Isolation Ward

From ebony pucks to magic foil, mystical and controversial tweaks.

Return to Isolation Ward

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Page: [ 1 ] [ 2 ]

Machina Dynamica's Teleportation Tweak

70.46.7.90
Posted on June 28, 2007 at 06:16:23
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Geoff,

When I first read this on Audiogon I thought someone had posted a fake gag-ad at your expense. But then I checked your website and saw that Machina Dynamica was actually selling the "Teleportation Tweak"

I want to be honest with you and tell you I'm having a hard time excepting this tweak at face value. That said, unlike many others here I won't be questioning your ethics or labeling you a charlatan. I don't think that my disbelief or my inability to comprehend how a device works entitles me to question your integrity.

I am hoping however that you'll give me/us an explanation of how and why this tweak works. I don't think asking for an explanation of how something you sell works is asking for too much, do you? I'll be looking forward to your reply...

Thetubeguy1954

"It is not clear that intelligence has any long-term survival value." -Stephen Hawking

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Machina Dynamica's Teleportation Tweak, posted on June 28, 2007 at 06:41:04
tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 8190
Joined: July 4, 2002
 Getting suspicious are we?
In electronic circuit analysis, they frequently refer to the “real” and “imaginary” components of a signal.
While the words mean different things here, the hifi market also has plenty of “real” and “imaginary” things too.
These imaginary tweaks work (when it does), by mental suggestion and desire, like the other “tweaks” that don’t actually change anything electrical or acoustical.
Best,

Tom

 

RE: Machina Dynamica's Teleportation Tweak, posted on June 28, 2007 at 08:06:14
stuck.wilson@gmail.com
Audiophile

Posts: 855
Location: DC area
Joined: May 7, 2006
 must work via the power of prayer.. god is my tweak guru..

that's absurd.

i did like the bit about john stewart's suit...

d

 

Time was, when *any* concept of "action at a distance" was similarly derided., posted on June 28, 2007 at 09:19:44
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 Radio? Impossible! You must be crazy!

Even more to the point was Einstein's "spooky action at a distance":

In 1935, several years after quantum mechanics had been developed, Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen published a paper which showed that under certain circumstances quantum mechanics predicted a breakdown of locality. Specifically they showed that according to the theory I could put a particle in a measuring device at one location and, simply by doing that, instantly influence another particle arbitrarily far away. They refused to believe that this effect, which Einstein later called "spooky action at a distance," could really happen...

Almost thirty years later J.S. Bell proved that the results predicted by quantum mechanics could not be explained by any theory which preserved locality. In other words, if you set up an experiment like that described by Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, and you get the results predicted by quantum mechanics, then there is no way that locality could be true. Years later the experiments were done, and the predictions of quantum mechanics proved to be accurate. In short, locality is dead. [Emphasis added.]

 

Why isn't this in Tweaks???, posted on June 28, 2007 at 10:20:15
Robert Hamel
Audiophile

Posts: 1905
Location: New York
Joined: October 24, 2002
 Seems like an odd place to post this?? Are you are looking for rational discussion on technical issues or just want feedback?? There is essentially no information on the page the link goes too. Can't see much of a discussion here asside from the expected Huh??????

 

RE: Machina Dynamica's Teleportation Tweak, posted on June 28, 2007 at 10:42:12
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 From their website:

"The Teleportation Tweak excels in layering, texture, inner detail, air and that indefinable, you-are-there presence of real music."

This has NOTHING to do with altering the signals present in the components of an audio system - as with many tweaks, any improvement in the sound is "imagined" - notice the word imag(e)imbedded in the word imagined.

"Layering, texture, inner detail, air ..." are never present in a sound reproduction system - they only exist in the listeners head.

 

"Long distance" - I imagine it looking like..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 13:37:43
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...a foil cone you wear on your head while listening.

 

Maybe they should call fixing your stereo via the phone..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 16:11:20
The Real Dick Hertz
 ...Transcontinental Medication?

 

Try calling them, posted on June 29, 2007 at 00:12:47
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 and asking if it still will work if:

1: you are calling from a cell phone (can you take the effect with you?)

2: what happens if you should move or change numbers?

Might give a clue, if it really works.


Stu

 

So how many times did YOU call?, posted on June 29, 2007 at 08:45:44
Richard BassNut Greene
 Wonder if their audio-upgrade-by-phone "batting average" is higher than when audiophiles compare a component with itself and somehow manage to "hear differences" 50-75% of the time?

In the Stereophile blind amplifier test (for one example a Golden Ear might actually read without launching the usual junkyard dog test methodology attacks and participant character attacks) when an amplifier was compared with itself (A vs. A ... or B vs. B) the "Golden Ear" participants said they heard differences in 62% of those trials when no differences were possible!

So you don't even have to hook up a new component to get golden ears to say they hear differences 62% of the time ... and that number would certainly be higher if there were small SPL differences too!

Maybe even 100%?

So how many times did you call in for your by-phone upgrade?

My guess is two or three times.

Six times if you've won the lottery lately.

Have a nice weekend and enjoy your music and try not to spend too much time arguing about wires and tweaks here, Mr. 1954.

R. "Mr. 1953" Greene
(older and wiser)


.
.
.
.



Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007

 

The Test Results Are In!!, posted on June 29, 2007 at 16:57:43
rlw
Audiophile

Posts: 3347
Location: Near West Palm Bch, FL
Joined: August 29, 2006
 A preamble to the Main Review
=============================
I didn't wanna do it, I tell ya!! Ya gotta believe me!! Geoff has graciously offered to me a credit for another Teleportation Tweak because I had expressed to him that I didn't want to do mine until I could get together with some friends so as to have more than one opinion to report on, perhaps sometime over the weekend. He was anxious to have me go ahead and do the tweak today because folks on the Internet we're awaiting the results. Well, I hope you guys are happy.

What I plan to do next is to gather with some other audiophile friends at someone's house and we'll conduct another trial using their un-Tweaked system. The system I am thinking about is quite resolving and is well set up. Give me a day or so to work out the logistics and I'll report back on the results of that trial...


Now, the main review
====================
I finished auditioning the Teleportation Tweak about 40 minutes ago and I'd like to share my thoughts on it.

At the outset of this trial, I promised Geoff that I would approach this with an open mind. I did so. I guess I should also explain that I am generally a skeptical person. I program for a living (a pretty good one, too) and prior to that I had a pretty successful sales career. So, in short, I am pretty good at analyzing things and I'm not easily gulled.

The music used for evaluation:
Pat Metheny's "Imaginary Day", 1st track
Joni Mitchell "Court & Spark", 1st two tracks
Mark Knopfler's "Sailing To Philadephia", title track

I am quite familiar with all these pieces and I feel they give a fair test to a system. The lows on the Pat Metheny disc are downright scary at times. Also, the pinpoint imaging and instrument placement on that album is among the best I've ever heard. Joni's voice, with all its intonations and inflections, is a good standard against which to measure and is music that I've listened to hundreds of times over the past 20-30 years. Mark's duet with James Taylor gives one a chance to hear some great guitar work on top of some great vocal harmonies.

Now for the meat and potatoes, and I *never* sugar-coat my meat and 'taters - I did not hear any change in the sound of the system nor did I perceive any benefit from the Teleportation Tweak. As much as I wanted to hear something, and trust me I *did* (a $60 tweak is a bargain), I must be butally honest with myself and you, dear reader.

Be that as it may, at least I can say that Geoff was completely open and forthright in his dealing with me, and he once again assured me during our phone conversation that he was extending a money-back guarantee if I was not satisified with the efficacy of the Teleportation Tweak. I am not satisfied and I am sure he will honor his word and refund to me the $60. Additionally, I will take him up on his generous offer to give the TT another go on another system - who knows what we may hear??


Test System:
============
HK Signature 2.0 Preprocessor
HK Signature 2.1 5 ch. power amp
Denon 3910 DVD/CD player
Gallo Reference 3.1 - Front L/R
Gallo Due - Center, Rear L/R
Goertz MI-2 speaker cables for 3.1s
MusicBoy/Petra ICs

-RW-

 

RE: Machina Dynamica's Teleportation Tweak, posted on June 30, 2007 at 11:30:16
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 "That said, unlike many others here I won't be questioning your ethics or labeling you a charlatan. I don't think that my disbelief or my inability to comprehend how a device works entitles me to question your integrity."

There are a lot of products being sold on merely anecdotal claims. Go to your local health food store to find other such products.

This doesn't bother me personally because while I think it might be bogus, as long as the marketing claims are toward purely subjective parameters, and the fact subjective performance cannot really be proven either way, that alone should *not* prohibit people from enjoying such products. Even if the enjoyment is purely psychological. And even if those selling the product seem to be taking advantage of the gullible and making big profits.

There is no law against gullibility, and there shouldn't be. And there is no law against catering to it.

 

A wiff of putricine, posted on July 1, 2007 at 07:06:39
tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 8190
Joined: July 4, 2002
 Hi Tubeguy

I went back and read more about this, pretty cool marketing.
After seeing some of the other offerings, I would pose a few thoughts.

Ok, so the “tweak” is initiated over the very limited quality and dynamic range of land lines and cell phones and unlike a voice is unaffected by distance related signal degradation.
The “sound” coming out of the phone would certainly be much lower in level than the equipment is normally exposed to in that in the room using the stereo so maybe its not sound that “does it”.
It works at any distance, even without the need for equipment warmup.
The effect is immediate and so profound it turns your recordings into a “you are there” experience (seemingly regardless of the recording it self?).

It also apparently works on video as well as audio, is then seemingly independent to the type of electronics, working on Tubes, Discrete SS, IC’s, Class A thru H operation, the whole shebang no mater what or age the signal or electronics is?

This is wonderful, an effect they can’t possibly explain and don't try, that unlike external effects on electronics in real life, is always positive, beneficial, always "knows what to fix", is instantaneous, can be transmitted via the extremely limited capacity of a telephone from the company to any electronics regardless of design, age or technology for a modest amount of $.

In the real world, extraordinary claims need to be backed up with extraordinary proof if they are to be taken as technically credible.
The closest they come seems to be one mention of A/B testing and to use a photo that has dish antennas in the background “as if” there were some desperately vague connection to technology or science.

While there are rare exceptions, usually, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, has webbed feet and a bill, has feathers, lays eggs and likes water, its probably a duck, or in this case the strong smell of putricine.
Call me a skeptical technologist.

Tom



 

Where do you get your imaginary tweaks?..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 07:27:38
Wellfed
 I've never been able to find a source.

 

...And how do you know that exactly??, posted on June 28, 2007 at 08:08:50
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 tomservo:
"These imaginary tweaks work (when it does), by mental suggestion and desire, like the other “tweaks” that don’t actually change anything electrical or acoustical."

...So I'm dying to find out.... how do you know that? As someone with plenty of experience with so-called "tweaks" that don't actually change anything electrical and acoustical, I'd like to know what your experience is with the Teleportation Tweak, and others that don't affect the signal or acoustics, in order to declare with such confidence that they are ALL a placebo?

Objective Audiophile 2007

 

I'm Still Skeptical These Days Tom, posted on June 28, 2007 at 09:40:54
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Tom,

I'm not sure how to take this comment "Getting suspicious are we?" I've always been suspicious and skeptical. There are three tweaks that in that past were proven to work, at least proven well enough for me, that is. As I've stated numerous times here there was a time when I believed wires couldn't possibly influence how an audio system sounds. Apparently many of the objectivists here cannot accept that someone would change their mind about wires, so my comments are mocked and dismissed as simply being made up, but truth be told I had stopped doing business with more than one dealer for trying to sell me on the idea that wires mattered. Fortunately for me Bernie an audio dealer I bought from in Newington, Connecticut was willing to put his $$$$ where his mouth was because he knew how I felt about wires and could have lost my business.

I was getting ready to upgrade from a $2.2K OCM88 preamp to a $4K Counterpoint SA5000 preamp. Bernie, the owner asked me if I trusted him to do me right and when I said yes, he said instead of spending $2000 to upgrade the preamps invest that $2000 in wires and you'll get more of an improvement! I was furious, I told him I would NEVER do business with him again. Bernie took the time to sooth my dispostion and made this suggestion. Go home and get all your wires Tom. In the meantime I'll setup an exact duplicate of your system here (I bought my system from Bernie so that was easy for him to do) When you get back we'll compare your wires to some wires I suggest you use. Then you can hear for yourself if wires do or don't make a difference.

So I went home and got my wires and a couple of my prized CD's. When I arrived Bernie took my wires which was all Radio Shack, (their best interconnects and their pseudo-monster speaker wires) and hooked the system together. Next we dropped in one of my CD's and I listened. When the song ended Bernie asked what I thought. I told him I liked it of course as it sounded essentially like what I heard at home.

Ok Bernie said lets exchange preamps. So preamps were exchanged and the Counterpoint SA5000 replaced my OCM88. Then my CD was played again. Once again when the song ended Bernie asked what I thought.

"I think it sounds a bit better." I said.
"$2000 worth of better?" Bernie asked.
"Well Bernie that's hard to say, what's $2000 worth of better supposed to sound like?" I said thinking about diminishing returns and all that. I remember Bernie laughing and saying "A $2000 investment in an upgrade SHOULD be immediately noticeable!"

So Bernie put the OCM88 back into the system and played my song again. It sounded just like it did at home (essentially) but not quite as good as the Counterpoint. I was beginning to question whether the SA5000 was worth $2000 for upgrading, but probably would have bought it as it was better and I was considering diminishing returns once again.

Now Bernie shut everything off and on one side he hooked up AudioQuest Emerald interconnects & speakerwire (as best I can remember that is) I do know it was AudioQuest and the combo was equal to about the $2000 I would have spent on the preamp.

Now before we continue remember:

1) I believed wires didn't influence the sound of an audio system.
2) I expected not to hear any differences with these wires.
3) My "Expectation Bias" should have influenced me to NOT hear a differences "if" the theory about "Expectation Bias" is correct!

Once again Bernie played my CD. This time he played only the channel my wires were on. It sounded just as I expected it to sound and essentially like it did at my home. Then Bernie looked at me and said "Ready?" I said, "Yes!" and Bernie now only played the channel with the Emeralds on it. I was shocked at the level of improvement. It sounded so much realistic, I was absolutely amazed. Before the song was even complete I wanted to hear the system with all the emeralds attached. This time it was even better than before, deeper, wider soundstage and just all around more realistic sounding. I couldn't believe a simple wire, dielectric and a jacket could influence the sound so much.

Needless to say I bought the wires. I went home and reattached my original wires and it all sounded very good to me. Perhaps I was fooling myself I thought? But then I pulled out my wires and hooked up the AudioQuest wires and just like at Bernies the soundstage got wider, deeper, bass was more extended and everything sounded just so much more realistic. So wires is one tweak on that I was wrong about.

There was also a time I didn't believe tubes could possibly sound better than solid state, after all tubes was an antiquated technology. Besides from the first moment you play them they're starting to deteriorate. Yet that myth, just like the wires sound the same myth was also proven to me to be incorrect. Tubes is another area, while maybe not a tweak per say where I was wrong.

Yes Tom I'm skeptical of tweaks when I cannot comprehend how they work. But these days I try to remain open minded enough to accept the possibility that the tweak may work in a way I cannot understand. How can a wire influence sound? I don't know exactly, but I know it does! Why should a tube sound more realistic than a transistor? Once again I'm not exactly sure why they do, but I know the better tubed amps do. Even John Curl admitted Dick Sequerra's tubed amps sounded better than any of his solid state amps! Although John did say his amps give most other tubed amps a run for the money if not actually being better than them.

I also remember when I was about 20 years old I went and visited a Hartley speaker representative in Storrs, Connecticut IIRC. His name was Leo Oxley. He played an all Hartley speaker system, which used the Hartley 24" Super-Woofers! This was one of my first exposures to good tubed equipment he was using an Acoustic Research amp/preamp. During our listening session Leo placed a VPI "Magic Brick" on the transformers of the amp and asked if I heard a difference. I honestly responded "Nope, no difference." Leo said "Lets listen for awhile and see what happens." After maybe 20mins passed Leo asked me once again if I heard any differences and once again I replied once again nope, no difference. At that point Leo said something like if you cannot hear the difference I might as well just remove the "Magic Brick." That's when I heard a difference, BAM! the moment he removed that damned "Magic Brick" the sound got duller and less transparent. Leo just smiled, I imagined he done that little stunt before. It appears that what the VPI did, it did very sllllooowwwlly. Something was definitely happening here-- Did it absorb stray magnetic fields? Did it damped the transformers? Did it dampen the chassis? I don't know what the "Magic Brick" did, but it happened so slowly I could only notice what it did when it was abruptly removed! That's one tweak that really amazed me. To this day I don't know what those "Magic Bricks" did, but they damn sure did it! The "Magic Brick" is the third tweak that worked when I didn't believe it would.

These days Tom I'm still skeptical on a lot of different tweaks, but try to keep an open-mind on things like cable stands, clocks, rocks, wooden discs or bells on walls etc., but I'd be willing to listen to any of them for myself to see if I heard any influence that made the music sound more realistic to me. Some things just sound too far fetched for me to simply believe on blind faith they would work. For tweaks like that I'd have to be shown that they work. That would require my seeing them installed and then my actually hearing a significant improvement. If that's not done for me the manufacturer can keep that tweak.

Thetubeguy1954

 

I can get the effects described just by reading about it!, posted on June 28, 2007 at 12:13:59
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
 From the Machina Dynamica website:
"The effects of the Teleportation Tweak are instantaneous and the improvement to the audio system will be audible immediately. The Teleportation Tweak excels in layering, texture, inner detail, air and that indefinable, you-are-there presence of real music. Bonus: The picture quality of any video systems will also be improved! The Teleportation Tweak works over landline phone or cell phone."

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina60.htm

Gosh! I can get that layering, texture, inner detail, air and that indefinable you-are-there presence just by reading about it! Absolutely amazing. Boy, that's some product!

_

"It pertains to all men to know themselves and to be temperate."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)

 

I'd pay good money to check out one of those babies! nt, posted on June 28, 2007 at 09:20:44
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 x

 

RE: ...And how do you know that exactly??, posted on June 28, 2007 at 10:49:17
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 one only has to read post on this board - or even your own (or my own) experiences. What I have that some others don't (and others do) is confidence that these "placebo" changes are only temporary and likely irrelevant except for the moment. Like a once in a lifetime sunset, I revel in those moments, appreciating how I have been moved by the experience.

 

crack smoking is similarly derided for good reason.. but somebody'll go to bat for it., posted on June 28, 2007 at 13:54:34
stuck.wilson@gmail.com
Audiophile

Posts: 855
Location: DC area
Joined: May 7, 2006
and what of the 'directivity' of such an action?

radio frequencies have laws which dictate how they operate, right? broadcast and receive within laws of electrical behavior.

how, praytell, does one 'broadcast' via quantum mechanics- moreso, via a TELEPHONE, a limited frequency electrical device, these fantastic permanent upgrades to one's system? radio broadcast stays as long as there is reception- and quantum mechanics ALTERS a system permanently after a PHONE CALL? if one could send such magical signals to your system between 300-3000hz, my system would've already delivered them to itself through hours of play, no?

i question the sanity of anyone proposing permanent alteration to any electrical entity via telephone call. quantum mechanics or not.

this is not a flat earther speaking. if you believe this, perhaps a magic wand may be in order as well...

sure sounds like a bucketfull of snake oil to me..

d

 

So actually, this isn't just Al Graham Bell talking...., posted on June 28, 2007 at 16:14:56
The Real Dick Hertz
 ...it's quantum mechanics in action? Perhaps we have misunderestimated the efficacy of this telephone tweak.

 

RE: Time was, when *any* concept of "action at a distance" was similarly derided., posted on June 29, 2007 at 02:06:03
SF tech
Industry Professional

Posts: 8891
Location: San Francisco
Joined: March 24, 2005
 Interesting that you invoke this particular argument...

Are you suggesting that Geoff has found a way to establish "quantum entanglement" from scratch?

What does it affect?

 

The "Magic Brick" was my introduction to high-end tomfoolery (sorry!) way back in 1980., posted on June 28, 2007 at 10:56:56
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 I had flown to California to audition VMPS loudspeakers (inter alia) and was greeted by Brian Cheney, Curl electronics, Len Hupp speaker hausers and... the Magic Brick. I had never seen anything like any of that, before. While doubtful, I had to admit it all sounded pretty good -- but not *as* good, with the Brick removed. "Huh!", I said.

clark

 

RE: I'm Still Skeptical These Days Tom, posted on June 28, 2007 at 18:12:56
tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 8190
Joined: July 4, 2002
 Hi Tubeguy

I meant the “are we getting suspicious” more globally than it sounded like when I went and re-read it, more like “are we having fun yet?
I was not addressing that at you specifically and was temporarily stunned by the description at the link, I have to say this is one far out tweak.
I think your continued questioning and sadly, putting up with some occasional abuse by some in response if anything shows your keen to get to the bottom of things. Don't take it the wrong way but that tenacity is a necessary trait of a person developing something new.

I couldn’t think of any other examples in technology (aside from a handset modem etc) where a telephone, with its extremely limited bandwidth, communicates with electronic circuitry via unintended means, let alone always having a positive effect, let alone for which money is charged.
Don’t say Ms Cleo, I mean in technology.

I suppose the real point of a persuasive sales pitch for a far out thing is just that, it should not persuade you that it will work, just that it might and is worth a try and THAT requires a purchase, which IS the point after all.
If it’s acceptably small amount of money, then you won’t gripe if it seems to do nothing and one is happy if “maybe it did something” or better.

On the other hand, it is a lot harder to work on things at the level they actually work, so as in most area’s, a dollar spent in marketing creating an image of R&D gets more results than a dollar spent in the R&D Lab.
Nearly invariably, the biggest selling Names are image not substance based.
I went though a driver factory once that was cranking out little drivers that cost under three bucks each. Nine of these went into a fancy plastic box that cost under 20 bucks a pair to make. The raw response was eq’d dramatically with a cheap equalizer circuit in order to make it sorta flat.
So, that pair of speakers cost about 70 dollars or less to make.
With a HUGE profit margin, one can afford a powerful marketing and legal department needed to produce the leader in technology image.
Best,
Tom

 

Regarding the bricks, posted on June 29, 2007 at 06:06:42
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37580
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 Notice how many components today use toroidal transformers?

rw

 

RE: not an example of expectation bias, posted on June 30, 2007 at 12:29:39
mls-stl
 > My "Expectation Bias" should have influenced me to NOT hear a differences
> "if" the theory about "Expectation Bias" is correct!

That is a simplistic misrepresentation as to how "expectation bias" works.

First there are always subconscious issues at work is a situation such as you were in. "Subconscious" means that you are not actively aware of how some factors are influencing your thinking. (If you were aware, they wouldn't be "sub"conscious, would they?) That is, unless you're telling us you don't have a subconscious. ;-)

The entire scenario you describe in the comparison process at your dealer is filled with so many "set-ups", negative and positive reinforcement points as to present a case study for sales people. Zig Zigler would be proud.

Second there are always variables in a casual product comparison process that are not well controlled. Can you reach a decision as to which product to buy? Sure. Does it mean anything in the world of science? No. At best you may generate an issue that is worth further investigation.

To sum it up, your vignette was not an illustration of "expectation bias" in the manner you think it should have been. As noted before, we do not cease to be human in our responses just because the subject is audio. I think the reality is quite the opposite.

 

Well Robert, posted on June 28, 2007 at 11:11:10
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Because I was looking for Geoff to provide me/us a technical explanation of how and why this tweak works and PHP is technically oriented forum, no?

I'm sure there are lots of other posts in other forums that could be placed in one or two other forums depending on what one's POV is when reading it.

Thetubeguy1954

 

Another was on General and got kicked to Isolation Ward nt, posted on June 29, 2007 at 15:48:54
Norm
Reviewer

Posts: 31024
Joined: September 6, 2000
 a

 

"Inner detail... only exist[s] in the listeners head." LOL!, posted on June 28, 2007 at 10:50:24
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 So whenever some instrumentalist voices an "inner detail" in the music that I've never heard before, it's all in my head?

That's good to know; now I can stop searching for better performances.

clark

 

Inner detail.... is "imaginary"? Yeah, that gets a "LOL" from me also., posted on June 28, 2007 at 12:06:47
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 >>This has NOTHING to do with altering the signals present in the components of an audio system

Brilliant deduction! Where did the company claim it did?

>> - as with many tweaks, any improvement in the sound is "imagined" -

...and you know that how exactly?


>>notice the word imag(e)imbedded in the word imagined.

Again... brilliant! Did you by any chance have anything to do with the theory of relativity? It sounds like one of yours.



Objective Audiophile 2007

 

...So for you, its your unconfirmed prejudices that give you confidence in what is and isn't valid in audio?, posted on June 28, 2007 at 11:56:50
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 >>one only has to read post on this board - or even your own (or my own) experiences.

Run that by me again, I'm hoping I misunderstood. Are you saying that to know whether an audio product or idea is valid, you have only to read a post on it?? Experiences are an entirely different matter, yet you're equating them as though they are one and the same. What makes you think your experiences will be the same as mine or others?

>>What I have that some others don't (and others do) is confidence that these "placebo" changes are only temporary and likely irrelevant except for the moment.

I don't think you understand what a "placebo" is. The very nature of a placebo change is (arguably) not "likely irrelevant". I still don't understand where you get your "confidence" from? Reading a post on the matter?

>>Like a once in a lifetime sunset, I revel in those moments, appreciating how I have been moved by the experience.

None of the things that I do which people say are only in my mind, are "temporary, like a sunset". Even though, logically speaking, they should be. Appreciate how others are moved by their experiences if you can appreciate your own, even if you believe its imaginary for them. (And if it is, then the sunset is imaginary for you!).

Objective Audiophile 2007

 

RE: "Inner detail... only exist[s] in the listeners head." LOL!, posted on June 28, 2007 at 13:17:34
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 Yes, it's not real - It's all in your head!

Dick Heyser, said it best - when he wrote about multidimensional audio. I paraphrase here: "in stereo reproduction we take two somewhat correlated voltage signals that before reaching the ears are split between several loudspeaker drivers who's individual acoustical responses are convolved with the room's acoustical resonances and reflections. The listener's ears pick of those signals and converts them to neural impulses that are converted to a multidimentional immagined soundfield with breadth, depth, and height; pitch, pace, and space".

And notice that the listener will accomplish this in all but the worst recordings - even monophonic recordings - knowing all the time that the actual performance may not ever have existed at all - but was assembled or contrived by a producer or engineer from performances distanced by space and time, themselves distorted by the recording venue and electronics.

So there.

 

VPI "Magic Brick" = You Don't Know What You've Got Till It's Gone!, posted on June 28, 2007 at 11:56:08
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Clark,

The funny part about the VPI "Magic Brick" was that I could never detect when it was placed on an amp and I could never fail to detect when it was taken off the amp! My friend Rick from Connecticut bought one of the bricks from Leo that day he showed them to us. Later we went back to Rick's house and played with the "Magic Brick" on his Counterpoint SA-220.

I'd close my eyes and Rick would at some point in time place the VPI brick on his SA-220 amp while I listened. Even though:

1) I knew the brick would be placed on the amp.
2) I knew it would make a difference in the sound.

I could never, ever tell when Rick had placed the "Magic Brick" on the amp. In every case after Rick would place it on the amp he'd wait about 3-5 minutes and then he'd finally tell me he had placed the brick on the amp about 3 or 5 minutes ago. The reason we waited 3-5 minutes is we wanted to see if either I (or Rick) with our eyes closed could detect any difference in sound slowly improving. But neither of us could detect when the brick was placed on the amp, nor could we detect any differences as it slowly improved after 3-5 minutes. After that we'd often listen together until about 15-20mins passed discussing if we heard any improvement ----we NEVER did!

But with the same exact consistency that Rick and I couldn't tell when the VPI brick was placed on the amp we couldn't help but detect the very moment it was removed from the amp!!! Whenever Rick or I listened with our eyes closed we'd notice the instant the brick was removed from the amp --provided we left it on the amp for at least 15 mins, BEFORE removing it. To this day I don't know what the VPI "Magic Brick" did. I cannot tell you why I couldn't tell when it was placed on the amp or why I didn't hear the sound sloowlly improve after it was placed on the amp. The ONLY thing I know for sure was it improved the sound and the moment it was removed the sound instantly deteriorated.

I wished I had access to one of these types of devices to test today on the Mastersound because if it made anywhere near the improvement I heard on the Counterpoint SA-220 I'd buy one for certain. If anyone has one they'd let me try I'd be very, very interested.

Thetubeguy1954

 

Well Tubeguy, posted on June 28, 2007 at 12:40:10
Robert Hamel
Audiophile

Posts: 1905
Location: New York
Joined: October 24, 2002
 After looking at the page I don't see how they could even offer up a nuts and bolts type response. You can ask all you want I don't expect an answer based on what's there. Didn't mean to be critical just seemed like a very odd topic.

 

RE: VPI "Magic Brick" = You Don't Know What You've Got Till It's Gone!, posted on June 28, 2007 at 14:33:32
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
You can make your own version of the "Brick" and carry out some experiments of your own at the same time.

You take a plain plastic bag and a piece of iron (a spanner will do nicely).
You place the plastic bag on top of a piece of equipment (say an amplifier) and listen. The sound, if anything, will be worse.
Remove the plastic bag and now place the iron spanner on top of the amplifier and listen. The sound, if anything, will be worse.
Place the spanner INSIDE the plastic bag and place the whole set on top of the amplifier and listen. The sound, if anything, will be better. If you do not hear any improvement in the sound, listen for about an hour and then remove the plastic bag with the spanner inside and listen again. The time you will immediately hear the sound go worse !!! Exactly the same experience as you had with the 'Brick'.

Now, if the explanation for the effect of the 'Brick' was anything to do with the WEIGHT of it on the amplifier (which was one explanation put forward way back at the time), then the WEIGHT of the spanner (on it's own) would also have had an effect !!
If the explanation for the effect of the 'Brick' was anything to do with magnetism (which was another explanation put forward way back then), then, again, the spanner (on it's own) would have had an effect.

The secret is to have the spanner (the piece of iron) inside another layer of something - in other words, once removed !! Which is what one version of the 'Brick' was - a chunk of iron inside a wooden box !!!

Explain that from conventional electronic or acoustic theories !!!
Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: ...So for you, its your unconfirmed prejudices that give you confidence in what is and isn't valid in aud, posted on June 28, 2007 at 14:18:24
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 No I only have to read the descriptions of the observations. Heck the changes in sound from "Placebo" components and tweeks are part of this hobby and I hear them as "real" all the time. For example when replacement power cord products hit a decade or so ago, the descriptions of glowing improvements, DYI tweeks and the number of products on the markets skyrocketed. Objectivists screamed, subjectivist preached the new gospel, DBT arguments ensued. Since most people I enjoy this hobby with are generally interesting and rational folks, when we try stuff out and hear a change in the sound - didn't that new cord sound better? Since I don't know every product out there I can't tell you if changing a power cord will change the sound in your observations - but I can tell you it will not change the signal in any properly designed component. Oh, and did I "hear" the difference in cords - yes. Later, was I unable to pick out the difference in a blind test, NO. I can test signal fidelity to -140dB (one part in 10 million) variation easily these days. I can measure rail and ground plane voltages to 1 part per million accuracy across a 0 to 25KHz range. Audible differences that are not reflected in such measurements do not trouble me, because I'd rather just set back and enjoy the sunset.

 

RE: Inner detail.... is "imaginary"? Yeah, that gets a "LOL" from me also., posted on June 28, 2007 at 13:35:19
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 I am reasonably versed the mathematics of general and special relativity, though I gave up on my PhD in Physics years ago.

 

It's even more effective..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 16:47:34
The Real Dick Hertz
 ...if you download and print the description of how effective the telephone tweak is. Then, rub the printed page over your system. For the ultimate in effectiveness, have the page cryo'd first.

 

It A Strange Tweak Indeed, posted on June 29, 2007 at 06:41:46
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Robert,

I agree it's an odd topic about a very weird tweak. I cannot begin to fathom what might be happening and was hoping Geoff would provide some sort of reasoning behind how and why it works.

Thetubeguy1954

 

I'm aware of how foolish we 'look', are you..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 21:27:29
Wellfed
 ...aware of just HOW foolish you appear?

 

"It's all in your head!" This is another one of those unproven assertions that "objectivists" are wont to make, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:19:27
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 ...whenever their circumscribed ideology is upset.

Also it demonstrates the insincerity and irrelevance of their otherwise constant demands for "proof".

clark

 

How can it NOT be., posted on June 29, 2007 at 08:11:12
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 I can synthesize some audio electronically, adjust the channels phasing and frequency response and place the source of the sound anywhere in the room when you listen to it, if you have even a mildly resolving system.

Play "Dark side of the moon" again - I know you have at least 1 copy in each media you use.

 

That's pretty random in nature. [nt], posted on June 28, 2007 at 21:39:18
Wellfed
 nt

 

So who said....Part 6,537,468, posted on June 28, 2007 at 23:28:43
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 >>i question the sanity of anyone proposing permanent alteration to any electrical entity via telephone call. quantum mechanics or not.

So who said it was a "permanent alteration to an electrical entity via telephone"?

>>sure sounds like a bucketfull of snake oil to me..

I guess you believe that it is of some benefit, as snake oil has proven to be.




Objective Audiophile 2007

 

"How, praytell, does one 'broadcast' via quantum mechanics?" LOL!, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:32:44
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 That same dripping sarcasm has been directed to experimenters in a wide variety of now-scientific fields. Through the ages there was much hooting and hollering from the likes of stuck.wilson, who evidently have some difficulty wrapping their minds around the fact that science is not a finished effort.

I quote from the great (and widely derided) Nicola Tesla:

"The history of science shows that theories are perishable. With every new truth that is revealed we get a better understanding of Nature and our conceptions and views are modified. Dr. Hertz did not discover a new principle. He merely gave material support to hypothesis."

Stuck.wilson clearly has no interest in experimentation *or* hypothesis, contenting himself instead with sneering from the sidelines.

clark

 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 00:29:29
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 Interesting! I took a few minutes to do a brief test on this theory, as I had not heard of it before. Here are my findings:

SYSTEM:

Well, my audio system is not installed presently, so I decided to use the top of my computer for the test location, since it was conveniently located right next to your post. I played an mp3 on the computer (JJ Cale's "Devil In Disguise", if anyone cares), listening through a pair of portable player headphones. The materials I used was a Ziploc bag (with the Ziploc brand stamped on it), and an iron bar, about 6" long x 1" wide and maybe a 1/4" thick.

- First, I listened to the system without "installing" anything, which I often do to hear what the system currently sounds like. (Although I should say, the first time you listen is -always- the best, and indeed this test was no exception).

- Next, I placed the empty Ziploc bag on top of the computer. Expecting the sound to worsen without fail (I already know what Ziploc bags sound like....), I was surprised to see this was not necessarily the case! While the Ziploc bag clearly degraded the overall quality of the sound (things collapsing, transients dulling, etc), the core of the sound had me transfixed. I could tell that even while things were degrading all around, "musicality" (a key aspect to music reproduction!), had gotten better. My being didn't mind the degradation, it was too busy enjoying the increased musicality.

- Next, the iron bar alone on top of the computer. This degraded the sound, nuff said.

- Next, the iron bar inside the Ziploc bag, with the bag sealed. It took me a minute, but I had to conclude you were right. This sound seemed to bear no relation to the sound of the bag alone or the bar alone. It was a "duller" sound than all the previous changes (including the original sound with nothing), because HF was not as bright, but there was more information now, soundstage got larger, and the confirmation of an improvement came from a stronger connection to the musical message than the iron bar alone. I realize most people would prefer this sound to that of the bag alone. But was it more "musical" than the bag alone? I listened again to just the bag, and again, confirmed that it did add additional "magic" to the musical message, though I hesitate to say "more", and would rather say "they're different".

CONCLUSION: You may be right about VPI. EMI is the pet theory of both the company and any technically-minded person who advocates this tweak, but it may have nothing to do with it. Myself, I always thought it was the weight. "Back in the day", when this thing was more popular, I tried heavy weights, like bricks (not the magic kind, alas), on top of my amp. Did improve the sound (ie. timbre gets sharper), but eventually, I found weights on top of equipment screwed up the soundstage, and in general, the sound. But could it be working on a combination of EMI filtering, dead weight (resonance tuning) and Beltist principle? Whatever, I would have to say now that there's definitely something Beltist to the operation of the VPI bricks, as the product does fit the once-removed theory.

It occurs to me that if everyone other than me were allergic to Kryptonite (tm), then we would all have greatly improved audio systems by simply placing a stick of it inside a plastic bag.....

Objective Audiophile 2007

 

RE: It's even more effective..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 18:54:25
Pat D
Audiophile

Posts: 12506
Location: Fredericton NB
Joined: June 20, 2000
 Thanks for the tip! I don't have any liquid nitrogen handy but I can freeze the directions before rubbing it over my system.

_

"It pertains to all men to know themselves and to be temperate."
---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)

 

I'm starting to get the impression that presented with, posted on June 28, 2007 at 20:54:30
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 capital for a big marketing budget you'd transform yourself into the next Bose!

LOL
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher

 

RE: I'm Still Skeptical These Days Tom, posted on June 29, 2007 at 05:46:40
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Hi Tom,

You know I have great respect for you and I hope I didn't come off as being angry by what you said. As you noticed and mentioned I continue to question how and why things occur in audio. I don't do this to be able to argue/debate/discuss with others who disagree with my audio POV, but rather this is a means to enable me to have the best, most realistic presentation of music I can afford in my home. Unfortunately I've had to endure a fair share of verbal badgering by some of the more lunatic fringe in the objectivist camp, who apparently don't approve of my methods or conclusions as a result of this.

This new tweak Geoff is selling is so difficult for me to understand how it works and seems so far fetched that when I first read it I honestly thought someone was making fun of Geoff by creating a bogus AD on Audiogon. As I stated in the original post I don't think my disbelief or my inability to comprehend how a device works entitles me to question Geoff's integrity. However I am more than a bit surprised that Geoff will not or can not provide an explanation of how something he sell works! My personal belief is as a dealer or manufacturer you should be both able and willing to provide an explanation of how something they sell works. I'm quite disappointed Geoff hasn't done so up till now.

For you Tom I wish you continued success.

Thetubeguy1954

 

Well don't get the wrong idea,, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:05:26
tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 8190
Joined: July 4, 2002
 Well don't get the wrong idea, being an R&D kind of guy, if it were me I would have put a "fiscally irresponsible" portion of resources into that avenue and probably hobbled the business.

 

Some great 'fun with parsing' potential here lads..., posted on June 28, 2007 at 21:35:09
Wellfed



If that's your bag baby.

 

Some people can just "Get It"..., posted on June 29, 2007 at 08:05:56
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 others just can't - but I sleep very well at night, and my dynamite looks are irrelavent to audio. And my systems always sound very good, but I've heard better.

 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 04:04:04
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
I was going to reply further to 'tubeguy' but I will reply to you because it would be exactly the same reply.

I suspect that 'tubeguy' never continued with any experiments way back when he first heard the "Brick" improve his sound. If he had done, he would have made some remarkable discoveries.
After realising that the "Brick" when placed on such as an amplifier had improved the sound, one is left with the questions "What on earth is going on. Is it the weight 'somehow having an effect on the audio signal' as has been suggested. Is it magnetism being affected which, in turn, is 'somehow having an effect on the audio signal' as has been suggested ? To attempt to find out you conduct the following experiments.
You have another IDENTICAL amplifier but this time a passive one - just sitting on a shelf - not connected to the AC power supply and not connected to the audio system. After listening with the "Brick" on the (working) amplifier, you remove the 'brick' and listen again. The sound will be perceived as 'worse' without the "Brick" in position. You now place the "Brick" in top of the identical but PASSIVE amplifier and listen again. The 'good' sound will be back !!!
Explain that !!!!
If you can get an identical improvement in the sound with the "Brick" on a PASSIVE amplifier, then any explanation to do with WEIGHT or with MAGNETISM affecting the audio signal no longer holds water !!! There IS no audio signal travelling through the PASSIVE amplifier. So, you are left with an observation - that the sound was improved with the "Brick" in position but with no explanation.
If you are a good researcher (and many people will recognise what follows) you don't let it go. It niggles you. But, as you have no explanation forthcoming you put the problem and experience on a (mental) shelf until such time as you think you may have found another explanation. Over a period of time - one, two three, five years this (mental) shelf becomes overcrowded with unexplained observations until one day you do something. Something which makes you jolt upright and you suddenly say "I wonder if what I have just experienced - which I HAVE some sort of explanation for - I wonder if this latest explanation can explain all those other observations piling up on the (mental) shelf ?"

You go back to the "Brick" again and try further experiments. Your latest discoveries are to do with layers of things - how sometimes odd numbers or odd layers are best (for sound) sometimes even layers or even numbers are best. It varies with no fixed and definite rule for 100% certainty. Now back to the experiment with the "Brick" The "Brick" is a piece of iron inside a wooden case (one layer of wood). Now, place the "Brick" inside a plastic bag or inside another wooden case and listen (two layers). The sound will now be 'worse' !! You won't get the 'good' sound back until you place the whole thing in a third layer or remove the second layer !!!
Explain that !!!!!

You can experiment as much as you want with the following. Tie a Reef knot in any audio cable - interconnect or AC power cable. ONE Reef knot only and it has to be a Reef knot - not any other knot such as a Granny knot !!! Listen to some music. The sound will be perceived as better. Now, tie a second Reef knot in the same cable and listen again. This time the sound will be perceived as 'worse'. To get the sound back to being 'good' again either tie a third Reef knot in the cable or remove the second Reef knot. If you think you can explain all that from within conventional electronic theories then carry on with the experiment. Remove any and all Reef knots from the cables and listen again. The sound will be perceived as 'worse'. Now, go to any other NON audio cable - such as the cable to the electric clock or the cable to the electric fire or to a PASSIVE cable - such as the cable dangling passively from the table lamp and tie a Reef knot in that cable and listen again. The 'good' sound will be back again !! Showing that any explanation you can think of from conventional electronic theories will no longer hold water. Explanations such as 'something affecting capacitance, resistance, inductance, microphony, dielectric effect, static, RF interference and so on' ???????
Have fun.
Over 20 years ago we were demonstrating all these things to UK retailers, UK manufacturers, UK audio journalists and THAT is why there was so much coverage way back then in the UK magazines. Until, that is, the ridiculers surged in with their input - and what is known as the "cold feet", "hide behind the parapet" syndromes set in !!!

Now the quote from 'thetubeguy' :-

>>> "The funny part about the VPI "Magic Brick" was that I could never detect when it was placed on an amp and I could never fail to detect when it was taken off the amp!" <<<

The part of quite easily being able to detect the sound to be worse when the "Brick" was removed is quite important - in fact so important that I started the talk I gave to a group with exactly that point. As Peter and I had gone around the different retailers, manufacturers, journalists I had seen this happen on numerous occasions and what had surprised me was how people had not understood why this happened. In other words, they did not understand themselves - the human being !!!
Regards,
May Belt.

 

With three variables in play, analysis always becomes difficult. Myself..., posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:39:52
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 ...previously I had seen only two, and that was bad enough!

clark

 

VPI Bricks, posted on June 30, 2007 at 01:43:31
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 are constructed out of laminated steel plates about .1 inch thick and stacked upon each other. Both the additional weight and the capture of the magnetic field is of importance in it's operation. Now if you know about magnetic fields you will understand that the plates have to aligned to work with the existing fields. The best sound using a VPI brick has the internal ferrous plates aligned with the transformer laminations. Placing a single brick above a toroidal transformer has mixed blessings, mostly negative because centered over a toroid, the magnetic field wants to dive through the middle, but the lams prevent the field from doing that. Two VPI bricks on either side of a toroidal transformer works much better.
Simply placing a brick on a component and not being aware of the nature of the magnetic fields will not guarantee a quality sonic increase.
I do not believe VPI makes them anymore. You can duplicate the effect by using an old transformer's laminated core. You can cut the windings off and use it that way, or simply place the whole thing over your power transformer. You can experiment that way with the orientation of the lams.
For toroidal transformers and motors I use large diameter toroids, which you can find at surplus outlets occasionally. They work quite well, but are subject to the same forces as transformers. A copper foil covering helps dissipate the eddy currents induced, particularly if you ground the foil. Here a dumbell weight (iron) will also work well.


Stu

 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 06:38:18
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Hello May,

I'm afraid I have to admit that this "Once-Removed" theory is a bit more than I can understand. Can you explain or do you have any ideas of why it works and effects the sound? All this time I thought the "magic brick" worked by deading the vibrations of the transformers and the tubes, plus absorbing or effecting the magnetic fields from the transformers.

I'll be making my own DIY "magic brick" but cannot help but wonder if the type of metal used matters? If so what's metal is best, iron, steel, brass, aluminium etc? My plans are to get a bar of whatever metal is best and then veneer a wooden outer layer on it. I don't want the metal to scratch my transformers so I will be adding a layer of felt on the bottom. But if the layers matter will this have a postive or negative effect on the sound? Or maybe I should I forego the wood veneer and just put felt on the bottom of the metal bar?

Thetubeguy1954

 

"Then any explanation to do with WEIGHT or with MAGNETISM... no longer holds water !!!" Correction:, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:43:50
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 You mean, any explanation having to do with only weight or magnetism; either or both may still be involved.

clark

 

"Tie a Reef knot in any audio cable." That reminds me!, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:49:29
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 Back maybe twelve years ago I made the acquaintance of an L.A. cable maker -- since disappeared -- who invited me to his place for a demonstration. There I found cables consisting of two separate and loose wires, and on them was a wooden grip which could be slid up and down the cables, at the same time *crossing the wires*! It was easy to hear the sonic differences when the grips were placed in different positions.

clark

 

Basic physics, posted on June 30, 2007 at 02:00:03
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 states that the magnetic fields are induced any time there is an electrical current and vice versa. No mystery here with a passive pre, as it still flows current. Even placing a brick on a cable will also affect the sound if the cable is being used (or under it if you suspect the weight is an issue.


Stu

 

I Do, posted on June 29, 2007 at 06:45:38
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 E-Stat,

Yes I do notice the increase in toroidal transformers. But sadly I'm not very technically adept so please explain how their usage relates to the "magic brick" and how it effected/influneced sound.

Thanks, Thetubeguy1954

 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:12:29
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
If you are going to make your own DIY "magic brick" and if you are going to test the two explanations put forward for why the "magic brick" improved the sound, and if one of the explanations was that the chunk of iron inside the "magic brick" absorbed the magnetic field created by the transformer in the equipment, then you have to also use a chunk of iron!!

You say that you don't want the metal to scratch your transformers. Why do you want to put the metal directly onto the transformers ? In the majority of cases, the "magic brick" was placed on top of the equipment's outer CASE !!
You are quite correct in wondering if an additional layer of felt would affect the sound. The answer is yes, as will a second layer of felt as will a third layer of felt !!!

To begin to understand so much, you have to move away from "something affecting the audio signal" or "something affecting the acoustic air pressure waves in the room".

Quite simply, instead of searching for a wooden case in which to place the chunk of iron, use a plain (unprinted) cardboard box !!!
Regards,
May Belt.

 

The idea behind the bricks, posted on June 29, 2007 at 06:56:12
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37580
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 is to absorb the stray EMF generated by traditional laminated transformers. Toroids generate less hum and about one-tenth the EMF, both ideal for use in audio.

Toroids render the bricks unnecessary.

rw

 

"Toroids render the bricks unnecessary." Is that an experimental result? nt, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:53:49
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 s

 

RE: The idea behind the bricks, posted on June 29, 2007 at 07:56:12
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 E-Stat,

I've noticed a few different proposed suggestions as to how and why the "magic bricks" worked over the years. The 2 I remember the best are:

1) The brick's weight deaded transformer, chassis and tube vibrations.
2) The bricks absorbed or influenced magentic fields around the transformers.

If #2 is the main reason the bricks worked then I'd agree toroids would render the bricks less effect and perhaps unnecessary. But #2 might not be the only thing the brick affected and it's possible they still might have some influence on toroid-based amps as well. I'd love to hear a brick on an amp that used toroids. We'd know in about 20mins if the brick helped or not!

Thetubeguy1954

 

Toroids, posted on June 30, 2007 at 12:07:03
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 generate a doughnut shaped field. Placing a flat piece of ferrous metal over and centered on a toroidal transformer will actually screw up the normal field, channeling the field form the egdes towards the middle and having them in direct oppostition to each other. You need a hole in the middle to allow the field to drop through, or alternatiely you could use two bricks on either side of the cneter.

I actually use large toroids (unmagnetised speaker magnet material) to very good effect over toroidal fields. Since the fields decrease in strength with distance, placement closer to the source is always of greater benefit.

Try placing toroids over, or under, motor assemblies: your TT motor, or your CD/DVD player spin motors. The sonic improvement can be quite dramatic.

For toroidal transformers, again remove the center bolt holding down tha transformer and replace it with a nylon equivalent. You will hear a more relaxed presentation, and a quickness to the music, with a larger soundstage.

I remember playing a very power hungry speaker with a large amp, and then opening up the crossover to examine the parts. I nearly burned my finger when I touched the bolt holding the air core inductor to the wooden case. The field dropping through the center of the coil was inducing current flow and with no where to go simply generated a lot of heat.

Early on, I purchased some Mu metal and did some experimentation with it. You can actually increase the size of the field by extending the mu metal way over the edges of the magnetic source. That's not necessarily a good thing. Placement and application is quite critical for best results.


Stu

 

RE: "It's all in your head!" This is another one of those unproven assertions that "objectivists" are wont to, posted on June 29, 2007 at 08:16:52
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 Look at this link - grab the book Open you mind.

Heyser knew - GRHS.

Here are three quotes.

"At the present state of sound reproduction technology, the audio engineer shares the professional goal of a magician."

"The effect that modern sound reproduction strives to achieve is the creation of an acceptable illusion in the mind of the listener."

"If we wish to understand how to 'measure' what we 'hear,' then we must deal with subjective perception and the illusion of sound."

 

RE: "How, praytell, does one 'broadcast' via quantum mechanics?" LOL!, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:19:11
stuck.wilson@gmail.com
Audiophile

Posts: 855
Location: DC area
Joined: May 7, 2006
 my god clark-

none of that was aimed at you exclusively, and if you believed it was, then my apologies to you, sincerely! if there is any mocking to be aimed here, it is most certainly at the advertising copy afforded by this company.

now, the idea of science being 'finished' is an entirely different matter to a phone call 'fixing' a system. i haven't the slightest bias against science, nor do i think that i understand all of what is possible with quantum mechanics.

however.

a telephone call? honestly. perhaps a little more explanation of this magical technology is due, as a short web page with little or no explanation of how, as i stated previously, a limited bandwidth device such as a telephone, could do much of anything to another electronic device which is permanent, or even useful.

this is not the voice of a crazy flat earther here. i believe very much in the progress of science. quantum mechanics and string theory are fascinating. but that DOES NOT infer that i will believe that a telephone is somehow going to transmit quanta, nor that a stereo device will know what to do with them when and if sent. electrical impulses from 300-3khz. but not subatomic particles that will 'align' my audio system magically through the phone line.

i am quite capable of suspending my disbelief, and am not living life in some pre-galilean dreamstate-- but this one's got a LOT of fleshing out to do before i throw 3 twenties into the void for a 20 second phone call. if this is an unexpected response from the inventor, then perhaps his clientele has a great deal more money than sense, and i commend his knowledge of an incredibly gullilble market portion. i however don't pitch money down the sewer, nor even into 'proven' technologies that easily.

should this be some viable technology, i'd be very excited to read about it, and fully understand to the best of my ability. that's not what's been given- just testimonials on a screen, and no information. if you understand it, don't argue-- spill it. how's it work, and why? armed with this-- i'm all ears. GIVE over that supporting material so that a hypothesis is FORMABLE.

otherwise- 'til that is put forward, by you, or anyone-- it's still a steaming pile of con-artist scheme 'supported' by science very few of the general populus WILL understand.. a great seam to mine by the p.t. barnums of the audio world.

convince me, and i'll recant. til then, i apologize for you feeling personally attacked, but not for being skeptical.

d

 

oh yes.., posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:46:45
stuck.wilson@gmail.com
Audiophile

Posts: 855
Location: DC area
Joined: May 7, 2006
and to address the statement that i 'clearly have no interest in experimentation *or* hypothesis'- i would hardly deem this as a full discourse from which anybody could conclude THAT.

lets not take ourselves THAT seriously on a silly public internet forum.. sense of humor is optional, but taking my rediculous proposition in the subject line, i'dve more than thought that the joking tone of my skepticism was apparent..

d

 

RE: "Then any explanation to do with WEIGHT or with MAGNETISM... no longer holds water !!!" Correction:, posted on June 29, 2007 at 10:56:51
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
>>> "weight or magnetism; either or both may still be involved." <<<

Clark,
Weight or magnetism (having an effect on the audio signal) are (were) the two explanations put forward for why (how) the Magic Brick improved the sound when placed on top of a piece of working equipment.

If you had done the experiment of placing the Magic Brick on an identical but PASSIVE piece of equipment and got exactly the same improvement in the sound as you did when the Brick was on the working piece of equipment then how could weight be having any effect (on the sound) or how can magnetism be having any effect (on the sound) - when there is no audio signal going through the passive piece of equipment to be so affected ?
Regards,
May Belt.

 

So does anyone here actually have one of these magic bricks to test?, posted on June 29, 2007 at 12:14:02
Posy Rorer
Audiophile

Posts: 977
Location: Earth
Joined: March 19, 2007
 I'm a bit skeptical about the EMI effect (EMI waves?? Preposterous! Where is this "invisible EMI radiation"?! I say "Show us the invisible EMI's!"), but whatever the effect wood-shielded iron may have on radio frequencies when situated near a power transformer, I find it impossible to exclude the resonance tuning effect of a several pound iron weight. I believe the laws of physics have already well established that placing that kind of a weight on that kind of an object will change its resonant frequency.

Now I have established to my satisfaction that the VPI brick must at least be affected by the laws of Beltism, since the iron core is completely encased, as was my iron bar inside the ziploc bag in the OR theory test. Understanding the influence of the remaining two possibilities (not excluding any others?!), is pretty easy - if you have access to a VPI brick. May offered the good idea of trying the brick on a passive amp (not unlike my test, where I tried the iron bar on a computer top! Don't get much more "passive" than that...).

That will help establish whether the brick is also influenced by Beltist laws, but if there are differences from switching the brick from the passive amp to the active amp, that "might" tell you (at the very least), how resonance tuning might also affect the overall sound of this device. (It only gets a little complicated to differentiate the effects of both principles, because strictly under Beltist law alone, simply moving an object from one location to another can change the sound). To understand the influence, if any, of EMI, you have simply to place the brick (on a passive amp) far away from the active amp as is possible to get in your home (but then.... that leaves open the argument as to how influential EMI really is.... "Some people" seem to think its as omnipotent as cosmic rays...).

Another way to try to put a divider between the effects of resonances and (the OR theory under Beltism), is, following May's idea, to test the influence of a heavy iron weight on the active amp, then with a plain cardboard box around the weight (which is light enough that it should have no audible influence under resonance theory). This has the possibility of showing the influences of Beltism on the weight, but I don't believe you can completely isolate the effects of resonance either, because the material itself (iron), especially in that location (transformer), will inevitably be having a 'Beltist effect'. Adding more bricks on top of each other doesn't prove anything either, because even if the weight was zero grams, a second one would be having an effect under Beltist laws.





Objective Audiophile 2007

 

Yes and no, posted on June 29, 2007 at 08:22:19
E-Stat
Audiophile

Posts: 37580
Joined: May 12, 2000
Contributor
  Since: April 5, 2002
 Some is mere technical speculation - does that sound familiar here? :)

Some is based upon HP's experience. I've seen bricks in his systems since the first time I visited Seacliff in 1980. He's got about a dozen of them. I still have an old pic of that IRS-CJ Premier One-Denneson JC-80-Goldmund Studio/T3 system where he used three of them on the amp. More recently, he used six! of them on the flotilla of black boxes that comprise a double pair of ASR Emitter 2s which do not have toroids. On the other hand, he didn't use them with Edge Signature monoblocks and now doesn't use them on the Edge amp that drives his MC system. He's kinda fanatic about testing that kind of stuff.

rw

 

IOW..., posted on June 29, 2007 at 10:04:56
Wellfed
 No

 

We were talking about the T. Tweak, not stereo -- please stick to the topic. nt, posted on June 29, 2007 at 09:13:03
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 d

 

Thanks For Providing Support Of My Previous Statement Here, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:05:50
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Hey gym,

I want to thank you for supporting a statement I've made here previously that many of the objectivists mocked. I stated: "However the typical measurements used today in audio don’t correlate with what we hear." This can be seen in this post... http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=prophead&n=29712&highlight=specifications+thetubeguy1954&r=&session=

Richard Heyser implied this same thing when he said: "If we wish to understand how to 'measure' what we 'hear,' then we must deal with subjective perception and the illusion of sound." However he said it outright when he said: "One of the worst-kept secrets in audio engineering is that what we hear does not always correlate with what we measure."

The sad part is when I said this very same thing my comments were set apon like a pack of wolves by many of the objectivists here. This is further proof that when it comes to objectivists here on PHP it's not what's said that actually matters, but rather who says it and whether it supports the objectivist's POV at that particular time that really counts, huh?

Thetubeguy1954

 

You must have this post on 'auto' so you can post it every few weeks...(nt), posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:02:14
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 (nt)

 

Please don't consider it "junkyard dog attack", but how is that relevant?, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:14:49
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 7181
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 Somebody listened to some amps and couldn't reliably tell when they were switched - what does it have to do with me or you? They could be deaf, drunk, stupid, or insincere, or all that together, as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, it's great that you have your system listed - it helps to understand where you're coming from. There's very slim chance anybody could tell differences between wires, when they connect such decidedly mid-fi equipment. I hope you don't take that as offence - I'm just stating obvious fact, and not trying to humiliate anybody. The only thing that matters is that you like it.

Unwillingness to experiment (upgrade) also saves you a lot of money, so many here can be just plain jealous - possible cause of that junkyard dog thing.

 

Richard You're Becoming Quite Boring, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:16:20
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001
 Richard,

I haven't called one time, have you? You are becoming quite boring repeating the same things over and over again though. Most of what you say is simply highly-subjective, negative comments, you make up and dress to appear as if they "might" have some credibility. Richard you're definitely older, but I highly doubt wiser. Bitter seems a more accurate description in keeping with what and how you've been writing here lately.

FYI I have a nice weekend planned. I'll be enjoying my music for certain. I seldom if ever post on the Asylum on weekends. So need to worry yourself about my spending too much time arguing about wires and tweaks here when the weekend comes...

Thetubeguy1954

 

Perhaps some are wondering why our pedantic objectivist neglected to, posted on July 1, 2007 at 12:29:05
bjh
Audiophile

Posts: 18614
Location: Ontario
Joined: November 22, 2003
 provide a link to the documentation for this particular test that he never tires of parading out, i.e.:

"In the Stereophile blind amplifier test (for one example a Golden Ear might actually read without launching the usual junkyard dog test methodology attacks and participant character attacks) when an amplifier was compared with itself (A vs. A ... or B vs. B) the "Golden Ear" participants said they heard differences in 62% of those trials when no differences were possible!"

Well the "Golden Ear" participants were actually visitors to a trade show and as for the listening environment we have:

"The room available to us at the show venue, the Dunfey San Mateo hotel, could hold about 55 seated people without crowding; as it turned out, the tests were so popular that we had to squeeze in additional people who were content to stand or sit on the floor (footnote 4). As then only about 10% of the listeners would have received any semblance of a stereo soundfield and the room was particularly lively, especially in the upper midrange and treble, differences in soundstaging performance between the test amplifiers would not have contributed to any subjective differences, I felt. In addition, there was often a problem with breakthrough from the adjacent room, despite Jeff Rowland keeping his sound pressures to mainly reasonable levels."

Mind you I shouldn't complain after all I always do my critical listening in an unfamiliar room with 50-60 odd strangers... alternatives such as sitting in sweet spot in my own room with my own system, or something similar listening to a friends' system, well they just ain't scientific, certainly nothing near the ideal setting such as the Stereophile/Golden Ears test described above!

---

Pretty sad that this is the best the poor fool can come up with... Ah well one can only work with what they got!



No Guru, No Method, No Teacher

 

Three [nt], posted on July 1, 2007 at 19:43:51
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000

 

I'm just saying, that experiment alone does not eliminate either of the other two possibilities., posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:53:44
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 It simply adds a third.

clark

 

Strange that you keep reading ...., posted on June 29, 2007 at 14:28:13
Richard BassNut Greene
 ... very strange.

If you don't like my posts, then why read them?
.
.
.
.

Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007

 

You're wrong in saying "many of the objectivists here" are "like a pack of wolves"., posted on June 30, 2007 at 07:43:26
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 Earlier I revealed the truth: They're more like a pack of hyenas.

clark

 

RE: Thanks For Providing Support Of My Previous Statement Here, posted on June 30, 2007 at 10:28:55
gymwear5@hotmail.com
Manufacturer

Posts: 3475
Joined: April 10, 2002
 In practice, objectivists like me tend to get frustrated with subjectivist when we should be frustrated with audio in general. It's the "imagining" process we can't get a handle on because it can't be measured. We get frustrated when a SET owner with oodles of distortion glows on about the wonderful presentation coming from his system when we know the signal is distorted and the same guy has umteen megabuck wrapped up in cables that we know don't change the signal at all and yet what we should be happy with the that he enjoys the sound of his system. So there's a new telportation tweek now that someone will purchase and it makes them happy with a new found listening experience. All I hope is that they didn't spend their last 40 clams on the experience and are keeping up with child support and any real obligations they have to society.

 

RE: Thanks For Providing Support Of My Previous Statement Here, posted on July 1, 2007 at 19:33:01
tomservo
Manufacturer

Posts: 8190
Joined: July 4, 2002
 Hi Tubeguy

I had the good fortune to have been invited to dinner by Don and Carolyn Davis while at a trade show in the 80’s. I got to sit at a table of Audio giants, Dick Heyser, Gene Patronis, Don and Carolyn Davis and others. Dick was a good friend of Don’s and a brilliant man, I said about 3 words other than responding to a few softball things Don pitched me.
I have used his TDS process (TEF machines) ever since and it is my main loudspeaker measuring tool and I am friends with the fellow who maintains the Heyser library. Dick’s insights about time is partly what has driven my time coherent speaker designs.

My point, I know for sure, none of those folks would tolerate and would be offended by the total nonsense which has crept into some audio product marketing.
All of these people were dead serious about what they heard AND measured, there livelihoods and reputations depended on it.
Like Dick said, measurements don’t tell you what you hear but would have likely added, your ears don’t always tell you what something is doing either and that can be very important when your developing something new.
Best,
Tom

 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 11:44:17
thetubeguy1954
Audiophile

Posts: 6112
Location: Orlando, Fla
Joined: January 7, 2001




MB: If you are going to test the two explanations put forward for why the "magic brick" improved the sound, and if one of the explanations was that the chunk of iron inside the "magic brick" absorbed the magnetic field created by the transformer in the equipment, then you have to also use a chunk of iron!!

TG1954: Of course you're 100% correct "IF" I wanted to make my DIY "magic brick" exactly like VPIs it would have to be iron. My goal is not to simply create an exact DIY copy of VPI's brick. Instead I'm hoping to discover why it worked and then possibly improve it's performance. I'm not very technically adept and I thought there might be other metals known to absorb ot affect magnetic fields even better than iron. If that was the case I'd want to use that metal instead of iron. The idea being that it "might" cause an even greater, better effect. I was hoping you might know which metal is best at absorbing or influencing magnetic fields.
======================================================================
MB: You say that you don't want the metal to scratch your transformers. Why do you want to put the metal directly onto the transformers ? In the majority of cases, the "magic brick" was placed on top of the equipment's outer CASE !!

TG1954: Unfortunately my transformers are "exposed", yes they're covered by metal cylinder covers but I don't want the covers scratched either. I provided a picture of my amp from the front and side so you can see what I mean. So I'd have to place my DIY brick on top of these covers. Hence the need/desire for felt.
======================================================================
MB: You are quite correct in wondering if an additional layer of felt would affect the sound. The answer is yes, as will a second layer of felt as will a third layer of felt !!!

TG1954: Ok that's what I'd thought you were going to say.
=======================================================================
MB: To begin to understand so much, you have to move away from "something affecting the audio signal" or "something affecting the acoustic air pressure waves in the room".

TG1954: I'm willing to try and understand that something else besides "affecting the audio signal" or "affecting the acoustic air pressure waves in the room" is happening. Can you begin to help me understand what you're suggesting is actually occuring instead?
=======================================================================
MB: Quite simply, instead of searching for a wooden case in which to place the chunk of iron, use a plain (unprinted) cardboard box !!!

TG1954: Great suggestion. I'll start with that.

Thetubeguy1954

 

Stereophile blind tests = rare..... 62% reporting "differences" when amps are compared with themselves = news, posted on June 29, 2007 at 14:22:59
Richard BassNut Greene
 This was Stereophile, so the components were high-end and the participants were GOLDEN EARS.

I assume Atkinson ran the test, and since he has written here that 30% of blind tests he's participated in had improper test methodolgies, that must mean he is a world-class expert on blind test methodology.

How could there possibly be a better test?

People forget that half the comparisons in any blind test are of a component compared with itself.

It's most interesting that the Stereophile GOLDEN EARS, when comparing an amplifier with itself, said they heard differences 62% of the time!

Seems like GOLDEN EARS have a stong bias toward reporting differences when none are possible.

That's important to consider when you compare two components ... especially when they play music at different SPL's (almost always in sighted comparisons).

It's very interesting how GOLDEN EARS like you think they know what a stereo sounds like by reading a component list!

Don't have to listen to the stereo.

Don't even need experience with any of the components in other rooms.

Just need to read a components list and let your EXPECTATIONS tell you the stereo is "mid-fi", whatever that means.

I appreciate the "decididly mid-fi equipment" comment because it so clearly points out that audiophiles think they can judge sound quality by reading a component list.

No need for double-blind auditions.

No need for single-blind auditions.

No need for auditions at all.

Just read a component list and immediately decide if the owner has the "right" brands and has spent "enough" money on the components.

By the way, my double-blind wire test used a much better stereo than I own. I didn't say I did all my tests at home.
.
.
.

Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007

 

"Perhaps a little more explanation of this magical technology is due." Hmm..., posted on June 30, 2007 at 07:36:04
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 To primitive peoples all technology appears "magical".

"But that DOES NOT infer that i will believe that a telephone is somehow going to transmit quanta." Then what DO you believe will transmit quanta (since you've reduced this to a matter of *belief*)? Just askin'!

"But this one's got a LOT of fleshing out to do before i throw 3 twenties into the void for a 20 second phone call." You've got a money-back guarantee and still you have problems? Geez Luiz.

"But not subatomic particles that will 'align' my audio system magically through the phone line." "Magic" -- that word again. A lot of "buts" in there too, we see.

"If you understand it, don't argue-- spill it. how's it work, and why?" And you are qualified to receive this intelligence, why, exactly? Are you a patent attorney? Remind me, we signed a non-disclosure agreement? Your demands, sir, are those of a child deprived of his toy for what the parents see as a very good reason.

"Otherwise- 'til that is put forward, by you, or anyone-- it's still a steaming pile of con-artist scheme... a great seam to mine by the p.t. barnums of the audio world." Speaking of attorneys -- you'll be hearing from mine. The crimes? Defamation of character, and silliness in the name of science.

clark


 

RE: Test of Once-Removed Theory, posted on June 29, 2007 at 14:32:48
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Now I understand why you said you would be placing the DIY "magic brick" directly on top of the transformer.

Aside from your desire to make a DIY "magic brick", how many feet does your amplifier sit on ? Four ? I also notice from your photograph that there is a (TV?) stand behind the amplifier - with four feet !!
Now, experiment with the (peculiar) odd and even rule. If your amplifier has four feet, place a plain piece of paper under ONE (only ONE)of the four feet. Listen for a short period of time, then remove the piece of paper. I think when you remove the paper, you will find that you can no longer listen with the same pleasure !!
Carrying on with the experiments place a plain piece of paper under ONE of the four feet of the TV stand, also under ONE of any other four feet of equipment !! Listen for a short time, then remove any one of the pieces of paper ! You will be surprised at the deterioration in the sound !

Nothing to do with vibrations, nothing to do with magnetism, nothing to do with 'something affecting the audio signal', but something to do with how the human being is reacting to their environment !!!!!!!
Regards,
May Belt.

 

My God!, posted on June 30, 2007 at 01:56:08
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 We are making mountains out of molehills!

If you want to improve on the VPI brick, be sure to radius the corners of the laminated steel or iron plates. Of course the thickness of the case matters: magnetic fields weaken with distance also.
Again, seriously examine a transformer. The better ones have more and thinner laminations in order to 'catch' more lines of magnetic force, as each lamination will pass one line of magnetic force. Magnetism would rather travel through ferrous objects than through air. The field traveling through the laminations will induce a current. A copper foil tape will speed this current flow especially if placed occasionally within the iron lams. Grounding the copper will 'sink' that current induced speeding the flow even more.

You may want to check the websites for people like Co-netics, who manufacture mu metal. They have useful tips and advice for magnetic shielding and channeling.

Stu

 

"The joking tone of my skepticism was apparent...." Hmm..., posted on June 30, 2007 at 07:49:35
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

Posts: 26843
Location: Massachusetts
Joined: May 5, 2000
 Although perhaps difficult to differentiate from the straight-faced derision most demanders here employ.

clark

 

I have four bricks, posted on June 30, 2007 at 02:07:30
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 and dropped one so I got to examine the internals.....
You guys are attemting to mystify a perfectly normal and explainable phenomena. Basic physics are employed here, no mysticism. If you want to verify the magnetic affect place a thick spacer of styro foam between the brick and the chassia and the effect will diminish, since magnetic field strength is also affected by distance. The weight is nearly the same, eliminating that factor. Or use an equivalent red brick if you really want to check.


Stu

 

38% must have "Golden Ears"..., posted on June 29, 2007 at 14:38:34
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 ...because they weren't fooled.

Which group are you in, Mr. Nut?

 

An alternative conclusion is that the tests are invalid at least for the purpose they are being used. nt, posted on June 29, 2007 at 15:44:06
Norm
Reviewer

Posts: 31024
Joined: September 6, 2000
 a

 

RE: Stereophile blind tests = rare..... 62% reporting "differences" when amps are compared with themselves = n, posted on July 1, 2007 at 05:45:01
Todd Krieger
Audiophile

Posts: 37333
Location: SW United States
Joined: November 2, 2000
 The last time I tested an amp against itself I heard a difference.....

Most amps sound quite different 15 minutes later relative to when they're first turned on.....

This is why most listening tests should be done with the amps running at least a couple hours.

And I think this is why people tend to hear "improvements" from tweaks..... And why people tend to prefer "B" over "A" when doing an "A-B" evaluation. (How often do you read about a tweak making things sound worse?)

 

Like a big wreck on the side of the road...I try not to look...(nt), posted on June 29, 2007 at 14:36:38
mkuller
Audiophile

Posts: 38130
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: April 22, 2003
 (nt)

 

Interesting. I did, of course, hear a benefit. Who is right or is it conditions differ?, posted on June 30, 2007 at 11:25:26
Norm
Reviewer

Posts: 31024
Joined: September 6, 2000
 Test System:

H-Cat P-12R line stage
Exemplar Statement Amp
Accoustic Arts Dac mk IV
Accoustic Arts Drive One mk II
Acapella LaCampanellas
Jade ics
Cerious Tech speaker wires
Stealth Dream power cords
Halcyonic and Acapella isolation bases all on Mana stands

 

RE: My God!, posted on June 30, 2007 at 12:53:03
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 "The better ones have more and thinner laminations in order to 'catch' more lines of magnetic force, as each lamination will pass one line of magnetic force."

Stu, the transformer has laminations to reduce eddy currents, that's all. Don't forget that lines of magnetic force don't really exist, they're just a mental model to help visualize the magnetic flux density and vector. So, actually a thicker lam will have a lower reluctance and more "lines of force" than a thin one, but it also has lower resistance and thus more eddy current loss.

Regards, Rick

 

RE: Basic physics, posted on June 30, 2007 at 06:54:21
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Quote from unclestu52:-

>>> "Basic physics states that the magnetic fields are induced any time there is an electrical current and vice versa. No mystery here with a passive pre, as it still flows current. Even placing a brick on a cable will also affect the sound if the cable is being used (or under it if you suspect the weight is an issue." <<<
*******************
Yes. I agree with conventional theory.
Yes, I agree that there will be an adverse energy pattern around electronic equipment anytime there is an electrical current.
Yes, I agree that if you hear an improvement in the sound when placing the 'brick' on a piece of equipment then this 'adverse energy is being reduced'.
What I challenge is the explanation that this 'adverse energy' was causing problems to the audio signal in the first place. So, placing the 'brick' on a piece of equipment and improving the sound was, yes, 'reducing the adverse effect' but I would suggest that it was not affecting the audio signal - it was doing something else !! Still exactly the same result but a different explanation.

You say there is no mystery with a passive piece of equipment as it still flows current.
Pray tell us how this passive piece of equipment, just sitting passively on a shelf, not connected into the audio system, not connected to the AC supply can be affecting the audio signal going through the working equipment.

If you say it can, then why does not everyone else know this ? Why do you have hundreds of Hi Fi retailers (around the world) with large PASSIVE displays of equipment, whilst trying to demonstrate the 'sound' of expensive Hi Fi equipment.
Why do you have numerous Hi Fi manufacturers and Hi Fi equipment distributors with large PASSIVE displays of equipment at Hi Fi Shows, whilst at the same time demonstrating the 'sound' of Hi Fi equipment ?

If, as you say, there is no mystery with passive equipment why do some reviewers of Hi Fi equipment have PASSIVE equipment strewn all over the place awaiting review ?
14 years ago I was so amazed after visiting various equipment reviewers that I wrote a paper on this very subject. (Available to read on our home page - called " Reviewers Story - written in 1993").
Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: I have four bricks, posted on June 30, 2007 at 03:56:01
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Quote from unclestu52:-
>>> "You guys are attemting to mystify a perfectly normal and explainable phenomena. Basic physics are employed here, no mysticism. If you want to verify the magnetic affect place a thick spacer of styro foam between the brick and the chassia and the effect will diminish, since magnetic field strength is also affected by distance. The weight is nearly the same, eliminating that factor. Or use an equivalent red brick if you really want to check." <<<

****************

Of course placing a thick spacer of styro foam between the brick and the chassis will change the effect. You have added another layer. AND, in addition, you have added a material (a foam made of a specific chemical mixture) which we (human beings) react adversely to. To prove this, all you have to do is to place similar pieces of styro foam on top of all manner of other equipment and you will experience the same adverse effect on the sound !!! The more pieces of styro foam you have in the environment, the worse will be your sound !!

If you want to experiment with layers under the 'brick' to try to show distance away from the (supposed) problem, then use layers of felt. Place one layer of thick felt and yes, you will most likely hear a deterioration in the sound but then place a second layer of thick felt and the 'good' sound will be back - even though you are now further distance away from the (supposed) problem. Place a third layer of thick felt and the sound will be perceived as worse again until you either remove the third layer or add a fourth layer - giving even further distance !!
I am not saying that there is NO stray magnetic field around equipment - what I am saying is that if you are prepared to do enough experiments, you will find that the effect of the 'brick' has nothing to do with 'an effect on the audio signal' !!!

You are correct that the effect of the brick has nothing to do with it's weight - that is why I described doing the experiment of placing it on top of an identical but PASSIVE piece of equipment. The effect on the sound will be the same as when it was placed on top of a working piece of equipment i.e an improvement in the sound - even though there is no audio signal going through the passive equipment !!!

But, you are not correct when you say that 'basic physics are employed here'.
Are you claiming that without the 'brick' on top of the (say) amplifier, stray magnetic fields are having an adverse effect on the audio signal but with the 'brick' in place the stray magnetic fields are being 'dealt with' (absorbed ?, flipped ?, changed ?) so that they are no longer having an adverse effect on the audio signal ?
If this was the case, then any such changes to the audio signal would surely be able to be measured - and if there were such measurements as proof, surely those measurements would be shouted from the rooftops by the producers of the 'brick' !!! And, therefore, following from that proof, no equipment would then be sold WITHOUT a 'brick' !!

The more experiments you are prepared to do, the less the explanations of weight or magnetism hold water !! So, as I have said many times. You are left with (correct) observations i.e that the 'sound' has changed, but with no explanations !!

Regards,
May Belt.

 

My apologies, posted on June 30, 2007 at 11:53:42
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 about the 'passive' gear: I somehow read it to mean a 'passive' preamp, i.e. one without active electronics.

That being said, you can demonstrate the magnetic effect by placing the brick under a component also. Or, if you wish place the brick on the shelf below.

As for designing to minimize the effect of a brick, one reason why toroidal transformers became popular was because they generate a smaller magnetic field. But as far as completely eliminating the effect of magnetic inductance, I suggest a brushing up on physics basics. Electron flow and magnetism are inextricably bound together.

Again, magnetic fields would rather travel through ferrous objects rather than through air. Sprinkle iron powder on a sheet of paper and place a magnet under, gently tapping the paper to align the powder with the lines of force. The place a piece of iron close by, doing the same. You will see a change in the nature of the lines generated. Using that knowledge will enable you to 'properly' locate a VPI brick on your gear, and also explain why some positions are more effective than others. There is no one carte blanche solution for very situation.

As for measurements, yes, you can measure changes (I have a Lakeshore Gauss meter). Most will not own or have access to a gaussmeter, but you could even employ a simple compass and see changes in the needle deflection, which is how I started out. But you can also use your ear, too. Again experiments with iron powder show that strategic placement of something like a VPI brick can reduce the stray magnetic field.

Measurement of magnetic fields are actually very enlightening, and you can measure the relative fields by again using a simple compass. On a 12 inch woofer, I can see and measure magnetic deflection up to 4 to 5 feet away. even a foot away from a CD player I can measure changes. The pervasiveness of magnetic fields, not counting the field of the planet, is far greater than many realize. The same applies to RFI which can be measured by a simple meter used by microwave servicers.

As far as actually placing the brick on a shelf, several other manufacturers, (Enacom, Argent, Roomtunes, Shakti, Shun Mook) have effectively demonstrated that placement of anything within the room can have an effect on the reflected acoustic wave, however small. You should get a similar effect using a weighted wooden box, as you have pointed out.

I use pieces of wood placed throughout my sound room for sonic advantage. By using sample blocks, I can easily assess which woods sound 'better' to my ears, and surprise, surprise (actually no surprise) the better sounding woods mirror their use in musical instruments.

One of the Shun Mook founders told me that the effect of the wood was discovered (by them) because one of them had a guitar for decorative purposes one one wall. His son decided to learn how to play the instrument and removed it, and then he realized that the skewed soundstage in his sound room suddenly reverted to normal. Ever notice that they often have a violin on display in their booths at CES, placed between the speakers? The placement is not purely for decorative purposes.

I have often visited my customers' homes, and by strategically moving their existing furnishings and decorative fixtures, greatly improved certain aspects of the sound, using their tastes as a guide.

Again my apologies for making that mistake on passive components, but I still must stand by my statement in that trying to 'mystify' a basic application of physics, you are actually doing audio a vast disservice.
The one thing I will say in parting is that the human body's sensitivity is quite astonishing, although not every one shares that sensitivity.


Stu


 

So... Styrofoam bad, Felt good!, posted on June 30, 2007 at 12:20:49
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 How about a short list, say twenty common household items with their "adversity" levels enumerated? How does PVC compare with Polycarbonate? Are there actually any beneficial things that we can strew about to help reduce the overall adversity?

And how does distance affect adversity? To be safe, do adverse items need to be a meter away? In the closet? In the next room? In the driveway?

Speaking of removal, how do you tote up the layer count of bonded material such as plywood and other laminates?

Thanks, Rick




 

Page: [ 1 ] [ 2 ]

Page processed in 0.069 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]