You are here

Log in or register to post comments
michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
the human field

Let me look around, any flamers up? Shheesh good! Sorry you readers have to go through all this mess. This hobby breeds some real winners (mg rolls his eyes). The good news is everything is going to head or return to one conclusion in the long run. For some kicking and screaming, and for others making perfect sense from the word go.

On the other threads talking about the Schumann Resonances and really anywhere we talk about the fundamentals we also find a support system that has to do with natures balancing act called harmonic structures. With the Schumann Resonances we find that there is an exchange going on all over the planet to compensate for the difference in particular area flux. The exchange of electromagnetic energy. My studies in this area has to do with these energies being variable and therefore tunable. As you can read in the Schumann Resonator reviews the products are variable. The high end audio manufacturers say to put their products at certain heights as the product will perform differently from place to place. Others point to the need of a volume control to increase or decrease the amount of effect. To recap, I compared this to volume controls on our stereos changing the sound more than just volume as the energies interact.

Everything involved in audio is part of an interaction, an interchanging of fair exchange that works in the sense of action vs re-action. It's all variable based on this inter-mingling that takes place. If you setup a sensitive omni-directional test mic in the center of your average room and did a tone sweep you would pickup an amazing concert that involved the acoustic/mechanic/electric energies sounding off. Because all of these respond to friction and vibratory oscillation they can be turned up and down just like a volume control turns up and down your sound. The physics of action and re-action is like having trillions of volume controls all over the world involved in constant varying adjustments. Watch the weather channel and you'll get a small sample of the value and volume interactions that take place non-stop. Sometimes we don't think of it that active because we're use to our bodies involvement in this continuum of exchange. The side of us that wants to measure is really nothing more than a snap shot, as compared to the variances that happen moment to moment.

Did you know that every time you breathe the sound around you changes. Your brain runs off of your body's generator. You can get hooked up and watch your brain charge and discharge. It's like watching a light bulb get bright and dim and repeating every cycle. Your electrical charge is one of the most complex systems there is, and it's completely unique to your own personal setting of energy exchange. Did you also know that your body's electrical output in an average room interacts with the electromagnetic fields around you at an average of 8 feet away from you? That's with you running in neutral. Your energy changes the Schumann Resonances around you, and the Schumann Resonances that are involved in the Earth's exchange, have an impact on your energy. It's not a one size fits all. All of us have a different setting that starts with the very core of Earth's Resonance all the way up to the energy we generate or those energies that generate us.

You come in and sit down to a piece of music and may think it's the greatest thing ever created. The next person comes in and listens and says that's the worse recording on the planet. To use a pun, the way your wired has everything to do with the way you react to not only the music but also the equipment and other energies around you. Your personal values of right and wrong are different than everyone else you know. You may have certain things in common like your re-action to an action, but as your settling into your energy "zone" your talents and abilities are quite unique. They're also quite variable. Your more apart of your listening than you think, and when you get to the point where you see your system as energy instead of a fixed component, or fixed setting you will have far more control over your sound.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
The Road to Rehab

That's actually hilarious. All the examples you gave for why the Schumann device is variable actually demonstrate how fixed it is. The height it's placed above the floor, the frequency. 1.5 meter above the floor is a fixed position not variable. Hel-loo! I don't know what reviews you're reading but the Acoustic Revive devices do not have frequency controls. Just the opposite. They are more accurate than other devices so variable control knobs are UNNECESSARY. If there was a control knob on the Acoustic Revive device don't you think you could see it? As I already pointed out, when you were probably sleep walking, the reason some devices have frequency control knobs is because they LACK THE ACCURACY OF THE MORE EXPENSIVE RR-888 device and must employ variable control knobs to dial in the 7.83 Hz frequency. So, what's next, that listeners wear different color underwear and fits into your GRAND TUNING SCHEME OF LIFE? Hahahahah At least you no longer jump up and down and claim the Schumann frequency is variable. That's a start to your rehabilitation. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Reply to Ron

Ron, you said re Michael :-

>>> “I was just claiming maybe you had already done Schumann resonance tests already judging by your knowledge on the topic and I was just curious to hear your results.” <<<

Ron. That is EXACTLY what Michael HAD said he had done.

As in Michael said :-

>>> “not only have I explored this topic, but I have also explored it with a fair degree of depth as to how it relates to audio.
Schumann Resonances check” <<<

Michael has not answered the actual questions I asked him (even though he has constantly stated “Done the questions and got the answers”)

He has not answered the questions :-

WHAT is the presence of the Schumann Resonance doing to the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

HOW is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

WHERE is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

Even though Michael has stated that the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information BOTH before the ear drum and after the ear drum !!!

Then, AFTER the musical information has reached the ear drum, Michael has not answered the questions :-

WHAT is the presence of the Schumann Resonance doing to the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

HOW is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

WHERE is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

Michael appears to bluster somewhat when challenged after boasting that he knows the answers. I have no doubt that Michael does a considerable amount of listening but I am absolutely certain that he does NOT know the answers. I would say that no one knows yet, we are all still ‘thinking/searching’ !!!!! Even though Michael has actually claimed (see below) that “neither I or Geoff have any desire to find out the answers” when the search for answers has actually been exercising our minds for quite a few years now !!!!!!!!!! AND, not only OUR minds but other (significant in audio) people’s minds also !!!!!!!

Michael said to you:-

>>> “Not to sound rude, and you have been most kind, but do you really think May and Geoff have any desire to find out these answers to the questions they ask?” <<<

Really ???? And you know this How Michael?? You are back with your presumptions again Michael.

Michael has even just repeated AGAIN that “he has done the testing”:-

>>> “Yes we have done the testing, but in stating this before on here it wasn't good enough for May & Geoff.” <<<

But, surely all the extensive testing he says he has done must surely have produced some answers ???????????

Answers as to HOW the Schuman Resonance is affecting the musical information.

Even when one reaches that stage, yet more questions emerge !

If, when people have tried introducing the Schumann Resonance into the listening room and gained improvements in their sound as reported i.e. better height, better depth, better separation of musical instruments, better clarity, better soundstaging – therefore hearing/resolving more of the musical information, and then, when removing the Schumann Resonance from the room and all that newly gained improvement in the musical information disappears, one is left with the knowledge that SOMETHING must have been having an adverse effect PRIOR to introducing the Schumann Resonance into the room.

So. Again with the crucial questions. WHAT had been causing that adverse effect in the first place ???????????

WHERE had the adverse effect been taking place, on WHAT and HOW had it been happening.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Reply to Ron

Ron, you said re Michael :-

>>> “I was just claiming maybe you had already done Schumann resonance tests already judging by your knowledge on the topic and I was just curious to hear your results.” <<<

Ron. That is EXACTLY what Michael HAD said he had done.

As in Michael said :-

>>> “not only have I explored this topic, but I have also explored it with a fair degree of depth as to how it relates to audio.
Schumann Resonances check” <<<

Michael has not answered the actual questions I asked him (even though he has constantly stated “Done the questions and got the answers”)

He has not answered the questions :-

WHAT is the presence of the Schumann Resonance doing to the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

HOW is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

WHERE is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information before that information reaches the ear drum ?

Even though Michael has stated that the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information BOTH before the ear drum and after the ear drum !!!

Then, AFTER the musical information has reached the ear drum, Michael has not answered the questions :-

WHAT is the presence of the Schumann Resonance doing to the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

HOW is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

WHERE is the presence of the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information after that information has reached the ear drum ?

Michael appears to bluster somewhat when challenged after boasting that he knows the answers. I have no doubt that Michael does a considerable amount of listening but I am absolutely certain that he does NOT know the answers. I would say that no one knows yet, we are all still ‘thinking/searching’ !!!!! Even though Michael has actually claimed (see below) that “neither I or Geoff have any desire to find out the answers” when the search for answers has actually been exercising our minds for quite a few years now !!!!!!!!!! AND, not only OUR minds but other (significant in audio) people’s minds also !!!!!!!

Michael said to you:-

>>> “Not to sound rude, and you have been most kind, but do you really think May and Geoff have any desire to find out these answers to the questions they ask?” <<<

Really ???? And you know this How Michael?? You are back with your presumptions again Michael.

Michael has even just repeated AGAIN that “he has done the testing”:-

>>> “Yes we have done the testing, but in stating this before on here it wasn't good enough for May & Geoff.” <<<

But, surely all the extensive testing he says he has done must surely have produced some answers ???????????

Answers as to HOW the Schuman Resonance is affecting the musical information.

Even when one reaches that stage, yet more questions emerge !

If, when people have tried introducing the Schumann Resonance into the listening room and gained improvements in their sound as reported i.e. better height, better depth, better separation of musical instruments, better clarity, better soundstaging – therefore hearing/resolving more of the musical information, and then, when removing the Schumann Resonance from the room and all that newly gained improvement in the musical information disappears, one is left with the knowledge that SOMETHING must have been having an adverse effect PRIOR to introducing the Schumann Resonance into the room.

So. Again with the crucial questions. WHAT had been causing that adverse effect in the first place ???????????

WHERE had the adverse effect been taking place, on WHAT and HOW had it been happening.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
read my answers

Hi May

It's not very practical for me to go back and re-give my answers, but I think it's also very impractical when I ask you if you have read my responses, and you give no reply.

Others on these topics are satisfied with the answers and are now exploring "tuning". This last month we have seen an increase in our products going to different countries and with this happening there's a movement taking place that is looking more deeply into the energies, on both sides of the human experience.

We're happy to see that people are spending more time fine tuning their music, as well as fine tuning their personal listening skills.

I understand that you desire to approach this from a Q&A, but this street would need to be a two way street to come to any conclusions. As people read these threads I hope they take the time to notice that we are sharing the actual changes to the music in real time. I think it might be time to point out that you are sweeping my answers under the rug, or perhaps you do not understand my answers. That said, you re-asking the same questions are giving the readers an opportunity to actually do their own testing, and give their own reports on what they hear. I might also point out that many of these people who come to this forum have made the decision to go elsewhere, because of the tone that accompanies the responses to these Q&A's.

As for myself, I'm staying on course giving real time examples.

have a great weekend, and thanks for your posts

things are shaping up nicely here

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
variable

Geoff said

"That's actually hilarious. All the examples you gave for why the Schumann device is variable actually demonstrate how fixed it is. The height it's placed above the floor, the frequency. 1.5 meter above the floor is a fixed position not variable."

mg

Actually Geoff, the science community has found that the schumann Resonances are quite flexible, and tie into the other pieces of the fundamental forces. The electro-exchanging takes place on several levels and works directly with the other forces of nature (physics). In audio you can't separate the Schumann Resonances from working with Earth's tone or for that matter the Human factor.

The fundamental forces are not put in a box. We now have 3 Schumann Resonance devices (well 1 now, had 3) to use in our "real time" testing. Since our other tests were put into some kind of audiophile spinning wheel, we decided, as we recently did with the cryo and freezing, and the C37 and demagnetizers to do another go round with these devices. If you would have been paying attention you would have seen that we got started on this a couple of weeks before I started this thread.

I have a quick session then I will be back with some, hopefully, interesting results that could be put in the book of conclusions, if there really was such a thing in this industry.

Also a note: I'm not going to play the brand game, and don't particularly think it is ethical for some here to try to mention certain product names as tools of their spins. If people can't do their own listening tests and put them in context, their thoughts are not much higher than a salesman on a car lot. I might mention a few units but I'll try to keep away from the audiophile names we are testing.

be back soon

"In this schematic, the oscillation frequency can vary with the value of the power supply and temperature." france

"Perhaps for us the point may be that we do not have to get exactly 7.83hz to get desired effects." ethiopia

"As the ionosphere varies in height, a precise frequency seems unnecessary although making it user adjustable is probably important." bulgaria

"The ideal position might to synchronize with local Schumann resonance and made an amplification."

"You would also want the two resonances to be in phase." canada

http://www.kellyresearchtech.com/elf.html

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Read my questions

>>> “On the other threads talking about the Schumann Resonances and really anywhere we talk about the fundamentals we also find a support system that has to do with natures balancing act called harmonic structures. With the Schumann Resonances we find that there is an exchange going on all over the planet to compensate for the difference in particular area flux.” <<<

Michael, you are STILL continuing with the generalisations. The reports in the Audio world are of the Schuman Resonance changing the SOUND – i.e changing the musical information. This now moves the subject away from a mere generalisation !!!

Yes. If it is us (human beings) who are doing the reacting, then YES each different person, in their different listening environment, listening through their different equipment and listening to different music will react differently to any effect the Schumann Resonance is having. BUT, Michael, your reply to me was that the Schumann Resonance is BOTH affecting the musical information before the ear drum AND after the ear drum !! Which then raises all the questions I have asked !!

>>> “Your more apart of your listening than you think, and when you get to the point where you see your system as energy instead of a fixed component, or fixed setting you will have far more control over your sound.” <<<
You are correct on this point – that we ARE more a part of our listening than we think !! But that generalisation still leaves all the questions I have posed unanswered. HOW is the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information ? HOW is it affecting the musical information of such as an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World for people (many people) to describe improvements of ‘better separation of musical instruments’., ‘better height’., ‘better depth’., ‘better clarity’., and ‘better soundstage’ ??

>>> “Did you know that every time you breathe the sound around you changes.”<<<

What has the generalisation of how we breathe got to do with HOW and WHERE the Schumann Resonance is affecting the musical information ?

You say you have given answers. I have seen long explanations from you of WHAT the Schumann Resonance IS but not HOW the Schumann Resonance changes the musical information !!!!!!!!! Surely HOW the Schumann Resonance actually changes the musical information is extremely important to the Audio World ??

>>> “It’s not very practical for me to go back and re-give my answers, but I think it's also very impractical when I ask you if you have read my responses, and you give no reply.
Others on these topics are satisfied with the answers and are now exploring "tuning".” <<<

So, if you say that “others are satisfied with your answers”, then why are many others, extremely intelligent and experienced people in the world of audio, still thinking/searching for the answers ???????????????????

There seems to be some inconsistency with what you are claiming (that other are satisfied with the answers you say you have given) and other ‘professionals in audio’ who are still thinking/searching !!!

>>> “We now have 3 Schumann Resonance devices (well 1 now, had 3) to use in our "real time" testing.” <<<

So, Michael, has that “real time testing” produced the answers to my questions ????

>>> “then I will be back with some, hopefully, interesting results that could be put in the book of conclusions,” <<<

Hopefully then with the answers to my questions !!!

>>> “In this schematic the oscillation frequency can vary with the value of the power supply and temperature." france
"Perhaps for us the point may be that we do not have to get exactly 7.83hz to get desired effects." ethiopia
"As the ionosphere varies in height, a precise frequency seems unnecessary although making it user adjustable is probably important." bulgaria
"The ideal position might to synchronize with local Schumann resonance and made an amplification."
"You would also want the two resonances to be in phase." Canada” <<<

All you have done, Michael, is YET AGAIN repeat what the Schumann Resonance IS. NOT what it does to the musical information, or where it does it or how it changes the musical information !!!!!

You making sweeping generalisations regarding the effect of the Schumann Resonance gets no one any further !!

Just like your generalisation regarding such as George Louis’s UltraBit Platinum-Plus liquid when you stated that the improving effect on the sound by applying the chemical to CDs etc was because of “dampening” !!!!!!

You were not prepared to explain HOW George Louis’s chemical could affect the musical information to give the improvements in the sound which Greg Weaver described by merely stating that it has to do with “dampening” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I don’t see you being prepared to explain HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information.

And, Michael, not only explaining HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information but also explaining what was (must have been) having an adverse effect to the musical information PRIOR to introducing the Schumann Resonance into a listening room.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Read my questions

>>> “On the other threads talking about the Schumann Resonances and really anywhere we talk about the fundamentals we also find a support system that has to do with natures balancing act called harmonic structures. With the Schumann Resonances we find that there is an exchange going on all over the planet to compensate for the difference in particular area flux.” <<<

Michael, you are STILL continuing with the generalisations. The reports in the Audio world are of the Schuman Resonance changing the SOUND – i.e changing the musical information. This now moves the subject away from a mere generalisation !!!

Yes. If it is us (human beings) who are doing the reacting, then YES each different person, in their different listening environment, listening through their different equipment and listening to different music will react differently to any effect the Schumann Resonance is having. BUT, Michael, your reply to me was that the Schumann Resonance is BOTH affecting the musical information before the ear drum AND after the ear drum !! Which then raises all the questions I have asked !!

>>> “Your more apart of your listening than you think, and when you get to the point where you see your system as energy instead of a fixed component, or fixed setting you will have far more control over your sound.” <<<
You are correct on this point – that we ARE more a part of our listening than we think !! But that generalisation still leaves all the questions I have posed unanswered. HOW is the Schumann Resonance affecting the musical information ? HOW is it affecting the musical information of such as an orchestra playing the musical score of Dvorak’s New World for people (many people) to describe improvements of ‘better separation of musical instruments’., ‘better height’., ‘better depth’., ‘better clarity’., and ‘better soundstage’ ??

>>> “Did you know that every time you breathe the sound around you changes.”<<<

What has the generalisation of how we breathe got to do with HOW and WHERE the Schumann Resonance is affecting the musical information ?

You say you have given answers. I have seen long explanations from you of WHAT the Schumann Resonance IS but not HOW the Schumann Resonance changes the musical information !!!!!!!!! Surely HOW the Schumann Resonance actually changes the musical information is extremely important to the Audio World ??

>>> “It’s not very practical for me to go back and re-give my answers, but I think it's also very impractical when I ask you if you have read my responses, and you give no reply.
Others on these topics are satisfied with the answers and are now exploring "tuning".” <<<

So, if you say that “others are satisfied with your answers”, then why are many others, extremely intelligent and experienced people in the world of audio, still thinking/searching for the answers ???????????????????

There seems to be some inconsistency with what you are claiming (that other are satisfied with the answers you say you have given) and other ‘professionals in audio’ who are still thinking/searching !!!

>>> “We now have 3 Schumann Resonance devices (well 1 now, had 3) to use in our "real time" testing.” <<<

So, Michael, has that “real time testing” produced the answers to my questions ????

>>> “then I will be back with some, hopefully, interesting results that could be put in the book of conclusions,” <<<

Hopefully then with the answers to my questions !!!

>>> “In this schematic the oscillation frequency can vary with the value of the power supply and temperature." france
"Perhaps for us the point may be that we do not have to get exactly 7.83hz to get desired effects." ethiopia
"As the ionosphere varies in height, a precise frequency seems unnecessary although making it user adjustable is probably important." bulgaria
"The ideal position might to synchronize with local Schumann resonance and made an amplification."
"You would also want the two resonances to be in phase." Canada” <<<

All you have done, Michael, is YET AGAIN repeat what the Schumann Resonance IS. NOT what it does to the musical information, or where it does it or how it changes the musical information !!!!!

You making sweeping generalisations regarding the effect of the Schumann Resonance gets no one any further !!

Just like your generalisation regarding such as George Louis’s UltraBit Platinum-Plus liquid when you stated that the improving effect on the sound by applying the chemical to CDs etc was because of “dampening” !!!!!!

You were not prepared to explain HOW George Louis’s chemical could affect the musical information to give the improvements in the sound which Greg Weaver described by merely stating that it has to do with “dampening” !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And I don’t see you being prepared to explain HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information.

And, Michael, not only explaining HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information but also explaining what was (must have been) having an adverse effect to the musical information PRIOR to introducing the Schumann Resonance into a listening room.

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
double posts

Hi May

Looks like your having a problem with double posting. If you hit your edit option you can delete or edit the double post.

If you look through the answers I'm giving, you'll see I'm building a foundation so that my answers are more than saying better or worse, naming a product, or giving a review link. It may seem like the long way around to you but when talking about the fundamental forces and how they are a part of the audio chain it's necessary to paint the picture of how all these fit together. It sounds general because perhaps it is, but I also get specific, as in when I wrote about "fundamentals and harmonics". I'll keep posting threads on the specifics as well to answer questions.

BTW, I've already been contacted by two reviewers who told me I have explained things in deeper detail than what has been given to them in the past, so I think some are getting it at least.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
answers

May said

"So, if you say that “others are satisfied with your answers”, then why are many others, extremely intelligent and experienced people in the world of audio, still thinking/searching for the answers ???????????????????"

mg

Who?

may

"And, Michael, not only explaining HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information but also explaining what was (must have been) having an adverse effect to the musical information PRIOR to introducing the Schumann Resonance into a listening room"

mg

So your saying you don't know how the fundamental forces work?

may

"And I don’t see you being prepared to explain HOW the Schumann Resonance affects the musical information. "

mg

May pardon me for saying so but it is you who keeps saying you don't know.

may

"Just like your generalisation regarding such as George Louis’s UltraBit Platinum-Plus liquid when you stated that the improving effect on the sound by applying the chemical to CDs etc was because of “dampening” !!!!!!"

mg

You haven't done you homework on what dampening is and how it works, which are on the pages of TuneLand.

may

"You making sweeping generalisations regarding the effect of the Schumann Resonance gets no one any further !! "

mg

I will explain it one more time.

The Schumann Resonances is the Earth's way of balancing itself through the exchange of lightning. They are not the same as Schumann Resonance Generators which do not exchange the electrical charge between the Earth's surface and the ionosphere. The Schumann Generators you have been refering to are wave generators. There are many brands for example http://quwave.com/Resonances.html .

My point first a formost is to point out that this is a variable science and application.

Earlier I explained that the fundamental forces of physics all work together toward stablizing the Earth's core resonance as well as the individual resonances of everything within the Earth's influence. Action-reaction and so on.

The other point I make is "everything affects everything else". Through our back and forth's on here I have asked you if you have an understanding of the "audio code" "recorded code" and the "audio signal". If you do, good, if not you will need to gain an understanding in order to understand my answers. If not they will, as you say, remain general.

Go back to my answer of "both", there is an effect before and an effect after. Now go back and read this ad. Schumann Resonances, the Earth's Core Resonances and your Body & Mind Resonances are all linked through "Vibratory Interaction". These Vibratory forms are all "Tunable". Not only are they tunable, but they are "Variable" within the spectrum of the Harmonic structures themselves. This is not exclusive to Schumann Resonators but vitually any object that is a part of physics. I think this is where the disconnect has been and I have said this a few times in the past. Your trying to paint a picture of specifics through the use of particular products and I am saying every object is part of the chain. Your saying that ***** product is making these described differences and I'm saying there may be thousands of different objects that can do the very same thing. These Schumann Resonators for example are basically amplifiers for a particular wave. Turn that frequency volume up or down and the affect will change. Change the frequency itself and there will be another change. Fact is put any tone in the room and the sound will change.

general vs specific

When you say improvement or better, what does that say exactly May? To myself this means very little. When I say "equalizing the stage front to back in-tune enough to see where the drum head is being struck", now that is saying something specific. When I say adjusting the frequency to 8.5hz instead of 7.83hz and the 16hz pedal allowed a vertical rise of 25' and made the entire room and body shake with the Great Ruffatti, that's specific!

to repeat what I have said before on here

The audio signal, the space you live in, your body and your mind are all part of a "Vibratory" system. This system runs from 1 cycle all the way up to the highest form there is. These cycles have fundamentals and harmonic structures. We feel, we hear, we see and we respond to this "scale" in several different ways, from our senses to our moods, to our health. Your body, mind and space are all a part of your sound perception: the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.

So you see May, while your giving me better (general) I'm waiting for a specific to work with, and then inturn I can describe a specific action and reaction through "doing". But you saying "JA" said or "Greg Weaver" or "George Louis" or "Dvorak’s New World for people (many people) to describe improvements of ‘better separation of musical instruments’., ‘better height’., ‘better depth’., ‘better clarity’., and ‘better soundstage’" means little to me. Better what May, be specific if your going to talk to me. There's not one thing specific May in all those things you said and have said for the last year and a half. May we have listening rooms that are so accurate that you can sit there listening and someone will walk out and have you point to exactly where the instrument is and is then marked, an adjustment made in the way of tighting the 3rd harmonic structure and then a re-measure. We will have a listener sit there to a recording, describe it, suggest a change in placement, air, tone, timbre, and we make the adjustment.

You ask "What Happened" when this adjustment was made? We re-arranged the harmonic structure, which inturn varied the signal to focus more on one specific over another. Same signal, different view of it. You want specific May, than give me a specific. Don't say better, pick a recording, pick an instrument and tell me what it is doing and what you would like to see it do.

may says again loudly lol

"why are many others, extremely intelligent and experienced people in the world of audio, still thinking/searching for the answers ???????????????????"

mg

My guess is they're probably playing with a fixed mentality instead of a varible one. Their probably trying to find "THE" answer instead of the "ANSWERS". Heck I don't know, that's a question for them not me.

My question has always been, why is a variable hobby being treated like it is made up of fixed units? May you might want to look at those "extremely intelligent and experienced people" and see if their products, design theories and measurements are variable or fixed. I've never seen a guitar "Tune" itself.

I've known some pretty incredible guitar players that never got a high school or college diploma, yet they could run circles around many in this audio industry when it comes to common sense. You can be a brain-y-ac and know very little about being the master of your own system.

boggles the mind that so many, have to run in the same circle, for so long, all because they refuse to "do"

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Speaking of boggling the mind

Anyone (like Michael) who thinks that CD treatments such as sprays, I.e. Liquids, work by damping and actually publishes such complete rubbish on his website is doing his readers a big disserve. What boggles the mind is none of his gentle readers has called him out on it. What's up with that? Sheep being led to the slaughter most likely. Don't follow leaders, watch the parking meter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that CD fluids operate a number of different ways! depending on which manufacturer you wish to talk about. But one thing is sure - NONE OF THEM OPERATE BY DAMPENING. The fluids actually operate by removing mood release compound, or removing dirt, or removing the static electric charge or by improving the transparency of the clear polycarbonate layer (recall the CD polycarbonate layer is not 100% transparent, only about 90% transparent) or improving the refractive index of the clear polycarbonate layer, thus improving the geometry of how the laser reads the physical data. Anyone offering up the idea that fluids are damping the CD must not realize the fluids are REMOVED from the CD by buffing after they are applied. Duh! To make matters actually quite a but worse for Mr. Green's position is that damping the CD and or damping the CD transport mechanism is actually A GOOD IDEA, not a bad idea. Somewhere along the line Mr. green became lost, and renounced damping and isolation. He is now a lost boy. The reason damping is a good idea, like shaving the outer edge of the CD with that certain beveling machine is that the CD wobbles slightly during high speed play and vibrates which throws off the laser reading just enough to be audible. So dampening to use Mr. Green's word, is actually a good thing. It's what happens when someone is isolated from reality and Stove Pipes in his own little world for thirty years. Damping is a good thing, not a bad thing. Everybody and his brother knows that except for the Tuning Foundation out in the middle of the desert. Some people collect old outdated ideas or just plain crazy ideas like dung beetles collect dung.

 photo photo_21_zpsqrskogzk.jpg

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Double Posts

Hi Michael.

>>> “Hi May, Looks like your having a problem with double posting. If you hit your edit option you can delete or edit the double post.” <<<

Yes, and I apologise to everyone for that. My skills on the keyboard are legendary but NOT my skills with a computer !!

>>> “It may seem like the long way around to you but when talking about the fundamental forces and how they are a part of the audio chain it's necessary to paint the picture of how all these fit together. It sounds general because perhaps it is, but I also get specific, as in when I wrote about "fundamentals and harmonics".” <<<

But, Michael, AFTER you have tried to fit “all these together as part of the audio chain” – you (anyone) has to then attempt to explain HOW and WHERE the musical information is changed !!

Because that musical information IS changed !! So, Where and HOW ?? You can’t just leave it ‘in the air’ – as ‘somewhere it is being changed’ and ‘somehow it is being changed’ !! If the musical information is changed, then it must have been changed ‘somewhere’ and ‘somehow’.

>>> “BTW, I’ve already been contacted by two reviewers who told me I have explained things in deeper detail than what has been given to them in the past, so I think some are getting it at least.” <<<

You may have explained what the Schumann Resonance IS in deeper detail than others have gone into – but, again I say, describing what it IS is not describing WHERE it is affecting the musical information or HOW !!

Explain to me just what these two reviewers are “getting” which so many other intelligent (audio) people seem to be missing !!

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
back to specifics

Hi May

We're back to specifics. This is why I challenge your use of "better" and the other terms. Their simply not specific enough. Changing the pitch of a note for example is very specific. You mechanically tighten the string, the vibratory code moves upward from one frequency toward the next higher one. Both the fundamental force and the harmonic structures move with it, and the tuning is set, causing the chain action and re-action into motion. This inturn changes all the physics factors surrounding this adjustment, or I should say adjustments because everything that has to do with you as a listener has now been adjusted (tuned) to a different pattern of action.

I guess for us to get on the same page you would need to answer my questions, as I am answering yours. I need to know what part of this discussion you don't understand in order to be very specific with my answers, and so far it seems like there is a disconnect concerning your questions.

the Where and How question

What specifically do you not understand about the where and how? Do you not understand the air pressure part, the fundamental forces part, the human body, or the mind? What part do you not get specifically and we can talk about that with more detail.

Let me say though I'm glad we are beyond "better" and getting into the heart of the matter.

may said

"what it IS is not describing WHERE it is affecting the musical information or HOW !!"

mg

Let me see if we can get on the same page. Again I'm sorry if I'm not getting your questioning exactly, but more I'm trying to locate where you are trying to get to.

Where?

The simple answer is everywhere. Your space, your body, your mind.

How?

By the physics of action and re-action.

Again May, this all seems so elementary to me that I'm hunting now for what part you don't get about physics, so I can get to something more specific. The fair exchange of the fundamental forces is pretty physics 101.

However you mentioned something a while back that is something that I personally believe. You said something like "was the energy already there", sorry I'm not looking back but think that's how you put it. My answer would be yes. To some degree the range of cycles 1 all the way up are at play, and are ever present. This is a little dicy of course because of the different types of patterns and how they may react in given situations, such as dead mass and standing waves, or other energies that seem to be standing still, but of course can't be cause we are spinning and in constant motion (travel). For this reason I side with the more practical approach. But as far as music goes, yes I believe the Vibratory cycles are there at some volume. The Earth tone is a good example of this. It's something that varies, but it never turns off. And when it does vary as in changing frequencies, the original fundamental didn't go anywhere, it has just been turned down.

Like for example the 8 (aprox) cycles that we are talking about is always there, it's just that when conditions shift the volume to another set of fundamental and harmonics, the 8 cycles is reduced in volume. Still there, it's just the gain goes up and down.

To make it more visual, it's all like a huge parametric EQ in constant flex. You apply your C37 and the pattern changes to include the new physics. The cycle range was always there, but with the addition of the chemical you changed the EQ, and all (space, body, mind) makes an adjustment to the newly set in motion action.

You see all the products you talk about are great, if the patterns end up working for the listeners "space body and mind". Where we come in is not so much to say bad, as it is to say potential or lack of potential.

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

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 11 months ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Reply to Michael

>>> “You said something like "was the energy already there", sorry I'm not looking back but think that's how you put it.” <<<

What I will have said, Michael, is that there is a wealth of musical information, already there, already on the recording, which people are not fully resolving until they do this, and that and that and that, both in the room and with the equipment.

And I would add, that everything, in the modern listening environment, has an effect on the sound (musical information). These are the points where you and I both AGREE on !!!

That awareness (of there being a wealth of musical information available but not being fully resolved) has been growing since the late 1970s after Jean Hiraga made people aware that different cables sound different and after Ed Meitner made people aware how cryogenically treating numerous things in audio can give improvements in the sound !!

Now, Michael, in reply to your latest remark :-

>>> “You see all the products you talk about are great, if the patterns end up working for the listeners "space body and mind". Where we come in is not so much to say bad, as it is to say potential or lack of potential.” <<<

“All the products I talk about are great” !!!!!!!! Of course they are !!! However I have just spent the past couple of years challenging you every time YOU have attempted to “knock them” !! The ‘patterns’ (as you put it – working for the listeners space, body and mind’) DO work for the majority of people and open up the potential for them !! And, to challenge you again on what you have just said - you DO come in and infer ‘something is bad’ !!!

As in your comment re the Schumann Resonance devices:-

>>> “The “Schumann Frequency Generators" we used in a more revealing setting such as a tunable room hurt the sound and didn't help it. It introduced an imbalance in the harmonics structures. In our testing the sound stages that were 30+ feet big side to side and front to back collapsed, putting focus on a few instruments but making the stage fall apart around them.

This same thing happened when using commercial units in the listening or around the listen room. Now if someone wants to use them to collapse the stage from huge to focus on a smaller part we have no beef with that, it's a choice just like anything else, but for our use it does the oposite from our objectives.” <<<

If we don’t know WHAT the Schumann Resonance is affecting to change the musical information, WHERE it is affecting it, HOW it is affecting it, and if it is alleviating an already existing adverse effect, then we won’t know what was causing the adverse effect in the first place. And KNOWING what was causing any adverse effect in the first place is just as important (regarding listening to complex musical information) as knowing how to alleviate it !!!

You have said that the Schumann Resonance, for you, caused the sound to be worse – in complete contrast to others (such as John Atkinson and Jason Victor Serinus) !!

To quote Jason Victor Serinus (from the WRMAF 2014 show):-

>>> “I too definitely heard greater soundstage proportions and three-dimensionality with Atmosphere and its module engaged. The demo was 100% convincing. The thing works.”
When all is said and done, I consider Ted Denney one of the most gifted and boundary-breaking mavericks in our industry.” <<<

And you also give conflicting comments regarding ‘treating’ CDs with the various and different treatments of colouring the edge of CDs, applying chemicals to the CDs, applying a demagnetiser to CDs, cryogenically freezing CDs !!

Your comments :-

>>> “All the treatments for the CD's have been to deal with electromagnetic fields?” <<<
And then in another explanation regarding treatments for CDs :-
>>> “The liquid treatments were a form of dampening, and the colors were acting as frequency beacons.” <<<

Even isoiP entered into the debate with yet another (simple scientific) explanation:-

isoiP said :-

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

Later giving the usual explanation put forward of ‘the printing/colour is affecting the deflection or defraction of the laser beam’.

You have ‘knocked’ anything which you have regarded as a “fixed” tweak (because it does not fit in with your ‘variable tuning’ concept), whereas I have always maintained that BOTH ‘fixed’ and ‘variable’ techniques should be used to their best advantage.

And, all the people experiencing having gained improvements in their sound (resolving far more of the musical information) from cryogenically freezing things cannot all be wrong !!

To give yet another example.

If someone changes a standard fuse with an audio grade, cryogenically frozen fuse and finds it gives them an improvement in the sound of better height, better depth, better separation of musical instruments, better soundstage etc, then they would wish to keep that new fuse in their system – especially if, when they changed the fuse back again to the standard fuse, they LOST all those improvements.

I agree with you that the change of fuse HAS TO GIVE an improvement in the sound to warrant changing but – when such an improvement has been experienced, then one would never wish to go back to the earlier (non improvement, standard fuse) sound.

AND, once the new audio grade fuse had been heard to produce the better sound, then the new audio grade fuse would be LEFT IN SITU – i.e. now a “fixed” tweak !!!!

However, I have seen you discourage people from using such “fixed” tweaks, advising people to leave the standard fuse in situ, not do any such ‘tweak’ of replacing it, because you have claimed that you can retrieve those improvements elsewhere in the system, with your variable tuning techniques.

What I say, however, is that if, after carrying out the experiments I have described, with the results I have described, then this shows that there was an inherent problem with the standard fuse (not allowing the better sound – i.e. more of the musical information to be heard) and that if the fuse is not changed, then the inherent problem will still be there !! NOT dealt with !!

Doing things elsewhere in the system could, yes, produce improvements in the sound (say hypothetically placing some of your wooden blocks under interconnect cabling) but in my opinion could NOT recover any actual inherent problem created by the standard fuse.

I have always challenged you on your “only variable tuning methods are the true answer” by saying that BOTH “fixed” and “variable” methods should be used to gain the very best advantages in sound.

I challenge your claim that your ‘variable tuning’ techniques can recover (overcome) various inherent problems existing throughout the audio system and with the actual recording. It is as nonsensical to me as claiming that one can overcome RF interference on the pick up wire by placing wooden blocks underneath the turntable or by placing acoustic pads on the ceiling corners. Those are additional techniques to deal with other problems.

What I have just said does not negate, in any way, the fact that various improvements in the sound can also be achieved by doing ‘variable tuning’. Variable tuning techniques are in addition to and complimentary to other ‘fixed’ tweaks.

To keep on with my RF interference theme.

If an audio engineer built a Faraday cage around a turntable and got an improvement in the sound of better height, better depth, better separation of musical instruments, better soundstage etc, and I asked him what he thought might have been causing the adverse problem in the first place, he would have replied that, in his opinion, there must have been some RF interference on the unscreened pick up wire – for the Faraday Cage to have had such an effect !!

He would NOT have given me the generalised reply of :-

>>> “The audio signal, the space you live in, your body and your mind are all part of a "Vibratory" system. This system runs from 1 cycle all the way up to the highest form there is. These cycles have fundamentals and harmonic structures. We feel, we hear, we see and we respond to this "scale" in several different ways, from our senses to our moods, to our health. Your body, mind and space are all a part of your sound perception: the ability to see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.” <<<

Which is what I refer to as YOUR generalisation type of answer !!! After I asked you the questions WHERE is the Schumann Resonance having it’s effect on the musical information, WHAT is it having an effect on and HOW is it affecting the musical information – before the ear drum and after the ear drum !!!!

And, as I keep telling you. I only ask YOU the questions because of your repeated responses of:-

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

>>> “These questions have been explored and answered “ <<<

>>> “I’m glad I’m on this side of the questions and not back on the asking side anymore.”<<<

>>> “not only have I explored this topic, but I have also explored it with a fair degree of depth as to how it relates to audio.” <<<

Regards,
May Belt,
PWB Electronics.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
That has got to give a guy a complex

So, let me see if I can summarize. Michael has bad results with Schumann frequency generators, even in light of the fact that the Schumann frequency, the natural one, is always present. Hmmmmm....Michael has bad luck also with Cryogenics. He has BAD LUCK with freezing. Michael also has said he's had BAD LUCK with Kait's products and the Belt's products, though when questioned about this he can't remember if he actually tried them. Hmmmmm...He gets BAD RESULTS with coloring CDs. He claims to have no issue with CDs and doesn't use CD treatments, presumably because he thinks the fluids act as dampers or because he believes CDs are just fine as they are. All of these things and he gets BAD RESULTS. WHEREAS just about everyone else in the world gets GOOD RESULTS. That has got to give a guy a complex.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
Home of the Super Intelligent Chip

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
to answer May

May said

"“All the products I talk about are great” !!!!!!!! Of course they are !!! However I have just spent the past couple of years challenging you every time YOU have attempted to “knock them” !! The ‘patterns’ (as you put it – working for the listeners space, body and mind’) DO work for the majority of people and open up the potential for them !! And, to challenge you again on what you have just said - you DO come in and infer ‘something is bad’ !!!"

mg

This is where you assumed and didn't take the time to read what I and other people were saying. Almost every tweak on the entire planet has a place, somewhere in the audio chain if the conditions are right between the recorded code, and environment and moment of listening. That again is a generalisation.

>>> “The “Schumann Frequency Generators" we used in a more revealing setting such as a tunable room hurt the sound and didn't help it. It introduced an imbalance in the harmonics structures. In our testing the sound stages that were 30+ feet big side to side and front to back collapsed, putting focus on a few instruments but making the stage fall apart around them.

This same thing happened when using commercial units in the listening or around the listen room. Now if someone wants to use them to collapse the stage from huge to focus on a smaller part we have no beef with that, it's a choice just like anything else, but for our use it does the oposite from our objectives.” <<<

Yes, this is exactly what happened, with the exception of some of the variable units. Or I should say, I like using some tones not so much around my listening area, but away from things when relaxing. I make my systems relaxing on their own for me and introducing something to me that feels or sounds fake will sometimes mess me up. But that's me. There are some super low pitch native drums that I like around my place and certain tones I like out side, but I'm pretty sensitive around my listening areas. I've always been sensitive when it comes to harmonics and energy structure. Like moving from room to room I can feel the electrical change immediately along with the room's pressure.

may said

"If we don’t know WHAT the Schumann Resonance is affecting to change the musical information, WHERE it is affecting it, HOW it is affecting it, and if it is alleviating an already existing adverse effect, then we won’t know what was causing the adverse effect in the first place. And KNOWING what was causing any adverse effect in the first place is just as important (regarding listening to complex musical information) as knowing how to alleviate it !!!"

mg

I just answered that, but it seems your not understanding my answers. That's ok no biggie.

may

"You have said that the Schumann Resonance, for you, caused the sound to be worse – in complete contrast to others (such as John Atkinson and Jason Victor Serinus) !!"

mg

I would say that was probably because my soundstage was far bigger than theirs to start with, but we would have to compare this to be sure. A lot of times May, if you have a smaller to medium size stage and you do a tweak the stage will open up some, but the opposite is many times true if you have a huge stage and add that same tweak. You have to remember that we use Vibratory designs to give huge life like stages that are much bigger than what the reviewers have (the reviewers we have worked with). This is one of the areas that surprises them.

So when you say their stage did this and that, we pretty much know their soundstage was smaller than ours to start with. Keep in mind what we do with tuning May "open everything up and then tune it back in". This is one of those disconnects you and I have, and the reason I invited you and Peter to come listen with us sometime and bring your products and tweaks. You see May, the people you mention and you and geoff are more than likely starting at the opposite end than we are (look at TuneLand). Your looking at systems closed down and you are doing things that open them up to one degree or another, or focus in on one part or another. What we do May is open the system up as much as we can get it, and then apply tuning. So while your going from 10x5x7 stages and making them stretch out some (according to their comments), we open that same stage their playing up 3 or 4 times that size and then tune things in.

may said

"And you also give conflicting comments regarding ‘treating’ CDs with the various and different treatments of colouring the edge of CDs, applying chemicals to the CDs, applying a demagnetiser to CDs, cryogenically freezing CDs !!"

mg

Conflicting to who May? Certainly not a guy who is listening to a real size real space stage. May if these guys are listening to a stage that is 10x5x7 and the studio is 30x30x15 your talking worlds apart in the amount of info. Like I said before, and this is not a bad reflection on anyone. The times I have listened with these reviewers their soundstages were tini tiny compared to what we listen to. Why do you think a lot of them have invited me to come open them up?

may

"You have ‘knocked’ anything which you have regarded as a “fixed” tweak (because it does not fit in with your ‘variable tuning’ concept), whereas I have always maintained that BOTH ‘fixed’ and ‘variable’ techniques should be used to their best advantage."

mg

May, I'm not in the knocking business, and the only reason I have gotten on your case or geoff's is because you pushed without spending the time referencing. So you thinking I'm knocking you or products is nothing more than both you and geoff trying to push fixed tweaks over variable ones. We've been doing both and are being extremely honest about our results, but May when you have someone trolling as geoff does there comes a time you have to say shut up and sit in the corner. A lot of these threads turn into disasters because you guys have not spent the time reseaching the same avenues we have. That's not our problem, we're just coming here to share.

may

"And, all the people experiencing having gained improvements in their sound (resolving far more of the musical information) from cryogenically freezing things cannot all be wrong !!"

mg

May, have I said any of these people are wrong? What I have said is "if you like it do it". I have pointed people several times to yours and geoff's pages so don't go down that road again.

may

"However, I have seen you discourage people from using such “fixed” tweaks, advising people to leave the standard fuse in situ, not do any such ‘tweak’ of replacing it, because you have claimed that you can retrieve those improvements elsewhere in the system, with your variable tuning techniques."

mg

I don't mean to get down on any products May, but when I'm working on someones system a common thing that happens is I will be asked to get a certain sound or a lot of times they want me to give them more of a filled stage. As I do this I go through and play with the parts of the system that are removable and explore with the listener if they like the direction we are going in or not. Many of these folks have a lot of audiophile tweaks, but will tell me they never really took the time to dig into what these products do. In other words at the time "it sounded good to them", but as time goes on most of these guys and gals get to a place where they start to notice things missing in the music. This isn't me May but them. Many times May, these systems are so over done that they need an audiophile exorcism. Do you know how many people do the audiophile tweak thing and after 20 years end up starting all over again with a basic setup? I'd say half or more. Do you see these pages hopping with thousands of posters May? Why do you think that is? People are only going to play the buying game for so long, before they start seriously listening and discovering that they have bought a ton of stuff that they no longer think does the job. Their systems play less and less music and sound more and more sterile or stuck in a particular sound. All I can do in this case is offer them a variable approach and let them decide for themselves if they like the audiophile stuff over the others.

may

"What I say, however, is that if, after carrying out the experiments I have described, with the results I have described, then this shows that there was an inherent problem with the standard fuse (not allowing the better sound – i.e. more of the musical information to be heard) and that if the fuse is not changed, then the inherent problem will still be there !! NOT dealt with !!"

mg

Better or different May, you put these words in audio that again aren't specific enough for the extreme listener sorry.

may

"Doing things elsewhere in the system could, yes, produce improvements in the sound (say hypothetically placing some of your wooden blocks under interconnect cabling) but in my opinion could NOT recover any actual inherent problem created by the standard fuse."

mg

Come on May. Your playing salesman again. Why don't you let the listeners decide? I do. But you with these must haves are out to lunch. Did you know we have our own fuse, own outlet, own power plugs, own RCAs, own Blocks, 20 different cones, spikes and other feet. We have 5 different types of acoustical products, 3 series of tunable racks and platforms, tunable rooms and speakers. Our own tweeter and cable. Our own caps and resistors. Our own electromagnetic wave formers, net shielding and probably a ton of other stuff, along with different finishes and different methods of treatments and applying treatments. We also build iso-rooms. May, come on! You say blocks as if that's what we do. Oh May what will we do with you lol.

I knock products? Do I May? That's actually a pretty big twist on your behalf and you know it. So why don't I list a lot of the other stuff we have and do? Because sometimes the people in this hobby are compulsive suckers. They don't mean to be, they're just trusting and want to get the best sound. You mention these specific products as must haves May, but I'm sorry they're not and I've been saying they're not for two years now. You throw out this guilt trip on people saying they have to have or they're missing part of the sound, and I'm sorry but that's not true. May there are hundreds of fuses and I'm not going to point to mine or anyone else's as being the be all end all. You say cryo as if God has ordained, but when you say it's a must your lying to the listening public and I'm not going to do that. Hun going and finding 50 guys who like freezing their CD's is a lie, if there are 50 others who didn't like the results and you say they are wrong, which is what you are doing. I can't do that. If a listener, be it a reviewer or you and geoff, or my best friend doesn't have the ability to produce a large stage, I'm not going to put my approval on a must have. Sorry if you think that's me knocking product but I have to deal with my own moral compass. It's not up to me to make their decisions for them. It's my job to try to offer them the tools that allow them to make choice. And as I have said if that choice happens to be your product or mine or whoevers that's totally up to them, but I'm not going to push stuff as absolutes when I know they're not. Can't do it, and for that reason I can't necessarily say the same types of blanket statements you and geoff do. Doesn't matter to me what reviewers said what, if I got a guy who doesn't like my fuse or the other highend fuses, and chooses to use a simple stock fuse, I'm not going to get on him, because I have heard a ton of systems that sound better with the original stock fuse.

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

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
geoff's post and my questions

Geoff said

"Michael has bad results with Schumann frequency generators, even in light of the fact that the Schumann frequency, the natural one, is always present.

mg

Actually I get great results tuning to the Earth tone and the Schumann Resonances, mainly because I understand what they are, a set of spectrum peaks. Schumann resonances are the principal background in the electromagnetic spectrum beginning at 3 Hz and extending to 60 Hz, and appear as distinct peaks at extremely low frequencies (ELF) around 7.83 (fundamental), 14.3, 20.8, 27.3 and 33.8 Hz.

geoff

"Michael has bad luck also with Cryogenics. He has BAD LUCK with freezing."

mg

Actually, I have respect for those set "fixed" tweaks, I just prefer starting with a more flexible range of fundamentals. I lean more toward heat treating and then mechanically tuning in to whatever desired tone I choose. I can tune to the same set of responses as the cryo or freezing or I can choose another set of fundamentals and harmonics. My view is, why be stuck with limited choices.

geoff

"Michael also has said he's had BAD LUCK with Kait's products and the Belt's products, though when questioned about this he can't remember if he actually tried them."

mg

http://www.stereophile.com/content/rainbow-foil-and-electret-cream-etc-1 People who wish to comment on them can go here or other threads. I personally am not interested in being called a liar when I give my results of these products. I will point out though that the history surrounding these particular products have not been one sided (all to the positive) as the designers suggest, which makes me a little concerned as to why they paint so vigorously that no system is able to play the true sound unless using their treatments and that all the results have been positive only.

geoff

"Hmmmmm...He gets BAD RESULTS with coloring CDs. He claims to have no issue with CDs and doesn't use CD treatments, presumably because he thinks the fluids act as dampers or because he believes CDs are just fine as they are."

mg

This is just a fabrication. Geoff Kaits has no idea what I do to CD's or my other methods of listening.

geoff

"WHEREAS just about everyone else in the world gets GOOD RESULTS. That has got to give a guy a complex."

mg

Well now we're back to this place, and why geoff would care to bring us here I have no idea. From what I have read and have posted here without regard to the results one way or another, the results are fairly mixed, but those who wish to read can do their own homework. However I wouldn't shout every one gets "GOOD RESULTS" when the results have been well published.

Calling others liars who get different results from yourself is a "BAD" (if I may shout for you) reflection on you and your products. I think it would be better for you to explore the possibilities of why they got different responses.

I do have a question for you though.

I wanted to become more familar with your "intelligent" products as you have said how your designing is far advanced to Qualcomm's, and as you know I am close friends with some of their folks and find them to be pretty darn advanced. In reading up on your products I stumbled across this and wanted to find out if this is true.

6moons review, quote from geoff kait

"The Intelligent Box and Intelligent Card are not manufactured by Machina Dynamica. Machina Dynamica is a strong advocate of the technology of the I-Box and I-Card and also a dealer for these products. Golden Sound is the distributor for the I-Box and I-Card. Regarding the 10 silver dots on the surface of the Card, those are not functional (as far as I can determine). In the orginal Intelligent Chip, the metal dots were actually "shells" that contained the quantum material between the metal sandwich."

According to this it gives the impression that you are not the designer behind your intelligent tweaks, but a supportive dealer of.

In regards to this what are the "intelligent products" you personally have designed and produced?

thanks

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Who shot John?

Michael wrote,

"6moons review, quote from geoff kait

"The Intelligent Box and Intelligent Card are not manufactured by Machina Dynamica. Machina Dynamica is a strong advocate of the technology of the I-Box and I-Card and also a dealer for these products. Golden Sound is the distributor for the I-Box and I-Card. Regarding the 10 silver dots on the surface of the Card, those are not functional (as far as I can determine). In the orginal Intelligent Chip, the metal dots were actually "shells" that contained the quantum material between the metal sandwich."

According to this it gives the impression that you are not the designer behind your intelligent tweaks, but a supportive dealer of.

In regards to this what are the "intelligent products" you personally have designed and produced?

The quote you correctly attribute to me was published at the end of the 6 Moons review of the Intelligent Box, which the two PhDs reviewed following a review of the original Intelligent Chip. Both products were from China and imported in the US by Golden Sound. It was a common mistake back then 2005 onward to believe I was the inventor of the original Intelligent Chip or the Intelligent Box since I was the Senior Shill for those products at CES and on line. Follow? So I was being honest when I corrected 6 Moons, who apparently assumed it was my product. Now, the next Generation Intelligent Chip circa 2008 and the Super Intelligent Chip circa 2012 are MY inventions and are the evolution of the original Intelligent Chip. For which, by the way I wrote the definitive explanation how it works back in '05. My other "intelligent" products include the Clever Little Clock, Quantum Temple Bell, the Teleportation Tweak, Blue Meanies, Blu Matter and Dark Matter. By INTELLIGENT I mean quantum mechanical in operation or affecting Information Fields or simply nanotechnology, just to be clear about it. I am hooked up with one of the most prominent nanotechnology companies in the US for the active ingredient for my Super Intelligent Chips. The active ingredient being, drum roll please, artificial atoms. Artificial atoms which I design. To summarize, I am not the designer of other manufacturers' intelligent products but I AM the designer of MY intelligent products. Follow? Of the 30 or so products in my line up currently most are straight physics products, only the few I mentioned are what I'd call "intelligent products." Of course even my first product the single airspring sub Hertz platform was intelligent in the usual sense of the word since it was almost impossible to construct unless you knew the tricks involved in its construction. It's a good thing I took Indeterminate Structures in school. Lol

The original 6 Moons review of the Intelligent Chip, not my chip but the one from China, appears in the article Photon Cannons, link below:

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/photoncannons/photoncannons.html

A photo of my Super Intelligent Chips is provided here,

 photo photo_23_zps2psjg06w.jpg

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
Home of the Quantum Temple Bell

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
quantum mechanics?

geoff:

I have a strong background in Theoretical Physics... could you kindly tell me precisely how you are leveraging the properties of quantum mechanics in this product? Any equations would also be helpful or whatever information you can provide; seeing as how you are in fact the designer. I also am not seeking to violate your copyright and produce these on my own. So I'm not asking for any proprietary intellectual property..just exactly HOW you are leveraging quantum mechanics?!??

I look forward to your reply -

Respectfully,

Ronald R. Stesiak, PhD (h.c.)
National Science Foundation
Computational Neuroscience
Computational Finance

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
How the Super Intelligent Chip Works
rrstesiak wrote:

geoff:

I have a strong background in Theoretical Physics... could you kindly tell me precisely how you are leveraging the properties of quantum mechanics in this product? Any equations would also be helpful or whatever information you can provide; seeing as how you are in fact the designer. I also am not seeking to violate your copyright and produce these on my own. So I'm not asking for any proprietary intellectual property..just exactly HOW you are leveraging quantum mechanics?!??

I look forward to your reply -

Respectfully,

Ronald R. Stesiak, PhD (h.c.)
National Science Foundation
Computational Neuroscience
Computational Finance

I have a strong background ...you know ...education and experience wise in theoretical physics too. For the purposes of this forum and not to get too bogged down in the minutiae of quantum mechanics for the benefit of those not so well schooled as yourself can I direct you to my paper, The Definitive Explanation of How the Intelligent Chip Works? See link,

Www.machinadynamica.com/machina64.htm

Oh, I totally spaced out! While you were away resting up I published How the Teleportation Tweak Works and actually started a thread on it here on the Tweaks forum.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica
We do Artificial Atoms Right

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Please refer to my paper

Geoff:

I fear your link is not to an academic paper of any nature; but rather a blog of sorts; as it does not adhere to any known academic standard for scientific publishing, and contains some humorous graphical elements that I fear would be rather frowned upon in any serious academic or scientific community. Perhaps you are playing an intellectual joke on me because I did laugh when first seeing the website.

At any rate, I would be truly interested in seeing the actual scientific original works, and if you study my paper, you will see I am genuine in my request. Nevertheless, I found your website to be helpful and proved a nice light and entertaining read and did a fairly good job at making some pretty deep physics accessible to the layperson. However, no measurements or reports of error or any scientific method were discussed.

On to the topic at hand, it looks like you were concerned with long-lived quantum entanglement. It just happens my team and I touched upon this in an academic paper we wrote last year; and has since been subsequently published by Cornell, Harvard, and The Journal of Theoretical Biology. If you are in fact the original and true author of this research you share the same concern for "long lived" quantum entanglement; as the device in question depends on its existence to be theoretically viable, you may gain some enjoyment from my paper and we should be able to have a very intelligent and useful dialogue. And therein lies the beauty of physics and other exact sciences: one can take the same or similar ideas, and even reference them in papers from vastly different fields, but come together on fundamental questions as long lived quantum entanglement. To re-phrase, though my paper is in Computational Neuroscience, we abstract and borrow from physics the idea of quantum entanglement and so the mathematics is identical and therefore you should be able to gain directly from studying it within our framework.

It is on page 7 of the paper where we introduce our rigorous approach to "long lived" quantum entanglement. If you open the PDF and just search for entanglement, you'll find our other citations.

Starting on page 4, we derive our quantum mechanical equations... it's a pretty deep read, but judging by your proclaimed level of proficiency in Theoretical Physics, you will no doubt be comfortable with the quantum mechanics, classical mechanics, statistical mechanics, and the Lagrangian formality. There's also a little bit of my favorite: Fourier thrown in. You should rather enjoy it. Also, you may even be able to add something useful to our observations with your proclaimed level of knowledge of theoretical physics and NASA background.

I look forward to your reply, and I truly value mentorship when I can receive it.

Respectfully,

Ron

paper can be downloaded free of charge from Cornell here:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.2352v12.pdf

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Thanks so much for your input

So, basically you didn't have any problem with the whole concept that I was trying to put across, am I correct? You do realize this not really supposed to ready for submission to Science magazine or AES or any such thing, one can probably best think of it as a kind of white paper since that's more or less how I intended it. How do the links you provided or the terminology you mentioned relate one way or the other with my explanation of the physics involved with the chip? I took a lot of physics and math myself. Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Reply to Geoff

Geoff:

If you are in fact the designer of this commercially sold and produced product, you have many many many documents. Design documents, schematics, computer code, and software workflow programs, etc.

I'm just requesting a link to your document(s) containing the actual real science without it being translated for a layperson. I am merely asking for the original scientific works; and out of good faith have provided a cost-free link to my own published works which are the building blocks of what one day our team hopes to accomplish: A truly sentient and aware machine. True Artificial Intelligence. This particular paper we wrote is original works that accurately describe human short term memory processes utilizing a mathematical and computational approach; along with our comparisons to EEG data to test the validity of our hypotheses. As any other researcher or research team, we follow the scientific method. As again, your product is in production, you must have a ton of documents and code and you must have also successfully followed the scientific method. I'm just requesting a link to the main paper that contains the more rigorous explanation of your design. It is only after I see this real scientific work that I may then have a productive conversation. As for now, I am uncertain if I "have any problems" as there is not enough detail to truly understand your design and approach. But I would re-phrase "having any problems" to "opening a debate" or just shooting the intellectual breeze with a colleague in theoretical physics.

As for how does my terminology and references relate to your work, that is simple. I took one of your main concerns from a physics standpoint: is quantum entanglement long-lived? And my team happens to have also explored this very intellectually stimulating and niche topic that I am quite honestly amazed at having run into someone else outside of my academic world who possesses similar knowledge. So I have invited you to study how we have explored describing quantum entanglement with my original paper; not a deeply edited blog. As intellectual scientific works are public domain, it should be of very little effort to provide a link to either your publicly visible patent or paper. Those are basically the two main mechanisms of communicating scientific knowledge.

Unless, of course, you are not the actual author or designer and perhaps have mispoken. In which case, I am still asking for a reference to the actual paper or patent to study as my team truly is also examining long-lived quantum entanglement and it is a very hot topic currently in the theoretical physics community as I am sure you are already aware.

Long story short, just eager to share our work and compare notes; as I truly enjoy my work and sharing it with others.

Kind Regards,

Ron

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
holy smokes Batman!

Hi Ron

That's some serious reading, my brain is hurting lol.

I would love to get your take on intelligent chips and artifical atoms.

I should clarify. I'm speaking in regards to absolutes vs variable.

example

"Electronic characteristics of a quantum dot are closely related to its size and shape. For example, the band gap in a quantum dot which determines the frequency range of emitted light is inversely related to its size. In fluorescent dye applications the frequency of emitted light increases as the size of the quantum dot decreases. Consequently, the color of emitted light shifts from red to blue when the size of the quantum dot is made smaller. This allows the excitation and emission of quantum dots to be highly tunable."

I don't care who comes up with what, good for me and good for them, but what I have a problem with are these people who come to this industry saying they have one fixed answer to life, and if you don't have it your not getting the same amount of info. I'm sorry but I don't see any of this as a fixed one size fits all technology or technologies. Somebody's trying to sell a short cut to a variable world.

Anyway I'll shut up and look forward to some thoughts.

very nice read indeed

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Uh, oh

I'm getting a bad feeling.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramamine

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
quantum entanglement

Geoff

Don't get a bad feeling. When you have people interested in your take on things it's an opportunity to shed light or share in the light. I'm enjoying Ron's involvement because he is asking you the same things I did only with a language that should be down your alley.

It's obvious where my focus is "the whole" as well as how to be an active part of the whole from a practical application approach. Where I hit the wall with you was the lack of variables in your view of science. From where I and my friends sit, we don't see how you come to the conclusions of "fixed". When you mention something I go back and look it up and find the opposite of standing still, but when I have tried to engage with you on this a (to me) very strange attitude comes on.

Now if Ron said "fixed" to me I believe I would be able to see his view because there's no guess work. I may not agree if he took that approach but at least there would be an understanding. This is why I have started a couple threads for you and May to get to the point, instead of the spins, or at least the appearence of spins. I was truly interested in learning what the both of you were presenting, but to me it didn't fit within, as I said, the whole and variable view. Toledo, Chris, Costin and now Ron I see as people who were interested in sharing, but this doesn't happen for some reason with you, and that's what throws me off.

For example, in this very short time I feel like I somewhat know or at least can explore Ron's world of thinking (even with me being perhaps more on the artist side and he...well read his works, yet after 2 years of talking to both you and May there's nothing I can look at that fits into a value I can hang on to. Does that make sense? It's not a put down it's just a huge ? mark. Certainly you two don't want to exist here without an identity. But when I ask or reply I'm called arrogant, but that's not the case, I'm trying to get your picture and it feels like your hiding from the camera. Like your last response "I'm getting a bad feeling", that's no answer to Ron's questions, which I would think you would want to be all over.

May says "the answers have not yet been found" and I'm saying to what questions. To me her questions don't have enough substance for me to grab onto. Same with you. I keep looking but don't see the plack on the wall. It's got to be more than Qualcomm sucks, or May rolling her eyes saying my friends or my engineers as if the question had anything to do about if my friends exist. This kind of stuff that has been happening all this time only sends red flags up.

Hopefully with Ron's polite spirit and articulation we can all get to higher ground.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Polite and articulate spirit?

Are you crazy? Ron just insinuated I don't write the chip explanation and am not the inventor of my own products. He drops a lot of names but can't follow through on his promise to build the Schumann generator, just to get back to the reality and the original thread before your heads explode. And you, the high priest of tuning Nervosa, keep posting inflammatory links to dirt you scrapped off your boot heels. You call that a polite and articulate spirit? I know passive aggressive behavior when I see it. Let the inquisition begin! Lol

 photo photo_24_zps2butntsl.jpg

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Clarification

Geoff:

I did not mean to be passive aggressive or rude at all. In fact, I was trying to be delicate and respectful by sort of being long-winded.

Perhaps my long-winded request to original scientific documentation came off wrong. For that I offer my serious apology.

You will hopefully notice by my short though visible track record here in Stereophile I am pretty kind in general and do not label any individual as "wrong" or "unworthy". In fact, I like to think of myself as very open and receptive to new ideas.

And that is all I'm asking for: is new ideas from you in this case. Just asking for deeper documentation.

I did not mean to insult you in the least. Perhaps that was just my again long-windedness and maybe slight frustration and eagerness to see exactly how the heck your intriguing gadget works!

Sincerely,

Ron

ps. as for the Schumann Generator, I must say things have changed professionally for me while on holiday. I have been promoted to Team Lead on our new research project for the National Science Foundation and simply and sadly fear I just don't have the time to indulge in many of my interests outside of research. I really do wish I had the time. Perhaps in the fall; as I may enroll in a graduate EE course in VLSI hybrid analogue/digital chip design and could certainly whip out a quickie prototype Schumann generator at that point. (I would have access to a real lab and real tools. I miss all of that and do not have a decent EE lab at home. Not even an oscilloscope or wave-form generator).

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Clarification

Hi Ron

You have not been out of line at all. I'm sure if Geoff had more to give he would have posted this info on his site, as he gives updates regular. Maybe by you asking, geoff will write the papers and do the testing you are requesting or explain why the testing is not necessary.

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

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Reply to mg

I'm certainly not asking Geoff to write papers... I know I myself dread that part of my research!

But I am inferring that since his product is being manufactured and sold, he MUST have more detailed documentation that already exists to which he successfully found a niche and is selling it commercially.

I'm just asking for these more detailed docs. If, like some of my research, the only documentation is lab notes, then perhaps Geoff, just share the mathematics or other non-proprietary algorithms or specific scientific theory on a private email. Just let me know.

Kind Regards,

Ron

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Barking up wrong tree

I'm not sure Ron and Michael are actually in the real world with the demand for documentation and mathematical formulas. Get real, guys. I am pretty sure that is THE funniest thing I've heard in a while. This is a hobby not some hot shot big science project. Would it make you feel better if I cut and paste the Schroedinger wave equations of state? What's next, demands for proof? Hahahaha

BTW I don't see any real heartburn from either of you on my paper explaining the quantum mechanics of the Intelligent Chip. I'm therefore assuming my words and funny pictures are sufficient to explain it to an expert as well as a layman. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
I do have a fundamental disagreement

Geoff:

Be careful what you ask for....you may just get it. In this case, a first pass at my technical analysis based on the data you have provided and standby after repeated requests for more substantial data or lab test results.

So here is my analysis:

The way I see it, you are proposing such a gadget works by either improving the laser beam imparted to the receiver, or somehow alters the physical properties of a compact disc. I'll address the first possibility now; though much of what I state applies to either scenario:

Every piece of scientific literature you have provided; as well as what I have read on my own research, indicates experiments regarding quantum mechanics and all sub-sets of said branch of science including quantum dots, are done in pretty serious CONTROLLED environments in pretty serious LABORATORIES; usually at large universities; sometimes from large corporations or the government.

Any way...my point being: your fundamental notion that your gadget works purely by a "leaky laser" or similar such wording is flawed.

Any and all experiments dealing with quantum dots; as well as quantum mechanics at large, typically involve very precise laboratory equipment. Not "leaky lasers". They also involve very precise prisms, partial mirrors, and the like. These lasers are also precisely aimed at said precise prisms and optics, to be *very* precisely collected and tabulated by *computer* to produce their results. Again, not "leaky".

So, as I have not seen any valid explanation of how this leaky laser light really makes it inside a metallic sandwich of what is reported to basically just be a small grid of thin silicon p-n junctions, aka sometimes Schottky Diodes, or transistors in general, then I fail to see how ANY light enters; let alone is excited, magnified or otherwise enhanced, and precisely escapes back to the recording mechanism inside the CD player that reads what is a BEAM; not a "leaky laser", even more ridiculously further and somehow altering the binary flow of zeros and ones into a more musical state? This is absurd at best.

In case, due to the sparsity of material to study I have misunderstood and that is NOT your intent, here is the second argument repeated for posterity: You are proposing your gadget alters the physical properties of the CD being played.

Schroedinger wave equations of state don't really apply here; as they can mathematically describe a STATE change, which typically needs a power source to apply; like a DIRECT and PRECISE and CONTROLLED laser in a LAB, which requires ENERGY. You are daring to suggest that not only "leaky laser" passive illumination somehow makes it past the metallic sandwich, but you then go on to presume this left over "leaky light" presumedly inside this gadget produces enough ENERGY to TRANSFORM the entire CD material to more optically transparent properties, with the only energy supplied by "left over" light from a "leaky laser"?

In fact, rather than the Schroedinger Equation, what really should be discussed here is basic thermodynamics and that it takes a hell of a lot of ENERGY to cause changes in properties of materials; in case that is the angle you are trying to take. Or even Einstein's basic equation: E=mc^2. You need a lot more E to change the state of the M of an optical disc.

So yes, I have a great deal of "heart burn". I was just giving you ample opportunity to gather sufficient backing documentation before I gave my first critique of what I believe to be a completely ineffective gadget at worst; an ill - conceived and poorly setup thought experiment relying on passive radiation of very low power laser light at best.

I await your reply,

Ron

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
You see, I actually don't entertain complaints about validity

You might be surprised but I don't entertain requests for additional data, or demands for proof or even more details of explanations that I have written. There are perfectly good reasons why this is so. I have seen a lot of skeptics and pseudo skeptics while I have been in the tweak business as it were and have had the wildest encounters you can imagine. I was joking when I mentioned Schroedinger. You need to learn to loosen up a little with me, if you don't mind my saying so too much. I AM in the entertainment business, after all. It will make the ride less bumpy.

For starters immorettybsure I explained all of your questions in the article, anyway. How the CD laser light gets out into the room how it gets into the or orange case how it gets into the inside of the silver discs. All of that stuff.

As for my paper, I said what I intended, no less, no more. I don't blame anyone for taking exception with it on any level. I don't even care if someone suspects it works by mass hypnosis or it's the placebo effect.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Final Reply
geoffkait wrote:

I'm not sure Ron and Michael are actually in the real world with the demand for documentation and mathematical formulas. Get real, guys. I am pretty sure that is THE funniest thing I've heard in a while. This is a hobby not some hot shot big science project. Would it make you feel better if I cut and paste the Schroedinger wave equations of state? What's next, demands for proof? Hahahaha

BTW I don't see any real heartburn from either of you on my paper explaining the quantum mechanics of the Intelligent Chip. I'm therefore assuming my words and funny pictures are sufficient to explain it to an expert as well as a layman. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

Geoff:

With that quote above, you threw down the proverbial gauntlet to evoke an intellectual response out of myself or Michael with regards to your gadget. Why you dragged Michael in I'm not sure. But that's besides the point.

I find it illuminating (pun intended) that when you are encountered with a fairly informal though rigorous critique of your gadget to which you ASKED (again, see your quote above), you retract back to an escape. You also challenged me for a response from one of your earlier posts in this topic with this brief quote:

" I took a lot of physics and math myself. Thanks in advance."

I'll just cut to the chase and conclude, from a scientific perspective, I would politely state my findings are inconclusive to reveal any effectiveness of said gadget.

Regards,

Ron

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
wish you would stay Ron

Hi Ron

I sincerly wish you would stay on this thread, here's why.

There are many in this industry who are not who they say they are or do what they say they do. As they are confronted, which usually starts out the exact same way you have, they are greeted with attacks from geoff and as well May (may being a little more ahead of the game). As time goes on these threads, which should be ones with value for the listeners turn into slips and slaps, which is what I have found is the MO of both geoff and May. I've called before for a higher curve to be set (seeing this is Stereophile) but to no gain or change. Saying that, this is about sharing as well as caring for our fellow listeners at whatever level they are on their journey. Disagreements, and personal style? Absolutely there will be many, but the chance to talk about these topics from several points of learning an experiences is key to the success of the advancement of high end audio.

You bring a quality that I feel there are many here as readers are learning much from. Shoot just based on reading your paper I've "slowly" lol, been following through with referencing. I've also been cross-referencing with my own notes, especially on the quantum dots, laser and such, because when I was first introduced it was in a very precise and controlled envirnoment, home of the Reagan (well I think one of two or three) Star Wars Laser (the one at Vanderbilt) in the late 80's-on. I was doing acoustical work for them at a few intervals and not only learned a ton, but these "labs" were "LABS". I went through the same thing when visiting NASA for work. What I'm saying is when I started reading both may and geoff, I started thinking MY GOD, their labs and research must be out of this world. Then, and it's a big then, I went to their websites and honestly thought I had made a mistake typing. So I started a thread asking for their sites and ended up finding out that there were all these reports and fighting going on between geoff and those who challenged him or were even asking for a little background. I came with the intention to learn, and recieved the spins of a life time.

But, puting all of this aside and giving both of them a pass, these topics are very important for the audiophile (those who want to find the inner workings of) experience. Maybe I'm wrong and May & geoff do have more than I have seen but "where is it?" and if they don't, should this put to stop the topics?

would love your feed back, and again ask you to stick with these topics

thanks

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

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
RE: Michael: Feedback on Quantum Mechanics wrt CD Players

For what its worth:

This is merely by Michael's request. I personally consider the entire debate over and resolved.

To temporarily give the matter further consideration of a scientific and pragmatic nature, I offer the following brief beginnings of my personal thoughts. No other thought or work other than my own for a few hours and Geoff's blog have been performed; and so I must qualify this is all hypothetical and basically an intellectual exercise. The main design problem with the current gadget is lack of sufficient energy. I will address this and other details.

Geoff I think has the beginnings of a good idea. It just needs seen to successful and measurable completion. I feel there could possibly be practical application of quantum physics to consumer cd players if some calculations were explored and revealed initial positive results.

What I would immediately suggest (again at a high-level intellectual exercise only) is the following:

His "gadget", which I will continue to refer to it for ease of reading as well as reference, could be optimized in the following possible configurations to actually provide a change to the audio signal. There are I see two possible and different applications; the first being to strengthen the original laser from the consumer device. The second being increasing the positive optical properties of the cd media. I will address them in order:

1. Remove the constrictive packaging around the actual quantum array.
i. using the same or similar doping techniques as employed in semiconductor technology, take the optics of a cd player and dope them with the quantum array. If the orientation is wrong, merely re-package it and align it optically with the laser.
ii. this could potentially strengthen the laser of the consumer cd player. though no other merit could be realized in my opinion.
iii. to further explain in layman's terms, doping is kind of like applying a thin layer of shellac (which would be the atomic level quantum array)...in this case it would sort of act as a magnifying glass...but not magnifying resolution....magnifying *ENERGY*. To me, this seems like a valid approach. It also obeys thermodynamics and basic laws of physics.

2. Take the quantum array, and keep it in a separate package, but again introduce it directly into the line of sight as the cd player's laser. Of course modify the package and add optics if needed. This will serve as a valid source of laser light or energy. IF necessary, a very inexpensive beam splitter could be integrated into the quantum array's packaging to avoid hampering the original cd player's laser.
i. now we have our valid, properly energized source of quantum laser light (for lack of a better definition)...
ii. because we have kept the original beam as our source, it is no doubt still in concentrated beam form; and probably and possibly even stronger.. take THIS beam, and shine it onto the CD Medium either multiplexed with the OEM laser, or if it does not harm the OEM signal, blast it at the same time, at the CD.... this could *possibly* have the effect of temporarily improving the optical qualities of the CD -ROM material as Geoff proposed. But in a radically different way... instead of trying to change the properties of the entire disc, which even quick Fermi calculations reveal would require far more energy than is available in a consumer cd player, we only attempt to alter the OPTICAL properties of the very small region of CD that is at any moment under the laser.... that is orders of magnitude smaller and therefore requires orders of magnitude less energy; and again, using Fermi calculations, may even be possible in a consumer cd player.

After spending a little more time thinking on this, a viable, consumer-installable or useable version of this thing could be made by merely changing the dimensions of the packaging to encase the quantum array (if possible) between micro thin layers of transparent semi-metallic media and applying this directly to the surface of each CD. Economies of scale could bring costs down and consumers would just peel it from "my" packaging and place the now optically transparent film over each CD they wanted to treat. Again, totally just initial brainstorming of this phase. But somewhat a fun intellectual exercise.

So that's it.

Beyond Geoff's own writings, I have absolutely no scientific evidence that a quantum array would be of benefit to a cd player, but if I was going to try it, and assuming prior theoretical calculations indeed showed it would be an improvement, I would *START* and continue the research and carry it further with my proposed methods mentioned above.

That's all I really have to say on this topic. But if the underlying calculations to PROVE any efficacy whatsoever is possible were never carried out, it is by and large a waste of time and science fiction.

It is for these valid scientific thoughts I had that originally piqued my interest on Geoff's gadget. However again, if the groundwork of the true theoretical physics was never done, then the entire topic is moot.

Respectfully,

Ron

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
The Variable CDP

I have to run to a meeting, and will go back and re-read, but while working at Vanderbilt the techs suggested to me that CDP's were actually incorrectly (incompletely) designed. They thought the CDP should have been built more like their laser in the design of making adjustments avaiable, for both laser intensity and other ranges of variables. They felt the CDP should have developed far beyond the basics, and the potential was far greater than what the marketplace settled on, and that the audiophile was not interested enough to take the medium any further than numbers and laser placement.

I have been tuning CDP's vibratory wise since the beginning, but have started to go down some of these other pathes as well. Simply put, a laser volume control plus light spectrum variables. Past this I would have to go private on the topic but, think about it. Instead of adding mass type products and fixed colors, the CDP is designed with the obvious variables at play. Sadly the CD may go by the way of the past, but who knows. Like I've said I'm more of a doer first :)

But, thanks for the thoughts on labs though. From what I have seen some of this stuff is not meant for garrage designers, but with those who have more sophistication.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Thanks for the well thought out response

I suspect you two dudes can at least appreciate why the Intelligent Chip was the big star at CES in 2005 and dominated the forums for nine months 24/7 over on Audio Asylum that same year. Does it really work? Naw, it's just the placebo effect. Expectation bias. Hypnosis. Mass hysteria ... that I created

Can it pass a controlled blind test? That is the question! Ha ha ha. However if the stupid thing does work you got some explaining to do.

I include Michael because it's pretty clear he's in love with the whole science and technology thing and If you're actually right he wants his share of the credit. Lol I can see the wheels turning now, "there is no way this goddamn stupid thing is NOT variable tuning."

Geoff Kait
Mariachi Dramatica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
2005 CES & AA

Sorry, must have missed it. I was at that show and heard nothing, nor did I even know who you were until 2 years ago. But I must ask, if you were such a big hit at the 2005 show, why did you two years later stop listening to In-room systems "never looking back". Wasn't your demo at that show with an in-room system?

Too many conflicts here. You had the best show room of all time and then you abandoned it for the high end CDP system with the best isolation stand ever made (discontinued) and headphones, and then abandon that for the Sony Portable Cassette Player. At first saying you wouldn't use the EQ they provided, but now you use the bass boost provided and it is now your new reference. So Ok, if 2 and 2 fit, your saying a portable cassette player with boost turned on is better than the 2005 show display that shook the world.

2005 intelligent chip is this the one? First one on the list from 2005
_____________________________________________________________________

"I have been listening to the Intelligent Chip, for a week. System: Audio Note CDT 2 transport, Audio Note Dac 1.1x Signature II, Audio Note OTO integrated amp, Audio Note AN-J/SPe speakers. I chipped a dozen CDs, one at a time, listening before chipping, then listening again. At first I heard no change at all. Then I thought I might have heard a subtle overall improvement, mainly in reduced edginess in violin and harpsichord but couldn't be sure. And the Talich Quartets version of a couple of Beethoven quartets seemed to get a little less dry. I set the chip under my Audio Note CDT 2 transport after Geoff Kait of Machina Dynamica suggested that some top mounted players tops can attenuate the chips effects.
Then I took five CD's I had copies of, redbook and SACD hybrids, after asking Geoff if the chip was supposed to handle SACD's the same way it handles redbook CD's, which he confirmed was the case. In a few cases I chipped the redbook CD, in the others the hybrid. And then I listened and switched, switched and listened, back and forth, usually a musical phrase rather anything extended. And I heard no difference. And when I thought maybe I did, I went back again to confirm it and then heard no change. In one case it seemed the redbook sounded better, which was the signal to me to throw in the towel.

If there is a difference, it is less than what I have heard between cables, between Auric Illuminator and none, even between Bedini Clarifier and none. If there is a constant difference and Geoff says in his experience it varies form disc to disc and system to system and I can't hear it. This doesn't prove anything one way or the other to me, but it does discourage me from pursuing this further. Thanks to Geoff for the chip and for an interesting ongoing exchange."

Is this part of the 9 month intelligent chip explosion Geoff?

Next one I read on the list was.
_______________________________________________________________

"* Does the effect imparted to a CD carry over to a CD-R copy of that CD?

GK Good question, hope this question will be answered by some users in coming weeks and months.

* Does the effect imparted to a CD carry over to any .wav, .mp3, or other format rips which are made from that CD?

GK Also, good question, don't know the answer.

* Can the chip's effect be imparted to a CD-R with music recorded on it, if that music was ripped from an untreated CD?

GK Excellent Q, don't know the answer (yet).

* Can the chip's effect be imparted to music that's recorded on a hard drive, or flash RAM, if that music was ripped from an untreated CD?

GK Don't know.

Geoff Kait"

third one one the list and last one for this post
_________________________________________________________________

"Here's what Mr. Altewischer (cf. chapter "Quantum Entanglement Robustness and the Altewischer Plasmons" of Geoff Kait's scientific adventure) says about the chip, and Geoff Kait's explanation:
"the site [Machina Dynamica's "how the intelligent chip works"] is most definitely a scam"

"and in fact our research has no relation to the content of the site"

"of course the detector inside the CD-player is well shielded from any "leak" light from outside going in"

"there is no way the socalled Intelligent Chip device could do this [physically altering the CD] by just being outside the cd player (other than destroying both itself and the CD + player)"

"me and my collegues had a few good laughs about it!"

It's more than 6 months that Clark Johnsen wrote that "within a year from now the mechanism behind the Intelligent Chip's effect on CDs will be understood and recognized - by a public resisting to growth etc."

Well, the explanation given so far is pure nonsense (as confirmed by an expert), so any public, not only the particular one CJ had in mind, will not be able to understand and recognize it. I suggest that the Dynamic Trio (aka Messrs. Kait, Curl, Johnsen) has another session of technical contemplation in order to come up with a more viable story."
_________________________________________________________

So my question now, is this the talks you mentioned that held the audio world in-spell?

Geoff, wouldn't it just be easier to back out of these threads slowly and resist commenting when you see people are serious about these topics?

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Asleep at the wheel

Michael, I didn't say there was a chip explosion. You did. I said it was the most discussed an debated product in 2005 and actually ever. I can't help it if you were asleep at the wheel. Of,course, like everything else in audio, there are two sides to the story. And not only that there are reasons why some folks don't hear the chip, just like there are perfectly good reasons why some folks don't hear certain other tweaks or devices. Now that you mention it, aren't you the poster boy for being unable to hear any tweak unless it's your own? Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynmica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
back to the OP

Hi listeners

If you would like to read the results of a listener on TuneLand concerning the Schumann Resonance Device (rr77) in real time here is a thread to look at. http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t288p150-greetings-from-malaysia

I'm sure there will be more listening and tests, but wanted to bump this so you could read a real time session on the topic.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
That's nice, but
michael green wrote:

Hi listeners

If you would like to read the results of a listener on TuneLand concerning the Schumann Resonance Device (rr77) in real time here is a thread to look at. http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t288p150-greetings-from-malaysia

I'm sure there will be more listening and tests, but wanted to bump this so you could read a real time session on the topic.

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

That's nice, but this is Stereophioe Forum. How about providing a Synopsis of the Schumann RR-77 test HERE, on Stereophile? Not that I care too much about any particular test. It is what it is. But give us your conclusions anyway. Besides all I see is a bunch of dots on the site you linked to.

Cheerios,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
Link to TuneLand

Hi Geoff

Sorry your having a problem with the link. Seems to be working find.

here it is again

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t288p150-greetings-from-malaysia

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
A+ for Avoiding the Question
michael green wrote:

Hi Geoff

Sorry your having a problem with the link. Seems to be working find.

here it is again

http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t288p150-greetings-from-malaysia

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

It would appear you're having difficulty with the concept that we're having the discussion on Schumann Frequency generators here, on Stereophile Forum. Doh! Why would we wish to have two forums. Yes, I know, that way we can learn all about Tuning. What a concept! Another one borrowed from the used car dealers association, no doubt.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
OK

I don't have time to bring all the info from TuneLand here, but here is a report of one of the listeners, as he reports in today on the Schumann Resonance Device.

"RR77 update,

Today is another good day for me, got back from work early and guess what there's no one at home .
So today I decided to place the rr77 around the house to hear how much will it affect "the sound of my music" rig.

I have been reading about this curious little silver box in other forums, as many suggested to place it around the house to get the best effect from it. To get the most effect is to place it near to your audio rig at around 5' of height.
Reading from my previous post the effect of rr77 was noticeable to my ears and was trying to get a "lesser" effect so I decided to place it just behind me. With an arm stretch I could reach the on off switch without moving my butt. This is good as I could easily flip the on off switch and hear the effect more accurately (like I said I've got poor audio memory ).

After a small session of listening to my favourite female singer Jennifer Warnes, I switched it on and with immediate effect I could notice the difference. As I posted earlier the first thing I noticed was a consolidation of vocals and instruments (giving a sense of better imaging) also it sounded much airier. The next thing I noticed was some amount of space between each instruments played (giving a sense of depth). Now with all of this happening the dynamics improved making certain notes sounding fast with nice attack. SRV's guitar strikes was very seductive .

All of these points mentioned will make you think that I am getting some nice music and stage. Well it is not so true . As I continued listening with the rr77 the tonality shifted up a notch giving me a sense of lighter tone, less body, feel and texture to each and every note played. The bass region suffered, it seems bass was rolled off at around 100hz basically I was missing some bass notes.

Now listening to different cd's gave me some mix feelings as some cd's sounded digital and some sounded flat but some sounded exciting especially those with lots of attack and fast sounding music. Either way nothing struck me to give it a two thumbs up. Maybe this effect is still too strong and I needed to place it farther away from me and my audio rig.

So I proceeded to place it near to my house entrance wall socket that is approximately 20' from me and 25ft from my audio rig. Once again with the rr77 on I listened, now there is a slightly lesser effect of what I mentioned previously but other than that it was still giving not much of benefits.

I proceeded to move it upstairs and place it at my computer room. I switched it on and went downstairs to listen again and compare the intensity of it's effect. I played back all of my reference music, now here there was a much lesser effect towards the music. It manage to retain some amount of focus and space between instruments but that airy sound and lighter tonality was reduced significantly. This gave me more body, lower tone, feel and texture. Yes this sounded much more natural however that dynamics (PRAT) which was the only thing that got me excited was no more there .

My overall impression on rr77, well generally listening to all of my reference cd's played it gave me a much better imaging and depth to my stage. However listening to most of my favourite tracks it just robbed the life and soul of that music and recording. Though I wouldn't deny that some tracks went well with the rr77 the music and its effect benefitted and complimented each other.

There are some things I can tolerate like not having a pin point imaging and airy highs but at the expense of sacrificing tonality, emotion, body and texture? Now that is something I can't live without.

Yesterday I played around with my ceiling using a small cardboard box which was placed at 1' and 3' in front of my head. I had exciting results that actually shocked me with the energy, forwardness and projection of instruments and vocals, it was a real wow factor. I had nice texture to each and every notes played. Details was slightly compromised but still the highs sounded sweet. Midrange was slightly plump yet buttery smooth.
As for the bass now this is something I have been lacking in my system previously but yesterday with the box up the ceiling that bass kicked in complimenting each and every note. Of course it was not one of those earth shattering bass but I was happy that there was some energy in my bass.
Imaging was surprisingly good, stage height dropped by 0.5', width was more or less the same. There was good 3d stage happening which is one of those things I crave for.

One issue that I faced was that the tone was a notch down making everything sounding dark. Not sure if it was due to the material or density of the box.

So I decided to give the rr77 another chance. Well logically since rr77 made everything sound light and airy, I thought that this would balance out that dark tone I was getting from the box up the ceiling. I only did 2 placements of the rr77 one was over my front wall and the other one was at the entrance of my house.

How was the results? Well with all those positives that I was getting from the box now with rr77 switched on everything collapsed miserably . First thing to notice was the loss of imaging and depth as I continued to listen the PRAT was also affected ( these 3 was the strong points for rr77 in use with my system but now it was the weakest of them all). The tonality did moved up slightly but not much. Everything sounded weird which either way I looked at it was not doing any justice to my system.

So to conclude the RR77 does change how your system sound. Did it benefitted me well the answer is not so much just a little bit and that is only when I placed it far far away from my audio rig. My friends have had some good experience using it to actually let me have a try thinking that it would also benefit my setup but unfortunately it was not so.

Regards"

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
That's the way the cookie crumbles

If you look hard enough you can usually find someone who will provide detailed negative reports on just about anything. Fortunately, one assumes, for Acoustic Revive, most of the reviews of their various versions of the Schumann frequency generator have been of the rave variety, including the recent review of the RR-888 device. Oh, well, that's how the cookie crumbles. Lol

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
objectivity

I didn't re-post this as a good or bad review, but as an objective (recent) study from a great listener, upon your request.

You should send yours and May's products to him for review.

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

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 14 hours ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
I'm so confused
michael green wrote:

I didn't re-post this as a good or bad review, but as an objective (recent) study from a great listener, upon your request.

You should send yours and May's products to him for review.

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

Great listener or not so great listener, his test is just a data point on the curve of experience and means only as much as you wish to read into it. I suspect his review can probably be thrown out as being just another outlier, given all the very positive reviews that have appeared over the years with respect to the Acousitc Revive Schumann frequency generators. Besides, it's a little strange he would choose the first Acoustic Revive device to review and not a later one, you know, an improved model, like the RR-888. The RR-77 is thirteen freaking years old.

Here are some awards:

French Magazine "Diapason" D`OR Award Gold Medal
U.S Audiophile Magazine "The Stereo Times" Most Wanted Components Award 2008
U.S Audiophile Magazine "6moon" Blue Moon Award
Audio Excellence Award Prize 2002 for accessories category

There are many reasons why some audiophile somewhere gets negative or NULL results for audiophile devices. Shall we review the reasons now? Let me know.....

Why on Earth would I send any of my products to someone who gets weird or unpredictable results for a product that has been fairly universally praised? Are you high? You know, jus because you refer to someone as a Great Listener or even if he thinks of himself as a Great Listener it doesn't necessarily follow that his conclusions of listening tests are true. That's what we call a logical fallacy. See, you just learned another one.

Here's a list of audiophile devices that have garnered negative reviews or at least negative campaigns by, one assumes, anti Tweakers, tweakaphobes or anti audiophiles.

The Tice Clock
The VPI brick
Shun Mook Mpingo disc
SteinMusic Harmonizer
Brilliant Pebbles crystals
Shakti Stone
Shakti Hallographs
The Intelligent Chip
The Clever Clock
Aftermarket Fuses, Isoclean, HiFi Tuning, Audio Magic, etc.
Ultra Tweeters
Silver Rainbow Foil
Teleportation Tweak
The Green Pen
SONEX acoustic foam squares

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

michael green
michael green's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 week ago
Joined: Jan 10 2011 - 6:11pm
well when you get over your confusion

When your confusion is over we would be happy to compare notes with you in a music referencing situtation. I see nothing in your posting as giving evidence to you actually listening to music and testing the Schumann Resonances for yourself. So when you have something of experience to share I'm sure everyone will give you an fair shake.

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

rrstesiak
rrstesiak's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 10 months ago
Joined: Mar 22 2015 - 5:38am
Schumann Gadgets

If anyone wants to ship me a gadget, I would LOVE to run the scientific method against it and draft a publishable review!

I may be able to build one with a breadboard and parts from Mouser...but a pre-built one would be nice.

;-)

Pages

  • X