Quote:
Why on Earth would you disparage Jan's system?

Because his system is so lame it's laughable. Now, that alone would not be justification for making fun of Jan. I don't usually hold others up for ridicule, at least unprovoked. But in this case Jan totally deserves it. Totally. He holds himself up as an audio expert, and insults everyone who disagrees with him, especially me.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:
[Ethan's] marketing scheme is simply to criticize others and place doubts in viewers minds.

your horrible U47 mic preamp as a reference, and it measures crap, horrible frequency response

you obviously cannot even make rudimentary measurements, let alone design something even average.

you demonstrate your total lack of even basic electronics.

you fake graphs, now mislead people

It is guys like you that give audio a bad name.

So yet more Ethan Winer scams on the unsuspecting public.

Said the pot to the kettle.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Why don't you tell everyone again how I'm embarassed by my system since I won't post pictures?

Ethan, there's no doubt.

You're just a prick!

And every one of your little followers thinks you're the best for putting "people like me" in my place. Gotta hand it to you, on a very small scale, you have it made.

This is who you want to defend, ncdrawl? The guy who can only call people names and make fun of their system? Big man that Ethan! Never any answers, never will accept a challenge. Just insults that you guys eat up. How's bullshit taste, ncdrawl?

This is what this thread is about to you?

Why'd you waste my time?

Quote:
Why don't you tell everyone again how I'm embarassed by my system since I won't post pictures?

Ethan, there's no doubt.

You're just a prick!

And every one of your little followers thinks you're the best for putting "people like me" in my place. Gotta hand it to you, on a very small scale, you have it made.

Notice Jan while he made fun of your system, I again posted Ethan's incredibly poor U47 preamplifier design. Ethan cannot even make basic spec measurements of his own little projects, but claims to be an expert. Talk about a hypocrit, Ethan Winer takes the cake.

And notice how he manipulated my post concerning marketing. Why didn't you give the entire details I presented Ethan?

It's about keeping the discusssion of anything outside of their comfort zone from advancing forward. That's the job here. If somebody actually begins to think something other than insults are the way to go about this, then they're in trouble. If someone begins to think maybe the numbers don't tell all, then their little gambit starts to fall apart. It's like any politician, it's about holding onto the power.

And like Frog said, this is the Stereophile forum?! No other forum would allow this sort of BS to stay on anything with their name on it. Nobody else lets members insult the other member's equipment just because they want to.

I have to take a minute to thank the moderators of this forum for the wonderful job they've done.

Quote:
And every one of your little followers thinks you're the best for putting "people like me" in my place. Gotta hand it to you, on a very small scale, you have it made

Jan, enough with the drama already. Of course I disagree with the system bashing, that was distasteful. I am of the same mind of him with regard to much of the "tweak" products out there, and I quite respect him for his work in acoustic treatment, and for the myriad papers he has written or been part of..but that does not mean that I agree with, wholesale, every single thing that he does. He and I disagree about power conditioning, for example.

Bold statement, ncdrawl. Very bold.

"So yet more Ethan Winer scams on the unsuspecting public."

Ethan's room treatments are scams?

I disagree.

I suspect Ethan simply copied information for his myriad "papers" from another source. Afterall, I have caught him so many times demonstrating his complete ignorance of electronics. His pathetic U47 preamplifier is just the latest example.

To write for magazines one has to simply be good at prose and follow the company line. Here is a good article to read about corruption.

http://www.boundforsound.com/reviews.htm#Truth

-------

Hi Buddha,

I use college textbook formula to demonstrate the very poor frequency response of the U47 preamplifier. Also the ratio of FET drain resistance, opt load impedance, and 100k drain resistor is a basic indicator of the lack of even basic first year electronics. You want high distortion and poor frequency response, use Ethan's circuit. There is no doubt as to the poor quality of that preamplifier. He would be laughed out of the classroom for that design for that purpose.

How do you know how much truth and half-truth he is telling you? And I just reread your post; I never said he was scamming the public with regards to treatments. However, he was outright caught faking room graphs and then later the RS mic graphs to cover up his room graphs fiasco.

Quote:
he was outright caught faking room graphs and then later the RS mic graphs to cover up his room graphs fiasco.

Caught by who? You? I take that as a compliment Steve!

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Gee, I wish the insults would stop and May would make an intelligent, non-belligerent post.

Can't say I blame her if she doesn't though. There's not much left of this thread.

Is there anybody on that side that's interested in talking?

Quote:
Gee, I wish the insults would stop and May would make an intelligent, non-belligerent post.

Can't say I blame her if she doesn't though.

Yeah.

That article by JGH was pretty damning.

Quote:

Quote:
he was outright caught faking room graphs and then later the RS mic graphs to cover up his room graphs fiasco.

Caught by who? You? I take that as a compliment Steve!

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Yep, me. AVS also saw through your fiasco.

Never mind.

Merry Christmas
Happy Honakah
Kool kwanza
Rah Rah Ramadan

Let's all have a kumbaya moment, kiss and make up (not make out, don't get any ideas)

Hasn't this discussion degenerated while I've been away? Nobody has managed to stay on topic just squabbling and name calling. Sigh

Lets get back to demagnetizing plastic shall we?

I have been doing some research in my absence and one branch of this has been to re-familiarize myself with the claims made by Furutech. Firstly the demagnetizing of vinyl LP's. Furutech claim that there is enough magnetizable material included in a vinyl LP via contamination during manufacturing that can be detrimental to the reproduction of music off the record. The only way that I can see this as a factor would be the magnetized contaminants would influence the moving coils or magnets in the phono cartridge. Now, being good audiophiles, we would shun moving magnet cartridges due to their relative lack of sensitivity. Moving coil is the only suitable subject here. So we have magnetized microscopic contaminants in our record that Furutech claims to have measured at 654.8 nT, that's nano Tesla, so in decimal notation that's 0.0000006548. Now after demagnetizing the LP Furutech measure an astounding, mind-blowing, brain numbing 0.0000005819!!!! A change of 729 nT. Excuse me I need a stiff drink to settle that fact in my mind..... glug...glug...glug. Ahhhhh That's better.

Hidden deep inside the MC cartridge that our audiophile has lovingly mounted on his $90,000 dollar tonearm are magnets. Manufacturers, who are looking for top dollar, have probably put neodymium magnets in their cartridge so that they can use the word neodymium in their sales brochure, sounds very impressive as does 'rare earth'. Neodymium magnets are the highest flux density to weight ratio magnets available and as such, the magnetic flux in the gap between the magnets (where the coils live) can reach up to 2.4T. So thats 2.4000000000 up against 0.000000729 hmmm. If I were to make a comparison it might be an ant carrying a dump truck.

So, this is a question for Jan Vigne...

Q. What percentage of 2.4 is 0.000000729 and if this was to represent a difference in the sound, how would the human ear detect it.

A.?????

Now to the CD demagnetization. I illustrated the magnetizable qualities of aluminum in my last post. Basically it does not have the ability to be magnetized in any significant way. And before you jump on that Jan, Frog et al, if a 55um layer of aluminum can retain any magnetic flux it is utterly, utterly miniscule. However Furutech have more magnetic nasties to throw at our brave audiophile. The ink on the label. Sweet reason! The INK!!!!! They're really reaching now. And somehow, this is going to warp the coherent beam of the laser or corrupt the digital information encoded on the disc! I know that the workings of a compact disc player seem like magical pixies at work but it's all rather simple. The laser shines on the disc and some of the beam shines back. The part that shines back gets detected by a photo diode and gets made into a logic state known as '1' because the circuit knows that a disk is playing it makes a lack of reflection into a logic state known as '0'. From these beginnings the 1's and 0's go into a buffer and are then clocked out by a crystal controlled oscillator (this accounts for the insignificant wow and flutter levels). The DAC is the next port of call and the 1's and 0's are made back into the waveform that was encoded by the A to D converters at the mastering facility. No amount of magnetism could affect the process unless it was causing the pickup to deflect which would result in higher error correction counts but not necessarily significantly higher error counts. Once again I call in my comparison of an ant carrying a dump truck. The magnetic flux that could be contained in the aluminum or the particles of iron in the ink (!) would create an almost unmeasurable flux. In addition to this, the act of playing the disc warms it up and this is known to affect all magnetizable materials the same way. The magnetic flux decreases and in extreme cases it will demagnetize the material in a significant way. Even neodymium magnets will be demagnetized by heat, ask any electric motor designer.

I recall years ago how some lamebrain was convinced that disconnecting the power indicator LED on his Linn Sondeck had made an

SAS, you offer nothing here, either... your stalking of Mr. Winer is pathetic. Since all you choose to do is take jabs at him, I will be putting you on ignore.

I guess I could say that was just too much to read and go on to ignore any questions asked just as you have chosen to ignore the questions I asked of you and others on the "nay" side of the debate(?) have ignored countless questions asked of them.

But saying something is just too much to comprehend is the chicken shit way of avoiding something. Commonly used by one side in this thread but still chicken shit and it reflects poorly on one's ability to reason things out from result to cause.

FC, you seem so enamored of your own ability to disseminate numbers. This is the second time you've told us aluminium is not a highly permeable material. Congratulations on that discovery. Unfortuately, we all agreed on that on page two, too bad you weren't here for that. And yet for all your numbers bashing and crashing you seem so poor at coming to a conclusion that is consistent with your own numbers.

I have to think your first question about the mc cartridge is poorly thought out. Wouldn't our interest be not in some magic number we've concocted out of thin air but in the real world of what might be happening here? Isn't that what we've been discussing as the op's topic? What did happen and why? To do that we must start not with raw numbers that exist in a vacuum of make believe only to satisfy a particular argument but with the essence of the debate. Was a change heard after the use of the Furutech device? From the reports we have available made by numerous reputable sources (you do agree to that, correct?), yes, there was a distinct and noticeable change made and the change resulted in an audible improvement in sound quality. That much we know to be true.

OK, from there we can proceed to ask how that might have happened. We have the result and since none of us have first hand experience with the device we are left to reason backward from the result we know to be real to the why and the how.

Rather than making up numbers and challenging anyone to come up with a % from this made up number to the actual result, let's work with the one number we have available to us. Which would be 729 nT, correct? Now, I would pose the question that starts with, "Since we know the 729 nT change in the "magnetization" of the vinyl compound resulted in an audible change, how much of cartridge's output is the result of a 729 nT movement to the side of lowering the random noise within the cartridge's output?"

That's not all that different than what you asked, FC, but the difference is critical to answering the question of, given our known result, how did the result occur?. Those are the only two things we know, the result and the stated number that changed. The rest of your numbers, FC, were made up and we have no use for made up stuff at this point in the discussion.

So.

Isn't this what we're interested in? What caused the reviewer's perceived change in sound quality to the positive? If so, then we need to know how much output is the result of a positive amount of 729 nT and how much is it lowered by a removal of 729 nT.

OK, what in the catridge's output would be lowered that could result in a positive change in the sound quality? Distortion overall? Noise? Both? Let's settle on both since we don't have much else to go on and they are most commonly tied together in the broadest terms. So, 729 nT results in a lowering of both the distortion and noise generated by the cartridge. Agreed?

Just nod your head.

The next question I would think would be what would be the most common situation where the Furutech might be used? Not some made up number that only serves to disprove a result but a real world number that would provide us with an answer to why the Furutech has been receiving numerous positive accolades. That would lead me to think just how much of a signal the 729 nT would generate in a given carrtidge? I think we can agree there is no "average" mc cartridge but I would assume someone who might have the funds and desire to purchase a device like the Furutech would probably not be using a high output mc cartridge. So, I really can't do the math since I do not have any absolutes from which to work and any "absolute" probably wouldn't actually be much of a standard given the wide variation of cartridges available to the "(well) over $2k for a needle crowd". But, if you consider the extremely low output voltages of the highest of the high end cartridges, then might not our agreed upon 729 nT be sufficient to cause less random noise to be generated by the "typical" high end cartridge?

Isn't that the point of the Furutech process?

A lowering of the noise floor which brings with it most all of the audiophile prizes? In basic terms, less distortion and lower noise = better sound? Hmmm? It seems we might be on to something here.

So, FC, I have to say your original question is somewhat like shooting elephants with a peashooter and it has no net result attached to your effort. Since you are so good at breaking down numbers, forget this neodynium magnet you magically quote and give us some idea how much lower the noise and distortion figures would be as a result of the 729 nT "voltage" being removed from the cartridge's output.

Unfortunately, Furutech doesn't provide that data for LP's - which is, of course, why so many of the opposing members call it snake oil. No data = no belief. Therefore all we have to go on really is their statement that most cartridge manufacturers go to "great lengths" to reduce magnetic modulation noise to gain overall better performance. OK, we've agreed the process can remove 729 nT of "noise" from the cartridge's output. We can easily, with just a bit of common sense, interpolate the gains in performance to be had as the result of that noise/distortion reduction.

Why has this taken 30 pages to resolve?

Jan, why the vehement defense of something that claims a .000030375% difference on this thread, yet totally dismiss 2% speaker distortion figures in another thread?

How does that 0.0003% play into the noise level of the average preamp?

And that's being kind about Furutech 'imaginative' numbers!

If you start being number grubber here, no telling where you'll end up! Right, Ethan?

There is much discussion about the greatness of the Thorens TD 124 (TD 190 and TD290, also,) yet those platters are actually quite magnetic!

OK, on to the optical disc portion of this debate.

You know, FC, it's really difficult to work with anyone who has such a distinct bias against the idea of the Furutech that they post this sort of garbage as proof of what they say ...

Quote:
I recall years ago how some lamebrain was convinced that disconnecting the power indicator LED on his Linn Sondeck had made an

Buddha, pease post when you are hung over. This posting while you are getting to that point is not working out well.

And don't ask for Winer's help. He'll just tell you I should be made fun of because he doesn't like my system - even though he's never even seen it let alone heard it - or measured it for that matter. And I have it on good authority that his system is pretty pitiful itself, and that's from someone who has heard his system(s). Yep, Winer's a prick and that's that!

OK, if I have this right, you want to know ...

Quote:
Jan, why the vehement defense of something that claims a .000030375% difference on this thread, yet totally dismiss 2% speaker distortion figures in another thread?

Lordy, lordy! How you try to trip me up by saying I said this and I said that. I never - never - said the distortion was reduced by .000030375%. You said that.

Actually, I said I couldn't determine just how much the noise and distortion numbers would be reduced since there is no such thing as a "typical" high end mc cartridge. Once again, the other stuff is what you made up.

I suggested we consider just how much the reduction in magnetism might reduce the noise and distortion in the "average" high end mc cartridge's output when we consider the "average" cartridge that might be used by somone purchasing the Furutech. I think we can all agree that cartridge probably isn't a Shure M97.

Nowhere in my suggestion does your .000030375% reduction in magnetism have any relevance other than as just one more number that floats around without any specific reference. That is not the actual reduction in noise and distortion.

We just know the results are thus, the demagnetization proceess reduces the noise and distortion figures. The rest we have to rationalize with the common sense we have to realize knowing the result we can determine the how of the situation.

I will agree Furutech leaves quite a bit to be unknown since there are no "typical" high end cartridges and there really are no typical audiophile LP's. So I would think the numbers do "float" around depending on the system and the disc being played. None the less, we know the Furutech works as reviewed and we have some idea how. That's what this thread is about.

Quote:
There is much discussion about the greatness of the Thorens TD 124 (TD 190 and TD290, also,) yet those platters are actually quite magnetic!

What are you drinking, Buddha? Glenmorangie?

Tell you what, why don't you ask Dudley about this? You're still on speaking terms with Dudley, right? At least Dudley, right?

Fremer doesn't use a Thorens and to my knowledge no one who has reviewed the Frutech has played the demagnetized LP's on a Thorens.

Didn't AD change out the platter on his Thorens to a material that is not magnetically permeable? Ask him, he's your bud, right? I mean somebody must be your bud.

Right?

Thanks, guys, this hasn't been much fun but we finally got to the answers.

Unless FC wants to answer those questions, it would seem like this thread has been taken care of!

OHHH I get it. I'm supposed to find out WHY it works, not why it can't work. Thanks for clearing that up Jan.

OK here's how it works. The massive magnetic flux in the vinyl record make the coils in the moving coil phono cartridge vibrate uncontrollably and produce audible distortion and noise

OR

The absolutely insignificant amount of magnetic flux associated witha vinyl LP would result in an insignificant percentage change in noise and distortion commensurate with the alteration between the "magnetized" and "de-magnetized" flux compared with the scale of the flux within the MC cartridge which even if it were reduced by a magnitude of 100 down to .24T there would still be a yawning chasm of difference.

Just nod your head Jan.....

No actual numbers or graphs have been provided for the magnetization compared to demagnetization effects on compact discs but hey! who needs that crap! Let's just forge ahead and discover the truth.

Here's how it works. The magnetic flux retained by the 55um layer of aluminium and the highly ferrous ink used to print the label on the CD conspire to jiggle the pickup in the CD player. The error count from the pickup soars to unacceptable levels (a situation never envisaged by the engineers that developed it) dangerous amounts of data are lost or corrupted and the signal is compromised. This situation is never experienced with the pernicious magnetic fields removed (by the magical de-magnetizer).

OR

The footling and pathetic amounts of magnetic flux associated with a 55um layer of aluminium and possible traces of ferrous metals in the printing ink have no significant effect on a laser pickup that has been designed from the ground up to be robust and able to correct for tracking and vibration errors.

Jan: Please provide a link to the double blind testing of treated vs. untreated discs. Also provide data on the ferous metal content of printing inks used on compact disc labels (maybe you could e-mail Furutech on that one)

Jan: You bemoan the parlous situation of your unanswered questions. I answered two in my last post.

Jan: I bemoan the fact that you didn't calculate the percentage difference between magnetized and de-magnetized LP records and post it for the forum. Instead, Buddha had to do it for you.

Lastly Jan. I do not need to answer the question of why .0030375% (revised by a factor of 100 to take into account low output MC cartridges) is an "audible" change. It isn't when you consider that an audible change in volume to the human ear is in the order of 3dB (1.5dB if you have golden ears).

Also, I apologise for including numbers (provided by Furutech) and calculations in my posts. As in the "liquid cable" thread, I know that numbers and calculations are unwanted, they cloud the issue of musical purity and sonic enhancement. Much better to have "chaos theory" and "we don't know how it works....it just WORKS!" instead.

Ask sasaudio. That's how he arrives at the component values in his designs. He throws all knowledge and logic out of the window and just makes something that WORKS! No books, no Ohms law no science.... it just WORKS! That's how he knows Ethans U47 pre-amp is such a dud!

Amazing!

Quote:

Quote:
There is much discussion about the greatness of the Thorens TD 124 (TD 190 and TD290, also,) yet those platters are actually quite magnetic!

What are you drinking, Buddha? Glenmorangie?

Tell you what, why don't you ask Dudley about this? You're still on speaking terms with Dudley, right? At least Dudley, right?

Fremer doesn't use a Thorens and to my knowledge no one who has reviewed the Frutech has played the demagnetized LP's on a Thorens.

Didn't AD change out the platter on his Thorens to a material that is not magnetically permeable? Ask him, he's your bud, right? I mean somebody must be your bud.

Right?

Jan, you are just being bitchy now.

There are many audiophiles who swear by those magnetic Thorens platters. Are they all wrong now, too?

Quote:
Buddha, pease post when you are hung over. This posting while you are getting to that point is not working out well.

And don't ask for Winer's help. He'll just tell you I should be made fun of because he doesn't like my system - even though he's never even seen it let alone heard it - or measured it for that matter. And I have it on good authority that his system is pretty pitiful itself, and that's from someone who has heard his system(s). Yep, Winer's a prick and that's that!

OK, if I have this right, you want to know ...

Quote:
Jan, why the vehement defense of something that claims a .000030375% difference on this thread, yet totally dismiss 2% speaker distortion figures in another thread?

Lordy, lordy! How you try to trip me up by saying I said this and I said that. I never - never - said the distortion was reduced by .000030375%. You said that.

Actually, I said I couldn't determine just how much the noise and distortion numbers would be reduced since there is no such thing as a "typical" high end mc cartridge. Once again, the other stuff is what you made up.

I suggested we consider just how much the reduction in magnetism might reduce the noise and distortion in the "average" high end mc cartridge's output when we consider the "average" cartridge that might be used by somone purchasing the Furutech. I think we can all agree that cartridge probably isn't a Shure M97.

Nowhere in my suggestion does your .000030375% reduction in magnetism have any relevance other than as just one more number that floats around without any specific reference. That is not the actual reduction in noise and distortion.

We just know the results are thus, the demagnetization proceess reduces the noise and distortion figures. The rest we have to rationalize with the common sense we have to realize knowing the result we can determine the how of the situation.

I will agree Furutech leaves quite a bit to be unknown since there are no "typical" high end cartridges and there really are no typical audiophile LP's. So I would think the numbers do "float" around depending on the system and the disc being played. None the less, we know the Furutech works as reviewed and we have some idea how. That's what this thread is about.

"We know the Furutech works as reviewed?"

How do 'we' know this, Jan?

Do you have one?

Did we also 'know' the broken darTZeel CD player worked as reviewed?

The Tice Clock?

The non-signal-conducting interconnects?

The Musical Fidelity "Stereophile Class A" Turbocharger?

"Knowing" that it works as reviewed implies some first hand knowledge, Jan. Tell us about your time with the Furutech device, please.

"We have some idea how..."

We were talking about demagnetizing CD's, as I recall. Tell me the data about "the reason how."

Quote:
Just nod your head Jan.....

Nod to what? More made up numbers? FC, what part of "made up numbers are useless" do you not understand?!

I've read your post several times trying to dtermine how you came up with the nmumbers you did. I can see nothing but some gobbledygook about cartridge manufacturers wanting to advertise the strongest magnets (which would then boost output) and therefore we have noedynium employed and neodynium has this number Tesla. Fine, I am saying what you have made up might be quite terrific but I'm not seeing the highest of the high end cartridges claiming they have the strongest magnets and the highest output. Instead I am seeing the manufacturers claim they have better windings in the moving coils of a moving coil cartridge. Yes, some talk of magnets but certainly not of highest output.

Most of the cartridges I presume would be used in a system that might include the Furutech would be extremely low output cartridges with real world - not made up - numbers in the 0.025 - 0.6mV output range. Even lower in some cases than Furutech's claimed 0.5mV "typical" mc cartridge.

Did you read the Furutech page, FC? I placed the link there so you could go look at their page. This is the second time the link has been provided for all to see.

Quote:
The massive magnetic flux in the vinyl record make the coils in the moving coil phono cartridge vibrate uncontrollably and produce audible distortion and noise

How about "randomly" in place of "uncontrollably" and I would agree with that statement? If we both agree to "randomly" - which wouldn't seem that difficult - then we do have our answer, FC.

Quote:
The absolutely insignificant amount of magnetic flux associated witha vinyl LP would result in an insignificant percentage change in noise and distortion commensurate with the alteration between the "magnetized" and "de-magnetized" flux compared with the scale of the flux within the MC cartridge which even if it were reduced by a magnitude of 100 down to .24T there would still be a yawning chasm of difference.

How about we stop using made up numbers? If you do that, then this scenario makes virtually no sense other than as the preldue to your "proof" nothing is happening. Since you made up the number, you get to make up the result too!

Sorry!

It doeesn't work that way, FC. We have a result and we do have some information from Furutech that indicates noise (and disotortion) are lowered.

The effect of the Furutech device is not something you or I can arbitrarilly question given the proof we have from multiple sources of some repute. You might not like their reports but that doesn't alter the fact numerous sources with some standing in the audio community have tested the Furutech device and given it positive reviews with similar improvements being reported. If you are unwilling to work from a result backwards simply asking how something occurred without prejudice or bias in the extreme, that is your problem and the problem of all the naysyers and not the problem of the Furutech product or the reviewers. It's also not my problem other than I have to deal with someone who wishes to make things up and present them as "proof".

Here's what I did concede to your issues with the Furutech. There are no typical high end cartridges and there are no typical LP's. An audiophile of some experience will have discs spanning over fifty years of manufacturing with vast differences in the make up of the "vinyl". I do and I assume most vinyl junkies who might buy the Furutech would have much the same situation. Therefore the numbers cited on Furutech's web page are selected to best demonstrate the effectiveness of their product. Sort of like a car manufacturer providing HP and torque numbers, they are not guaranteed, they are "averages" which vary day to day and hour to hour.

But the car manufacturer does not simply pull numbers out of the air to make their case as you have done with your Tesla number for an unknown and as far as I can tell non-existent mc cartridge.

FC, provide numbers that reflect the real world and you might have an argument that would stand up under the slightest bit of scruntiny I can provide given the information I have to work with. However, right now, you are living in la-la-land and you want all of us to join you there just because you claim the music never changes.

Quote:
Jan: Please provide a link to the double blind testing of treated vs. untreated discs. Also provide data on the ferous metal content of printing inks used on compact disc labels (maybe you could e-mail Furutech on that one)

Why? MF's columns are not available to me on line. You'll have to take that issue up with someone at the magazine, not me or you'll have to do some work on your own, FC. OH, HORRORS!!!

The data you ask for has been provided in this thread. I'm not in the mood to do all the leg work for you, FC. Further, as May has stated, the numbers most commonly seen for these materials are "static" numbers much like Winer's measurements for an amplifier. They do no reflect the reality of magnetically permeable materials spinnning - as you admit they do - at high speeds within the electromagnetic field of a CD player.

Quote:
Jan: I bemoan the fact that you didn't calculate the percentage difference between magnetized and de-magnetized LP records and post it for the forum. Instead, Buddha had to do it for you.

FC, you bemoan it because you were too lazy, like the rest of this crowd, to go look at the numbers provided by Furutech even when the link to the information has been placed under your nose for easy access - TWICE!

Twice, FC, not just once but twice but anything that might interfere with the willful ignorance of your side of this "debate" has gone ignored and even disparaged for being "too long to read" and requiring too much effort. I've been here for thirty plus pages of this crap. I've read all the entries. If you and those like you cannot read the facts when they have been handed to you twice before you begin to just make up numbers just to say you can make up numbers, then there still really is no "debate", is there, FC?

Quote:
Lastly Jan. I do not need to answer the question of why .0030375% (revised by a factor of 100 to take into account low output MC cartridges) is an "audible" change. It isn't when you consider that an audible change in volume to the human ear is in the order of 3dB (1.5dB if you have golden ears).

That statement refutes itself. Maybe it doesn't if you truly feel Stereophile has been wrong from the beginning. But that's another question I've asked and no one has answered. However, FC, you must admit I do feel JGH was right when he started this magazine and I have to asked the same question I've asked so many times that has gone unanswered by the likes of you, if you do not believe in what Stereophile stands for, why are you here? Answer me that, will you please?

Quote:
There are many audiophiles who swear by those magnetic Thorens platters. Are they all wrong now, too?

No, they are listening for and hearing differing qualities within the music's presentation. Just as we all do.

And how do you know there are "many" audiophiles who swear by that platter? There are "many" car nuts who swear by a '57 Chevy but rip out the old six banger anyway.

Don't make stuff up just to be making stuff up, Buddha.

Quote:
"Knowing" that it works as reviewed implies some first hand knowledge, Jan.

Please, Buddha, I'm asking you nicely, don't make stuff up. We know what the reviews say, which is positive. To disprove those comments, you'll have to show me an equal number of reviewers with their first hand knowledge of the Furutech who report no improvements.

The ball's in your court on this one, Buddha.

Quote:

Quote:
"Knowing" that it works as reviewed implies some first hand knowledge, Jan.

Please, Buddha, I'm asking you nicely, don't make stuff up. We know what the reviews say, which is positive. To disprove those comments, you'll have to show me an equal number of reviewers with their first hand knowledge of the Furutech who report no improvements.

The ball's in your court on this one, Buddha.

Ah, so no first hand experience. I suspected as much.

This explains alot. If it's written by a reviewer it is "knowledge."

That must be your substitution for, "If you haven't heard it, you don't have an opinion."

I've heard Furutech treated LP's, "demagnetized" discs from the 'leading competitor,' and have heard hundreds of 'demagnetized' CD's. I've even had a Bedini Clarifier in my owm home (gasp!) Maybe you should try some first hand listening before spouting off on "knowing" a device works.

"I know it 'cause I read it," yeah.

Jan, when you are shown wrong, you get very personal, and it leaks onto other topics.

Maybe a little time out. I've read reviews about high colonics, so they must work.

Quote:
I've heard Furutech treated LP's, "demagnetized" discs from the 'leading competitor,' and have heard hundreds of 'demagnetized' CD's. I've even had a Bedini Clarifier in my owm home (gasp!) Maybe you should try some first hand listening before spouting off on "knowing" a device works.

Good for you, but allowing things to drift into the conversation works both ways. First of all, you yourself admit you post only when you are hung over. Do I need to show you that post or do you remember it now? Second, I never claimed any first hand experience with the Furutech, so bad on you for suggesting I did.

I have to work with what I'm given here, Buddha. I see numerous reports that claim a positive result from the Furutech. I trust the people who reported those positive results to not be reporting "for the sake of controversy" or however that sillyassed phrase went. Therefore, I place some large amount of trust in the fact they have reported their findings correctly and that the Furutech does have some efficacy as a product. Therefore, I feel confident when I say we "know" the product worked as reported. It is not up to me to prove it did not, got it?

I've not seen one report from anyone I trust to give an honest appraisal that says the Furutech did not operate as reported by the others. Where are they, Buddha?

Bad on you for not supplying that information.

Your comments to me would lead me to think there might be something more going on here. You're right I have no more personal experience with this product than practically anyone else inputting their "sentiments' to this thread. I remind you once again - I never claimed any experience with this device. But you didn't mention the others have no experience even though they continue to spout.

So, bad on you again for suggesting I am the only one here who cannot be trusted due to a lack of personal experience.

FC, has no experience with the Furutech or apparently with reality yet he plays with words and numbers far more figuratively than I do.

Bad on you for not mentioning that fact.

Why don't you say something to FC, or ncdrawl, or Alan who started this thread with no personal experience with the Furutech but felt he could declare it snake oil while lacking any desire to acquire personal experience?

Bad on you for that too, Buddha!

Do you not mention or post to the others for a reason? Possibly because that would not suit your case as well as disproving my personal but wholy unclaimed experience?

If I claimed experience with the device but had no instrumentation to prove the numbers Furutech provides, would that make me dishonest if I repeated those numbers? I don't think so from an honest point of view.

Would you say the others here cannot just make up numbers to suit their own case? If so, then why did you not say so to FC when he did just that?

Bad on you once more, Buddha.

Buddha, you've reached the stage in this thread where you are bantering just to be bantering. You call on Winer for support when you know exactly what Winer will whine on about.

What proof would you have me offer here that is not equal to all the others on this thread? Did you ask Winer if he had any experience with the Furutech before he spouted off? No. Yet it would be reasonable to assume Winer doesn't know squat about this product from any personal experience. right? It would be reasonable to assume Winer hasn't read anymore of this thread than most of those who have no personal experience with the Furutech. Wouldn't it also be reasonable to think Winer hasn't even read the Furutech web page since there would be no need for him to do so since as we all know after being told flatly by him "he does know everything!"?

So why not mention his lack of experience? Or his lack of interest in finding out about the product he spouts on about? Or just because he is a prick?

Why call on someone with such a total lack of experience to the point of not even reading the Furutech web page for back up to prove yourself right?

Because that wouldn't support your claims against me?

Very, very bad on you for that, Buddha.

Talk to the others in equal measure, Buddha, before you start making accusations your words cannot back up.

As they say, I rest my case!

Now, if you do not mind, this thread is not about me, it is not about Winer, it is not about a lot of things that have entered this thread.

It is about the Furutech device and how someone calls something snake oil without even being capable of taking in the slightest bit of information without overload or without the capacity to think for themself beyond the immediate moment.

If you wish to debate my reasoning of this issue as presented to FC, do so. Otherwise, leave the personal stuff out of this.

Quote:
SAS, you offer nothing here, either... your stalking of Mr. Winer is pathetic. Since all you choose to do is take jabs at him, I will be putting you on ignore.

Really? So the fact that ethan claims to be such a hot designer and attacks Jan's system while his own U47 mic preamplifier is down dbs in the audio band is not important? 2) In fact, the U47 preamplifier spec is worse than Jan's electronics specs. 3) The fact that ethan cannot even measure simple specs or design a preamplifier yet claims to be an expert in electronics is not important? I just feel for those who copied that U47 preamplifier thinking they were getting even an average design.

NC, I see you never ever contribute except to applaud ethan, even when ethan is caught in his own devices. Isn't it your position to expose those offering snake oil and false pretenses, which ethan is doing with the U47 preamplifier and his "electronic" experience? If ethan was really that great in electronics and design, I would not be able to expose the U47 huge flaws. Are you getting a little under the table from ethan since you are obviously condoning ethan's snake oil?

Quote:

Quote:
SAS, you offer nothing here, either... your stalking of Mr. Winer is pathetic. Since all you choose to do is take jabs at him, I will be putting you on ignore.

Really? So the fact that ethan claims to be such a hot designer and attacks Jan's system while his own U47 mic preamplifier is down dbs in the audio band is not important? 2) In fact, the U47 preamplifier spec is worse than Jan's electronics specs. 3) The fact that ethan cannot even measure simple specs or design a preamplifier yet claims to be an expert in electronics is not important? I just feel for those who copied that U47 preamplifier thinking they were getting a nice design.

NC, I see you never ever contribute except to applaud ethan, even when ethan is caught in his own devices. Are you getting a little under the table from ethan to keep ethan's facade intact?

sas, I think you would come off better if , as a professional, you remained above the frey.

You could share your knowledge with us W/O bringing up Ethan.

I think that would increase rather than decrease interest in your designs.

I hope you take this as an observation rather than a criticism and it is just my reaction, maybe others see it differently.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
SAS, you offer nothing here, either... your stalking of Mr. Winer is pathetic. Since all you choose to do is take jabs at him, I will be putting you on ignore.

Really? So the fact that ethan claims to be such a hot designer and attacks Jan's system while his own U47 mic preamplifier is down dbs in the audio band is not important? 2) In fact, the U47 preamplifier spec is worse than Jan's electronics specs. 3) The fact that ethan cannot even measure simple specs or design a preamplifier yet claims to be an expert in electronics is not important? I just feel for those who copied that U47 preamplifier thinking they were getting a nice design.

NC, I see you never ever contribute except to applaud ethan, even when ethan is caught in his own devices. Are you getting a little under the table from ethan to keep ethan's facade intact?

sas, I think you would come off better if , as a professional, you remained above the frey.

You could share your knowledge with us W/O bringing up Ethan.

I think that would increase rather than decrease interest in your designs.

I hope you take this as an observation rather than a criticism and it is just my reaction, maybe others see it differently.

Thanks for your input Tom. I will consider it. I just hate seeing viewers being taken advantage of and put down when he cannot design a simple preamplifier. I will consider it though, Tom.

sas, thanks for considering that.

When I think about buying electronics , Ethan doesn't even come to mind. I don't think he sells them.

When I add to my room treatments he is the 1st person I will buy from.

I suspect others share my view. In other words I don't see Ethan's views on electronics as threatening to any electronics designers.
Most of us have been around too long (shoot me) to be influenced.
If we like tubes we'll buy tubes, SS we'll buy SS, think all amps sound the same, we'll buy the most power for the buck.

I love my tube headphone amp but I have a SS speaker amp, I love it too.

I see value in blind tests but if I fail one but still think I hear an important diff. I'll buy anyway.

I bet there are a # of middle of the road audiofools like me. Some lean to the subjective (like me) but respect the objective side and some lean to the objective while still valuing subjective assessment

Quote:
AVS also saw through your fiasco.

LOL!!!!!!!!

You were totally shot down at the AVS Forum as soon as they recognized you for the troll you are. Tell you what Steve, drop everything right this minute, and let's see your link to the AVS thread. I'll wait here for you (cue Jeopardy theme).

--Ethan

Quote:
ethan claims to be such a hot designer

I never made such a claim. In fact I acknowledge that in the professional world of audio design, compared to real EEs, I'm just a hack amateur. Look at half of the design articles I linked and you'll see me thanking my mentor Bill Eppler. Now, Bill - there's a very hot designer. However, I understand very well the large picture of "how stuff works," which is why I know that a CD demagnetizer is a bullshit product.

Quote:
attacks Jan's system

Actually, I did no such thing. All I did was describe Jan's system! Think about that. That you (and Buddha) saw it as an attack shows how pathetic and ridiculous Jan's system really is. Okay, now I just insulted Jan's system.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:
he cannot design a simple preamplifier.

I've mostly been ignoring your ad hominem attacks, but it occurred to me this needs addressing. What exactly is wrong with my simple FET microphone preamp circuit? It seems remarkably similar to the FET preamps shown here:

http://www.rason.org/Projects/jfetamp/jfetamp.htm
http://www.hawestv.com/amp_projects/fet_preamp/fetpreamp2.htm
http://www.till.com/articles/GuitarPreamp/

Steve, here's a great chance to show off your superior intellect. Please post a schematic for how you'd do this circuit.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:

sas, thanks for considering that.

When I think about buying electronics , Ethan doesn't even come to mind. I don't think he sells them.

When I add to my room treatments he is the 1st person I will buy from.

I suspect others share my view. In other words I don't see Ethan's views on electronics as threatening to any electronics designers.
Most of us have been around too long (shoot me) to be influenced.
If we like tubes we'll buy tubes, SS we'll buy SS, think all amps sound the same, we'll buy the most power for the buck.

I love my tube headphone amp but I have a SS speaker amp, I love it too.

I see value in blind tests but if I fail one but still think I hear an important diff. I'll buy anyway.

I bet there are a # of middle of the road audiofools like me. Some lean to the subjective (like me) but respect the objective side and some lean to the objective while still valuing subjective assessment

See what happens when you don't address both sides. As you will soon see, ethan is about to be made out a fool again.

Quote:

Quote:
AVS also saw through your fiasco.

LOL!!!!!!!!

You were totally shot down at the AVS Forum as soon as they recognized you for the troll you are. Tell you what Steve, drop everything right this minute, and let's see your link to the AVS thread. I'll wait here for you (cue Jeopardy theme).

--Ethan

The 10 mic comparison thread Ethan. Remember, on page two all your supporters left you when I posted your previous mic spl graphs showing the RS graph was within 2db of the Earthworks graph. Then suddenly after July, the RS mic is a whopping 24db different. Used your own previous graphs to demonstrate how you changed the FR of the RS graph. Wow, you sure can manipulate and mislead can't you.

Quote:

Quote:
ethan claims to be such a hot designer

I never made such a claim.

Oh yes you did. You have stated in the past that you know everything to know. Don't lie about it Winer. You also listed the U47 preamplifier, among other links, in your resume. So now you list junk design in your resume as a credit? No you listed the preamplifier hoping to bolster your design credibility. Unfortunately see my next post.

Quote:
In fact I acknowledge that in the professional world of audio design, compared to real EEs, I'm just a hack amateur.

No you haven't previously stated you were a hack. You have always claimed you know more than anyone else. And you posted the U47 preamplifier because you are a hack? No you posted it to be copied, to show off. Be honest Ethan.

Quote:
Look at half of the design articles I linked and you'll see me thanking my mentor Bill Eppler. Now, Bill - there's a very hot designer.

How can you make a personal judgement since you just admitted you cannot design and are a hack in electronics? And circumstances surrounding your "design" is quite different than the three you listed. And who would want your "designed" preamplifier with a frequency response down -1db at 8khz (-3db at 16khz) or down -1db at even twice that frequency?

Quote:
attacks Jan's system

Actually, I did no such thing. All I did was describe Jan's system! Think about that. That you (and Buddha) saw it as an attack shows how pathetic and ridiculous Jan's system really is. Okay, now I just insulted Jan's system.

--Ethan

Nope you stated this

Quote:
As I understand it, Jan's "stereo system" consists of a flea-power toob amp, loudspeakers with a single small midrange driver (no woofer, no tweeter), with 30 gauge magnet wire between the amp and speakers. Jan, if this is not correct please accept my apologies and clarify your system. Otherwise, I think this pretty well sums up Jan's expertise with audio and hi-fi.

Read the last sentence, the disparagement. And you also mentioned 30 gauge wire? I did not know Jan used 30 gauge wire. Provide a link to prove that.

Quote:

Quote:
he cannot design a simple preamplifier.

I've mostly been ignoring your ad hominem attacks, but it occurred to me this needs addressing. What exactly is wrong with my simple FET microphone preamp circuit? It seems remarkably similar to the FET preamps shown here:

http://www.rason.org/Projects/jfetamp/jfetamp.htm
http://www.hawestv.com/amp_projects/fet_preamp/fetpreamp2.htm
http://www.till.com/articles/GuitarPreamp/

Steve, here's a great chance to show off your superior intellect. Please post a schematic for how you'd do this circuit.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

I have already done it twice. You are such a novice you don't even know what is wrong with your design when I give you tips. I explained it in two previous posts. Go back, read, and maybe you will learn the major problems with your poor copied preamplifier design. You are no more advanced than about a 10 year old kid in electronics. (By the way, those 3 examples are pretty poor for accurate reproduction. You would be laughed out of class with those designs. Maybe good for what guitar players might want for sound though. I also doubt Dr. Edgar, Audio Research, Conrad Johnson etc would use your design. More likely laugh at it.)

Yet more evidence you are a novice about electronics, or design. Just a copier of someone elses work without understanding what it means.

Now Tom, you still want to stand up for this guy??

Quote:

Quote:
attacks Jan's system

Actually, I did no such thing. All I did was describe Jan's system! Think about that. That you (and Buddha) saw it as an attack shows how pathetic and ridiculous Jan's system really is. Okay, now I just insulted Jan's system.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Can you link to where you described Jan's system?

Thanks

Quote:
Remember, on page two all your supporters left you when I posted

I already asked for the link. Without a link you just look like a jerk telling yet another lie about me. Well, you look like a jerk anyway, but that's another story.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:
Can you link to where you described Jan's system?

It was a few dozen posts back: #55494 - 12/14/08 03:04 PM

Here's what I wrote:

Quote:
As I understand it, Jan's "stereo system" consists of a flea-power toob amp, loudspeakers with a single small midrange driver (no woofer, no tweeter), with 30 gauge magnet wire between the amp and speakers. Jan, if this is not correct please accept my apologies and clarify your system. Otherwise, I think this pretty well sums up Jan's expertise with audio and hi-fi.

BTW, I'd kill to see photos of The Frog's hi-fi.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:

Quote:
Well, you look like a jerk anyway, but that's another story.

--Ethan

Sorry but you already have that honor.
Remember, we (including silverman) also caught you in that string claiming the RS meter was accurate in the lows. Of course it is approx 7db low at 20hz and 4db at 40hz even according to your own graph. You then changed your position and posted that was correct. So if we had not corrected you; when someone adjusts their system to the RS meter, the bass would be almost twice as loud as it should be. Wonder how they were to rectify the situation???

Steve, nobody "caught" me doing anything. Several people here have already told you that you're way out of line, yet you persist anyway?

Anyway, you'll have a hard time coming up with a link to what you described at AVS, as I knew. In fact, they shot you down for being a jerk, much as is happening in this thread.

I think you and Jan should go find a nice quiet corner and make out. You have so much in common.

--Ethan

____________________
Bring back DUP

Quote:
Well, you look like a jerk anyway, but that's another story.

--Ethan

Quote:
Sorry but you already have that honor.
Remember, we (including silverman) also caught you in that string claiming the RS meter was accurate in the lows. Of course it is approx 7db low at 20hz and 4db at 40hz even according to your own graph. You then changed your position and posted that was correct. So if we had not corrected you; when someone adjusts their system to the RS meter, the bass would be almost twice as loud as it should be. Wonder how they were to rectify the situation???

Would you guys please keep your little lover's quarrel to yourselves? Thanks.

I'm certain that will be effective, Stephen. Did you take post graduate level courses in forum moderation?