Uh ... it eliminates vibration?

What's the real question?

Any movement relative to a magnetic field will induce a voltage and therefore a current in anything conducting electricity. Also, current in a wire or component will generate its own magnetic field.

Quote:
Do capacitors really care if they are not held completely still? Does wire care? Do resistors? Transformers?

Certainly in the case of capacitors the answer is yes. Wire and resistors, the general opinion would say it matters. If their "concern" is not specifically for themself - which it would appear it is - then a resistor or cable would react to the signal they are presented and it would very likely affect their behavior and performance in a circuit. Transformers? I am unaware of anyone trying to hold a power transformer still but the effect they have on other components is not unknown. I would assume interstage and output transformers would react much the same as any other coil and therefore benefit from lower vibration levels. Remove a crossover from the high pressure area inside a loudspeaker enclosure and you can hear the improvement the repositioning provides.

Is this another thread asking for measurements?

Quote:
Is this another thread asking for measurements?

Since Elk already conceded that the rack (and presumably its vibration isolating qualities) made a positive difference in his system, I think it's safe to put yer dukes down. So far.

Quote:
What physically is going on?

Good job on your questions ELK.
Even though I will not yet disclaim that something physically has changed, I still believe that many changes are not physical but psycological based.
The comments about electrical modulation induced by motion (vibration), while technically correct is probably a non issue when one considers the relative values of the main signal vs the induced signal. I have no data to base my belief on and am open to any factual input.

Quote:
Do capacitors really care if they are not held completely still? Does wire care? Do resistors? Transformers?

Recently I replaced the spikes on my speakers with Cera Balls of Finite Elemente (http://www.finite-elemente.de ) and the improvement was HUGE (on wooden floor). Seems that the vibration control works on some other principles...???

Quote:
Cyclebrain, I share the same skepticism; how could such little factors make a difference.

While it could be psychological, the first rack I tried made a big difference. As a few people asked what had changed when they first came into the house (not even in front of the system - I have a big listening room and an open floor plan) I am convinced something positive changed.

But I am still going hmmmmmm . . . .

Electrical motors, can be like an AC or DC motor, or they can be mechanically coupled, like that of a loudspeaker driver motor.

Motors ARE vibration or motion within electrical/magnetic fields.

Electrical devices like HIGH END AUDIO GEAR..are considered on their ability to deal with fairly small changes (or lack of changes) in their internal electrical considerations.

It should be clear, then, that micro vibration in the gear creates minute changes in the internal signals.

In the case of a rack with multiple coupled items..the effect can be a cumulative increase in sonic coloration by a given specific vibration characteristic..

Quote:
In the case of a rack with multiple coupled items..the effect can be a cumulative increase in sonic coloration by a given specific vibration characteristic..

....caused by microphony!

I don't know if it'll answer your questions, Elk, but Art Dudley addresses the topic of isolation in his June "Listening." You might find it interesting.

Quote:
Are you saying that it is the motion of a component's wires and other parts relative to each other that causes a change in the sound?

Absolutely. It's the very basic considerations of AC conduction, first year electronics, first class, first semester. AC Electricity 101. Yet some (mostly folks who have knowledge of and work in the electrical fields-a pun!) don't get it? Bizarre -to say the least. It's not the whole story, but part of it.

In one of my electronics student guises, I made myself a dual rail (+) and (-) rail variable power supply, that was fairly humongous and overbuilt. I did it as the requisite 'student project', for that course. The noise levels in rails under full DC resistive loading amounted to 0.008% ripple.

The point?

I had to take it outside the school, with a massive power cord and the test gear, then, drive a copper rail into the ground as a adjunct to the regular ground..to get that % number. The school labs had far to much electrical noise in the air to reach the unit's real noise floor. I could move my hand around it to change the results, due to the charge issues of the human body, in air, in the building.

Imagine the steel and aluminum..and the copper traces..and all the signals going through all those parts and components. At that time I was doing things like taking out the main resistor in the given amplifier's feedback loop..turning it around..and then burning it in for 2 days and then listening closely for a day to the amp on amplifier coupled direct drive electret headphones that I had modified. Then, turn the resistor around.. burn in again..and then listen for a day.

Swap out resistors, capacitors, chassis components, everything under the sun, in systematic single cause analysis of components and all considerations that surround them. For years and years on end..overall.. thousands of times, on all kinds of gear.

Now, I can, with a interestingly high degree of accuracy..go to an audio show..look at an amplifier (usually my best trick in this area) that is open and on static display.....and tell people what it sounds like.

Just by looking at it. I might ask what solder was used, but that's about it.

Quote:
Now, I can, with a interestingly high degree of accuracy..go to an audio show..look at an amplifier (usually my best trick in this area) that is open and on static display.....and tell people what it sounds like.

That story should pick up some hot chicks at the bar.

Quote:
Now, I can, with a interestingly high degree of accuracy..go to an audio show..look at an amplifier (usually my best trick in this area) that is open and on static display.....and tell people what it sounds like.

Just by looking at it. I might ask what solder was used, but that's about it.

I can look at a post and tell what it smells like, and this part of the post smells like B.S.
Sorry about being so rude.

Quote:

The point?

The school labs had far to much electrical noise in the air to reach the unit's real noise floor. I could move my hand around it to change the results, due to the charge issues of the human body, in air, in the building.

- what about a case with lid - grounded to comply the rules and to get rid of noice ????

Quote:

Now, I can, with a interestingly high degree of accuracy..go to an audio show..look at an amplifier (usually my best trick in this area) that is open and on static display.....and tell people what it sounds like.
Just by looking at it.

- be careful, JA and all the staff at STP will be very jealous. yo kinda Copperfield...

Quote:

Quote:
Now, I can, with a interestingly high degree of accuracy..go to an audio show..look at an amplifier (usually my best trick in this area) that is open and on static display.....and tell people what it sounds like.

Just by looking at it. I might ask what solder was used, but that's about it.

I can look at a post and tell what it smells like, and this part of the post smells like B.S.
Sorry about being so rude.

Ignorance will get you nowhere. Except more ignorance.

Sorry for being so rude. Nothing personal dude. You reach out and smack me on the forehead, I smack back. Simple enough.

Fair enough.
Cheers.

Quote:
Does anyone know why vibration control makes an improvement in the sound?

I have an audiophile friend that has added vibration damping to many portions of his electronic equipment, including internally. I don't think he uses any specific racks or stuff like that, as I've not been over to his house for a while. It appears to him, and seems plausible to me, that what he was doing is to dampen/reduce vibration in locations that affect the sound.

Vibration isolation is a complicated field, with fairly straightforward equations. My opinion that it's complicated is due to the materials involved, and characterization of the material properties correctly in order to use those numbers in the equations. It's also complicated in that putting a vibration-susceptible gear on a massive versus a floating suspension depends upon what in that gear is sensitive to vibration. It's possible to put something on one isolator and it helps minimize vibration, but putting the isolator on another may actually increase the vibration to the device at certain frequencies. Although the analysis can be done, it's not obvious from the start that one way will work better than another without knowing the problem area that needs isolation.

I've also heard stories that cases, CD trays, circuit boards, etc., need additional damping to improve over its stock sound. The hypotheses advanced sound plausible, but I have no experience in doing these mods.

My guess at this time is that certain components are sensitive to vibration. Others have covered the current-carrying conductor moving in magnetic fields, the self inductances, the capacitances between devices, microphonics. On of the conjectures is that solid state devices under vibration could flex and cause strain in the material, possibly vary in resistance (?) like a strain gauge, and hence cause some effect on the sound. Don't know how much of an effect this contributes, and have not tried to analyze this.

I have added spikes to my floor-standing speakers, and that improved the low bass. It's attributed to mass coupling the speaker to the wood floor instead of sitting over carpet and a foam carpet pad. It also works on the subwoofer that I recently tried. No measurements were done to show the improvement, only listening experience.

In this case, the speculation would be that the speaker cone can reproduce the waveform better if the magnet/basket/enclosure system is non-moving and the voice coil is. If the speaker is sitting on a bouncy surface, the voice coil and cone moves one way and the enclosure moves the other, albeit much less. I have not proved that this is the case or better preserves the shape of the waveform, only that it seems to sound better.

Anyone familiar with "vented" speakers know that it's possible to get the driver to move minimally while the passive radiator moves a lot. It's not hard to imagine that under the right combination of conditions, a speaker on a bouncy surface might act similarly, in that the driver is moving little and the enclosure is moving a lot.

In your equipment rack, the air vibrations from the speaker is transmitted to the components, as well as structural vibrations through the floor. A heavy mass damps vibration by being difficult to move (inertia). But a rigid material can transmit sound quickly, like a steel bar. It's complicated.

Quote:

In this case, the speculation would be that the speaker cone can reproduce the waveform better if the magnet/basket/enclosure system is non-moving and the voice coil is. If the speaker is sitting on a bouncy surface, the voice coil and cone moves one way and the enclosure moves the other, albeit much less. I have not proved that this is the case or better preserves the shape of the waveform, only that it seems to sound better.

Quote:

Why the vibration control works on speakers has an analogy to hand weapons. It is a difference there when you fire a hand weapon from the hand or fixed in a chop. The bullets will have different velocities. On hard fixed weapon the velocity of the bullet is higher then the velocity of the hand held weapon bullet because the kickback is damping the reactive force.

Good analogy for action-reaction, one of Newton's laws.

I've even tried guy wires anchoring the speaker to the floor, like an antenna mast needs be anchored. This was over 15 years ago. It works better than anything else, other than the cement speaker built as part of the floor..but that's another story.

I'd call it more like being one of Newton' 'theories' as it is not universally applicable. It only works on the 'Newtonian' level, and falls apart at the quantum, or, beginning at the molecular level- it becomes less correct, as a singular, or predominant entity.

Quote:
I was amazed at the improvement realized when I moved my equipment form a heavy MDF shelved cabinet that I had made to a decent quality Target stand (manufacturer, not store) which I borrowed from a friend. I then bought a PolyCrystal stand that made yet again a large improvement.

PolyCrystal stuff is great !! Getting ahold of the company is a different story

Vibration Testing
So informative things are provided here, I really happy to read this post, I was just imagine about it and you provided me the correct information I really bookmark it, for further reading, So thanks for sharing the information.

I saw that the last post was 2008 and gave a read. Amazing how things change.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Some of the more interesting areas I've been exploring recently are damping and isolating transformers, damping and isolating printed circuit boards, damping capacitors, damping the CD tray, not to mention the ins and outs of vibration isolation of the CD player and amplifier. I am just ready to test a new, dual layer iso stand using cryogenically treated high carbon steel springs and very heavy masses that incorporates constrained layer damping to reduce residual vibration on the top plate.

Geoff Kait
Machinadynamica.com

I don't like the sound of dead components at all. I've got to have a soundstage that goes outside the rooms walls. When I put these deadening materials on the soundstage goes squeeze, right in the middle of the stage and in the speakers. It's like watching toy solders play instead of a hall. Geoff you said you only have a headphone setup now. What does it do different with headphones than someone using an in room speaker setup?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Ever since the landmark article Bad Vibes in Stereophile Magazine by Shannon Dickson circa 1996 I have been keenly interested in vibration and especially vibration isolation, but also resonance control. The year 1996 was around the time of the introduction of the Vibraplane on an unsuspecting public, a vibration isolation stand taken almost directly from the Newport Corporation desktop microscope isolation stand. About a year later I introduced the Nimbus sub Hertz isolation stand with unprecedented resonance frequency below 1.0 Hz. To illustrate just how good that performance is compare with Vibraplane which at the time was a 3Hz stand. For high end systems, it was a time of much rejoicing and jubilation since what was considered to be state of art was kicked to the curb by these new fangled isolation devices. At around the same time we also saw sand filled stands, air bladder systems, later Ginko "racket ball" iso stands, Mana glass plate stands, Minus K negative stiffness iso stand, as well as a bunch of others from Relaxa (magnetic levitation), Vibrapods, mechanical springs form VPI and yours truly, Silent Running, As well as all manner of homemade solutions such as Bungee cords, bicycle inner tubes, tennis balls, bubble wrap, you name it. What all these novel ideas were about was getting the poor slob of an audiophile out of the noise floor and elevating home audio reproduction to an art form and out of the then current state of Hi Fi. Fast forward almost twenty years and we see new ways to deal with resonance in the components, the primary culprit being Mr. Transformer. Why no one really investigated this before is a complete mystery. But there's more. Capacitors vibration as a natural course of their operation and, trust me, that vibration, while quite small relative to a lot of things, is very audible. There are similar problems associated with the CD tray! the CD transport (surprisingly noisy little beggar), electron tubes, of course, Herbies Tube Dampers to the rescue, I use two per tube, can you believe it?! Where will it all end? Hopefully nowhere soon. Most recent investigations surround the very remarkable annealed mu metal for wrapping around transformers and EMI absorbing material from 3M. Later.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamics

Sorry Geoff, this is one area I would have to disagree. The audio signal is vibration, no way around that, and everything that touches that signal becomes a part of that signals performance. You put dampening material on or around it and you dampen the content. Your welcome to come to any of our test sites and explore for yourself and bring any product you would like to test. I'm not trying to marginalize your research and findings but there's some other approaches you might want to do before being so emphatic. Have you ever tried free resonant top tuning for example? You don't have to kill the vibrations but tune them. You'll get a much bigger stage and far more detail and dynamics. With tuning you can make the sound dampened like you are talking about, but also any other way you would like the sound to be. People should be able to have the sound however they want, but don't you think it would be better if the listener had the tools to get that sound? Let's say someone gets this stuff you talk about and after a while decides he wants a different sound, shouldn't he or she be able to tune in the sound they want?

There are way too many people walking around with absolute this and that. I don't buy it and neither does anyone who makes their system variable. They've been where your at and they've been where every fixed system has taken them. Now they can go where they want in this great hobby of sound.

Lets do a test together sometime. You pick the recording. Dampen the signal like you say and describe it to me. I will tune in the sound that you describe, but here's the thing. When your done, your done. I'll sit here with a variable system and say hey Geoff how about we widen the stage to the size of the recorded hall a little more and raise the height as well as focus in on the second violins. While we're at it lets put a bigger halo around the timpani. When you kill the vibrations you don't have a prayer of being able to do this, yet the person tuning can do this all day long. It comes down to what this hobby is for. One fixed sound, or a system that can play anything.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

I guess I prefer to think of the audio signal as an electromagnetic wave, subject to the vibration produced by Earth's crust motion, traffic, transformer noise, turntable motor noise, footfalls, the noise capacitors produce during normal operation, Of course there is such a thing as over damping, so one should try not to get too carried away. But to dismiss vibration isolation and mechanical damping at the wave of a hand seems a little bit drastic. :-). The effects of vibration on the audio signal is analogous to how isolation stands reduce the blurring and jitter visible when viewing a specimen through a microscope.

Cheers,
Geoff Kait, Machina Dramatica

Hi Geoff

I don't think we are on a different page when it comes to vibration. Where we are on a different page is the way we "tune" it. Why would you think I dismiss anything? I design high tech studios and music research wings for universities. I consult for Herman Miller on acoustical/mechanical design. I was also the acoustical division for UMI before they were bought by Selmer. I have my metal work done at one of the leading vibrtory facilities in the world. Not just talk about it but actually build parts for the space program. I'm not allowed to dismiss anything. I have a web forum that explores electromagnetic fields/waves, and specifically the things you mention.

You know Geoff, this whole "wave of the hand" stuff may work on people who actually don't do their studies, but for the designers who really do give their lifes work in the studies of these things it doesn't fly. If we want to share credentials then lets do it, but lets not mince words and try to paint pictures about things that you or I think, lets get down to the know. High End Audio has a ton of designers who have been able to get away with what they think for too long. They don't have real testing credentials or real testing/listening facilities. I try to be polite, but there comes a time when you have to lay down the cards and move away from the talk people and take serious the walk people. You my friend have a choice to challedge what I say or where I get it from, but if you do this than it does in time come down to that show of cards, not just talk.

I come up on a forum and present variable tuning, and all of a sudden the fixed guys come out of the closet to boldly state their claims and try to dissuade. Well it's going to take more than talk. There are people actually actively tuning, and I have tuned at the reviewers own homes, and I have active tests going on as we speak. Why you or anyone else would want to attempt to call this a "way of the hand" is beyond me. People from this industry come and listen on a regular bases and have for years. They are welcome with their test equipment and have for years. You read about it in Widescreen Review with Michael Green and Bob Hodas. Bob did his tuning, and I did my tuning, look it up. So you see I have never shy'd away from the tests or science of the audio signal in any way, in fact I welcome it and here's why. To be in the technical side of the music world and making a difference you have to be willing to put on your ears every day a learn something, and that's what I do. My place is stacked with wood curing to be placed in tunable rooms. Amplifiers are being received for vibratory testing and products being made to best ground them. I tune things from the earths foundation to the ear, every step of the way, look at the forum and see for yourself.

I'm very curious what others do as well in the design world and ask questions about their setups. Most of the time I find out that they don't have complete systems where they test the entire audio signal path, but I tests their methods anyway, and what I have found is that the signal is highly tunable and the recording has far more signal on it than the audiophile is made aware of. Uncovering this signal takes all three parts of the audio trilogy to be as flexible as possible and I have designed in all three areas and do testing every day on all three. I likewise was curious about your testing after seeing the you made bold statements on this forum and even challenged me as soon as I came here and started posting. That's fair and I welcome it, but while talking to you I find out that you don't even have a speaker/room setup and haven't for 6 years now according to you. You said on here "I went from Fulton Nuances to Sennheiser HD600s six years ago and never looked back". This made me even more curious so I asked "Do you do all your listening with headphones now, no room/speaker listening? If I may ask, which Fultons were they?" and you said "There is no doubt that speakers, when I had them, are much more capable soundstage-wise than headphones; that's certainly one of the big challenges with headphones - to get as big and open and transparent and "realistic" a soundstage as possible. But I wouldn't say I was trying to get the soundstage my speakers, which were Fultons, had." and so I wonder, why is this guy challenging me if he is not even listening to a room/speaker system?

It looks to me that you have giving up on the in room stereo listening position (this is according to your words) so why would you think your posts and challenges to me "wave of the hand" are legitimate? Your saying, on one hand that people need to do this, and on the other hand your not even doing it on a speaker/room setup yourself. I on the other hand say, yes you can dampen to where Geoff says and that's one of your choices, but there are also many other places to stop at and enjoy the music from many angles and variable tuning spots. You say "kill the vibrations" and I say "the audio signal is the vibration". I invite you to come listen with me and explore this for yourself and you wave it off and make a comment to dissuade. That's not how a view this hobby Geoff, and I think that this is partly why this hobby is in such bad shape. It's great to talk, but you also have to walk. It can't be all these guys with the truth and no one else has it, all these guys making stuff that sounds different to everyone elses and theirs is the only way. I've said this on here before, not everyone can have the absolute sound can they? It looks to me like people have been stated they have the way for many years and it is nothing more than their own truth to them and their trying to push their agenda. I as well am pushing an agenda. The only answer is a variable one. Just like the instruments that make the music, we have the ability to let it play more accurately through the means of variable tuning. If designers wish to keep sticking their flags in the ground and standing fixed the audiophile world will never stop going in circles and will keep insisting they have found the answer, the fixed perfect sound, that is until they put on a piece of music their system can not play, then the whole thing is up in smoke again and they have to start the blame game all over again or do what you did, walk away from in room stereo listening altogether.

No my friend, there's a better way and it's not me saying my sound is better than yours or yours is better than mine, it's exploring the vibrating pathway known as the audio signal and finding what affects it and why. Not talk my friend but doing. And not sitting there with the distortion card because you haven't gone far enough in the testing. My question to you and the other designers is you have done the dampening but have you done the tuning? Have you seen how little it actually takes for the signal to travel and how to keep that whole signal intact? I have and so have others and so don't try to buffalo. Everyone who I know of that explored tuning at the simplist form has come back with the same results. The audio signal has far more music content that the average audiophile listener is hearing, and the audio signal is highly tunable, making way for higher dynamics and much lower distortion.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Michael, this is pretty silly, you show me yours, I show you mine. I designed the FAA communication satellite system 25 years ago and worked for NASA for many years in radar analysis and satellite comm. I have participated in some of the most celebrated systems ever assembled at CES including but limited to the Tenor Rockport system in the Tuscany Hotel way back in 2001 that many senior reviewers and audiophiles thought was the best system at the show and that uber reviewer Jonathan Valin proclaimed not only the best system at the show but the best system he had ever heard. I was also invited to participate with John Curl and Bob Crump back when they were showing the Bar B Q amplifier and Blowtorch preamp, about the time the JC 1 came out. Mine was invited by Pierre of Mapleshade Recording Studio to demonstrate my then new sub Hertz (that means below 1 Hertz) Nimbus isolation platform. My undergraduate thesis was the design of a low thrust engine for interplanetary space travel that produced thrust by bombarding highly magnetized metal crystal with high energy Xenon ions.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait, Machina Dynamica

Well than, you should know that systems are tunable shouldn't you. That's one, and second you should know that to stay on top of the game you need to be a practicing in room listener to recommend in room listening products. Geoff, I didn't make the comments about your listening habbits or system, you did. You came up and said kill vibrations. I did, and the sound died with it. Should I have lied? Should thousands of listeners lied? If you came up and said, you had one setting, here it is, hope you enjoy it but there are many settings, that would be cool, but you didn't. Here's the thing Geoff, there are thousands of guys making your claims with different results and sounds. Why are their claims any less valid than yours? All these guys you mention and thousands more know how to come up with a "fixed" sound through killing part of the signal and bringing to life another part. All of these guys (including myself) have design awards. They change a part in any of their components and the entire stage and presentation changes. I appreciate all of their sounds, and have recreated them with my tunable systems. Why would this upset you?

And yes Geoff, show and tell is what this hobby has always been about. You show me yours and I'll show you mine. Why do you think they have trade shows and reference system displays? Geoff, last night through tuning I matched the sound of a system over seas, so that I may hear what he is hearing. I had him describe the sound and the stage and I tuned my system to get what he was getting so we could talk about what was going on. I would think something like this would excite someone like you. While he was posting his sound I matched it in order to say do this and watch this happen. This gives him choices with his sound so he may tune it in the way he would like. Why would this be a problem for you? Why don't you and I do the same thing and dicuss it here on the forum.

Lets show people how flexible the audio signal is. I'm game are you?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

michael green wrote:

Well than, you should know that systems are tunable shouldn't you.

Uh, I am a fan of tuning, especially things like Mpingo discs, Harmonix and Marigo devices. Don't put words in my mouth.

That's one, and second you should know that to stay on top of the game you need to be a practicing in room listener to recommend in room listening products. Geoff, I didn't make the comments about your listening habbits or system, you did. You came up and said kill vibrations. I did, and the sound died with it.

You obviously didn't do it right.

Should thousands of listeners lied? If you came up and said, you had one setting, here it is, hope you enjoy it but there are many settings, that would be cool, but you didn't. Here's the thing Geoff, there are thousands of guys making your claims with different results and sounds.

Thousands? Really?

Why are their claims any less valid than yours? All these guys you mention and thousands more know how to come up with a "fixed" sound through killing part of the signal and bringing to life another part. All of these guys (including myself) have design awards. They change a part in any of their components and the entire stage and presentation changes. I appreciate all of their sounds, and have recreated them with my tunable systems. Why would this upset you?

Why should I get upset? I don't even know what you're talking about.

And yes Geoff, show and tell is what this hobby has always been about. You show me yours and I'll show you mine. Why do you think they have trade shows and reference system displays? Geoff, last night through tuning I matched the sound of a system over seas, so that I may hear what he is hearing. I had him describe the sound and the stage and I tuned my system to get what he was getting so we could talk about what was going on. I would think something like this would excite someone like you. While he was posting his sound I matched it in order to say do this and watch this happen. This gives him choices with his sound so he may tune it in the way he would like. Why would this be a problem for you? Why don't you and I do the same thing and dicuss it here on the forum.

We are having a discussion but I have a sneaking suspicion this is going to be a one sided one.

Lets show people how flexible the audio signal is. I'm game are you?

Ok. But only if you agree that an audio signal is an electromagnetic wave, not vibration. Lol

Geoff Kait - Machina Dynamica

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hi Geoff, you can call it whatever you would like. I don't have a problem calling some of the energy electromagnetic wave. Let me know when you have a system setup and we'll begin.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Hi Geoff

I set up a place on TuneLand for you to jump in and give your side of the story http://tuneland.techno-zone.net/t217p30-stereophile-forum#4161 . I'm happy to look at this from whatever angle you wish as long as there is listening involved. Talk would be meaningless without the listening to back it up wouldn't you agree? After all the people out there reading this have audio systems. I'm happy to post any of your explanations and as you can see on the thread have already given a wide range of definitions and you can add as many more as you wish. I will of course be taking the approach of the audio signal being variably tunable. And I do want you to know I have no desire to put words in your month.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Looks like we will probably have to agree to disagree, Michael. I respectfully decline your kind invitation to join you at TuneLand.

Cheers,
Geoff Kait
Machina Dramitca

Well the invitation stands any time you wish to talk to people who prefer to use vibrations instead of killing them.

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Michael, I just had a brainstorm. Since you apparently like vibration, why not import some more vibration? Then you would have even more to tune, no?

"No matter how much you have in the end you would have had even more if you had started out with more in the beginning." Old audiophile saying

"The only good vibration is a dead vibration." Another old audiophile saying

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dramatica

An audio signal is an electromagnetic wave only within the audio system. Once it reaches the transducers it becomes a variable air pressurization (or vibration).

Of course, unless you stick the speaker cables directly into your ears, which keeps the music in the electromagnetic realm right to your brain.

Well, yeah, the acoustic waves are mechanical waves, I used to have some Room Tunes Corner Tunes Echo Tunes to deal with some of those type of "audio signals." But let's be real for a second. Most people think of the electrical audio signal when you say audio signal, no? As Michael stated earlier, in his inimitable style,

"I tune things from the earths foundation to the ear, every step of the way, look at the forum and see for yourself." So, apparently he is referring to the electrical audio signal as well as the acoustic waves for his tuning. He refers to the audio signal as vibration, which would be true in the case of acoustic waves. But in the case of the electrical audio signal, the electromagnetic wave, moving at close to the speed of light in a conductor, it is composed of photons - which have no mass - unless you are overreaching it cannot be considered vibration, which among other things, is characterized by mass, no?

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

geoffkait wrote:

But in the case of the electrical audio signal, the electromagnetic wave, moving at close to the speed of light in a conductor, it is composed of photons

Are you serious?

Since the wave propagation speed in wire is less than speed of light not photons but a wave that has some similarity to photons (acting as a wave). An electromagnetic wave in a vacuum would be made of photons.

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica

The entire audio chain is variable and highly tunable. Geoff, instead of you going off in some world of protonisms. Stop a minute and realize that we all have studied this, and as some may state it one way or the other, the great news is we can tune our systems. We no longer have to sit there and play the plug and play game. Can't you be happy for that? Just cool the jets a moment and lets all get back on the same team. The signal is tunable no? And with it being tunable that means something is able to be tuned. If you want to say electromagnetic waves are tunable I could care less, and the next guy can say it's because the signal is running through mechanical conduits and that's fine too. I don't really care how someone wants to state it, the truth is this should be a variable hobby and not a fixed one. I changed my system 5 different ways today all through tuning the electrical signal, now you can come up with the whys however you want. There's nothing to prove here. There's only people sitting listening to music who would like to be able to make their systems more flexible. Is there anything wrong with this?

michael green
MGA/RoomTune

Michael, Protonisms? Huh? I was was referring to photons not protons. If you wish to cast aspersions at least use the right word. As long as you dismiss damping of the transformer, damping of the printed circuit boards and isolating the components from structural vibration, you will operating at a disadvantage to the more advanced audiophiles who grasped the significance of the landmark Virbraplane back in 1996. Good luck to you in your endeavors, "good tuning" as I imagne you guys would say. I'm out.

Geoff Kait,
Machina Dynamica

So if the wave in a conductor is not based on photons (but on a change in the energy of electrons in the outer layers of atoms), and the wave velocity is totally unrelated to the electrons' velocity, and the electrons do have a mass (and usually vibrate, even in the absence of an electromagnetic field), what is left of your theory on the impossibility of vibrations in electronic circuits?
And BTW, how come a massless particle cannot vibrate, i.e. regularly change it's position with a specific frequency?

Kind of strange ideas for a former NASA specialist (just hope it didn't misread and it wasn't NSA)!

In a wave there is no particle. So it makes no sense to say the particle changes position. Back to the drawing boards.

Cheers,

Geoff Kait
Machina Dynamica