| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Hang on there... It is my understanding that at LEAST half of the people who listened to the two copies you posted either didn't hear the difference or felt that the difference wasn't significant enough to warrant the time, effort and/or the expense of demagnetizing the LP.
I am one of those people. I could not consistently tell if there is a difference between the two files and if there was, it was so minute as to be insignificant. So, forgetting all the measurements and DBTs and everything else, considering that a very high percentage heard little or no difference means that this treatment is controversial. Hence, you're asked to jump through hoops.
As far as I'm concerned, I would not ask you to jump through any hoops, prove anything, re-record and repost the files or anything of the sort. My feeling on the matter is that since a significant portion of the people who listened to the files heard little to no difference, the case is closed.
Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to post the files. I don't believe there is anything else that should be asked of you.
One might ask why it took poor little me to inform all of the great and mighty vinyl experts at Stereophile of this once well-known fact. Apparently, Fremer has recently denied it on this forum, dissmissed it completely out-of-hand.
Good for you. Then you don't need to know which files are "demagnetized" and which are not, because this is Ethan's doctored and edited 10s snippet test you are referring to, not Mike Fremer's. Because Winer did not specify how many, if any, were the demagnetized version (in order to trip me up as much as possible), it'd be wrong to even assume 2 are before and 2 are after. Plus, as he said, he has no intention of ever giving anyone the results anyway, if I don't take the test.
Absolutely agree. You will not hear a difference with Ethan's files, and that's because of what Ethan did with them. Some people have enough trouble hearing differences with Fremer's original files (Ethan of course couldn't hear a thing!). But all who have heard both sets, reported Fremer's showed greater differences. So if people are going to hear differences with any of these test files, it will be with Fremer's. Which it should be said (again!) are NOT DBT-ready "test files", they're "demo files", to do simple A-B listening to. Someone please tell that to Krueger, because as usual, he can't figure these things out for himself.
Welcome to the world of Tom Waits. Sleazy jazz poet extraordinaire.
sasaudio wrote: With all the claims made about whether or not Ethan's files are 'honestly' produced 10 second clips of the original two lengthy files, is there a need to answer this question without 'certifying' those four files against the two original files?
Stephen Mejias wrote: I don't think anyone needs to answer Ethan's question at all. I was just throwing guesses out there because I wanted to see how Ethan would respond. I should have known better.
AFAIC, it's official! No one need answer Ethan's bogus, anti-scientific, disingenuous test challenge. Because if Ethan ever even bothers to reveal the results (he twice said he won't if I don't take his test!), and ever announces a "winner", thus proving him wrong about many unfounded ignorant rants against the Furutech deMag and his Pioneer-quality hearing skills, mark my words, it'll be the day pigs fly.
I've been silently following this thread since its inception. I have watched it slowly (quickly?) deteriorate into mudslinging and name-calling. At this point I just have to ask: "Is it really this difficult for people to believe that magnetically charged impurities in a pigment could possibly have an effect on a highly sensitive coil of wire hovering just above?"
I'm not saying that there's a drastic change in sound quality because I haven't listened to the files, nor have I tried it myself (I probably never will.). All I'm saying is that electricity is going to do what it's supposed to do whether you want it to or not.
"One might ask why it took poor little me to inform all of the great and mighty vinyl experts at Stereophile of this once well-known fact: After you play an LP you must let it recover. Yes. Really."
Oh, Really? Let me guess, you heard this nugget of wisdom, uh, through the grapevine? At Hydrogen Audio? Around the water cooler at the AES convention?
Prove it.
Let me see if I have this straight:
Arny, j_j and you suggest an LP can sound different from play to play. And this is why people reported hearing a difference between the
Yes. This and a whole lot more. It's the particular "people" who fight these ideas like as if their lives depended on winning the argument, that you have to look at. They are "science-deniers", and status quo keepers. They pretend to argue for "science", but in fact selectively choose which "science" to believe in. And will always choose whatever fits their established beliefs and agenda. Ethan, Krueger, Axon, jj, Xenophanes etc... ALL had dismissed the Furutech deMag before even hearing its effect, or really knowing how it worked. This is truly business-as-usual for Ethan though. He never knows how anything works, but will dismiss it to his last breath, if he simply doesn't believe it can. Science or no science.
These arguments will always be academic for these professional skeptics, because they can't even hear differences when you demonstrate the device to them. e.g. It has now been shown in this thread that Ethan's hearing is about as sensitive as a wooden leg. Combine that with an unyielding will to deny the scientific principles at work, minimize the meaning of objective measurements, deny other's subjective hearing experiences, and declare the Furutech snake oil before even coming close to testing it, and what you have are a bunch of know-nothing bone-headed anti-high end skeptics who should be taken no more seroiusly than early release mental patients. Because there's not much difference between them (sorry, I do not mean to offend any early release mental patients. Trust me, I have more respect for you than I do for these guys
).
Oh Oh OHOHOHOHH!Mr. Kot-ter! I got the answer!
Yes, this makes perfect sense. What doesn't, and this has nothing to do with you, is how readily some people dismiss the Furutech device without a proper test. On the other hand, I can appreciate the flip side - how can people accept the efficacy of the Furutech device without a proper test.
My answer to both is - because they can. And whether we like it or not, hi-fi is a listener-driven hobby.
Troublemaker!
Why does it need to recover if there is so little deformation during the play that the sound has not changed when playing it a second time?
Since the equipment is common to all the recordings, why should there be a problem matching 1 and 3 to sound alike unless the LP has changed? Simply demagnetize it, then magnetize it via magnet (such as a speaker magnet), and so forth. What is so difficult about that? Please explain.
Thanks.
You assume facts not in evidence.
You have to make sure 1 and 3 are indistinguishable before you can proceed, and with LP you can not assume that.
So do the work. If you can prove a negative DBT between 1 and 3, then you can attempt to try 2.
OBJECTION! What's are "assumed facts" and why the hell not, your honor?
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/inde...ost&id=4817
"After 50 plays it is almost unlistenable. The groove walls clearly show enormous damage." (Using an electron microscope)
So you still cling to the assumption that after two playings there is not a perceived change in sound?
Arny in reply to letting LPs rest.
The point is that michaelavorgna
caught some in a bind by stating
The problem is that some got their rears caught in a contradiction claiming that an LP's grooves distort and hence the second play won't sound the same, and yet claimed to hear no difference of the files. Of course by posting what you did, your friends rears were "extricated" from the situation/contradiction.
Thanks. I think I'll buy it. I've never been much of a Tom Waits fan. Maybe this will get me interested.
I just didn't recognize the voice. Tom Waits is really not my cup of tea. He has always been in my "troubadour that writes well but can't sing category". I initially didn't like the selection. However after multiple "listens" it has grown on me.
Of course I know who Shelly Manne and Lew Tabackin are. I have recordings by both of them. I'm rather fond of the Toshiko Akiyoshi Lew Tabackin big band.
Being a teenager in 1976 when the top 3 billboard hits were "Silly Love Songs", "Don't Go Breaking My Heart" and "Disco Lady", and the top album was Frampton Comes Alive -- Tom Waits was a welcome reprieve. I've been a fan ever since. Enjoy!
Will we all feel like you do?
Whose wine? What wine?
Interesting, now either prove, with testable, verifiable facts that all of use can hold in evidence, that there is in fact any collusion whatsoever, or retract your claim of collusion.
Hint: I came into this thread late, and didn't even see a lot of the flaming. It's only your outright bigotry and lack of ethics that allows you to see such lunacy and outright nonsense.
Now apologize.
Perhaps Jeremiah the Bullfrog's?
Don't drag those dogs into this fight! Clearly the piano has been drinking (not me).
This was common knowlege and documented in the days of. Here's a modern example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/12998963@N03/collections/72157607960260181/
"These albums tend to withstand the deformation caused by normal play better than regular vinyl."
It makes perfect sense that audiophile recordings are pressed onto heavy vinyl so they can better withstand repeated plays.
...Oh wait...
Oh please Arny, hyperbole may as well be your middle name (and yes, I did the research ;-)
Unless you edit this post of yours again, I'd say you've defined hyperbole to a T.
And I'd suggest sticking to replying to 1 post at a time. It makes things easier to follow.
Just because people can do stupid things like pretend that there is no such thing as listener bias, doesn't mean we have to take their blather seriously.
That's Ethan. This is you:
It's time for you guys to get your blather in order.
First, get the ship's mast out of your own eye.
I tried to read this entire mind-numbing thread. I scanned it all, certainly. So, I may have missed something amid all the private intrigues and interpersonal agendas.
Still, I must say it. Nobody mentioned anything about living with this thing in his or her system. There are a lot of arguments about double-blind befores and afters, and there is a lot of stylistic grand-standing, but nobody says anything about actually living with this thing in a system for a few months.
The only reason I give so much credence to Stereophile reviewers is that they actually live with this shit in their systems. They turn it on when they are hung over or on the rag, as well as when they are bright and chirpy. They live with the gear and evaluate it from that living perspective.
I have a CD de-magnetizer. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I don't really give a rancid fuck why. On balance, I want it in my system, or I would throw it at my neighbor's dog (don't get all up in arms -- my neighbor's dog deserves a CD demagnetizer between the runnin' lights as certainly as Tim Geithner needs a new acting coach, and, besides, I would most likely miss anyway...). I like it in my system. When it works, it enhances my enjoyment of my music. When it doesn't work, who cares?
I hope everybody is enjoying more music, with or without a demagnetizer. Happy tunes.
I've learned a lot following along with this 70 page clusterfuck of a discussion.
Super. Feel free to start doing so on this forum.
Hey "JJ" (or whatever your name is this week).... does your master ever program you to spout anything but feigned indignation at people? If so, could you tell him to turn the switch to something else? Tell him your righteous anger slash feigned indignation routine is not working, and it gets really old when repeated 5,000 times over, across a period of 20 years. LIke you. Plus, I always get the impression you're going to faint at any moment.
You seem to speak in hyperbole, I'm more comfortable with speaking in the language of science.
LOL! Looks like someone wound-up the Krueger doll again. Arnold's "langauge of science" appears to be anonymous articles on the Flickr! photo sharing site.
Deformation of the vinyl due to playback may be an explnation for the difference that I may have heard in my DBTs.
So now you heard them? Ok, because you started out saying you heard differences. Then no, you no longer heard squat, because that didn't really jibe with your agenda and you had to align yourself with what Ethan was preaching. And now once again, you say you did hear differences with Fremer's files in a DBT. Let us know when you settle on a decision, and please note that I am holding my breath.
What I find noteworthy here is that you can't tell the difference between a degradation from a supposedly, allegedly, infinitessimally "deformed pressing" (between one play and the next, you'd have us believe!), or an amelioration from a demagnetized run. If your powers of discernment are this bad, why do you even bother to take subjective listening tests, Kruger? Just so you can see if you can beat your ABX score?
This was common knowlege and documented in the days of. Here's a modern example: " target="_blank">http://www.flickr.com/photos/12998963@N03/collections/72157607960260181/
Ahh.. yes, "proof by Flickr photos". The new standard of science for audio DBTists! And THIS is what you were basing your attacks against the group, Stereophile and its staff on, eh? How typically Kruegerian. You can thank Geoff for calling you out on that one. I note how ironic it is that you're even pointing us to a Flickr article which states that most average people can't hear the difference between a CD and a new LP pressing! Brilliant! I guess you're going to have to concede now that "Science" (reg. tm.) proves CD's are no better than LP's. Brilliant!
Well my pseudoscientific friend, in the words of your DBT-trolling brother "jj", either prove, with testable, verifiable facts that all of us can hold in evidence, that there is in fact any significant deformation between one playing and the very next of an LP record, significant enough to account for the significant differences I and others heard in MF's files. Else retract your claims and whop yourself with the heel of your shoe until I say "Simon Says".
That's not true. I strongly suspect that the Furutech device has no audible effects, but I did report hearing a difference between the untreated and treated LP in 20 of 30 total trials in a DBT.
Thank you for proving what I have always said: Your ABX tests are worthless, and a waste of time. For even if you hear differences greater than chance in as many as 30 trials, your expectation biases overrule and you conclude whatever you wanted to believe in the first place. At least it was your time you were wasting here, and not anyone else's.
ML wrote: If playing a record twice without 'recovery' time affects its sound, why would only some people hear this difference?
Apparently some of us were possibly more effective listeners.
I'm sure Ethan is not thanking you for this, but you just confirmed what I have been saying about how this test proves his lack of listening skill. All these differences he and you both measured, all these differences due to so-called "recovery time" between playings, and finally, all these differences due to "deformation" between playings, and your friend Ethan couldn't hear a damn thing between them. You on the other hand may or may not have heard differences, depending on what day this is and who's asking. And even so, you can't describe those differences. Brilliant! You are both now fully qualified to guess people's weight at carnivals.
IME DBTs are often more sensitive than sighted tests because they tend to overcome biases towards not hearing differences.
But unfortunately, not the biases where you tell yourself what those differences mean. Brilliant!
This was common knowlege and documented in the days of. Here's a modern example:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12998963@N03/collections/72157607960260181/
"These albums tend to withstand the deformation caused by normal play better than regular vinyl."
"Common knowledge."
The reason heavy vinyl is used is so the grooves can be cut deeper and wider, yielding better bass performance and higher dynamic range.
You didn't read the part where its alleged benefits are obvious?
I get it, this science stuff is over your head. :-(
OK, so now you admit that you've already invested in the strange business of demagnetizing non-magnetic digital media.
I guess that the principles of operation of CD players is over your head as well. :-(
Except of course that you do, which is why you wrote this little post.
I guess that your CD demagnetiser is like a little talisman, a lucky charm that you use to drive away random attacks of the bad sound demons?
Wow! Do you also shrink heads? That is, do you shrink heads other than your own?
Great post, arnie. Really, that "language of science" BS you strictly wanted to speak really overwhelmed Clifton's logic there. I doubt he'll be able to answer any of those retorts, he's going to be on the floor laughing for the next week - I know I will be. Great stuff, really, really great stuff from you this time! I learned a lot. And I already knew too much about you.
How do you do this with such frequency, say one thing and then do the other? There must be a scientific word for that. Help me out here, O'man O'science you. Would it begin with a "L" and end with an "r"?
Trying to sneak around your problem? I posted the quotes in my last post you conveniently neglected to reply to; that both you and arny stated it is very important to let an LP rest because of deformation problems.
See more below.
Let's see if I need to apologize.
First you conveniently left out the quotes I posted from you and arny, mentioning deformation and the absolute need for resting the LP. This has major implications since deformation changes and exaggerates the distortion characteristics.
After getting caught by Michael after the fact, you suddenly claim you really don't know if any sonic changes occur after a play and the deformation. How convenient.
Next, the deformation is much more extreme at the high frequencies than lower, so the increased distortion levels are also exaggerated at the highs. Of course this changes the harmonic structure of instruments, especially the upper harmonics which are so easily recognized.
Next you state this.
Of course you would claim that. However, the distortion characteristics have changed by both frequency and amplitude. Interesting that this has been known for years, you hype yourself as an expert, yet you suddenly and conveniently don't remember.
Next, the article, from Hydrogen, stated that after only 50 playings, the sound was "almost unlistenable" with "enormous groove damage". You again conveniently left that out in your reply.
If you are so ethically honest why haven't you mentioned expectation bias (like arny unwittingly has) here, on hydrogen and avs forums and how it corrupts the input data when figuring the confidence level of dbt tests? You certainly mention expectation bias when doing sighted tests. I am open to proof.
And why have you not fully disclosed yourself (Xenophanes as well) by using your signature and mentioning that AES is backed by companies, so a conflict of interest? You are not a third party as you lead the public to believe.
And on this thread
http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showf...e=4&fpart=1
which started with a bait
and suddenly 4 from Hydrogen and AVS forums, including you suddenly show up out of no where.
There is no apology coming from me. You are slick though.
I would suggest that you refrain from making utterly false, conspiracy-theory statements like that quoted above. It only shows the depth of your prejudice and hostility.
As expected, you can not prove any collusion (since none existed), and seek falsely to potray interest in one's own scientific discipline as "collusion".
You have clearly shown yourself to be an enemy of truth, science, and progress, and on that note, you've moved yourself into my list of "crackpot stalkers".
Fact challenged much Steve? Here's what the forum database says about us:
Arny Krueger: Reged: 09/01/05 Posts: 161
j_j: Reged: 03/13/09 Posts: 151
Xenophanes Reged: 09/07/05 Posts: 92
Ethan_Winer Reged: 09/01/05 Posts: 1408
So what's special about September, 2005?
If memory serves, that is about when the Stereophile Forum started up.
Compared to 3 of us Steve, you're a relative newbie! ;-)
Let's see what arny left out. Let's check the time lapse between The "dishonesty of sighted listening tests" and previous post for the four. (Notice arny left out axon, we will see why in a moment.)
1) Xenophanes April 22, 09 "dishonesty of sighted listening tests"
Previous post Sept 20, 08, so 7 months between posts
2) Axon made his first post on "dishonesty.... so new . No wonder arny left him out. That ought to cause the old arny "credibility" meter to plunge toward zero.
3) J_J made his first two posts two days before the "dishonesty.... string. So new .
4) Arny posted on "dishonesty..... april 30th. Before that
previous post occurred October 12, 2005, some four years before.
So all four appear at the same time, on the same string, and after a member has baited the public/members. Hmmmm.
As one can see, these guys can't be trusted (except Axon) for much of anything.
Apparently, This stalker thinks that speaking up when one's experience and expertise is appropriate is somehow "untrustworthy".
Tell me, do you think the WTC was brought down by thermite, that there is an alien body in Area 51, and that the international Illumanati control the world, too?
So are you denying you belong to AES and that companies pay to belong to AES? If you do not deny then you have a conflict of interest imo.
Check out my above response to arny. Also, an innocent man usually claims "I am innocent" rather than "you can not prove any collusion".
Notice he could not answer one of my scientific points (including article from Hydrogen audio), as usual but instead attacks me.
No wonder he will not post his real name and take responsibility for his posts. But maybe he is really imposter using Jim Johnston's credentials. Interesting.
My overall position is that I use science but disdain those who manipulate science to mislead the public.
What I see Steve is that you are holding me accountable for not mentioning Axon, when in fact you did not say in your post exactly who the fabulous four were. I was forced to guess.
Secondly, your information only counts posts. Apparently lurking here and not finding anything worth responding to is a foreign concept to you.
In fact Axon signed up on 09/02/05, about the same time as the rest of us except JJ.
What is it that caused people to inflate very limited evidence into positive proof of wrongdoing and an immediate threat?
Paran... parano... paranoa! :-(
Posting on the SP forum is a little like being the "guest of honor" at a lynching, or perhaps more reflective of he sophistication and table manners of most of the party - a cannibal dnner.
;-)
>>> "Michael Fremer claims that placing a demagnetizer under an LP record changes its sound, and apparently some people believe him. You don't really need to know more than that." <<<
***********
This is very disingenious of you Ethan. You know perfectly well that there is far more going on than you have portrayed in that simple sentence - and FAR MORE people involved than the one person's claim you quote !!!!!!!!!!
I.e. :-
Michael Fremer's description after demagnetising discs.
>>> "But more importantly, why don't you trust your ears???????
I trusted mine when I heard what the Furutech did, despite my utter cynicism about it (which is why it sat on the floor for 3 months before I tried it).
What I heard was so obvious, so repeatable, so clear, it was like "is that the Empire State Building?" Not "I'd better do an A/B/X to prove it really is the Empire State Building" (I know that analogy is not valid). The point is, not one skeptic---and I'm talking recording engineers, mastering engineers whose names you know, and the editor of the magazine have all heard the difference....the only reason. The only reason you wrote what's above is because you haven't experienced it. Because had you, even if you don't trust your own ears (or your own eyes I guess), this is an easily heard, easily repeatable phenomenon. It's a HUGH difference." <<<
***************
Quote by Stephen Mejias after his experience at Michael's house :-
>>> "Okay, first we'll listen to something without the demagnetization and then we'll listen again, and you tell me if I'm crazy. Here, here. This is a brand new album, never played before, and it's a female vocal which, as we all know, the audiophiles love. This Diana Krall live thing, unwrapping it now for the very first time. Let's see how it sounds.
We listen.
Okay?
Okay, not bad, now let's put it on the deMag and see what happens.
It takes just a couple of moments. In the meantime, Mikey is back and forth from his stacks to the turntable, preparing to show me other things. JA is in a backroom, tending to his connections.
The red light on the Furutech deMag goes silent, indicating the process is complete. Mikey returns the LP to the Caliburn and we listen again.
There is a difference and it is obvious and it is immediate. The applause at the very beginning of the LP sounds more like real applause, more like pairs of human hands coming together to make sound, and less like Styrofoam or static. JA walks into the room and announces, "There's more bass, too!" I'm not sure that JA's even aware of what we've changed. It sounds as though we've listened to two different pressings of the same album." <<<
*************
John Atkinson during the open Stereophile debate at the Montreal 2009 Hi Fi Show.
>>> "There are things that boggle my mind in High End audio. There are things that I would like to think I understand (from a technical and engineering point of view) and then something happens which literally blows my mind and it doesn't fit the world view. Such as during the trip which Stephen and I did to Michael's house (where I heard an improvement in the sound and thought it must be a different disc) !!" <<<
Quote from Robert Deutsch, also during the same Stereophile debate
On applying a demagnetiser to CDs. >>> "Every time I have used it I have experienced an improvement in the sound each time" <<<
***********
Do the 66 pages devoted to this particular subject really boil down to you, Ethan, (and some others), believing that the differences all those people described hearing (and numerous others within the audio industry) were, all the time, JUST the difference between an LP being played - and then, without the LP being "allowed to recover", being played again ????????
What then about Robert Deutsch's experiences where he says that he has NOT used the demagnetiser on LPs but HAS used it on CDs - with a similar effect on the sound which the others had described - i.e an improvement ???????
One person's after another's, after another's ACTUAL experiences with the device - all dismissed so casually !!
Regards,
May Belt.
Pages