there for heavens sake!"

my point is all we can hope to hear from our gear is the original recording. which sometimes can be a cruel thing. because many recordings of many brilliant performances actually suck. then the question is: do i want my audio chain to reproduce that faithfully and can i still enjoy it... or do i want it to magically flatter it and amplify elements that aren't there, and that probably will utterly falsify better recordings?

i love Bill Evans' Waltz for debby. utterly brilliant performance. but honestly you could listen to it as a 256k MP3 and not miss a damn thing, it is NOT a reference recording. there are two or three mikes there and the separation is very crude. and there are many more "reference recordings" like that. i'll say it - Keith Jarrett. love it. own them all. but there are prolly 3 mikes on his piano which, as you listen to it, makes it sound like his piano is 20 ft wide in most recordings, and i go "why doesn't anyone ever say it, why is this a hallowed reference piece?". for the dynamics, perhaps, not for the staging, but that's seldom mentioned.

my point is merely - sure we can hope the recording engineer did a good job and the instrument sound like the instrument. but there seems to be a universal music law that the best performance never gets the recording it deserves, and the most perfect reference recordings are of mostly sterile ho-hum performances.

personally - i want a system with enough wired-in warmth to not make my favorite music performances with ho-hum recordings sound unlistenable after listening to good recordings of good performances. which by definition requires a tad of imperfection and coloration.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
start to finish

Hi pablolie

My comment was the recording starts at the beginning, not about any preferences. If you took one million listeners you will have one million preferenced views. My point is far more simple, way before getting into any adjustments or choices or likes and dislikes. The recording obviously starts with the first note played in the hall, studio or any place the actual music is being made, the beginning of the audio chain.

I make no reference to the way you like it or what you think about what a system is or isn't doing.

Me saying ".. The audio chain goes all the way back to the instrument .." is just the simple fact that the music starts one place and travels all the way to the end as an audio pathway. If we didn't start with the very sound there would be no sound. As for the way it sounds, is about what goes on in that audio pathway.

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
>>> “I truly believe that May

>>> “I truly believe that May, not so much geoff, believes there is something that was missed in technology without her involvement, but without her being "involved" in the "doing" of todays world she has built a wall around her of defense. Her challenges have become lost within her word rambling, but it doesn't take much to see that she is at this point only able the voice "you haven't done this yet" which is the battle cry for those still living in the past.” <<<

If “my challenges have become lost”, then I will try to spell it out better.

I deliberately use examples of other people’s devices and techniques for two purposes.

Firstly. Because what they have discovered (and then developed their products and devices) are providing what I refer to as Clues – clues to other things, going on in the environment, which have an effect on the sound.

Secondly. Because I want to take things out of being personal to me and to our products and therefore to avoid personal attacks !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regarding the point you make Michael:-

>>> "you haven't done this yet" which is the battle cry for those still living in the past.” <<<

So, let me try to ‘spell it out’.

You, Michael, in you descriptions of your ‘variable tuning’ you refer to such as:-

>>> “The last time I did the same thing with the tuning bolt on one of my speakers the same thing happened. Or platform and again the same thing.” <<<

So, presumably this is the same instructions you give your customers. I don’t have any problem with that, Michael, if it gives you (and them) an improvement in the sound – which is what you have obviously discovered. I repeat, I have no problem with that.

Except that other things, present in the listening environment, are deliberately ignored. I use the word deliberately because you deliberately advise people not to do “fixed tweaks” – to rely on ‘variable tuning’ to recover information.

So, let us look at the scenario of Jack Smith following your ‘variable tuning’ instructions and ‘adjusting the tuning bolt on your speakers or doing the same thing on a platform”. What I say, Michael, is “What about (such as) the six different interconnect cables, in the room, with six different chemical mixtures used in their plastic insulation ?”

And, following your recommendations, left in Jack Smith’s listening room - NOT ‘treated’ with such as Nordost’s ECO 3 liquid. NOT ‘treated’ with such as the UltraBit liquid. NOT having a demagnetiser applied to them. ALL these techniques which could allow better ‘sound’ (better resolution of the complex music) but which are poohed, poohed by you Michael – because they are FIXED TWEAKS. How “head in the sand” can that be ???

Nothing to do with me, Michael and our products, or limited to what we have discovered. These people have also discovered how to improve the sound !!! Extra to ‘variable tuning’, extra to dealing with vibrations !!!

So, Jack Smith has (at least) 8 different problems – six different chemical mixtures in his six audio interconnect cables, then his loudspeakers and his ‘platform’. You are encouraging (allowing ?? what descriptive word would you like me to use??) Jack Smith to ignore the six cable plastic insulation problems and to only concentrate your ‘variable tuning’ as THE method, as THE answer and as THE truth !!!!! And as is shown in the next paragraph from you, Michael, your latest addition – they are today’s “cutting edge” !!

>>> “In todays world of technologythe words "vibration", "tuning" and "harmonizing" are the cutting edge. Some people are still in the age of "fixed" and do not understand the age of "variable". They treat energies as something to kill or stop, or set in a fixed position, instead of being able to get their minds around the continuum of energy itself. Their approach to technology is a 2D model in a 3D world. May and geoff are good examples of that age.” <<<

That paragraph, Michael, is absolutely typical of your thinking. That it is OTHERS who are not understanding !!!!

Today’s world, Michael, is in understanding just what, in the modern environment, is affecting how we resolve the complex musical information. I don’t dispute that doing such things as adjusting ‘tuning bolts’ can give people improvements in their sound but there is another entire area which you are actively encouraging people NOT to explore !!!!!!!!!! How is that “being at the cutting edge” ??????????

The chemical mixtures in the plastic insulation of audio cables, in the other materials, other plastic products, fabrics etc in the modern environment are nothing to do with “variable tuning” or “vibrations” procedures !!!!

You can’t “variable tune” out the adverse problems caused by some of these chemical mixtures. You have to ‘think out of the box”.

You keep quoting me as referring to things we began to discover some 30 years ago as though I am stuck in the past. It is that we began to discover things earlier than others – but such things are there and have been there all the time – to be discovered – and others have been gradually discovering similar things which affect the ‘sound’. THAT is why I refer to the other products and devices !!! THAT is why I call what they have also discovered CLUES !! Clues to things, in the modern environment, which has an effect on how we resolve the musical information !!

And that, Michael, is STILL going on – is STILL producing new techniques and new products !! TODAY and quite possibly TOMORROW and the day after that as well !!!!!

Your method is not THE method, your answer is not THE answer and your truth is not THE truth !!!!

I shall keep repeating, Michael, that there are OTHER THINGS which can affect the sound and how we can better resolve the complex musical information – AS WELL AS any of your tuning techniques.

Your method is not THE method, your answer is not THE answer and your truth is not THE truth !!!!

Don’t you realise Michael, when “slagging off” these other products, you are also ‘slagging off’ equally brilliant engineers.

Might I suggest that you read the article in Positive Feedback Online.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue76/acoustic_revive.htm

The article is on The Acoustic Revive Chronicles in the January/February 2015 issue and is about the products designed and made by a brilliant engineer, Ken Ishiguro.

About “Fixed Tweaks”, Michael !! About “Fixed Tweaks” !!!

>>> “Some people are still in the age of "fixed" and do not understand the age of "variable".<<<

Tell me Michael, does Ken Ishiguro come within your descriptive “still in the age of ‘fixed’ and ‘does not understand the age of ‘variable’ ???????????????

Your method is not THE method, your answer is not THE answer and your truth is not THE truth !!!!

Which is EXACTLY what you have claimed. I am NOT the one exaggerating – you are !!

If, after introducing such as a Schumann Resonance device into the room one can resolve much more of the musical information, then that means that that (further) information has been in the room all the time !!!! The Schumann Resonance device does not MAKE (introduce) ADDITIONAL musical score to what is already on the recording – so the further musical information one can resolve after the introduction of a Schumann Resonance device MUST BE the musical score which is already on the recording.

So, that leaves the question “Why was that additional information NOT being resolved before the introduction of a Schumann Resonance device ?” – When it has been shown that it was there – in the room – all the time ?”

Yes, Michael, I am back again with the questions. Questions which you, yourself, have stated:-

>>> “Done the questions and got the answers” <<<

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
answering May

May said

"So, let us look at the scenario of Jack Smith following your ‘variable tuning’ instructions and ‘adjusting the tuning bolt on your speakers or doing the same thing on a platform”. What I say, Michael, is “What about (such as) the six different interconnect cables, in the room, with six different chemical mixtures used in their plastic insulation ?”

mg

I usually use one type of cable throughout my systems, and test internal wires to see if they are compatable. However if someone finds a mixture that suits them better for whatever reason sound wise, I make note of that so if needed we come back to it. I also do something with cables that is fairly unique to us, as far as I know. It opens up the cables response to the flow of the signal as it travels through.

If Jack followed "my" recommendations he wouldn't have 6 different interconnects. May, wouldn't it be better to actually learn what I recommend before making these stories? This is what I mean by spin. You have people responding to spins and not real situations. Why would I or any designer talk in terms of stories instead of actual practice?

may

"ALL these techniques which could allow better sound"

mg

They "could" also make worse sound. As far as "poohed, poohed", we're pretty careful in applying treatments as to not accidently create a problem where there isn't one. Because I have seen treatments go both ways and be very random in results, I would recommend holding off on trying something till after the listener has made their system as tunable as possible. It's surprising how many systems are ruined by tweaks, all because the listener has not applied what their system already has the potential of doing.

May

"That paragraph, Michael, is absolutely typical of your thinking. That it is OTHERS who are not understanding !!!!"

mg

You didn't read past your own view here May. You can continue to paint todays technology as something that has missed your points if you wish. That's a battle between you and them, has nothing to do with me. I see todays technology R&D going way past what has been done in the past, even the way they deal with past technologies.

May

"Today’s world, Michael, is in understanding just what, in the modern environment, is affecting how we resolve the complex musical information. I don’t dispute that doing such things as adjusting ‘tuning bolts’ can give people improvements in their sound but there is another entire area which you are actively encouraging people NOT to explore !!!!!!!!!! How is that “being at the cutting edge” ??????????"

mg

This is nothing more than a false statement.

May

"The chemical mixtures in the plastic insulation of audio cables, in the other materials, other plastic products, fabrics etc in the modern environment are nothing to do with “variable tuning” or “vibrations” procedures !!!!"

mg

This is a false statement.

May

You can’t “variable tune” out the adverse problems caused by some of these chemical mixtures. You have to ‘think out of the box”.

mg

Looks like your in the box, from where we sit.

May

"You keep quoting me as referring to things we began to discover some 30 years ago as though I am stuck in the past. It is that we began to discover things earlier than others – but such things are there and have been there all the time – to be discovered – and others have been gradually discovering similar things which affect the ‘sound’. THAT is why I refer to the other products and devices !!! THAT is why I call what they have also discovered CLUES !! Clues to things, in the modern environment, which has an effect on how we resolve the musical information !!

And that, Michael, is STILL going on – is STILL producing new techniques and new products !! TODAY and quite possibly TOMORROW and the day after that as well !!!!!"

mg

Why would you have a problem with me than May? When I work with a test lab, we spend much of our time with chemical interaction and reaction. I think maybe another one of your problems with me is that you simply don't believe me. I'm not sure I or anyone can fix that for you. Frankly it's a little scary for me to even bring up research teams to you, cause if you don't even believe they exist and they certainly don't want to work with you, it could be a bad reflection on my reputation. If you would though like to know of these research teams and their testing, you can email me and I will give you some names, but I do want to warn you, if you treat them in public how you treat me they have legal departments that may not be so patient. You and geoff have demonstrated pretty loose lips, that for me is maybe no big deal, but for companies who are doing these types of programs even I have to sign disclosures before entering their labs.

I can't speak for others, but as for myself knowing that you don't even know this research is being or has been done makes me a little tentative concerning you. You acting as though you have something they or we don't without even knowing what tests we and they do, is just a little on the weird side for me to be honest. You seeming to make this a May & geoff vs michael, is out and out strange I must tell you. I can't picture people on test teams being all that thrilled to have someone tell them they don't exist on an open public forum.

You say "think out of the box" yet don't display any willingness or past dealings with advanced technology companies. That's odd to me.

may

"Your method is not THE method, your answer is not THE answer and your truth is not THE truth !!!!

I shall keep repeating, Michael, that there are OTHER THINGS which can affect the sound and how we can better resolve the complex musical information – AS WELL AS any of your tuning techniques.

Your method is not THE method, your answer is not THE answer and your truth is not THE truth !!!!

Don’t you realise Michael, when “slagging off” these other products, you are also ‘slagging off’ equally brilliant engineers."

mg

You obviously are not reading my responses, and I grow tired of repeating myself, however if it promotes TuneLand I'm in for the ride.

may

"Tell me Michael, does Ken Ishiguro come within your descriptive “still in the age of ‘fixed’ and ‘does not understand the age of ‘variable’ ???????????????"

mg

If you can't tell by the pictures, then you should spend more time on what we do.

may

"Which is EXACTLY what you have claimed. I am NOT the one exaggerating – you are !!"

mg

That's fairly funny actually :)

may

"If, after introducing such as a Schumann Resonance device into the room one can resolve much more of the musical information, then that means that that (further) information has been in the room all the time !!!! The Schumann Resonance device does not MAKE (introduce) ADDITIONAL musical score to what is already on the recording – so the further musical information one can resolve after the introduction of a Schumann Resonance device MUST BE the musical score which is already on the recording."

mg

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t217p90-stereophile-forum

yawn!

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
>>> “When I work with a test

>>> “When I work with a test lab, we spend much of our time with chemical interaction and reaction.” <<<

You are at it again, Michael !! With your generalisations. Your time at test labs - with chemic al interaction and reaction - to what end ??????

With HOW they affect the sound, the resolving of the music ???

>>> “cause if you don't even believe they exist and they certainly don't want to work with you, it could be a bad reflection on my reputation.” <<<

Why wouldn’t I believe that some test labs are working on chemical interaction and reaction ??? It is what those ‘test labs’ are working on which affects the listening to and the resolving of MUSIC and what their results are!! Resolving the complexities of MUSIC is the discussion, Michael – not throwing out a generalisation that some test labs are “working on chemical interaction and reaction” !!

>>> “I can't picture people on test teams being all that thrilled to have someone tell them they don't exist on an open public forum.” <<<

You really DO make the most outrageous presumptions !!! Just who are you referring to who might be saying the test teams don’t exist ?????????????

So, Michael, during your involvement with and your visits to these “test labs”, researching ‘chemical interaction and reaction’, did they tell you which (from the list below) of those chemical mixtures the human being reacts the most adversely to and which the human being reacts the least adversely to ???

Bextrene, P.V.C., polythene., polyethylene., polystyrene., polyurethane., polypropylene., polyalkene., P.T.F.E., Teflon., acrylic., nylon., Perspex., BAF., adhesives., paints., lacquers and so on – the list is endless.

Then did they tell you WHY that reaction takes place and HOW that reaction can change the sound (musical information) ?????????????

>>> “May
"The chemical mixtures in the plastic insulation of audio cables, in the other materials, other plastic products, fabrics etc in the modern environment are nothing to do with “variable tuning” or “vibrations” procedures !!!!"
mg

This is a false statement.” <<<

No Michael. It is not a false statement, You cannot (no one can) ‘variable tune’ away the problem of the effect of an adverse chemical on the ‘sound’ – ‘sound’ in this case meaning the human being resolving the musical information. You can do something else to the audio system or to the room and, yes, make changes in the sound but the original problem with an adverse effect from a particular chemical in the room will still be there – the human being reacting with an adverse reaction !!! “Variable tuning” meaning just that – variable. Meaning that one can do the technique or undo it – at will. So, with ‘variable tuning’ one would have to remove such as the outer insulation of a cable and take it out of the room for ONE sound – or – alternatively leave it on the cable, in the room, for another sound !! Or remove a particular plastic product or material from the room for ONE sound and bring it back in again for another sound.

Nor can you ‘deal with’ the problem of an adverse effect of a chemical on the sound by ‘vibration dealing techniques’ !! You can do something else (vibrationwise) to the audio system or to the room and make changes in the sound but the original problem with the adverse effect from a chemical in the room will still be there – an adverse effect !!!

I am very intrigued by your statement :-

>>> “I also do something with cables that is fairly unique to us, as far as I know.” <<<

Now, THAT is becoming interesting !!!! When will THAT technique be revealed ? If it is remarkably good, then surely it will be a “Fixed Tweak” ?? One would not want to retain it for one recording but remove it for another recording ? I.e “variable tuning”. Just using Logic – Michael !!

Or are you referring to your ‘heat treatment’ ?? In which case you would be doing a “Fixed Tweak” because once a cable may have had a ‘heat treatment’, then that treatment would be ‘fixed’ – i.e you don’t ‘do it’ and then ‘undo it’ with each recording !!

>>> “I can’t speak for other, but as for myself knowing that you don't even know this research is being or has been done makes me a little tentative concerning you.” <<<

You “know” that I don’t know - do you. How do you KNOW that ??? Again with your outrageous presumptions !!

I know that your method is not THE method, I know that your answer is not THE answer and I know that your truth is not THE truth !!

I know there are other ‘tweaks’ and ‘techniques’ – produced by other people (other than you, Michael) – which can give remarkable improvements in the sound !!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
more answers

May said

>>> “When I work with a test lab, we spend much of our time with chemical interaction and reaction.” <<<

You are at it again, Michael !! With your generalisations. Your time at test labs - with chemic al interaction and reaction - to what end ??????

With HOW they affect the sound, the resolving of the music ???"

mg

Of course. Why would they hire me if it wasn't about sound, music, and mood setting?

may

So, Michael, during your involvement with and your visits to these “test labs”, researching ‘chemical interaction and reaction’, did they tell you which (from the list below) of those chemical mixtures the human being reacts the most adversely to and which the human being reacts the least adversely to ???

Bextrene, P.V.C., polythene., polyethylene., polystyrene., polyurethane., polypropylene., polyalkene., P.T.F.E., Teflon., acrylic., nylon., Perspex., BAF., adhesives., paints., lacquers and so on – the list is endless.

Then did they tell you WHY that reaction takes place and HOW that reaction can change the sound (musical information) ?????????????

mg

Actually, I was the one telling them my reports on the different materials, and they were the ones creating different formulas for me to test from the listening end while they were testing things from the "green" end. They had me do testing to see if the "green" materials could perform at the same levels as the more toxic materials. It was a ton of fun for me and is probably why I got to do this for a few companies. The labs have some pretty amazing testing tools.

One of the cool things is some of the companies have huge spaces with homes inside of the buildings where they conduct some of their tests. So I could come in and have them make a wall, or whole room for them to run all kinds of tests on. Let me give you an example without saying too much. Before the switch from incandescent to fluorescent in standard bulbs there were a ton of tests done on the human behavior patterns with the basic light groups and some pretty futuristic ones. You complain about general speaking but you must understand that the marketing of something of this magnitude is not done with people of loose lips. All I care to say about some of these things is everytime in modern days that you see a change happen, like the changing of bulbs, or the electric cables coming to your house, or transformer designs, you can be sure these companies are far more advanced and involved in areas that have an impact on music than you give them credit for.

This again is how I know you personally haven't gone this deep, because if so you have already known these things. You wouldn't be downplaying the CES for example if you knew what was really going on behind the scenes of developement, and you certainly would not be putting chemicals on cable if you knew of the cable changes that are in the proccess of taking place.

may

"The chemical mixtures in the plastic insulation of audio cables, in the other materials, other plastic products, fabrics etc in the modern environment are nothing to do with “variable tuning” or “vibrations” procedures !!!!"

mg

Actually May, this is indeed a false statement, or should I say an ill informed one.

mg again

The rest of your post is redundant and arugementative based, so I don't really need to keep that spin alive. But if I could add to this.

I think you and geoff making attempts to point the finger at me as me thinking I know it all is blinding you from the fact that I keep saying I am but a student, as you have been, as well as anyone who is involved in technology. You speak of being open, well no one can pound it through anyone elses head that technology has indeed moved way past putting a chemical on an already over built product. Innovation is not so much about trying to fix the old, but moving on to the new. May you pointed me to a link and I looked. What I saw was a picture of a very old school audio setup, with over built product that was broken and people talking about how to attempt to fix this broken sound. You also pointed to your 6 cable story and asked me to be involved in it, to which I say Why? My recommendation is to not have 6 interconnects.

now for the readers

Again you have to wonder why May doesn't quote the whole of my responses but only the parts she thinks she can turn the tables on? May, you don't think readers see this but they do and have mailed me that they do.

Piece by piece May's arugements (and geoff's) are boiling down to them not knowing as much as the modern world of technologies. May, brings up old school products to try to show me how they are "advanced", and as much as I don't want to pick on these designers or reviewers or experts in the old school of high end audio, these examples show us how far behind this part of the industry is. These pictures and articles (as much as I may like these folks) are not the picture of the future, but more a scrambling of the past. May and others still do not realize why the audiophile industry is all but extinct: (of a species, family, or other larger group) having no living members:

May is so bent on saying michael's way is not "THE" way, that she forgets michael didn't create tuning, he just uses it as "THE" way of all things that have any type of interaction with energy. She points to cables as something sitting still on a planet that spins at 1000 miles per hour. She tries to make "her" logic fit a fixed theory of audio as if there was any chance that audio stood still. She talks about what michael ignores as if no one is reading. May has her "what abouts?" and everytime they are answered she reverts to "ignoring" the answers, and starts from the beginning of pointing to things not being answered (a spin).

The OP is about May and geoff being able to tell us the hows and whys of their "advanced concepts". Have we seen them give account for their "claims"? I personally have not but point to their pages none the less and encourage people to try if they are interested.

As for my answers and representing the tune, we have found that there is nothing on this planet that is not engaged in natures fair exchange or human's adjustments. From the lowest frequency to the highest beam and beyond the signal, any signal is tunable. This upsets May and geoff and they battle against not only natures ability to keep itself in function, but against me who counts what they do as a part of the adjustments.

All things musical are subject to one principle, and as much as they belly-ache about it, they can't change the physics of something being in-tune or out-of-tune.

I had an interesting talk on a plane trip one time where I was sitting next to a NASA engineer. We both were wearing our thinking caps and having a great time. We talked about "absolutes" and how they were nothing more than words that had man's spin on them. Man tries to look at the world as a polaroid when it is really a 3D movie and then some.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
outrageous presumptions & generalisations

I'm glad we are working through things step by step, as I said I would do as time allows.

May seems to get upset when I (in her opinion) give outrageous presumptions & generalisations, so it's time to get into some of this. Feel free to look up May's website and the links she points to and articles as her proof on topics. For myself this tells me a lot about May's training and background.

May often states that tuning is not the answer to audio, to which I and science disagrees with her. On a variable planet all things are subject to tuning, and tuning on many levels, which is something else she disagrees with. The science of varying degrees of energy is something I have dedicated a lot of my time to, and one constant that I have learned over time is the physical reactions to time and space. That fact is there is no constant to moments within a continuum. A continuum is based on action and reaction and does not reverse it's dimension. In simple terms the world works off of a system of balance. When something is out of balance it is out-of-tune, and when in balance in-tune. If you break down every physical unit of energy you will find "movement", nothing is standing still, as I pointed out earlier in a post, the Earth is in a 1000 mph spin and that is within an orbital system of never ending travel. For this simple fact, I call all things tunable. May thinks this is "outrageous presumptions & generalisations" on my part, but if you look at physics for what it truly is I happen to be right on the money. There are no such things within tuning that is "outrageous presumptions & generalisations".

lets take a look at outrageous presumptions & generalisations

May says if you treat everything with her chemicals you will get a sound improvement. If you read reviews on this you will see that this is actually a mixed bag of results. In some cases good and other cases not so good, but in all cases different from the last or next. This is what I would call outrageous presumptions & generalisations, when someone makes absolute statements on a varying planet which balances itself off of the continuum of change and interation.

I want to take a few of these till you get the point.

Did you know in science it is believed that a color valued experience is never predictably the same twice? The chances of all conditions being exactly the same as we are in motion is next to none. Because of this our brain and eyes are always in a state of "tuning". Our brain puts into action the ability to stabilize the content of the variables our senses filter 24/7. Your body knows how to put you into a comfort state that interacts with the moment.

Let's put on your stereo. Play a piece of music you are familar with and enjoy and your system does pretty well. Go get a bite to eat, leaving that system on repeat. Come back to that piece of music and it will sound different if you are open minded and the same if you are not. Even the type of personality you have has something to do with the sound. When your mind is set to explore and comfort you will hear differences in the music every time. When you are focused and upset with something your hearing it's harder to hear any differences. There is a whole range of things that dictate the sound, because sound is a moment, an interaction of many "variables". Some of these are physical and others the way our senses react. If your thinking you have absolutes and have escaped psychoacoustics I have bad news for you, psychophysics is something you do with all your senses all the time. With listening psychophysics can be one of your biggest tools, but first you have to get past the negatives and learn to focus on the positives.

I don't trust anyone who is not actively involved in the physical act of extreme listening to tell me anything about stereo. Listening is one big variable and can take you as far into a piece of music as you wish to go. As you learn the variable physics and psychophysics and start to use them together the answers of audio will be there waiting for you. One of the most important parts to this is realizing that every recording is different from every other recording, and there is a matching of codes that need to take place in order to get closer to the original signal. For this reason I personally have made all my systems as simple as possible, getting rid of a lot of the mass and extra parts and pieces. I also have turned my systems into environments and not stereo components in a living room.

variable vs fixed

When I'm designing a system, I try to keep all things equal in the departments of electrical, acoustical and mechanical, and I also try to make my systems as tunable as possible. There's not one part of your system that can not be made variable in the analog state. You might have one component more stuck in it's sound than another but if you are after tuning in the music you can put together a system that will act and tune exactly like a musical instrument. How far you wish to go is up to you, but the answer to opening up that recording is available.

I have to run but hope to get back to talk about some more of these "fixed" tweaks that May and geoff mention.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
demagnetizing

One of the other topics May brings up is demagnetizing, and says I skip over this in tuning, but is she stating the truth? Fact is I'm very involved with electromagnetic field R&D. She refers to demagnetizing in outrageous presumptions & generalisations, so before I jump her on this I'm going to give her the floor so she can explain exactly how she uses demagnetizing in audio.

the floor is your May

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
The demagnetising issue

>>> “One of the other topics May brings up is demagnetizing, and says I skip over this in tuning, but is she stating the truth? Fact is I'm very involved with electromagnetic field R&D. She refers to demagnetizing in outrageous presumptions & generalisations, so before I jump her on this I'm going to give her the floor so she can explain exactly how she uses demagnetizing in audio.” <<<

I bring the technique of demagnetising up because it is a “Fixed Tweak” and therefore something you would not recommend. So, if you say you don’t skip over this technique in ‘tuning’, then you must be using a ‘fixed tweak’ !! Either you use the technique in one of your ‘tuning’ procedures – in which you would be using a “Fixed Tweak” or you don’t. “Fixed” meaning that you can’t demagnetise, then undo what you did, go back to where you were, then demagnetise again – meaning you can’t do ‘variable tuning’. Once demagnetising is done, it is done !!

>>> “so before I jump her on this I'm going to give her the floor so she can explain exactly how she uses demagnetizing in audio.” <<<

This is going to be fun !!! Let me see the ‘jump’, Michael !!

I have already explained, Michael. I don’t like to refer to what we do because I don’t want it to get into a personal attack. So I bring in other people’s experiences because I recognise what they have done and heard and I recognise that they have experienced similar changes in the sound as WE have from doing similar things !! Because the experiences have been shared is the reason why I use them as examples !!

What I THEN add to that is that when changes ARE heard then we (anyone interested in audio and listening to music) have to make attempts to explain HOW the sound (musical information) is being changed and WHERE the sound (musical information) is being changed.

I challenge you because you claim that yours is THE method, THE answer and THE truth. I do not challenge you that you can make changes in the sound – you would not be recommending certain techniques if they had not given you improvements in the sound. When I challenge you however, you then accuse me of “having no understanding or knowledge that one has to ‘tune’ musical instruments !!!!! So, I challenge you again on THAT presumption
!! And it IS a presumption on your part, Michael !!

>>> “Fact is I'm very involved with electromagnetic field R&D.” <<<

In that case, Michael, you should then be able to answer some of the questions I say are STILL on the shelf, awaiting answers !!!!

>>> “You also pointed to your 6 cable story and asked me to be involved in it, to which I say Why? My recommendation is to not have 6 interconnects.” <<<

I must correct MYSELF from an earlier posting of mine. In my story of Jack Smith and his 6 cables – I DID say 6 interconnect cables. I was actually meaning at least six cables – both interconnect and AC power cords – present in a listening environment !! So, Michael, you say your recommendation would be not to have 6 interconnects but even YOU would have to have at least a combination of 6 cables (audio interconnect AND AC power cords) in your room !! ALL with chemical mixtures in the plastic insulation surrounding those cables !!

You then queried “Why should you get involved in that story?” I would say because hundreds if not thousands of your customers or potential customers WOULD have at least 6 cables – all with plastic insulation around them – in the room where they would be beginning to attempt to carry out your “variable tuning” techniques !! If the problem of possible adverse chemicals used in the plastic insulation material surrounding cables is not dealt with, then that problem will still exist whilst at the same time the person will be attempting to “variable tune” !!

THAT is why you should be involved in that story !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, Michael never said...

May, Michael never said fixed tweaks don't work, he only said variable (tunable) tweaks work better.
So by all means, do all reasonable fixed tweaks to improve the sound but if you want the best you have to go variable.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Logic fail
iosiP wrote:

May, Michael never said fixed tweaks don't work, he only said variable (tunable) tweaks work better.
So by all means, do all reasonable fixed tweaks to improve the sound but if you want the best you have to go variable.

Your statement is completely illogical. Every Yutz with ears knows that tweaks and devices are not equal. To try to construct a hierarchy of which "fixed" tweaks and devices work best and which "variable" tweaks and devices work best would itself be folly and would take a single person more time than is left in his life. And to compare fixed tweaks to variable tweaks and devices would be even more absurd, it's like trying to compare apples with spaghetti. In other words you're pissing up a rope.

According to you and Michael, the fixed ones you tried don't work at all. So, I submit something's wrong somewhere. Perhaps it's a question of system resolution or hearing issues, or not following instructions, who the hell knows? Maybe you can send a photo of your system to Michael for him to analyze. Lol. In fact, Michael reports no luck with ANY non tuning, I.e., variable, tweak or device. Therefore, I suspect you two knuckleheads are simply following the lead of Ethan Winer which is to dismiss or disparage all tweaks and devices that conflict with your own. Even the ones you haven't tried. You do see the ridiculousness of your argument, don't you? Case solved.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Step by Step

>>> “When your mind is set to explore and comfort you will hear differences in the music every time. When you are focused and upset with something your hearing it's harder to hear any differences.” <<<

Now we are in discussion mode, Michael. This is good. Now you are coming into my territory – away from “variable tuning”! OR. Are YOU suggesting that your ‘variable tuning’ stops people being “upset” – from being under tension ???
WHY is it harder to HEAR any differences when one is upset with something, Michael ? Is it because one is under tension ????

Then, if the tension is ‘eased’ then WHY can more of the musical information be resolved. HOW is that musical information changed when the tension is ‘eased’ ? WHERE is that musical information being affected ? When that very musical information heard (resolved) after the tension has been ‘eased’ must have already been IN THE ROOM and must have already reached the ear drum !!

A person being ‘upset’ and under ‘tension’ cannot possibly affect the musical information on the disc, cannot possibly affect the audio signal travelling through the audio equipment and cannot possibly affect the acoustic information in the room. So, if the musical information is ‘affected’ by a person either being ‘upset’, or after the upset situation has ‘eased’, then WHERE was that musical information being changed and HOW was that musical information being changed ???????????

And, if that musical information had already reached the ear drum. then what had happened to it when you (anyone) was upset – to then be recovered when the situation causing the ‘upset’ was ‘eased’ ?

We are discussing such as the musical information of an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World. Being changed !! We are not – just – talking about someone’s MOOD i.e. not in the MOOD for listening to Dvorak’s New World.

Which path are we going to go down, Michael. ? The path that everything has to do with the “recorded code” or everything has to do with “vibrations”, OR the path that there ARE other things, in the modern environment, which affect how we (human beings) react – and THAT reaction can change the ‘sound’ (the resolving of the complex musical information). ?

Or are you prepared to at long last acknowledge that one can AND SHOULD take into consideration ALL areas which can affect the musical information of an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World ? That maybe, quite possibly, yours is not THE method, or THE answer or THE truth ???

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
BINGO

Costin said

"May, Michael never said fixed tweaks don't work, he only said variable (tunable) tweaks work better.
So by all means, do all reasonable fixed tweaks to improve the sound but if you want the best you have to go variable."

mg

I haven't read the other posts yet, but as time goes by I'm seeing listeners converting from the ways of the typical high end audio approach to a more open one :)

I was waiting for this to start happening here as well as in general, and now we're seeing a fair number of people moving to a variable approach to the hobby, which is my goal. May and geoff both act like I'm opposing them in some way, and it's a little funny to start with. Of course this hobby and industry is going to go more tunable, there's no stopping that, and why would we want to?

May postures herself against me as if that for one second stops the "Tuning Revolution". Geoff....well who knows where his mind is, I don't think his focus is on anything other than being an internet troll :) Forgetting these two and their goals though, I'm more than thrilled to see the extreme listeners out there going for it. You won't regret your efforts, and there is a place to visit where you can do your exploring with others. Tuning is not something you need to do alone. It's not a matter of hit or miss like fixed tweaks can be and many times are. Variable tuning is just that, your incharge of your journey.

TuneLand allows you to let go of guilt listening (the class ladder). We also allow you, encourage you, to get your hands dirty and treat this hobby as your own personal concert hall, it's your hobby. I think there are so many trying to dump on you that they have the answer, that they themselves refuse to see that I'm not saying "my way", I'm saying "the way". Of course tuning is "the way" and whether in part or full blown variable, you are involved in tuning your system. So don't let the old school polute your thinking, take a look around you, the next chapter for you is sitting right in front of you.

If you have a sound from your system, that is bothering you, something is out of tune. Throw away that bad recording crap, and how your system is so revealing, and listen to me. "If your system doesn't sound right something is out-of-tune". You don't have to make it any more difficult than that. It might be frustrating that things don't sound right, but that's no reason to throw your music out the window. Come read how your fellow high end audio listeners are correcting the problems of bad sound.

With each post May and geoff are looking more and more stuck in their views, and either they themselves will embrace tuning or be lumped in with the many who can't and won't see past their own need to be boss. Fact is folks, there is no boss outside of the "method of tuning". I'm not the boss of tuning, you the listener are the master of your own system, and either you have made it one that can play the music or not. Only you in the privacy of your own room know if things are well with your listening soul.

What TuneLand and MGA/RoomTune does is offer tools for you to get closer and to make your job easier, but do we have all the answers? YES! because we are the collective of the hobby and industry of listening, and understand that the only one that can put your system in-tune is you and your ears. We believe in the "answers" and explore them with you. We don't treat you like the parts of this industry that keep telling you there are no answers (so stupid), but turn over every rock with you so we together will find that "absolute sound" with you. Why in the world would someone be in the hobby of enjoying music and not being able to? That is the most defeatist attitude around and is only used as a bait from those who are not "practicing" listeners.

TuneLand is here to help you become that master of your own space. We don't sit there saying your doing it wrong, we point to the ways we have found in doing it right, plus understand that every space every where as well as the listeners are unique. What works for one guy may be completely different from the next. Stop being labeled and put in a box, this is your hobby and if you want to sit there unhappy so be it, but if you have that audiophile spirit that needs to dig out every morsel, we at least hear you and are at the same place with you.

You can't get there by talking, but doing!

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
May?

Come on there gurly lol?

may said

"I bring the technique of demagnetising up because it is a “Fixed Tweak” and therefore something you would not recommend."

mg

There is nothing fixed about demagnetising May. If your going to bring up stuff at least have a general knowledge about the topic.

Both you and geoff keep talking about subjects that you are not very well versed in and trying to make yourselves look in the know over others, but might I recommend you look up versed and what the dictionary uses as their "in use", "Many faculty are not as well-versed in the high tech world as are their students. Better get back to school, or next time, write about something you are well-versed at."

As I have said before, your trying to school others could be brushed up on a little. Why don't you start by telling us what you know about demagnetising, cause you are way off in saying that "demagnetising in an audio system is fixed". WOW may! I feel like I'm in 1st grade in the school of audio LOL. Come on kiddo, don't waste our time if you don't really know how something works.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
May?

Come on hun!

"I have already explained, Michael. I don’t like to refer to what we do because I don’t want it to get into a personal attack. So I bring in other people’s experiences because I recognise what they have done and heard and I recognise that they have experienced similar changes in the sound as WE have from doing similar things !! Because the experiences have been shared is the reason why I use them as examples !!"

mg

If you can't speak from personal experience and in real time, why waste our time in speaking at all? I have never taught audio classes without lab time. Audio is about "doing" May.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
May?

May

"I challenge you because you claim that yours is THE method, THE answer and THE truth. I do not challenge you that you can make changes in the sound – you would not be recommending certain techniques if they had not given you improvements in the sound. When I challenge you however, you then accuse me of “having no understanding or knowledge that one has to ‘tune’ musical instruments !!!!! So, I challenge you again on THAT presumption
!! And it IS a presumption on your part, Michael !!"

Let's be honest here May, and tell the readers you really have no idea what Michael Green recommends to his clients? Nore do you come to TuneLand to find out for yourself? You paint pictures out of thin air and expect them to stick, but May all listeners have to do is come to TuneLand and ask.

Why don't you read the OP and see once again what you have turned this thread into. Why don't you go ahead and start a thread called what we do on TuneLand by Michael Green, instead of filling pages with what we all can see is going to be the end. Fact is people are tuing and you are trying to fit a couple of your parts into the wagon. But what you don't get is, going ahead and throw them in the back if you want, but don't try to school people who have gone past what you have, and if they haven't show them they haven't.

You want to talk about things like demagnetising fine, I've got several right here. One thing I can tell you though May. I can use each one on the exact same cable design and they all in the end sound different. So don't waste our time telling us this is a "fixed" absolute positive thing without knowing.

I don't give a rats butt-bone what reviewer you handed the tweak info to, if they are doing the testing to the extent we do things they would come to the same results. This hobby is a variable hobby, and because it is variable "in all things analog" they are by nature tunable.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
May?

This gets old but I'll push on LOl

May said

"THAT is why you should be involved in that story !!"

mg

May this particular story of cables, is played out many times for anyone to read on TuneLand. How I make them, why I make them, how to use them, how they respond in systems, how to tune them. Also you can read in real time how others answer these same questions in their systems in real time. There are aslo people who share their differing cable setups from what I do and they too can give the reasons why.

The more you try to put TuneLand or myself in a box, the more you are going to find that we believe in the whole of the industry and that everything is a part of everything else, and I try not to make judgements in that box, that frankly screws over a lot of listeners for many years.

But lets go back to our first back and forths, where you and geoff said if we didn't do certain things we were not going to get all the music to start with. Why has yours and geoff's tone changed, and why have you after a year now dropped the "must do" that you guys acted like would change the hobby forever and the rest of us are sitting on the side lines?

So far you nor geoff have offered that "absolute must have". Your mysteries are fading quickly May in front of us all. It appears to me that the only two here who have not figured out the answers are May Belt and Geoff Kait. I other folks here have systems and are using them in real time to explore their music. At first (and I can understand) they treated me like any outsider, but as we all get to know each other the commons start to out weigh the differences for those of us who wish to have open minds about our hobby. I've had quite a few PM me with their ideas on tuning, and have seen the orders and some even starting to post. You and geoff act this is a bad thing. You have listeners exploring May and you act like the answers are not able to be found without you. Sorry that you and geoff are not willing to join and that geoff is even trying to distract, but May PEOPLE ARE TUNING! Sorry had to throw a mayism in there lol.

Did you and geoff think that people would not try? Your too stuck on yourselves kids, of course the hobby is taking tuning more serious now that I am back to be cheerleader, why wouldn't they? And as you say "here's another clue" they would have found it without me and my "boldness" lol. I'm just the guy in the crowd waving his hands. There are more people tuning than are buying components I would imagine. We are in the age of "tuning" May and you nore geoff nore myself is going to stop or break the spirit of the audiophile. Geoff can fire away all he wants and all it really does is point to the tune, same as you.

May do you honestly think any who have tried or are trying tuning are sitting there saying "michael missed something"? Come on May Belt, everyone who knows me or has heard of us knows we crave learning more about the tune and sharing as we learn. Hey, when you have reviewers telling you they are afraid of reviewing you because it would mean game over for fixed components, you know someone is paying attention.

First step is to get people to notice us again. Next is to blow them away with our Vegas demo. And finally, after the nay sayers have died off, the hobby of listening to music at the extreme level will be better and in more harmony then it has ever been.

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

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, OF COURSE

May,

OF COURSE our mood and tensions affect the way we are "resolving" music that already is in the room.
OF COURSE we are not listening just with our ears but with our brain, so if our brain is "entangled" in other worries our appreciation of music will diminish.
OF COURSE getting relaxed and concentrating only on the music (without other subconscious thoughts) will let us hear - or rather RESOLVE - more of the musical information.

BTW, I never challenged these facts, they should be obvious to any serious audiophile.
I only challenged the fact that tensions/worries/physical pains/etc. can be alleviated by using color strips marked "SAFE ASSHOLE" or that writing "MINE > OK, GEOFF'S > NO" on the mirror will somehow make me feel better (especially if I have no knowledge of English). As for the chemical goo supposed to act on your mind and somehow cancel the bad mental state induced by various other chemicals: well, if this would REALLY work it would be used in most factories, computer rooms and even in the Mir Orbital Station to alleviate possible tensions between crew members (having to cohabitate for months in a constrained space).
Now if they do these things - and since you are not involved - it means Michel is right stating this stuff has already been studied long before you came with it. OTOH, if they don't use it they probably came to the same conclusions I did: IT'S PLAIN CRAP!

Now did I make myself clear?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
I for one think you made it very clear
iosiP wrote:

May,

OF COURSE our mood and tensions affect the way we are "resolving" music that already is in the room.
OF COURSE we are not listening just with our ears but with our brain, so if our brain is "entangled" in other worries our appreciation of music will diminish.
OF COURSE getting relaxed and concentrating only on the music (without other subconscious thoughts) will let us hear - or rather RESOLVE - more of the musical information.

BTW, I never challenged these facts, they should be obvious to any serious audiophile.
I only challenged the fact that tensions/worries/physical pains/etc. can be alleviated by using color strips marked "SAFE ASSHOLE" or that writing "MINE > OK, GEOFF'S > NO" on the mirror will somehow make me feel better (especially if I have no knowledge of English). As for the chemical goo supposed to act on your mind and somehow cancel the bad mental state induced by various other chemicals: well, if this would REALLY work it would be used in most factories, computer rooms and even in the Mir Orbital Station to alleviate possible tensions between crew members (having to cohabitate for months in a constrained space).
Now if they do these things - and since you are not involved - it means Michel is right stating this stuff has already been studied long before you came with it. OTOH, if they don't use it they probably came

to the same conclusions I did: IT'S PLAIN CRAP!

Now did I make myself clear?

You made yourself clear a long time ago. You're stupid and you're an asshole. We listen and we get it. Have you given any consideration to rehab? I think you should. Give my condolences to your besotted liver.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Out of ammo, Geoffy-boy?

Just nothing else than personal attacks to sustain your position?
Now who's the stupid asshole, since you seem unable to answer to the topic? Rush, geoffy-boy, your prostate is calling... but first just tell me, you're listening to WHAT, since noone seems to figure out what May is listening to (yeah, I know, you have your "tweaked" walkman) LOL

P.S. My liver is just fine, thank you, and you should know liver cells can regenerate. Unfortunately brain cells are unable to do this, so say hello to your incipient Alzheimer on my behalf.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
??

I don't think someone who doesn't even have a stereo setup should be calling anyone one an A**hole geoff.

You, who are reading this do understand that Geoff Kait doesn't even have an in room stereo setup, and hasn't going on 8 years now.

May & geoff are you really that upset that Costin is being fair with you?

May is trying with every ounce of her being to find something that is not tunable. Why is pretty weird to me. I can't think of anything within the moving audio chain that can't be tuned. We talked about the Earth as going 1000mph in a spin, and the earth having it's own note which is vibrating. We've talk about there really being no absolute inert or isolation on a planet rotating, which NASA gets, but Geoff coming from NASA doesn't.

We've talked about magnetic, electromagnetic and the atmosphere which all contain variables. So if the whole world is in motion (a variable continuum), what's so hard about May & Geoff not getting that everything on Earth is without a doubt "tunable" and is involved in tuning moment to moment?

Geoff calls people stupid and yet doesn't know what is taught in the first grade "the Earth rotates". Picture this readers, a guy from NASA who doesn't know the Earth is rotating. I would think that technically speaking that would be considered pretty stupid. Or at least slow.

Now onto May. One would think that someone of her assumed smarts, would be able to see the sun rise and set every day. Where I write from, I can see the light go across this room from beginning to end during the day. I can walk outside and feel the change as it happens. The morning feels different from mid-day. It's pretty easy for me to pickup any physics text book and read about energy and the continuum of energy on Earth and it's ties to vibration as well as sound, but May doesn't believe this exist. I can type any motion related word into google or bing and get back, well lets do it movement :an act of changing physical location or position or of having this changed. Or music and see nothing but motion and the wrting of such motion. I look at electrons, same thing. Tons and tons of Vibes all over the place. I type in energy and am introduced to "transfer" (one of TuneLands most used words) and, well just read this:

"Some types of energy are a varying mix of both potential and kinetic energy. An example is mechanical energy which is the sum of (usually macroscopic) kinetic and potential energy in a system. Elastic energy in materials is also dependent upon electrical potential energy (among atoms and molecules), as is chemical energy, which is stored and released from a reservoir of electrical potential energy between electrons, and the molecules or atomic nuclei that attract them."

Oh My May, it looks like evrything works off of a fair exchange that can be adjusted through....here it comes.... "tuning". Ok so let's look at tuning: to adjust (a circuit, frequency, or the like) so as to bring it into resonance with another circuit, a given frequency, or the like". Or, as some here are upset that I fine-tune: to adjust precisely so as to bring to the highest level of performance or effectiveness".

You see May, geoff and those who can't play the music on your systems, if your listening to a system at one setting the chances of you getting "the highest level of performance" is next to none. This hobby is about listening to music yes, but the word "audiophile" suggest a higher standard than some guy listening to a portable cassette player, or some lady talking instead of experiencing the vibratory codes within our hobby. It's more than a guy saying he has 300 CD's and can only play 10 of them.

This part of the hobby is loosing ground because of one thing and one only, it's getting lazy! It has for the most part lost it's ability to tune, and heckles us who have stayed true to the art of listening. We who look at our systems more than trophies planted in the front of the room with price-tags still attached. Sorry, extreme listening has always been about doing. Being an audiophile is not someone coming up to a forum and saying why, or some cheap excuse or using that price-tag as the answer punch line. Those who get upset because someone has arrived at the place of being able to "play" the music, is the opposite of what this hobby is about.

So if a few have to stand there with a dumb look on their face till they catch on, I guess it is what it is. The rest of us will continue to have the joy of choosing any piece of music in our collection.

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re-posted reply

>>> “Of course this hobby and industry is going to go more tunable, there's no stopping that, and why would we want to?
May postures herself against me as if that for one second stops the "Tuning Revolution". “ <<<

You are back again, Michael. With your outrageous presumptions.

I have NEVER said the ‘tuning’ technique should stop. I DO NOT posture myself against you to STOP the ‘tuning technique’. I REPEAT again – I challenge you when you claim that yours is THE method, is THE answer and is THE truth. THAT IS WHAT I CHALLENGE !!!

>>> “There is nothing fixed about demagnetising May. If your going to bring up stuff at least have a general knowledge about the topic.
Both you and geoff keep talking about subjects that you are not very well versed in and trying to make yourselves look in the know over others,” <<<

I think YOU are guilty of trying to make yourself look ‘in the know over others’ – far more than me !

If you are going to bring up the suggestion of “look in the dictionary”, then I suggest you look up ‘demagnetising’ - “deprive of magnetic quality” !!

If you demagnetise an LP, then you demagnetise it. FIXED !!! Meaning not variable. Meaning can’t demagnetise for one listening and then go back to a second listening of the same LP but undo the demagnetising you have just done ! FIXED.

However, if you want to use the term “not fixed” as in – after quite a few more plays of the same LP it could need demagnetising again – then you really are “stretching” the term “nothing fixed about demagnetising” !!!!

>>> “cause you are way off in saying that "demagnetising in an audio system is fixed" <<<

When something is non reversible, then it is ‘fixed’. Just because it might need re-doing later does not make it a ‘variable’ technique. The point I have been trying to make all along. If such as an LP will sound SOOOOOOOO much better if it is demagnetised, you discourage people from doing so, have them walk right past the untreated LP, to leave it alone and instead walk towards the ‘tuning bolt of the speakers’ or the ‘tuning bolt of the platform’ and to rely on such “variable tuning” procedures ONLY to get them where they want to be – better resolution of the music!!

What is soooooooo wrong with doing both ? Getting the best of what is available ?

I say again. THAT is why I challenge your claims that your method is THE method, your answer is THE answer and your truth is THE truth.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Reposted reply No 2

>>> “because I recognise what they have done and heard and I recognise that they have experienced similar changes in the sound as WE have from doing similar things !! Because the experiences have been shared is the reason why I use them as examples !!"

mg

If you can't speak from personal experience and in real time, why waste our time in speaking at all? I have never taught audio classes without lab time. Audio is about "doing" May.” <<<

In my reply I actually SAID that we had done similar things as the people I quoted from AND had similar experiences as the people I quoted from.

THAT is DOING – Michael !!! THAT is ME talking from personal experience ! You mention the word “real time”. I don’t have to be doing it today, this hour, this minute to speak from personal experience. Experience is experience !!!

You really are digging deep to find something to challenge me on aren’t you Michael when you have to mis hear my very words !!!!!

>>> “But lets go back to our frirst back and forths, where you and geoff said if we didn't do certain things we were not going to get all the music to start with. Why has yours and geoff's tone changed, and why have you after a year now dropped the "must do" that you guys acted like would change the hobby forever and the rest of us are sitting on the side lines?” <<<

I haven’t changed my tone !! I am still saying if you don’t do certain things you won’t be getting ALL the music to start with. For example. If you don’t demagnetise the LP, then that problem remains – however much ‘variable tuning’ you do !! If magnetism can be induced into the LP, through it being played regularly, then that problem is THERE – if you don’t deal with it. One only knows that there was a problem in the first place AFTER a demagnetiser had been applied and more information is heard !! Which means, logically, that that more information had not been heard BEFORE applying a demagnetiser !

>>> “I've had quite a few PM me with their ideas on tuning, and have seen the orders and some even starting to post. You and geoff act this is a bad thing. You have listeners exploring May and you act like the answers are not able to be found without you. Sorry that you and geoff are not willing to join and that geoff is even trying to distract, but May PEOPLE ARE TUNING! Sorry had to throw a mayism in there lol.” <<<

Again, YET again with the presumptions. Why would I think it a bad thing that you are getting orders or that some are starting to post ??

I am saying that you are encouraging people to walk past, step over, swerve around, ignore what have been shown to be problem areas regarding obtaining good sound. Nor do I claim that the “answers are not able to be found without me”. I have given you example after example of discoveries which OTHER people have made and have been reported on – which have provided what I refer to as CLUES to problem areas in the first place and then CLUES to what, actually, might be going on. I have ALSO said that these things would be discovered even if May Belt and Peter Belt had never been born !! Those things are there, to be discovered !!

>>> “You want to talk about things like demagnetising fine, I've got several right here. One thing I can tell you though May. I can use each one on the exact same cable design and they all in the end sound different.” <<<

Brilliant. Now we are getting somewhere. So, Michael. You have heard them sound different. You KNOW why they sound different, do you ? WHY different demagnetisers sound different when applied to the same cable ? You HAVE said before that you “have done the questions and got the answers” many, many times.

So, please enlighten us from your answers !!!!!!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re-posted reply No 3

>>> “OF COURSE our mood and tensions affect the way we are "resolving" music that already is in the room.
OF COURSE we are not listening just with our ears but with our brain, so if our brain is "entangled" in other worries our appreciation of music will diminish.
OF COURSE getting relaxed and concentrating only on the music (without other subconscious thoughts) will let us hear - or rather RESOLVE - more of the musical information.

BTW, I never challenged these facts, they should be obvious to any serious audiophile.” <<<

Costin. It is your immediate “OF COURSE” response which is the problem. It means that none of your personal experiences have caused you to have any questions, on a shelf, awaiting answers. You even go on to say “the facts should be obvious to any serious audiophile” !!!

If, hypothetically, at any part of the actual physical audio system, someone talked about ‘an area being entangled’ so that ‘our appreciation of the music will diminish’ because of that ‘entanglement’, QUESTIONS of “WHERE”., “HOW”., “WHAT is going on” would be whizzing around like a cyclone. When a similar thing is happening to the musical information of an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World, inside our brain, you have NO questions left on a shelf and your answer is “OF COURSE”, “IT IS OBVIOUS !!!!!!!!!!

It is NOT obvious WHAT is affecting the musical information. It is NOT obvious WHERE this musical information is being affected and it is NOT obvious HOW this musical information is being affected.

I repeat what I have been saying to you all the time. You are not thinking deep enough !!!!!!!

Instead, you tell me you “talk to engineers”.

If “the engineer you talk to” has not had experience of the effect of such as the Schumann Resonance device on the ‘sound’ (musical information) then when you ask him his opinion on this device, what would that opinion be ? Even if he HAD experience of that device, what would be his answer be to HOW it is changing the sound and WHERE it is changing the sound.

If YOU, personally, have not had experience of the effect of the Schumann Resonance device on the sound (musical information) then you won’t even have any questions to even try to work out some answers for !!

The majority of the reports of the beneficial effect of the Schumann Resonance device on the sound have been positive. Michael has given his usual ‘thumbs down’ on it’s effect – which just follows a pattern we can predict from him regarding anything which he regards as a ‘Fixed Tweak’.

Even if we have nine people who hear that device give an improvement in the sound, a tenth person who cannot hear any difference in the sound at all and an eleventh person who actually heard it cause the sound to be worse, there are STILL the questions of HOW did it change the sound either way (better or worse), WHERE did it change the sound either way, and WHAT is going on ?

The Schumann Resonance device was originally developed to aid someone’s “wellbeing”. If the device IS allowing people to relax and that reaction ‘aids the resolving of the musical information’ the Questions of WHERE are those changes taking place, and HOW are those changes happening are STILL there, awaiting answers ?

The answers of “OF COURSE” or “IT’s OBVIOUS” is absolutely not sufficient !!

We are not talking about just ‘enjoying Dvorak’s New World more’, we are talking about hearing greater width, greater depth, better resolution and separation of the musical instruments etc.

Again, Costin, the answers of “OF COURSE” or IT’S OBVIOUS is absolutely not sufficient !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
being fair

Hi May

I have listeners coming over today to listen to Ravel: Bolero / Daphnis Et Chloe Suite No. 1 / Ma Mere L'Oye, as they want to talk about Kenneth Jean's approach, which is mixed in their thinking do to the lack of passion vs precision. One of the guys has Avalons and the other Watt/Puppies. If they will I'll have them read through our last exchange and get their views.

Since your a doer, maybe you would like to throw on this piece and join us. Of course they will be here and you will be there but this will be a good place to start comparing notes, don't you agree?

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

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
May, flooding the subject won't work

I asked you some questions but I didn't get any answer. I'm in no mood to read the whole Tolstoy's "War and Peace" online, so please take the time to respond using short sentences.

P.S. Nicholas Boileau said "What is conceived well is expressed clearly". Please try!

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
A little bit of tune... (to paraphrase Elvis)

So I had problems with a side wall. I tried almost everything short of asking my wife to stand there for the whole time I listened to music. Finally I found a decently designed diffuser that I was ready to order.
But then, I talked to one of my friends (audio dealer) that most of the audio community around here think he's nuts: his demo room is finished in bricks with various shapes and various surface treatments, special recesses in the walls in which he keeps some ancient bronze and so on. I was dissatisfied by the visual impact of the diffuser so he offered to design a wooden panel - a combination of different woods all differently "sliced" to offer what I wanted. I said OK but also asked him to provide some tuning elements of my own design.
Well today I went to his place to see the result: looks gorgeous (a real piece of art) and has tension rods activated by turning brass knobs (bought from the flea market, cleaned and looking like jewelry). We tried it in his room and every twist of the knobs was clearly audible. Tomorrow I will install it at home, hope I will enjoy the sound as much as the looks!

Some technical facts for Michael: it's a curved panel made of several woods, backed by a strong flat panel of "burnt" granite. The tuning screws allow to force the curvature of the panel (inwards or outwards) and also to horizontally compress (tension) the whole wooden structure by using two horizontal rods with screws on on the sides. Since the panel is slit, compressing it affects the shape and dimension of the vertical "windows".

Methink tomorrow will be a long long day!

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
:)

Sounds like your going to have a great time!

Tuning is such a natural part of listening, it throws me for a loop when people don't get it. How can the hobby of listening to music not have tuning, know what I mean? Blows my mind to see High End Audio marginalize this part of the hobby. But I also understand that the listener was thrown under the bus when the money game got rolling and the audiophile bank rolled this hobby a few times over. I did the same thing till treating the audio trilogy as equal parts that need to be in balance to deliver the goods. I'm sad though that tuning got put on hold for a few years. Our systems should have been made variable as soon as the equalizers went out the window and we were left with only the volume control. But this will be corrected now. Still though, there were so many people tuning in the early 90's that I never thought it was going to slack off the way it did, but I couldn't keep traveling at that pace. I was doing 25 high end and pro trade shows and all the stuff in between a year and had to make a choice. Going from music touring to trade show touring wore this boy out. I assumed high end audio was set, and far enough along that I could do more in the pro end of things. I was wrong. Because this hobby is enthusiast driven, it needs a daily feeding. A hobby, any hobby, will not survive if it is selling boxes without the method. When the trade shows went more static displays, I turned to my friend Herb from Mobile Fidelity and said "your seeing the end of this chapter". No way will this hobby survive talk without the walk, it must have a method. As you keep tuning this and that you'll see what I mean. You are going to find that every part of this hobby is variable, even the parts that seem like they wouldn't be. I'm absolutely convinced that this time around tuning is going to become the norm for the extreme listener.

The hobby itself is ready. With the boxes not moving nearly as fast as 15 years ago the hobby is no longer being run by new product fever. The serious listeners are coming out of the woods. You may not see them post much but our mail has gone way up, and the excitement buzz is starting to roll. It might take another year more or less to be back in the groove, but watching the numbers, somebody out there is tuning.

Looking forward to getting your reports, Costin.

Now after a full day of demo-ing I'm beat.

:)

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Mars Needs More Cheerleaders

Michael wrote,

"Tuning is such a natural part of listening, it throws me for a loop when people don't get it. How can the hobby of listening to music not have tuning, know what I mean? Blows my mind to see High End Audio marginalize this part of the hobby."

Poor baby. Do you feel marginalized? How about a group hug?

"I also understand that the listener was thrown under the bus when the money game got rolling and the audiophile bank rolled this hobby a few times over. I did the same thing till treating the audio trilogy as equal parts that need to be in balance to deliver the goods. I'm sad though that tuning got put on hold for a few years."

Well, maybe tuning got put on hold more like thirty years. But who's counting?

"Our systems should have been made variable as soon as the equalizers went out the window and we were left with only the volume control. But this will be corrected now."

When I showed with Pierre Sprey of Mapleshade Recording Studios in '97 there was no volume control. Were we ahead of the times?

"No way will this hobby survive talk without the walk, it must have a method. As you keep tuning this and that you'll see what I mean. You are going to find that every part of this hobby is variable, even the parts that seem like they wouldn't be. I'm absolutely convinced that this time around tuning is going to become the norm for the extreme listener."

By extreme listener I assume you mean someone who's jumping up and trying to tune the sound in for every single recording like a monkey on crack?

"The hobby itself is ready. With the boxes not moving nearly as fast as 15 years ago the hobby is no longer being run by new product fever."

This is probably very good news for the pharmaceutical industry, which is getting ready to deal with all the new neurotics.

"The serious listeners are coming out of the woods."

Yup. Like monkeys on crack.

"You may not see them post much but our mail has gone way up, and the excitement buzz is starting to roll."

You won't see them posting much because they're too strung out to post.

"It might take another year more or less to be back in the groove, but watching the numbers, somebody out there is tuning."

Yeah, right. Somebody out there is hallucinating. What audio apparently needs is more cheerleaders.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
??

Geoff

"When I showed with Pierre Sprey of Mapleshade Recording Studios in '97 there was no volume control."

mg

I'm sure that would make a wife happy :)

All I can say to the post above is please reader read, lol

What show Geoff?

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
A Great Day!

Saturday was another great day in Paradise :)

I want to thank the guys for coming by and sharing their thoughts. For a couple of hours there I felt like a DJ, but we made it through. 5 audiophiles (well versed audiophiles I might add) was not what I was expecting to show up, 2 at first and the audio ambush later LOL.

The day turned out much different than I thought it was going to be, but there were some things that I still thought useful enough to talk about here.

The first thing, and I need to take note of this, the guys (none of them) any longer were Stereophile-ites, or TAS readers. As far as that goes barely looked at the high end audio press anymore except for an "occasional" fact finding mission, of which they have found their own sources to handle most of this separate from what they called "the a**hole club". I asked when they dropped away from being part of the mainstream? "we never dropped out of the hobby, but out of the BS", "shortly after the reviewer wars". I asked what the "reviewer war" was but the answer was something I had tasted myself but never bothered with. Doesn't really need to be talked about more than the fact that I could tell these guys are serious legit hardcore audiophiles who took no prisoners.

I'm not sure what was the most fun, their expressions of the music or them going through my music collection. Next time, if there is one, there will need to be 5 listening rooms setup lol. These guys have been friends a long time and throw each other out of the chair, several times. "come here listen to this" type of thing. I also got a lot of "can you do this with my system", a lot. The one fella kept patting me on the back making comments about the Viola Mini speakers saying "no way" and laughing. I told him "I'm not done voicing the model yet" and he said "not done?" with more laughter. He kinda made me nervous to be honest, but later when we were outside (yes it is 70 here) he asked "is there any way to gutt my speakers and get anywhere near this sound". That took the edge off for me lol. I wasn't sure what they thought, but could tell they were pretty opinionated and laughed a ton. I was told that there are two kinds of laughing when they go listen, one that the system is very bad and one is the system is very good. That's when I started laughing with them.

"We heard about your setups, but no one will believe this until they hear it for themselves". That was about the best thing I could have heard. That's the most common statement I get, so by that time of the day I was feeling pretty good and stopped apologizing about the place being such a wreck.

I knew these guys were for real, but really for real when they pull different pieces of music. I could almost tell from tuning those pieces what they were going to be listening for. What I was surprised at though was they only asked me to tune for the sake of hearing the tuning change. "yep by God" and then they took their turn "holy "sh**" and other expressions came rolling out. I asked if they wanted more tuning demo, and they were like nah, and went back to squeezing in as many recordings as they could during the day and giving each other slaps and, told you so-s. I did butt-in one time, and said let me do something. I had them listen, then I did a quick tune-up and had them wait about 15 minutes, then had them listen again. I was hearing a tilt starting to happen from all the music changes and wanted to lower the tone of the top end so any clustering would stop. I got thumbs up across the board for this move. I felt like the 1st 8 or so recordings were ok, or at least so so, but after that much changing that quick I could hear the mid to upper harmonics starting to close in. Typical when this happens and harmonics don't get a chance to settle. The one guy said "I never saw someone correct this".

At the end of our day we spent a little time talking about what was happening and they told me they were pretty read up on TuneLand but wanted to hear it. They're flying out tomorrow so I'm looking forward to their adventures. You could see their wheels turning, and I think at the very least there are 5 guys who are going to be tweaking the low priced Magnavox DVD Player I recommend. They were not shy about telling me this was the best digital they had ever heard and surprised it was "doing analog better than analog".

I won't get into what they are going to do concerning my products cause I don't want this to come out as anything but a sales pitch for the "tune".

:)

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
you lucked out May

Hi May, you lucked out about the referencing Ravel. I was thinking maybe I could get someone to look at this thread and give me their thoughts, but one of the friends when hearing your's and geoff's name had a few things to say and wasn't very interested in having the day ruined. From what I could gather this guy was part of some listening tests you guys were involved in, in 2008 or something, and it turned into a "joke". It sounded like something that was talked about on a forum with a bunch of guys talking about you and geoff and it turned into a big mess when people started to give their opinions of what they heard. His comment was "don't get involved with these two cause they will never stop talking about topics they know nothing about". So, I didn't push.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
You can take some solace. Plus a pop quiz...oh, boy!
michael green wrote:

Hi May, you lucked out about the referencing Ravel. I was thinking maybe I could get someone to look at this thread and give me their thoughts, but one of the friends when hearing your's and geoff's name had a few things to say and wasn't very interested in having the day ruined. From what I could gather this guy was part of some listening tests you guys were involved in, in 2008 or something, and it turned into a "joke". It sounded like something that was talked about on a forum with a bunch of guys talking about you and geoff and it turned into a big mess when people started to give their opinions of what they heard. His comment was "don't get involved with these two cause they will never stop talking about topics they know nothing about". So, I didn't push. Are you on psychotropic medication? Let me know and I'll give you a little more space. Hahahaah

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

I'm sure he must have been one of those strung out audiophile neurotics we see much these days that you seem to attract. Guess you aren't the only one that doesn't understand what May and I are talking about. Whew, that's a relief! At least you can take some solace in that.

As May and I are actually not related and are not the same person, nor have we ever been at the same place at the same time, and since we were not involved in listening tests together in 2008 nor was I involved in listening tests myself in 2008 your neurotic acquaintance was lying or you are lying. Take your pick.

As promised, a pop quiz

What do you call someone who habitually posts mean lies about others on the forum?

1. A nogoodnik
2. A clever fellow
3. A dork
4. A troll
5. A gossip

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
nope

geoff said

"I'm sure he must have been one of those strung out audiophile neurotics we see much these days. See, you aren't the only one that doesn't understand what May and I are talking about. Whew, that's a relief! At least you can take some solace in that, Goldie."

mg

Nope, not so much. All of these guys were pretty darn hip. I had a very good time.

To be able to hang out with guys who are at this level in the hobby is always a blast for me. Their past the BS and totally up on not only the soundstage but also the music history of the industry and the recordings. And one thing that I noticed, and impressed with, was the range of music they listened to.

I don't picture understanding you or May was high on their lists lol. They were well beyond you guys saying "better" lol. And I have a feeling a little further along than a portable Sony Walkman cassette player as their reference. Two of them have quite the reel to reel collection BTW. I was impressed with that cause I think the one guy was younger than me by a few years. Man, based on what they told me I'd be all over that collection. Could you imagine getting your hands on a second generation "Aqualung" reel to reel, I'm jealous for sure.

Nope sorry geoffy-boy but when you watch someone listening to St. Martin in the Fields, one moment and say, I want to hear Reed and Cale "Drella" "a dream" the next, you know your listening with someone who "understands". An audiophile of great understanding actually, and not an old fool who should probably be banned from these pages, if Stereophile was smart.

Visiting with audiophiles "true audiophiles", is like meeting a long lost brother who was hidden from you at birth. Doesn't matter what views outside of that soundstage exist, when they are locked in that chair you experience a side of them and their relationship to that stage that is nothing short of enlightening when they stand up and sigh "WOW", and a hand-shake or hug. Sorry geoff, but true audiophiles act nothing like you. Their not engage in constant war and starting wars. True audiophiles live for that moment of the stage, not talkers saying "they don't get soundstaging" like yourself and May.

If you and May were real audiophiles the first words out of your mouths when someone experiences a recording would be "that sounds like fun" or "wish I were there" or "go guys". When I come to this forum and read, I have to take a step back and wonder what hobby this is, cause this is certainly not the hobby I experience with "real audiophiles". Real audiophiles not only "Do" the hobby but can't wait to share their "doing". Music is anything but what you guys are doing here sorry to tell you. If either of you had a heart you would be shouting from the rooftops of how great it is to experience the soundstage. You would also explore after being told things like "CD's can and do produce smooth top end", instead of creating spins and excuses because you can't get there. Like the guy who said "I have 300 CD's but can only listen to 10 of them". This my friends is the opposite of being and audiophile. Most audiophiles are on the persuit of "how did you do that" and not "It doesn't work". "It doesn't work" only points to failure and has nothing to do with real listening and what it is to be someone persuing the music. A real audiophile is the guy who is givin Tape, CD, Vinyl or whatever and knows how to make magic. A true audiophile listens to people of success not the dregs of failure.

I can tell all of you reading one thing for sure. If you think these engineers designed Tape, or Vinyl or CD's to produce "bad sound", your fools, and have been fooled by someone else who was a failure in revealing the recorded signal. If you wish to down this hobby that's fine with the rest of us, just don't call yourself a successful audiophile.

Nope geoff your far from right on this one. Maybe you should gather your troops, have a seat and pass your portable cassette player around the room. But when you call myself or these guys "not audiophiles" your doing noting but exposing yourself as an old fool, with little more than what most call a scam.

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
>>> “but one of the friends

>>> “but one of the friends when hearing your's and geoff's name had a few things to say and wasn't very interested in having the day ruined. From what I could gather this guy was part of some listening tests you guys were involved in, in 2008 or something, and it turned into a "joke". It sounded like something that was talked about on a forum with a bunch of guys talking about you and geoff and it turned into a big mess when people started to give their opinions of what they heard. His comment was "don't get involved with these two cause they will never stop talking about topics they know nothing about". So, I didn't push.” <<<

THAT is the lowest I have seen you stoop, Michael !!

I confirm what Geoff has said. Neither Peter, me or Geoff, together or individually have been involved in any listening tests “in 2008 or something”. Complete hearsay, Michael. And you should be thoroughly ashamed in writing such in a worldwide forum !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And further on what this “GUY” is supposed to have said :-

>>> “His comment was "don't get involved with these two cause they will never stop talking about topics they know nothing about".” <<<

I know my subject, Michael. THAT is why I can challenge you in the areas which I challenge you on !!

I know you haven’t got the answers, Michael – however many times you say “Done the questions and got the answers” or you would be shooting me down in flames with the answers. I know there are many questions, still on the shelf, AWAITING answers !!

Instead you resort to quoting some “guy” ????? with some weird description of none existing listening trials followed by a vague “maybe this happened or maybe that happened” or a vague “it sounded like something that was talked about on a forum”

>>> “It sounded like something that was talked about on a forum with a bunch of guys talking about you and geoff and it turned into a big mess when people started to give their opinions of what they heard.” <<<

How can a “NON EXISTING LISTENING TEST” be talked about on a forum “with a bunch of guys giving their opinions of what they heard” during this NON EXISTING LISTENING TEST ??????????????????

Really, Michael, are you really feeling so threatened you have to resort to this latest ?

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 18 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Mumbo and more jumbo
michael green wrote:

geoff said

"I'm sure he must have been one of those strung out audiophile neurotics we see much these days. See, you aren't the only one that doesn't understand what May and I are talking about. Whew, that's a relief! At least you can take some solace in that, Goldie."

mg

Nope, not so much. All of these guys were pretty darn hip. I had a very good time.

To be able to hang out with guys who are at this level in the hobby is always a blast for me. Their past the BS and totally up on not only the soundstage but also the music history of the industry and the recordings. And one thing that I noticed, and impressed with, was the range of music they listened to.

I don't picture understanding you or May was high on their lists lol. They were well beyond you guys saying "better" lol. And I have a feeling a little further along than a portable Sony Walkman cassette player as their reference. Two of them have quite the reel to reel collection BTW. I was impressed with that cause I think the one guy was younger than me by a few years. Man, based on what they told me I'd be all over that collection. Could you imagine getting your hands on a second generation "Aqualung" reel to reel, I'm jealous for sure.

Nope sorry geoffy-boy but when you watch someone listening to St. Martin in the Fields, one moment and say, I want to hear Reed and Cale "Drella" "a dream" the next, you know your listening with someone who "understands". An audiophile of great understanding actually, and not an old fool who should probably be banned from these pages, if Stereophile was smart.

Visiting with audiophiles "true audiophiles", is like meeting a long lost brother who was hidden from you at birth. Doesn't matter what views outside of that soundstage exist, when they are locked in that chair you experience a side of them and their relationship to that stage that is nothing short of enlightening when they stand up and sigh "WOW", and a hand-shake or hug. Sorry geoff, but true audiophiles act nothing like you. Their not engage in constant war and starting wars. True audiophiles live for that moment of the stage, not talkers saying "they don't get soundstaging" like yourself and May.

If you and May were real audiophiles the first words out of your mouths when someone experiences a recording would be "that sounds like fun" or "wish I were there" or "go guys". When I come to this forum and read, I have to take a step back and wonder what hobby this is, cause this is certainly not the hobby I experience with "real audiophiles". Real audiophiles not only "Do" the hobby but can't wait to share their "doing". Music is anything but what you guys are doing here sorry to tell you. If either of you had a heart you would be shouting from the rooftops of how great it is to experience the soundstage. You would also explore after being told things like "CD's can and do produce smooth top end", instead of creating spins and excuses because you can't get there. Like the guy who said "I have 300 CD's but can only listen to 10 of them". This my friends is the opposite of being and audiophile. Most audiophiles are on the persuit of "how did you do that" and not "It doesn't work". "It doesn't work" only points to failure and has nothing to do with real listening and what it is to be someone persuing the music. A real audiophile is the guy who is givin Tape, CD, Vinyl or whatever and knows how to make magic. A true audiophile listens to people of success not the dregs of failure.

I can tell all of you reading one thing for sure. If you think these engineers designed Tape, or Vinyl or CD's to produce "bad sound", your fools, and have been fooled by someone else who was a failure in revealing the recorded signal. If you wish to down this hobby that's fine with the rest of us, just don't call yourself a successful audiophile.

Nope geoff your far from right on this one. Maybe you should gather your troops, have a seat and pass your portable cassette player around the room. But when you call myself or these guys "not audiophiles" your doing noting but exposing yourself as an old fool, with little more than what most call a scam.

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

You have proven to be a facile liar and mean spirited debater, having been reduced to personal attacks unseen on these fora in a long time. More indication that TuneLand is the Branch Davidians of the audio industry, some sort of weird off shoot of Pro Audio trying to get in the pants of young gullible audiophiles. You are preaching hate and pseudo science. Never seen such claptrap in all my born days. And the whining! Plus you can't spell.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
thought this was about being fair?

Man, look at your tempers fly! Hey don't get on my case if you guys have a trail of BS or praise to deal with. I'm not your press release manager, and I'm not your babysitter. I'm over here having a great time listening with audiophiles and you guys seem to not like it. Sorry but that's not my dig to deal with, nor is listening to what someone says. You guys try to paint pictures of relevance, and I'm not sure there is any. Some guys came over like usual and I mention I've been posting on Stereophile as usual (for the past year), people ask what's up with that, we talk a little about it, and when they read your posts or name they respond and you guys get in a tizzy. Isn't and never has been my problem to control peoples temperments.

Some people like stuff some people don't, being fair is about listening to both sides, but most of all listening for yourselves, and I think there are probably some who do and others who don't. I will say this though. The guys who visited me were well rounded listeners and knew music. If you or geoff want to make that into some kind of lie, well what can I or anyone else do?

I mainly deal with people who are musically well studied. If this makes you uptight that they would rather pass on talking about you, not my problem. Look at how upset you are over a mention instead of happy to see listeners having a good time. This to me speaks volumes, and if you are going to be on the same forum as me and other advanced listeners maybe it would be wiser for the both of you to stay away from our threads. If you don't want the heat, stay out of kitchens where there are real cooks "cooking".

I said this

“It sounded like something that was talked about on a forum with a bunch of guys talking about you and geoff and it turned into a big mess when people started to give their opinions of what they heard.”

Like I said we didn't spend much time on it, however with your reaction I go back and look at some forums and indeed you and geoff are on the war path against anyone who may have a different view. Sorry May & geoff but is indeed you two on these forums, unless someone is posting on your behalf, but the writing styles are the same.

I guess what we could do is posts these forum threads and if you guys are so concerned maybe you would know what he was refering to. If it wasn't a test that you did well it was probably things done with your stuff and was talked about. I'm not the judge nor the jury on your goods. From what I read, some like them some don't and both of you like to argue.

If you want to keep making more out of this than it is, expect coments from both sides. I'm here to promote tuning.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
really?

I don't see myself as a debater at all, and as well as Einstein, I am indeed a bad speller. So when you call me a liar by trying to associate me with quoting something that someone else said about you in the context of being fair, I am an Einstein in your eyes. I thank you for the compliment.

As far as mean spirited, if your calling me having great days of listening with fellow audiophiles mean, well I'll have to go back and see where I have misread my thesaurus.

Personal attacks. Now that one I have trouble with, in regards to on one hand desiring to promote the tune, and on the other you & May being on my threads as thread flaming wars experts. Since this is my first long term dealing with internet trolls I must admit I'm torn between me responding to you guys or not. I think if there were more posters on the topics I have interest in I would not respond to you at all. A while back I realized that both May and yourself have nothing new to offer me, which was a bit of a disappointment. I was hoping for more. Seeing you attack others though the way you do, helps me to deal with you as a fairly low life person, and I don't feel nearly as bad as I would if I had respect for your internet encounters. Your that guy in school that picked on others, and I was the kid that beat the snot out of you till you left them alone. So in that regard I see you as more of a sheepish coward, with quite possibly a drinking, drug or even mental condition. That part I do feel bad about actually, but as I have tried to befriend you in the past and have seen your agenda fairly clear, the most I can hope for is you find someone else to stalk.

TuneLand

TuneLand I see as a place for people to go beyond plug & play. TuneLand deals with the shades inbetween the frequencies. Those special bits of information that make notes what they are instead of numbers on someones chalkboard. TuneLand is the land of doing as opposed to talking about things that may or may not be. TuneLand is the difference between people like you and May vs music explorers.

The rest of what you say, is nothing more than an old man watching the water boil over in his pot, hating others breeding success.

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

iosiP
iosiP's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 years 3 months ago
Joined: Jan 12 2014 - 4:41pm
Go take a leak, geoffy-boy

My oh my, geoffy-boy gets offended:
You have proven to be a facile liar and mean spirited debater, having been reduced to personal attacks unseen on these fora in a long time.

Now look who's talking, the old fart that responded to a serious attempt to get a clear answer (from someone else, BTW) with the following memorable scientific proofs:
You made yourself clear a long time ago. You're stupid and you're an asshole. We listen and we get it. Have you given any consideration to rehab? I think you should. Give my condolences to your besotted liver

But those are not personal attacks, just geoffy's prostate SOS call. Well now...

Pages

  • X