|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.181.190.237
When I first read about the introduction of the Synergistic Research Tranquility Base at the last CES, I was somewhat skeptical that a platform could condition a computer by simply placing it on the platform. But having previously been impressed with Ted Denney’s creations while visiting his factory, I was more than willing to give this platform an audition.The Synergistic Research Tranquility Base allows one to place active components on the base for active signal conditioning within the component. First developed for computer conditioning, it has proved to be equally successful with other audio components. I will be focusing my review solely on the Tranquility Base used with my Early 2011 MacBook Pro. My MacBook Pro is a 2.3GHz i7 Quad Core with 16 GB RAM and an OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SATA 3 drive for the operating system. The Music library is on a Promise Pegasus 4TB Thunderbolt drive. The DAC used for the review is a Wavelength Crimson HS with Denominator module and Silver transformers. The excellent Pure Music 1.86 with OSX Lion was used in both listening sessions.
The Tranquility Base is beautifully finished with Aluminum sides and Plexiglas top and bottom. The base has a 9 layer laminate for mechanical isolation, a Ground plane, and Active Signal Control. The Base comes with 6 MIGs (Mechanical Interface Grounding) footers. 3 are placed beneath the base, and 3 beneath the component. They can be tuned depending if they are placed up or down. The Base has a Ground Wire that plugs into the base and the other end into the AC. The Base is powered by an MPC (Mini Power Coupler) that is plugged into your AC. There are 2 Enigma Bullets provided for fine tuning the sound. In summary, there are 3 connections to the Base; the Ground, MPC, and the Enigma Bullet.
One should experiment with the MIGs and Enigma Bullets for optimum sound. I found this process easy with minimal effort. The MPC provided can be upgraded to the Galileo Mini Power Coupler for an additional $400. This provides enhancement in sound staging, definition, noise reduction, with greater clarity than the standard MPC provides. I used both MPC units and felt that the Galileo was a significant upgrade.
There are three models of the Tranquility Base. There is a Basik model for $998, The Tranquility Base I purchased for $1998, and a larger XL model for $2998. Ted recommends that the computer and hard drive be placed on the Base. His advertising shows a Mac Mini and a Western Digital HD sitting on a Tranquility Basik.
The 1st day listening session:The first title I played was Carl Kidd Tell Me Once Again. A Linn 192/24 recording that features Carol Kidd’s singing with a guitarist. The most obvious change to the sound with the Tranquility Base powered on was a larger soundstage. The soundstage was not exaggerated, but wider, deeper with greater sense of height. Carol’s voice was projected forward into the room. Turning off the Base resulted in a significant collapse of the acoustic space with Carol’s voice and the guitar now sounding somewhat two-dimensional. The background was darker with the Base energized.
I then played Patricia Barber Modern Cool MFSL SACD rip 176.4/24. The soundstage became very holographic in presentation with a slight reduction in hardness of the piano with the Base. Voices were projected into the room with a greater sense of ease and dimensionality. Instruments and voices were better defined with the Base.
Fourplay 96/24 and Fouplay Energy SACD rip 176.4/24 displayed stronger, better defined dynamic bass with greater slam with the Base. As with the other two titles, the soundstage opened up considerably. Also, the midrange and high end were smoother with superior resolution when listening with the Base.
Don Grusin The Hang, a 96/24 DVD-A rip was “energized” by the Tranquility Base. This live recording’s acoustic space opened up with the Base and provided better high end detail with increased smoothness in the sound. The dynamics with the Base were quite astounding.
The Reference Recording 176.4/24 HRx Exotic Dances from the Opera with Eije Oue sounded more open and alive with the Base. The Base not only provided a huge soundstage, but instruments within the soundstage were more easily identified particularly front-to-back perspective. It also appeared that background noise was reduced by the Base.
The 2nd day listening session:
I invited two friends, both hard core computer audiophiles that own fine systems. I enlisted them for the “blind testing”; not telling them when the Base was on or off. We listened to a variety of music - James Taylor, Dave Alvin, Alison Krauss, Stevie Wonder all ripped SACDs at 176.4/24. Several Reference Recordings HRx titles 176.4/24, and several HDtracks titles 192/24 including Fleetwood Mac and Cat Stevens were also listened to.
The boys had no problems identifying the Base every time. It is really a night and day difference. Both easily heard the soundstage changes with the Base. Dr. Bob felt that the midrange definition was vastly improved. Both of my friends heard the same things that I had heard the previous day.
The Synergistic Research Tranquility Base has been a real eye opener for this audiophile. The improvement that the Base delivers is substantial and easily heard. The Tranquility Base allows one’s DAC to fully realize it’s potential. I don’t feel that the Base will turn a $200 DAC into a $20,000 DAC, but the Tranquility Base will get the best out of your present DAC. The Wavelength Crimson HS/ Denominator puts out one of the finest soundstages in the business. I was amazed at how much better the soundstage sounded with the Base. Bass had more impact and was more dynamic in presentation. The noise level dropped with enhanced “black” background. Highs and midrange were not only more detailed and transparent, but smoother sounding. The Tranquility Base delivers the goods promised by Synergistic Research.
After a great deal of consultation with Lucy, she has decided to award this product her highest rating of Four Paws Up.
Thanks to Peter Hansen, the National Sales and Marketing Director at Synergistic Research, for delivering the Tranquility Base and showing me the fine points of setup. I have no financial relationship with Synergistic Research. My Tranquility Base was purchased from The Cable Company.
Steve
Edits: 03/23/12 03/23/12Follow Ups:
Discussions like this go on all over the net...I just participated in one about the schiit bifrost DAC, where the majority praised the device and a handful of dissenters voiced their opinions and some even returned their items after auditioning. At least schiit audio has a 15-day policy to exercise a return option. Something tells me that would not be the case with the Synergistic product. Inquiring minds would be lining up to try to see if the Synergistic base lived up to the manufacturer's and owners' claims. I personally bought and enjoy my schiit bifrost, but even if I could afford the base, I'd shy away, too skeptical. Give me a Thorens with a decent cart, a computer that upsamples to 24/192 and a handful of lossless files and I'm perfectly happy without the thousands spent on a justifiably questionable tweak.
Freedom is the right to discipline yourself.
You can borrow loaners from dealers and on-line dealers like the Cable Co.
This product is so unique, I'm sure much will be written on it in the future.
.
Posted by Mercman (A) on March 20, 2012 at 13:21:18
"Actually, I don't get into most audiophile tweaks. Things might sound different, but usually not better."
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
It was meant to be sarcasm! Jeez, you are some ball breaker!
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
NICE TEETH!!!
Dude...I want to see measurements in millimeters of the width and height of your soundstage both before and after the Tranquility Base.
Why haven't you yet posted the THD before and after levels, and the micro-harmonic spectral decay plot?
Noticeably absent are the specs of the 6 different sets of speakers, amps, and DACs that you've tried, as well the 6 different rooms/homes that you've tried it in.
We appreciate the photos that you took of your Macbook, - but where are the shots of the interior of this base?
You mentioned Lucy, but where are the cats?
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
Edits: 03/26/12
Lucy and I will try harder next time.
Sorry.
SR will be coming out with the new MK2 SE version soon so hurry up and buy the MK1 so the 2 can be released. The MK2 SE will give a wider/bigger/taller/deeper sound but if you really want an even larger sound stage just wait till MK3 SE AN comes out. If having a 3 story house and the system is on the 1st floor playing one can go to the 3rd floor BR and have a Sax player playing there in the room. This can only happen with MK3 SE AN so stay tuned.
Steve,You mentioned that Lucy gave the Tranquility Base a "four paws" review. The ultimate test would be to place Lucy on that Tranquility Base, to see if her soundstage might increase to that of a Great Dane. :)
Edits: 03/25/12
.
I've racked my brain to think of a reason why this thing would have such a dramatic effect on a laptop. The only possible reason is that it affects the data stream i.e. it affects the amount of jitter but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense since the DAC you have is supposed to be unaffected by computer jitter.
So the next logical question is it really affecting the computer?
.
The laptop is acutally suspended by 3 MIG feet. I believe the Base eminates an electronic (electromagentic) field that is canceling electronic noise in the computer. The Base is probably having an effect on components sitting near it as well. I have no idea what the "documented size" of this radiated field is.
Edits: 03/25/12 03/25/12
nt
Probably DC current flowing through the plates, assuming that the product uses the patented "technology". From what Mercman indicated the "enigma tuning plugs" seem to be various resistors corresponding to reference numeral 39 in figure 6 of the patent.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Many people have documented changes and improvements in sound with crystals of various types, below or above their gear.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Thanks for the review Merc. Good to have someone with the equipment "take one for the team" whether it be good or bad.
I do have concerns however and I think that much was well described by Dynobot who obviously researched your past reviews. In reading the review, I could not help but get a feeling that this sounds like a contrived press release! I work in health care and come across scientific "research" quite often where you know that some of the stuff was written by the manufacturer rather than an independent agent. That's the kind of feeling I get here. Doesn't really help when you've visited the manufacturer and they sent someone over to help set it up for you... That would definitely have major impact on one's opinion which should really be just about this piece of metal you bought for $2K. Also doesn't help that we still have no idea what this thing is supposed to be doing (I thought I saw someone from Synergistic posting here but they have not bothered to clarify anything)!?
Look, I may be off base but just putting my thoughts out on this.
BTW: In what way was the following "easy"?
"One should experiment with the MIGs and Enigma Bullets for optimum sound. I found this process easy with minimal effort."
What were you listening for? You got a number of variables here with these "Bullets" and whatnot so I don't quite understand.
Also, for this blind testing with friends, was it an instantaneous change with in on/off?
Was there NOTHING you disliked about this thing? It concerns me that these tweaks almost always improves but never deteriorates the sound... For example, if this thing was doing something, could you also find combinations of the bullets and MIG's where you hear deterioration in the audio? What about putting the computer beside the unit and detecting noise or something...
Let me try to address all of your questions Archimago.First the MIGS and Bullets:
My computer uses a solid state drive. I didn't hear any difference using the MIGS in either of the 2 recommended positions. A component that is sensitive to vibration would have been another matter. As for the Bullets; one tends to be warm and full sounding, the other airy and more defined. The differences weren't all that great between the two. I went for the airy defined sound. This didn't take very long to determine my preference. Perhaps the process would have been more involved if I was placing a DAC or preamp on the Base.
My Relationship With Synergistic:
I ordered the Base from the Cable Co as the local dealer no longer carried Synergistic. I have met Ted Denney in the past and visited the factory. It's only about 1.5 hour drive from my home. I have their cables, but use a Shunyata Power Conditioner, so I'm not a 100% Synergistic guy. After Ted saw my initial post about the Tranquility Base, he offered to have his VP deliver and set up the Base since I live about 1 hour from his VP. I said sure. Ted knew I had purchased the Base from a dealer in PA; I have done business with the Cable Co in the past. He was trying to be nice to me and I appreciated it. But I'm not an important industry guy. Just another inmate. Synergistic is a small CA company that does try to be responsive to their customers.
The Blind Test:
The Blind Test was pretty much a joke. When the Base is on, it is so obvious that you would need to have a hearing impediment not to be able to pick it out. I turned it on and off for the boys and they immediately knew when it was on. And yes, it is easy to turn on and off instantaneously by pulling the Bullet out that is necessary to complete the active circuit. At the same time the ground can be pulled as well.
Was There Anything I Didn't Like About The Tranquility Base:
When I was going to write my review, I was going to ask 2 questions:
1. Does it make an obvious difference?
2. Is the difference a positive one?About 3 years ago I heard the Syngergistic PowerCell Conditioner in my system and didn't like it. I thought it was too much of a good thing if you know what I mean. ( Their new PowerCell 10 SE MK III is a much different device today and I haven't heard it). I was afraid that the Tranquility Base perhaps would increase the size of the presentation at the expense of definition.
The fact is that it doesn't do anything "negative" that I can hear. I listened for 3 hours today and just loved the damn thing. As for other tests, well I haven't had it all that long. Although I am darn sure that I want to keep it. Turning it off is a drag.
My feeling about the purchase was this. If I didn't like it, I could return it. It really wasn't that big a deal. Naturally, having a local dealer is the way to go.
My Review Sounded Like A Contrived Press Release:
No matter how I write things for this forum, I get shit one way or another. Too positive, not enough detail, too much detail, etc. I only spent about 30 minutes writing this piece. Once I have tested the component to my satisfaction, it goes pretty quickly for me. If I were publishing something, believe me, it would read much differently.
Look at all of the fuss over my stating that the soundstage was bigger. I would have written a treatise on soundstage if I had known this was going to be an issue. I think I explained myself pretty well on this soundstage thing with my replies to Dynobot.
I purposely did not write about the Base being used with other types of components as it would no longer be pertinent to this forum. That's for another time and another place.
In closing, the Synergistic Research Tranquility Base is an active power conditioner for a component. It also has the ability to deal with vibration issues. The big difference about this conditioner is that it works by simply placing the computer, DAC, etc. on the Base.
Remember guys, I'm just another inmate sharing my experiences with you. I don't sell audio or get special deals on the equipment, although that would be a nice thing :)
I hope in the end we are having some fun and enjoying the music.
Steve
Edits: 03/24/12 03/24/12 03/25/12
Merc -- thanks for the write up. WRT all the comments, all you can do is shrug. Sometimes, there's just no winning.
WRT to the Tranquility Base, I think the only thing that's completely clear with the product is that it certainly has a great name. Wish I had some idea of what it did or how or why it might be appropriate or effective. The product sheets online were somewhat less than helpful or clear.
-------
Find me at: http://parttimeaudiophile.com
"I hope in the end we are having some fun and enjoying the music"
Steve,
Now you are asking for too much. :)
Some here take this much too serious!
I do really appreciate your info, it helps those with an open mind enjoy the hobby. IMO (most) of the people here are sincere when they post and try to inform.
I do find it a bit comical that an individual that is so insistent on knowing how it works, would probably never buy one in a million years anyway.
Bob
"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." A.E.
"I do find it a bit comical that an individual that is so insistent on knowing how it works, would probably never buy one in a million years anyway."
Why would you say that? I generally find that those who are inquisitive enough to attempt understanding of a topic become major advocates when curiosity is satisfied.
"Why would you say that? I generally find that those who are inquisitive enough to attempt understanding of a topic become major advocates when curiosity is satisfied."
You are speaking about the sane members...
"The Blind Test was pretty much a joke. When the Base is on, it is so obvious that you would need to have a hearing impediment not to be able to pick it out."
Have you done any double blind tests? I ask this not to doubt that you hear something, but rather because of your remark. It's been my personal experience that differences that "obviously" require a "hearing test" often become inaudible as soon as one partakes of a blind test. I remember some blind tests conducted by Brad Meyer in which everything sounded the same and as the test continued everything started to sound like s****.
As to others hearing the same thing, this is what one would expect from guests in one's home. I've equivocated on more than one occasion during an audio demonstration when I was a guest. There are at least two good psychological reasons for this. People avoid conflict. People also are unwilling to admit that they aren't hearing something that others are reporting.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I like this statement Tony:
"Have you done any double blind tests? I ask this not to doubt that you hear something, but rather because of your remark. It's been my personal experience that differences that "obviously" require a "hearing test" often become inaudible as soon as one partakes of a blind test. I remember some blind tests conducted by Brad Meyer in which everything sounded the same and as the test continued everything started to sound like s****."
Over the years, I've observed that there are some folks among my circle of audiophile friends who are reliable in their auditory perception and those who aren't when it comes to hearing differences. When the reliable ones say they hear an obvious difference, it usually pans out in the blind tests. These are the folks I'm most impressed by and pay close attention to their observations.
I've often wondered if psychological tests can be used to separate these people; for example, if tests of impressionability or suggestibility could be useful here. I love the technology which satisfies the geeky side of me, and of course really enjoy the music. It's the people one often meets whether on boards like this or locally that I find just fascinating though :-)
Even if I did double blind testing it still wouldn't be totally accepted here. If I had ten guys listening with me it would make no difference. If you really want to get down to brass tacks, how do you know the reviewer even has the product under discussion?There are only so many terms one can use to describe an acoustic (musical) event. One uses the same terminolgy for consistency and communication. Take this soundstage business. Some of these fellows believe that the soundstage can't keep improving or the bass or highs, etc. And how does one describe something like a soundstage? If I were writing for say Stereophile, I guess I would talk about layers of front-to-back dpeth, height, extension beyond the lateral border of the speaker, or the geometric shape of the stage. Is it as wide at the back of the hall as the front? These terms are relative to the equipment we are using at the time. Things do improve, but you would never know it reading some of the statements presented here.
"By now it must sound like Orchetra Hall"
At times I believe fmak has the right idea. Just say it sounds good and screw the rest.
What I find most obnoxious is the proclmation by some that the only reason the reviewer likes the product is because it has a fancy case, or it was expensive, or it is some expectation bias.
"Honestly I think its just the 'New' wow effect"
These are the people I don't find fascinating in this forum or the real world. But trust me when I say that I understand their motivation.
Edits: 03/25/12 03/25/12 03/25/12
there's never going to be an adequate test or evaluation. Because it exists, it does not work.
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
''the only reason the reviewer likes the product is because it has a fancy case, or it was expensive, or it is some expectation bias''
and influence by certain vendors.
And when fmak states an opinion ( a rare event ) he speaks from the heart :)
''the only reason the reviewer likes the product is because it has a fancy case, or it was expensive, or it is some expectation bias''
and influence by certain vendors.
Couldn't agree more.
Along those lines inmates interested in various aspects of psychology (perception, decision making, etc...) may find the book linked below an interesting (but lengthy) read. The author is a Nobel lariat in economics.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
But this isn't a psychology forum. You really don't know what the reviewer's true motivation is. All you can do is accept things on face value and compare his experiences with your own.
That's assuming that one has experiences :)
It isn't necessarily a matter of intention. It's a matter of perception and if one wants to be serious about understanding what one is hearing it is necessary to study what is known about how the human mind works. The mind does a good job of keeping most people alive most of the time, at least until they can reproduce and raise their children, but this includes making snap judgments that don't necessarily stand up in the light of careful investigation.
Any audio engineer who isn't a liar will admit that he has "optomized" the equalization on a recording by careful tweaking of the controls and noticed a large improvement in sound, only to discover after the fact the the component had been inadvertently "bypassed" and all of his knob tweaking had no effect other than as a placebo. No intentions here, just faulty perception. Sometimes it works the other way. I made a change in 16 bit dithering due to cockpit error on my part but didn't hear any change from the day before because I was convinced there were none. That was until my friend who didn't know that "nothing" had changed remarked on the difference. After listening again I noticed what I had missed and verified that indeed the sound had changed. (This comes under the rubic of a "triple blind" experiment where the experimenter didn't even know he was conducting an experiment.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"As to others hearing the same thing, this is what one would expect from guests in one's home. I've equivocated on more than one occasion during an audio demonstration when I was a guest. There are at least two good psychological reasons for this. People avoid conflict. People also are unwilling to admit that they aren't hearing something that others are reporting."
Do you think that this might depend of the familiarity of the individuals in the group? People who know each other well might be more forthcoming than relative strangers. One's good friends will usually tell you if you are nuts!
a
Passing a blind test would be valid evidence that the Base did something significant to the sound. Failing a blind test would prove noting about the Base. As failure is what I expect to happen, proving something about the Base was not why I suggested that Mercman do a test.
Why did I suggest that Mercman do a "useless" blind test? Simple. It was so he could experience first hand the mental "clash" that comes when the "obvious" doesn't prove to be quite so obvious. An audiophile Zen Koan.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Mind you I don't resent participating in double blind comparisons of products with extended listening to a limited number. I totally reject the 30 seconds exposure and saying same or different. I must say that in the few where I participated in ratings, there was little agreement. I once tried a Bozak preamp as it had the highest average rating. It was returned the next day.
It used to be amusing to listen to Bass-Nut rant and rave about speaker cables on Prop-Head. I found the blind tests that I did personally to be fatiguing because the effects were close to the noise level in the equipment, the room, my ears, my mind or whatever.
The 30 second tests tell you only some of the story, but the skeptics and deniers will tell you that's all there "scientifically" is. The real scientists know better.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I think about all the things I have tried over the years that were supposed to improve the sound of my system. One "tweak" that I could never hear a difference with was the Shakti Stone. I placed that son-of-a-bitch on every component and the result was nada. Fortunately it was easy to unload. ( a pun?)
The Tranquility Base is no Shakti Stone.
Well, Lucy and I are keeping the Tranquility Base. And no, I won't loan it out :).
Are you kidding me? Blind tests are the highest level of evidence of a *difference* in sound characteristic.
Whether that "quality" is an improvement is another issue.
Evidence of WHAT are they (audio blind tests), exactly?
That one particular person, with UNIQUE properties of an ear/brain combination, listening to UNIQUE sound system in UNIQUE listening space, can - or can not - hear certain differences?
What is the value of that, exactly? Whose brilliant idea is that you can extrapolate those unique results to reach conclusions about ANYTHING other than that particular person and that particular system?
In your own words - are you kidding me?
In most studies people cannot tell any difference and scholars who use it wrongfully accept the null hypothesis that there is no difference. Unfortunately, logic disallows acceptance of a hypothesis. Research can only reject a hypothesis thus we seek to reject a null hypothesis.
So the measure is invalid or not isomorphic to the variable we seek to assess and the research findings are illogical. Other than that everything is hunky dory.
Sorry, disagree. Have no idea what your wordsmithing is about. What do you mean isomorphic measure? How does research not be valid when it is out of research and engineering that you're listening to good sounding equipment these days?
As for "many" thinking it's invalid, who are these "many" you're referring to?
Please show me a well written peer reviewed article arguing that blind listening tests are flawed... Until then your comments appear to be pure obfuscation.
Sorry, I'm not going to spend much time with your questions. If double blind tests use the typical 30 seconds same/different format and accept the null hypothesis as illogically true, there is no peered reviewed journal that will accept them other than the one set up by these researchers as they could get nothing published in other psychology journals.
You ask, "How does research not be valid when it is out of research and engineering that you're listening to good sounding equipment these days?" I have no idea what this confused statement means or what it has to do with double blind testing, which as far as I know has never resulted in any audio designs.
Mind you, I have no concern with your valuing double-blinded tests. I just deny that they have any general value whatsoever.
"You ask, "How does research not be valid when it is out of research and engineering that you're listening to good sounding equipment these days?" I have no idea what this confused statement means or what it has to do with double blind testing, which as far as I know has never resulted in any audio designs."
You do realize massive hours of testing (including blinded trials) went into the design and selection of PCM and bit-rates related to the CD technology in the early 80's right? Some of the most respected firms like Weiss regularly uses blinded testing to validate designs as well.
Show me some reasonable publication which states that double blind testing is invalid. Here's IMO a nice one from back in 1981 on parameters for "meaningful subjective tests". I don't see any major problems with their rationale, including item 4:
http://community.klipsch.com/forums/storage/3/505785/subjective-debate.PDF
There is nothing wrong with blind or double blind tests where the question is whether you hear one sounding better. Since the null hypothesis is that there are no differences, you are rejecting the null hypothesis. In the choice of a 44.1 kHz in the research you mention entails hearing no difference between this rate and the music. It might have satisfied the Sony and Phillips engineers and allowed this rate to go forward, but any exception to hear no difference at any time, proves they were wrong.
Also if the variable assessed is not widely accepted as validly capturing that of interest, no amount of use of this measure gets researchers anywhere in proving their point.
It amazes me that audiophiles want DBTesting and would value it. I would be totally unresponsive to a conclusion that cables don't differ using DBTs with a 30 sec. exposure to sound and having to make the same/different choice.
"You do realize massive hours of testing (including blinded trials) went into the design and selection of PCM and bit-rates related to the CD technology in the early 80's right?"
And look where it got us: initially mediocre sound and the deterioration of the audio industry as mediocre sound removed hope for excellence and directed all the action to portability and convenience. Once mediocrity was accepted as the norm, it was only a small step to sub-mediocrity, with the introduction of lossy CODECs developed according to psychoacoustic principles and "validated" by double blind tests. Here we have the situation where the father of is technology publically admits that he doesn't personally use it and recommends its use only where absolutely essential. (Today that would means streaming audio via radio links or wired links in areas with sub-par Internet access where people are paying little or nothing for what amounts to background music.)
Norm is absolutely correct in his remarks about accepting the null hypothesis. There is nothing to debate on this point between someone who understands this and someone who does not.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Uh huh... "There is nothing to debate on this point between someone who understands this and someone who does not." So that's it then eh?Like I said, please show me a well articulate piece of work explaining this issue as to why DBT's are invalid. I've been looking...
As for the part about mediocrity in music. I disagree that Sony and Philips were somehow content with mediocrity - I applauded the arrival of CD and still do. They did what could be done in the early 80's and 30 years later, I still think they did a damn good job with essentially no scientifically verifiable evidence to show otherwise!
As you know, there are astounding modern recordings in jazz and classical music (not to mention amazing CD reissues of older analog recordings) which I doubt can be bettered by anything in analogue land. Some of the Analogue Productions or MFSL CD releases are the definitive versions to own. Heck, even the 2009 Beatles remasters (especially 24/44 USB release) sounds at least the equal if not better than the old vinyl IMO (I know this is controversial among the vinyl-lovers). From what I see, their engineering results have been phenomenal.
The loudness wars and deterioration in modern (especially pop/rock) releases has nothing to do with what CD/digital technology is capable of (as I'm sure you also know, Tony). That's IMO more a reflection of deterioration in societal standards than a technological issue and as you put it a preference of convenience over quality.
As for lossy CODEC's, here again is a compromise. But as I have opined here before, I know of nobody who has complained about a lack of enjoyment in an very well encoded MP3 (say LAME 3.9x @ CBR320 or -V0 VBR) complaining until they were informed that this was what they were listening to all along; at least compared to the original digital information from which it was derived.
Edits: 03/26/12 03/26/12
DBTs can be valid when they produce a result, i.e. when they reject the null hypothesis. They are not valid when they do not produce a result, i.e. when they fail to reject the null hypothesis. See the link below and/or read some books or take a course on statistics, epistemology, principles of science, etc.
As to MP3s, I can not stand to listen to MP3s, but I will go so far as to admit that 320 MP3s are adequate for voice, background music, or for a quick assessment of some aspects of a musical performance. AAC is a slightly better encoding, but this primarily appears as a lower bit rate for the same quality.
From the very first, it was obvious to me that CDs were "wrong" and the best that can be said about them is that there are now some recordings that are excellent, but none that I would consider sonically outstanding. I prefer to listen to high res digital transfers of old analog master tapes than DDD digital at 44/16. The best sound today is found in high res digital at the original sample rate and it is somewhat better than transfers of analog master tapes because some of the characteristic tape distortions are missing. My sonic standard is live concerts of acoustic music. My sonic standard for reproduced music is a live microphone feed, as can be heard at a recording studio or broadcast station. I have done enough sample rate and format conversions using the best available tools to be able to appreciate the differences intrinsic to the format from those that come from the production process.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Tony, well, I guess this is where the discussion of DBT's specifically and perhaps subjectivism vs. objectivism generally end...
I believe I understand what you're trying to say about the null hypothesis and Norm's use of the term isomorphic. I approach audio pragmatically and in situations where DBT can't prove a difference, I'm quite satisfied that MOST LIKELY there is no difference and await the next experiment to show otherwise.
I don't think this is unreasonable, it has been 30+ years with the CD! All we seem to see are reports like Meyer & Moran (2007). I think there are sporadic reports on Hydrogen Audio that stuff like high bit-rate MP3's can be ABX'ed but generally this is for stuff like castanets rather than real music. Other paradigms like audio differencing has not been able to add anything more.
I have never seen experiments of hi-res digital being differentiable from 16/44 in music or vs. mic feeds in controlled settings. As such, I'm not sure how you can say CD's as a whole sound "wrong". Sure, there were some really bad CD's back in the old days on equipment that were not fully 16-bit capable, mixing/digital manipulation done in low precision, suboptimal resampling algorithms, etc... I bet some people got pissed off at CD's for missing pre-emphasis flags that sounded thin and brittle (I ran into this the other day with a first press 1984 Howard Jones "Human's Lib" - once you de-emphasize properly, it sounds quite good). Of course things are no better these days with crappy over compressed loud recordings and every pop tune sounds artificial and Auto-Tuned(TM). These IMO are not issues with the core technology.
Oh well... I think that's all I gotta say. Time to put on a recently acquired Zinman/Tonhalle Mahler No. 2 for the evening. I promise not to engage in any more discussion on DBT/ABX for the rest of this year :-)
The BBC got the nation to spend enormous sums of money to go to DAB digital radio which was 'an improvement' on FM. Now, ten years later, they have had to abandon DAB for a new system because the thing sounds so bad!
Fortunately, the new government did not get taken in by the digital gurus and have declined to cut off FM transmissions.
This is a very good demonstration of the effect of lobbying by various vesterd interest groups.
Thanks Merc. Appreciate the detailed response. lookin fwd to reviews as they come in...
Thanks...
> > RE: core2duo or i5 ?
Posted by Mercman (A) on October 2, 2010 at 09:13:48
8GB RAM would make a noticeable improvement in sound quality. The soundstage opens up.
> > > The Ridge Street Audio Enopias USB Cable
Posted by Mercman (A) on May 18, 2009 at 07:36:16
This cable goes beyond the Alethias in soundstage width and depth. In this regards, it is amazing. The new BSO 88.2/24 recordings while good with the Alethias, now have a soundstage size that greatly enhances the listening experience.
> > > Wavelength Audio Crimson with 96/24 DAC Module
Posted by Mercman (A) on September 16, 2008 at 07:50:12
The Crimson is the bigger, richer sounding DAC with a larger soundstage- especially front to back.
> > > Comparison For Tony
Posted by Mercman (A) on December 18, 2011 at 07:28:34
The HRx is much bigger sounding in soundstage with better defintion of the strings, etc.
> > > Amarra 2.0 Final Version
Posted by Mercman (A) on July 16, 2010 at 07:36:27
Pure Music has a wider and deeper soundstage and a bit less brightness to the sound.
> > > RE: Perhaps I am a dunderhead for not trying Pure Music in the memory mode until tonight, but wow!
Posted by Mercman (A) on August 19, 2010 at 06:05:58
Soundstage size is the the most obvious.
I could go on and on and on, but I think it is clear that with every review you make the exact same comments about "what ever" product you review...that is, it make the soundstage bigger than before.
Over the years the "Soundstage" has just gotten bigger and Bigger and BIGGER!!! Just how BIG is your soundstage now???
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
"Over the years the "Soundstage" has just gotten bigger and Bigger and BIGGER!!! Just how BIG is your soundstage now???"
In some cases, a sound stage can be larger than life. You may find this on the studio recordings I made of my wife if you play them back on a system with widely spaced speakers, i.e. in a large room with the speakers much further apart than the size of the original instrument (7 foot Steinway grand).
If one wants to experience this sonic aberration it helps to have a very high end system... :-)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Then you can count me out.
I'm upper mid-fi at best.
I understand how the room can seriously put limits on the overall sound. My room now is abysmally small compared to what I had a few years ago. Needless to say no matter what I change in my system the soundstage does not keep increasing.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Sorry, my comment was sarcastic. When the recordings were played in the room where they were made (on large Snells) they were life size and essentially indistinguishable from a live performance in the room. So the "high end" system with bloated sound stage didn't cut it on this particular recording. ($5000 speakers and $1500 amplifier in 1990 dollars don't count as what I would call "high end".)
When one sits in an actual concert hall one will not hear anything approaching an audiophile's idea of an orchestral soundstage unless one is sitting in the front row. From my experience the sound is much nicer back about row 20, although the first time I heard "imaging" live it was quite interesting.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
> > When one sits in an actual concert hall one will not hear
> > anything approaching an audiophile's idea of an orchestral
> > soundstage...
Audiophiles frequently pay great homage to the idea of reproducing the live event, but often get wrapped up in chasing after details that have no live counterpart to imitate. At times, it almost seems comparable to a Walt Disney view of nature as seen in an animated film. Bambi and his mother are there in great detail and quite engaging, but no one should pretend they are viewing an honest portrait of real nature.
Yes it would behoove every "Audiophile" to attend Live performances as much as possible in order to 1) Apprecitate true artistry 2) Get out of the house and enjoy an event with others 3) Support artists who play out of a passion for the art 4) To keep in mind what a true musical tone/space/attack/emotion sounds like in order to have a realistic point of reference.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
recordings...
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
When I use the "live" music reference, it inevitably refers to acoustic instruments and unamplified voice. I think a lot of others come from the same perspective. I believe it's a worthy goal to recreate the sense of real instruments and voices without the need for embellishment or a Kodachrome effect that's "more" than if I heard the musicians live.
I'd agree that wanting a home stereo, no matter how fancy, to replicate the experience of a pop/rock event through a giant mono PA system in some acoustically atrocious stadium is not something everyone is after, though I'm sure that approach has its fans. (And I say that without judgement as there is a lot of pop/rock music that I like.)
There is almost never a "live acoustic event."
And when there is, - it really does suck...
I was really horrified the first time that I went to the SF Opera house, - what a nightmare of wretched acoustics, poorly amplified voices, indiscreet microphones + amplification, poor orchestra sound, and incredibly noisy old women in the audience: would much rather have a mediocre CD recording any time.
I am sure that sometime, somewhere, there's a fairly decent, small, chamber orchestra, playing without too big of an audience, and without someone having a cold or a child with them...
Really, - there is really no such thing as "live, unamplified" music.
Unless one counts the "folk girls" who don't really play music, but strum two cords on a horrible sounding Yamaha acoustic guitar in a coffee house while reciting bad poetry?
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
Sorry you had such bad experiences with live up-amped music.
Try searching for local artists clubs, sometimes they have nice venues with artists coming in and performing in good acoustical spaces. FYI, all of these in my experience have been relatively smallish spaces.
Not to say that one is better than the other, but I have been to some crappy amped live performances.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
"Try searching for local artists clubs, sometimes they have nice venues with artists coming in and performing in good acoustical spaces. FYI, all of these in my experience have been relatively smallish spaces."
Often live is far from perfect. Many Jazz clubs have really poor acoustics. It is just lucky if you find a good sounding room. On the other hand IMO the music is the message, not the acoustics. I never thought about acoustics when listening to Bill Evans live...And I still don't when I listen on my system...
I can say that most times, - I am not focused on sound quality at live events: unless it is really bad. The acoustics at both Yoshi's jazz clubs in the Bay Area are bad, but the Oakland Yoshis is a little better.
My "pop-rock-music-combo" warmed up for Crowded House at the Berkeley Square back in the olden times, and we were astounded, = thinking that CH was miming to the record. But the sound system at the Berkeley Square was mono, and they had an excellent sound dude named Tumbleweed. I loved that guy...
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
Sure Jazz clubs/Bars etc do have poor acoustics.
But I was talking about something totally different. I found a couple of places that catered to "Artists" ie not clubs/bars etc. These groups were all about "Art" they held events for local artist for poetry, painting, music, etc. and the venues were very nice. Look for "Artists" groups not Jazz clubs/bars and dives.
I also found some smallish [seat 100 or so] places that have professional artsits. I saw Stanley Clark at one of these before.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
In the Boston area there are a number of nice halls where live music can be heard, some free as in Jordan Hall at the New England Conservatory as well as a smaller recital hall. For live Jazz there is the Regatta Bar in Cambridge, where I've heard a number of first stringers over the years. Here one has to put up with some noise from clinking classes, etc., but by purchasing reserved seats it was possible to get up close to the performers and get good sound. Symphony Hall is one of the finest halls for orchestral music in the world. One wants to sit in the first 20-30 rows on the floor, or in the front center rows of the first or second balcony for the best sound. Unfortunately these are the most expensive seats.I assume the situation is similar any many large metropolitan areas that have multiple universities.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Edits: 03/28/12
...with live music has been so poor.
I'd hate to be without my weekly dose of organ music at St. Louis Cathedral Basilica (Kilgen console with 118 ranks and 7,621 pipes) and the Cathedral Choir. I can guarantee there is no recorded substitute for that organ live - and it doesn't have a mike on it.
Or, the concerts at Powell Hall, widely accepted as on the list of the best symphony halls in the world.
Or at the much smaller Sheldon Hall which is a great venue for a chamber orchestra or jazz group (which may or may not have amplification - it's up to the artist).
In short, I have no problem finding places to listen to great sounding music live.
But, that's the nice thing about this hobby - different strokes for different folks. You can chase whatever strikes your fancy. Sounds like we're at different ends of that spectrum.
Not sarcastic at all....
I agree with your analogy of sound in spaces. Once upon a time I used to be able to experience a very nice huge soundstage. My speakers were about 12 feet apart and a good 4 feet from the side and back walls. It worked out pretty good as I recall.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
.
A couple of givens.....
... soundstage is easily manipulated by a recording engineer on multitrack recordings
... multitrack studio recordings where musicians aren't even in the same room and overdubs are used don't really have a true soundstage
... unless careful attention is paid to how it is recorded a live recording will have a distorted soundstage
... even live recordings can be manipulated to affect soundstage
So is bigger better or is the system you are listening to distorting the signal in some way like phase shifts at some frequencies to increase it? I have a Ginger Baker recording with Bill Frissel where the guitar is way outside the right speaker. If it shifts even further right is that better or a distortion?
Its like saying system A has more bass on a certain recording than system B so A is better then finding out system A has a serious bass boost at some frequencies.
I agree with Dynobot, if these increase have occurred as Mercman describes his soundstage would be bigger than his house by now. He is focusing way too much on something that really doesn't matter that much.
.
Which only means that 'realistically' it either can not be true.
-or-
His perception of soundstage decreases with time and a new 'anything' refreshess this perception of increased soundstage [which actually did not increase over the last implementation].
Because IF the soundstage actually increases one-over-the-other as new 'things' are put into the system THEN the sound would become unrealistic pretty quick.
-or-
His system started out with an EXTREMELY small soundstage and is just-now becoming to a realistic level....which I doubt.
This increased soundstage thing just does not add up.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Certainly, there are recordings that better capture the sound stage in the recording venue. I have personally experienced improvements in the precision of the location of musicians and vocalists in the sound stage as well as a greater sense of being involved in the sound stage. In my 10 by 13 by 8 foot listening room in New Mexico, I heard a jump to a much wider and higher sound stage on Diana Krall's Live in Paris with room treatment devices. This was most true on live recordings. Studio records vary greatly depending on microphone placements.
I attempted to explain to you that the soundstage concept is composed of multiple components. But I guess if you have never experienced a fine recording with a system that can reproduce the soundstage, I guess this concept is non-existant for you.Don't just pick on me, read the reviews of professional audio reviewers:
Significant Product Introduction — The Absolute Sound
Greatest Technological Breakthrough — The Absolute Sound
“About five seconds into the first A/B someone behind me who had come in during the middle of the demo whispered, “Holy —-!” My feelings exactly” The Absolute Sound’s Steven Stone on our new Tranquility Base
(with the) Tranquility Base sound was remarkably expansive and realistic, but with the Tranquility Bases removed low-level ambient cues and layered depth were reduced. A remarkable demo.” The Absolute Sound’s Jonathan Valin
Edits: 03/24/12 03/24/12 03/24/12 03/24/12
.
This is a discussion forum. If you don't want to have your findings questioned and discussed then I suggest you don't post them.
To reply to your quoted sources.... I have long found the audiophile press to be a bunch of arrogant snobs with questionable abilities. I can't remember the last time I looked at one of the magazines you quoted as I trust very little of what they say going back to the long dead Julian Hirsch. How old are those guys getting anyway? The founding "golden ears" of those rags must be pushing 70 or more. How well can they hear at that age?
Until I realized I needed to trust my own ears and those of a small circle of trusted friends I bought way too much crap based on glowing reviews in the audiophile press only to sell it once I found it wasn't as described.
Thank you for indulging my little rant
.
.
I have posted reviews here for the last 6 years. One has to have a thick skin to stick around that long.
If you ever get an opportunity to borrow a Base, I think you will be surprised at what it can do.
> > > > The founding "golden ears" of those rags must be pushing 70 or more. How well can they hear at that age?
The National Institute of Health says:
It is estimated that 30% of all people over 65 have significant hearing impairment.
About half of all people over age 75 have some amount of age-related hearing loss.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Okay I see you are sensative on the subject so I will drop it.
Thank you for your time and effort.
Rightfully I can not deny your perception because it is your own.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Your argument implies that the soundstage my system reproduces has not really changed over the years.What I thought was large in 2006, is not the same as my concept of large in 2012. Wilson Sasha speakers purchased several years ago changed the playing field. So did my new Wavelength Crimson HS/Denominator Silver DAC purchased last year. The new computer, new Pure Music, and on and on.
In 1960, I don't think that there were speakers that could reproduce the wonderful soundstage information on RCA Living Stereo Recordings made in 1958.
Am I getting through to you? Today I listened to a magnificent recording made in 1959. RCA Living Stereo SACD rip 176.4/24 Bolero. Listen to La Valse on my system and you will hear something very special in terms of soundstage. There are much better speakers, amps, etc. out there compared to what I own. I have heard much better than my little system.
Edits: 03/24/12
"In 1960, I don't think that there were speakers that could reproduce the wonderful soundstage information on RCA Living Stereo Recordings made in 1958.
There was a beautiful soundstage when playing these recordings (pre-recorded tape format) through a pair of KLH-6's driven by a Citation II in 1960-1961. Peter Moncrief and I used to haul our stuff into the large chapel at our school, a room that seated hundreds. Getting an equivalent effect in a normal living room didn't work with this equipment. Also, we didn't have stereo records in this era because these sounded terrible on the available equipment, hence the tapes.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Since this has improved your system so much, perhaps other gear with benefit from the device as well....
I read some other reviews and it seems the resounding impression is that it indeed increases the soundstage...one person even commented how the soundstage seemed to explode.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Most of my observations about soundstage are based on orchestral recordings. Please read my reply to Dynobot about the concept of soundstage.
Edits: 03/24/12
.
why
are 4 out of 5 of the discs listed in your review are not orchestral.
.
Another point:
If you came over to my house, I would play the Wilson Sashas for you. Then I would turn on the Wilson WatchDog Sub that comes in at around 32 HZ and you would hear an enlargement of the soundstage. I could then turn on the Tranquility Base and the soundstage would get wider and deeper and more layered.
.
... Is bigger better?
By manipulating the phase of different frequencies you give the brain different aural cues about the placement of instruments. For instance, the fake surround from home theater sound bars. Based on your criteria of bigger is better this fake surround is an enhancement.
In a properly set up stereo system a mono recording is directly in front of you. However if you delay the sound coming from one speaker, easily done by moving it further away, the sound seems to shift toward the closer speaker. If you delay the higher frequencies in one speaker and the lower in the other then the soundstage widens as those frequencies seem to come from closer to the non delayed speaker.
Just because it changes doesn't mean it is better. You obviously seek out that which increases the size of it but you really don't know if that is an accurate portrayal of the event or an electronic manipulation.
I enjoy the effect as much as anyone but in and of itself it is a poor indicator of the quality of the sound.
.
Maybe audiophile "large sound stage" phenomenon can be associated with phase distortion from non-transient perfect loudspeakers...
The famous "Q-sound" for getting "3D" effects is another example, based on an adaptation from binaural recording methods.
I have speakers here that I can switch from Acoustic LR4 to "phase corrected" LR4. In any case, I find that soundstage is very recording dependent and am very skeptical of generalization about sounstage dimensions.
Then again I listen to a lot of different kinds of recordings and not just "2-mic orchestral" stuff.
Cheers,
Presto
Where we are having problems communicationg is the term "bigger". When I referred to the soundstage being "bigger", I should have been more specific. This is my failing not being a professional reviewer.I should have used terms like increased front-to-back depth, more layered, etc. You are correct that simply bigger would be a distortion of the sound.
What I am really trying to say in my own pitiful way, is that the soundstage became more revealing.
Edits: 03/24/12
Does it seem to have more information within the soundstage?
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Placement of instruments / vocalists exist in the recording's acoustic space assuming it has this space to begin with. You can perceive acoustic space between them and front to back placement of instruments. Turn the Base off and this collapses into a more two dimensional acoustic space. There is less of this layering effect.
This seems to have been invented by Stereophile reviewers and it is not clear to me what it means.
There should be no differentiation between and amongst 'details'.
There are much better ways to describe the presentation of instruments, voices and high and low level sounds than this term.
To me Micro details = faint nuances in sound that would otherwise go unnoticed...taps of the feet, clear movements of hands on instruments as they play, artists inhaling while they sing or perhaps someone in tha back keeping pace with a drum stick or a bell etc. These things contribute to the overall 3D realism of the sound space imo.Macro details = overall presence of instruments within the soundstage. Increases in volume of only one instrument when takes the lead vs. just an overall loud presentation. Presence and realism that paints a complete picture of the individual singer or instrument. This gives me the "in the room" feeling vs. from the speakers feeling.
I never read Audio mags btw.
To me when someone uses the word Huge Soundstage to describe the sound it only tells me the it sounds big and open...ie the Quantity of the sound...nothing about the Quality of the sound.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Edits: 03/26/12
''To me Micro details = faint nuances in sound that would otherwise go unnoticed...taps of the feet, clear movements of hands on instruments as they play, artists inhaling while they sing or perhaps someone in tha back keeping pace with a drum stick or a bell etc. These things contribute to the overall 3D realism of the sound space imo''
Faint nusances are not faint and should be there with a high definition system. They are simply obscured by 'middling' systems. To me, macro and micro as you described them are the same thing, the revelation of which improves with improvements in the replay chain.
If you don't like how I described the sound I perceive fine.
You are free to put together your own words to describe what you hear.
It should be no suprise that each person might have a slightly or even a completely different perception of reality. Who's perception is real???
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
In general I agree with you. However, since the perception of sound and the location of sounds in space is a creation of listener's mind based on sound waves arriving at his body it is possible for different listeners to perceive the same sound waves differently, not to mention use different language to make conscious and describe to others what was heard.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I also agree with fmak. But I have tried to define what I think people are trying to describe with these terms.
This gets into the ability of the speaker/system to reproduce dynamic changes on both a Macro and Micro level. This is something that my Wilson speakers do very well.Since the noise floor seems to drop with the BASE, Micro dynamic changes would be more easily heard.
I try to stick to things that most everyone will hear with their systems. To being parsing the musical event at the level you are talking about requires fine speakers. I'm not suggesting that what you have isn't a fine speaker; I just haven't heard them.
Edits: 03/26/12
''dynamic changes on both a Macro and Micro level.''
Please define this.
The perception of a low level musical event's changes in volume vs a large level muscial event changes in volume. For example, a harpsichord playing in the back ground of an orchestra. Can you percieve dynamic changes in the volume of the instrument or does it get lost in the background?The smack of a bass drum like on the reference Recording stuff is an example of a macro level event. Does the system play this drum without breakup, or is there compression of the sound. Or in the case of Tony's speakers, is the woofer sent to the retirement home. Or better yet, the string section of the orchestra playing. Does it sound the same all of the time or is there perception of a dynamic change in volume.
Edits: 03/26/12 03/26/12
There should be a change in the perception of volume as-in a live event.
People get all excited when they hear some 'slam' or 'attack' during a certain section of a song when the volume increases. But actually you should experience this all throughout the recording on both the Micro and Macro level.
As far as compression, I don't play my music loud enough to blow any speakers. But I do hear both Micro and Macro details. If I didn't I would not be satisfied with the sound and go back to the drawing board...ie wallet.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
"Or in the case of Tony's speakers, is the woofer sent to the retirement home."
I believe the A60's belong in the funeral parlor, but for jollies I will try to re-foam these old hags. Fortunately they were replaced by two young tarts and their momma who between them have no trouble handling the bass drum on the RR Firebird. At the end so much air is moving that it is possible to feel the hairs on my leg tickle with each drum stroke. Tom Danley's TrainStart sounds pretty realistic also. But no 32 foot organ fundamentals in this small room. Certainly no space shuttle launch with 10 Hz at 140 dB SPL, either, :-) In addition to the tactile bass is the presence of high frequency "air". I don't know the frequency range, but with "Charlotte Margiano sings Wagner" her physical presence a few feet from me was eerie. Something to do with ultrasonics out the Beryllium tweeters?
In addition to these gross effects, there were major differences with low level material, including hearing bows hitting music stands, some quiet singing by a piano player (other than Glen Gould whose singing wasn't quiet) and a number of defects in recordings that I hadn't noticed before, such as some DC offsets at the start of a few tracks that resulted in a quiet thump. This comes from a system that will play at peak SPLs about 118 dB at my listening position, but at the volume settings that I use there is always more than 10 dB of unused headroom so there is little or no dynamic compression from the drivers.
(From the manual: "We would like to give a word of warning about the high sound pressure levels that can be generated by these loudspeakers...Because of their low levels of distortion, and the minimal fatigue incurred by the user, it is not always obvious to realize the actual sound pressure level while working. Please bear in mind that exposure to excessive levels over a sustained period of time may lead to permanent hearing loss.")
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
How would you rate your hearing acuity?
Whats that you didn't hear me...???
I SAID HOW WOULD YOU RATE YOUR HEARING!!!!!!
FYI hearing damage occurs at sustained levels of 90-95db as I am sure you are well aware.
Please scratch ear drums OFF your organ donor card.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
The "crest ratio" is the difference between peaks and the short term (e.g. 0.5 second) average in the music. Typically this will be 20 dB on an uncompressed recording. Thus one needs at least 100 times more power than one might think. One needs even more than that if one wants ones system to preserve the dynamics as recorded. For example, when one plays a dynamic speaker loud its voice coil will heat up, increasing its resistance. Since the amplifier is putting out constant voltage the net result will be a compression of dynamics. In other words, one needs about 1000 times as much power as one would think if one wants to stay a factor of ten from the limits of one's equipment.So basically, if one wants clean sound that preserves all the recorded dynamics one needs a system that has the capability to damage ones hearing. I generally listen at an average SPL around 85 dB, perhaps 90 dB for fff passages in a Mahler symphony. This is not going to do (much) hearing damage, since only portions of the music are at these levels. Peak SPL could be 105-110 dB, and the extra head room ensures that there is no significant dynamic compression on playback. If one has a system that will reproduce the sound of a space shuttle launch at the VIP platform (10 Hz at 140 dB) one will have a system that can destroy one's house.
It would be nice to be able to hear sine waves at 21 kHz like I could 50 years ago, but now it's more like 14 kHz. (I probably did more damage to my hearing by flying Cessna's some years back than I did going to concerts (classical and jazz).)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Edits: 03/27/12
I see little reason for the distinction. Both should be there at the right levels in the right places in a high resolution system.
When one of these is not right, then it is down to veiling, compression, phase distortion, or distortion etc. Making up fancy words is just part of the game of reviewers and vendors (like bullets which are really resistors).
No argument here with the micro/macro thing Fred. But Vendors are salesmen so what's new?
The real thing to focus on is not the propaganda, but what the product does.
And in the case of the Tanquility Base, it does a lot.
But noone seems to know how it works?
You say it does wonders, but does it do the same for each user?
I can see why it does what it does it your case. You have highish rpm fans in 2 places; you have a RAID setup with 2 (or 4?)spinning hdds; and you have a microphonic prone valve output stage. Isolate one from the other; add an em field(???) and who knows what may happen? If you add 2 sets of isolating feet plus a multilayer grounded base, there is going to be a difference in perceived SQ anyway.
"You say it does wonders, but does it do the same for each user?"Good question. Well Synergistic Research does imply that it will help crappy systems like mine.
Perhaps if it ever shows up in your country, you can evaluate a loaner for us.
My DAC is resting on a Symposium Ultra with Rollerblock sandwich using their best ball. It is on a rack some distance from the computer and Promise Pegasus hard drive.
Edits: 03/27/12 03/27/12
To being parsing the musical event at the level you are talking about requires fine speakers. I'm not suggesting that what you have isn't a fine speaker; I just haven't heard them.
==============
Well my speakers are no Wilson Audio's for sure but what I described is exactly how I parse the musical event in my system.
If I could not hear these things then I guess I would not look for comments about Micro/Macro details. However, in my current space its a bit difficult to get the most out of the speakers/system. They prefer a larger space.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
My friends are not classical fans. Nor are most of the inmates here. Also, I was able to demonstrate enchanced soundstage with the pop and jazz recordings listed. Many of the MFSL SACD stuff I used for demo is very good. Dave Alvin, Patricia Barber, etc are really wonderful.
Soundstage discussion involves numerous components that have evolved and improved in my digital system over the last several years. The easiest component to reproduce is width. But for a long time, digital reproduction had difficulty with front to back depth. This may be why vinyl was and is so popular. Over the last several years, the front to back component has improved significantly. The Denominator Sabre 32 module and Pure Music helped my system considerably. Improvements in OSX and computer hardware have also contributed.The third component of the soundstage is height. This is probably the most difficult to reproduce.
As our components improve, soundstage will be analyzed more carefully with language that better describes what we are actually hearing.
What I considered to be a large soundstage just 2 years ago, would pale to what I have achieved today.
Perhaps there is a pattern. The pattern is not just used by me, but all of the other audio reviewers. The equipment continous to improve.
And lets not forget the contribution of excellent hi res files.
So yes, you will hear repetition of comments made when trying to describe the musical reprodution event. Just read Robert Harley, John Atkinson, and even Harry Pearson. Do you think that HP's description and conception of soundstage was the same in 1980 as it is today?
Edits: 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12
it's the right soundstage that matters, not the kind of in your face projection that some audiophiles like.
Subtlety and image placement are equally important.
But if the tonality of the instruments are wrong then the sound is unbearable.
I do enjoy listening to music vs. analyzing sound. But if I heard some of my favorite artists portrayed in a huge soundstage and the vocals were thin, the bass notes were not portrayed correctly [amongst other musical aspects] I would go back to the drawing board.
Usually when I get a new device, IC, Power Cord etc. I do analyze the sound, but even if I miss something, over time what ever is 'wrong' will stand out. I think this is why Audiophiles 'Jockey' around so much with different gadgets etc. trying to tweak their sound just right. After all, if the sound was perfect to begin with most people won't try to fix-it.
Others might say, This is a Hobby and trying new things is part of the fun. Which is fine too.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Merc,
Are you sure you are not shrinking and that is causing your soundstage to seem larger??? :)
By now it must sound like Orchetra Hall
Honestly I think its just the 'New' wow effect.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
"By now it must sound like Orchetra Hall
Honestly I think its just the 'New' wow effect."
Well not totally...
I trust what Merc says. He is a pretty good listener
and things that he mentions are often similar to what
I have heard with different changes or software.
I do not get into all he esoteric tweaks, but they can make difference.
I remember the VPI magic block. A chunk of iron inside wood.
It made a difference when placed on ones power transformers.
A $5 iron block did the same thing, But Harry made allot of $$$.
This is obviously much more sophisticated and very cool.
The most important aspect of business is Marketing.
Not R&D, science, engineering or anything else.
With proper marketing you can sale Ice to an Eskimo, $5000 work-out machines to little old ladies and blocks of iron to Audiophiles.
Marketing made "i" anything cool and resurrected Apple from a sure grave.
Granted all of these things may be legitimate products, but I think we all can see how Marketing can influence sales.
Should have named it the Tranquility iBase.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
"With proper marketing you can sale Ice to an Eskimo, $5000 work-out machines to little old ladies and blocks of iron to Audiophiles."
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Oh so you know Harry? :)
A block of iron on my power transformer did the same thing.
Just not as pretty.
explanation.
But I sure would like to know about other aspects concerning the sound.
Impact, clarity, tonality of bass/mid/treble, speed, richness of vocals, etc.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Then go out and do your own Eval. DIY dude. Why whine when you can test for yourself?
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
Most audiophiles tend to focus on several things when listening. It is vey difficult for anyone to analyze every component of the total music experience that we are hearing. In medicine we have a specific language that allows one physician to communicate with another. I'm afraid that we don't have a standard language in our hobby that is as descriptive and universally accepted as in medicine. Gordon Holt and Harry Pearson did a great deal to try to describe what they actually were hearing and develop a descriptive vocabulary. If you go back to 1970, audio publications like Stereo Review simply used measurements that failed to describe differences in the sound of components. If two amps measured the same in harmonic distortion, Julian Hirsch felt that the amps were similar sounding.Remember, I am not a professional reviewer and I don't try to pretend that I am. I just try damn hard to describe what I am hearing.
As for the Synergistic Research Tranquility Base, I think we were lucky to get one of the first production models. Our little forum presented the first review.
Edits: 03/23/12 03/23/12 03/23/12
As you say we seek to convey in words what we hear and as with all our senses, our words are inadequate.
I find myself focusing on the word "realism" in reviewing. There is a thrill to getting it more and more. It is a combination of dynamics, the precision of the sound stage and accuracy of the instruments' timbre and constant position regardless of the notes played or in the case of a big instrument, a sense that you can hear where the high piano note keys are versus the low, and a palpable presence of a vocalist. As a manufacturer friend says, "the musicians are here!"
"The Tranquility Base allows one’s DAC to fully realize it’s potential."
Was this with the DAC itself on the base or just being fed from a computer on it?
Looking forward to hearing more about your adventure as you have the time to listen and fiddle. Probably this is one of those things that I'll only get to experience vicariously but that's way better than nothing as there is something incredibly beguiling about things that work by "magic". I've always liked permanent magnets for that very reason...
Regards, Rick
So, we have a computer with a fan, and a fasy spinning HDD rack that need a $2900 isolation base to work better.
For me, I would want to know what the base is doing other than isolation, screening, and what, bulleting?????????
"For me, I would want to know what the base is doing"
Exactly! That's the fascination...
Rick
I often wish we lived closer to each other. I would have enjoyed having you over to hear the Base. As I wrote in my review, the difference with the Base on is an obvious night and day difference. The three of us were simply amazed with this thing.
Obviously, there is an explanation of why the Tranquility Base works. I understand why Ted is reluctant to fess up. He is in business to sell product.
There are those that suggest what we heard was nothing more then the excitement of playing with something new. Simply not so. The reviewers from the Absolute Sound were very impressed with the Base when demoed at CES.
I predict that there will be much written about tha Base in the future.
"I predict that there will be much written about tha Base in the future."
Me too!
In fact I'm hoping for a couple more installments this weekend, don't let your fans down, this is seriously fun stuff...
Rapt Rick
I asked Ted if the Base had a break-in period. I know his Power Cell conditioner does. He replied:"There is but I've not put a value on it"
Edits: 03/24/12
"The Tranquility Base allows one's DAC to fully realize it's potential."
With the computer on the Base.
Really appreciate your thoughts, and review. You know that you're going to get goblets of mud thrown in your eye, but you persist. Thanks again for the courage, and passing on your thoughts, despite the nay-saying; which is bound to arise.
"In this land right now, some are insane and they're in charge. To hell with poverty, we'll get drunk on cheap wine."
How right you are Sordidman. The forum's Pinhead can't exert any personal control from commenting on something he hasn't seen or heard. What's worse, he has the inflated ego to suggest that we didn't actually hear anything different using the Tranquility Base.
And you wonder why less than 1% of the people who read this forum actually post here.
Very interesting. Thanks for the review. I've been interested in the Tranquility Base since reading about it somewhere, probably in one of the audio magazines. I'd be very interested in hearing it in my system.
By the way, I have the exact same computer setup as you (Early 2011 Macbook Pro, 2.3GHz i7 w/ 16 GB RAM, OCZ Vertex 3 240 GB) I don't have the Pegasus drive but I'm eying one of the Thunderbolt drives.
Gary
Interesting but do they provide any tech information on how it does it's magic? Why does it plug into an AC power outlet? What is the "mini power coupler". Is it a power supply? What are the fine tuning bullets actually doing? What is it tuning? Thanks.
a
The Mini Power Coupler is the power supply for the base. It is an active power conditioner. How it works will be up to Ted Denney to explain. All I know is that it is an amazing device that really works.I hope some of my friends that listened to it today at my house will post their impressions.
Edits: 03/23/12 03/23/12
I also had a chance to visit Mercman last Friday with Dr. Bob, my brother-in-law and have a listening session. It has been 18 months or so since my last visit to Mercman to hear his rig. Few things changed and need to be mentioned before I comment on the Tranquility Base.
For those here who have been hosted by Mercman are aware, he is a very gracious host. He has a beautiful home, listening room, understanding and supportive wife and of course, his chief research assistant, **LUCY**! Since my last visit, Mercman had his Crimson DAC upgraded with the Denomiator 32/192 with Saber 32 module. He was kind enough to spin through several cuts and let my ear adjust to the new sound. The upgrade is anything but subtle and one can immediately hear the increased resolution and detail top to bottom. The ripped SACDs at 176.4/24 must be heard. They are fantastic sounding. The increased resolution allowed me to really let go get lost in the musical experience. While the Cosecant v3 can do 96/24, the increased resolution is simply stunning.
Wavelength's Chief Scientist , Gordon Rankin, has hit the ball out of the park with this upgrade. I'll look forward to the Cosecant V3 upgrade path and hope he can cram as much of this technology onto its circuit board as possible.
Tranquility Base:
Dr. Bob & I were able to detect the Tranquility Base in or out of the system in every blind test. It's effects are not subtle. Improvements top to bottom in the frequencies as well as improvement in sound stage depth & width were perceived. Imaging was more holographic, bass had more "slap" (and Mercman rig got some bass!) and gone was any artificial effect of "digit-itis". I do not know how the base works less the explanation on his Synergistic's webpage, but indeed it does.
I would be interested in a trial of a Tranquility Base once I am able to make other significant changes/upgrades in my rig (Cosecant upgrade top priority). I walked away knowing that I have some serious work to do to my rig but throughly enjoyed my visit and listening session.
Thanks to Mercman for his gracious hosting and I look forward to my next visit!
Ripped SACDs do not sound as 'great' as dsd played digitally; the pcm 'signature' is still there.
And the base gets rid of digititis? There shouldn't be any in a refined setup playing hires.
Famk,
I was speaking about the hardness of the 44.1 files and how the base helps that digit-tisis sound compared to hi-rez files.
listen to 44.1 files with an excellent setup ?
One of the guys wanted to hear a CD quality track.
For most evaluation I generally use hi res titles.
Just to piss you off Fmack :-)
post just shows how unreliable your earlier one was. Read it agin
Looks to be working :-)
"listen to 44.1 files with an excellent setup ?"
Dead musicians.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I think Jim really liked the music played from these ripped SACDs. They did sound very good. I'm hoping that Gordon will enable my DAC to play native DSD files. I have saved the DIFF files for the future.
I didn't think my system had "digititis". But the Base does reduce a slight bit of hardness heard on some titles.
Thanks for the kind remarks Jim. The check is in the mail :).
one reads the Patent abstract, this tells nothing.
It will be sad if Patents are granted this way. Do the examiners evaluate it with $100 000 audio systems?And how many combinations of components and placements????.
"one reads the Patent abstract, this tells nothing."
Perhaps you should read further?
As utility patents go, I think it's fairly good. One of the main goals is to provide enough information to allow someone skilled in the art to reproduce the implementation and have it exhibit the stated characteristics. There is no onus on the applicant to chase the mechanisms down to root cause however there is a risk if they don't in that there may be other, possibly even better ways to implement the device that won't be covered by the patent.
I think I can build a version of the power "conditioner" from the information disclosed and probably have the materials on hand so it's tempting. I'm awaiting with baited breath for further results from our test facility down by the border...
If you bring yourself to actually read the patent tell me what you think of the part that starts with "it is known", I don't have it in front of me but it's short so I'm sure you will find it.
Of course this thing is NOT the device patented but is perhaps a logical and obvious extension of it. If not he has to patent this one separately. One thing that's different between our patents and yours is that we can patent stuff that has already been on the market for up to a year prior to filling where you guys have to do it before initial release so there may be more interesting things to come.
Regards, Rick
'someone skilled in the art'????????
Of what? Saying how it actually works, or trying to fob off potential rivals with words.
Magical bullets indeed.
"someone skilled in the art'????????"
This is a phrase often used when discussing patents. A patent is supposed to "teach" someone of ordinary skill how to "practice" the invention. One can find this phrase or similar phrases in the patent laws. In the case of this patent such a person would typically be a electronics technician with 2 year vocational degree or an electrical engineer with 4 year engineering degree. Both would be assumed to have some practical experience as well.
"Magical bullets indeed."
Based on Mercman's subsequent post these appear to be resistors that one plugs in to adjust the current flow along the parallel plates described in the patent.
The patent does not tell how to build the device. While it describes the number, thickness and separation of the plates it does not describe their other dimensions. It also does not describe the voltage, resistance or current flow going through the plates that are doing whatever they are doing (polarizing the dielectric, creating magnetism, etc.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"[the Art] Of what? Saying how it actually works, or trying to fob off potential rivals with words."
I suppose whatever art it takes to build the critter. Do you think you could build one from the disclosed information? You did actually read the patent didn't you?
Fobbing off potential rivals with words has another name: civilization. It's either that or brute force, which would you prefer?
Look, I'm curious why it works also, real curious and I'd love to have one for a couple of weeks to try and non-destructively understand the mechanism. However if I couldn't but it really made a substantial improvement in my system then the experiment could turn expensive since I'd likely pony up the money and keep it. I guess we all have our limits...
Rick
Here is an update for you Rick:The power supply (MPC), or in my case the Galileo MPC, sounded better plugged into the Shunyata V-Ray II I have as opposed to the PS Audio Premier. No surprise here since the Shunyata sounds better than the Premier. The resultant sound was less dark.
Edits: 03/25/12 03/25/12
Thanks Steve, almost no end of variables in this hobby is there?
I would love to know the relative "goodness" you get between having just the computer on the base, just the DAC, and just the cable between the two. And having nothing on it but having it plugged in for that matter...
But of course since I can't hear the sound the puzzle aspect looms large. I must admit that that mode collapses pretty easily into just enjoying good sound for me when actually listening.
Thanks again for the update!
Rick
They do not examine IF it works, only the mechanism used to make the claim. The combination of parts called out in the patent that contribute to the end claim is the subject. If no other combination of parts exist in relation to the same claim then patent granted.
The checks and balances are....if John Doe tries it and says it does not work as claimed. John can re-design [reverse engineer] the product and get his own patent as long as his combination of parts are different enough from the original. Many people/companies are forced to patent many variations of a product to prevent this. You especially have to make sure you patent key-features of the product so that without those features any new product by someone else will not be able to work. This will force John Doe to come up with a completely new design.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Edits: 03/24/12
This is an oudated system whereby 'inventors' seek to conceal the physical and scientific principles of operation of a device.
Knowledge has moved on leaps and bound; but the Patent system has not kept up to date..
In the US it is easy to get a patent, no need for working models or anything else. The validity (or lack thereof) of a patent only appears subsequently in the event of an infringement lawsuit. The person being sued for infringement would have an opportunity to declare the patent invalid if the document doesn't explain how to practice the invention.
The patent system in the U.S. is totally broken because millions of dollars can be wasted on litigation on patents that never should have been granted in the first place.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
= Millions of dollars earned.
All depends on your POV. Its no mistake that the system is the way it is....
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Can't expect Coke to tell what exactly makes the taste.
BTW, Coke and Pepsi had to 'change' their formula or else put a 'Cancer' warning on the labels in California.
Maybe the secret ingredient is the "Secret" itself....ie nothing/magic/hope/etc. After all 30% of tested males responded positively to a Placebo of Viagra.
High Cost + Shinny well made exterior + reputation = Wow!!!
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
Well, the Japnese did mass spectrometer analyses of Scotch Whiskey and is able to produce a not-bad domestic product. This can be done with Coke but may be noone bothered.
The Taiwanese won a prize in Britain for theirs because of the faster aging in their hotter climate!
.
Dynobots Audio
Music is the Bridge between Heaven and Earth - 音楽は天国と地球のかけ橋
I tried the basik under a Woo Audio headphone amp. The basik was placed on a Black Diamond Racing shelf, which the headphone amp had been on.
I do hear an improvement in ambient detail, which without the basik, sounds slightly muted. I call it a nice improvement, although nothing drastic.
I would like to see some flat footers or slim pads to place the unit on. Space is sometimes limited, and I don't like feet that slide easily. Marigo Labs makes coupling disks that are about 1" in diameter, and 1/8" thick. I plan to try those or similar.
I've tried the MIGs on other equipment including the headphone amp, before getting the basik, and did not care for them.
One thing I would like clarified, is how far above the base is the field effective. Like any other field, I suppose the intensity reduces as distance is increased.
Tarq
"One thing I would like clarified, is how far above the base is the field effective. Like any other field, I suppose the intensity reduces as distance is increased."
Yup, usually in an inverse square kind of way...
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: