Isolation Ward

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

Return to Isolation Ward

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Easy test of Belt theory

71.223.118.20
Posted on March 22, 2008 at 16:08:21
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 A while back, I mentioned in an email to Geoff Kait that I have sometimes dreamed of building an audio shed, where I could listen to music without all of the negative influences that Peter and May Belt speak of. As a separate building, it could be insulated from the endless bar codes, spare CDs, wires, electronics etc. that supposedly affect our ability to hear what is in the music. Instead of treating them as Geoff and the Belts do, you could just completely eliminate the source of the negative influences. If I used a battery powered system, I could also avoid a lot of EMF by not even having AC electricity in the shed at all.

And then I thought wait a minute, I live in Arizona and can be outside a lot...who needs a shed? So I am thinking of rigging up a high end portable computer and headphone system to take out in the yard away from the house and all of its influences.

And today as a test, I hooked up my Audio Technica W1000 headphones to a little portable mp3 player we have to see if I could hear a difference in sound between how this rig sounds inside my office versus out in the yard away from the house. And as an initial impression, there is a difference. The sound in the yard is much richer and more detailed.

It seems this is a no-cost experiment for anyone with a portable headphone type system to see if music sounds better when you are away from all of the man-made materials and energetic effects of being inside a house. If so it would suggest there is something to Peter and May's theory. Of course by using the same portable music player with headphones you would always be comparing apples to apples, so it does not really matter how good your portable device is, but a decent and revealing system should provide a better test. You can just listen for a while inside the house and then head outdoors to a more natural setting and see how the sound changes. The headphones would take out any room effects versus playing say a boombox which would sound radically different outdoors without any walls.

I would love to know if anyone else tries this out, what difference you hear if any.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Easy test of Belt theory, posted on March 23, 2008 at 04:28:58
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 There is one experiment you can do Nirmala with your 'listening outside experiment' using your battery operated mp3 player - because batteries are also an adverse problem !!!

Have two identical sets of mp3 player batteries. Put one set of batteries through the freezing/slow defrost procedure and keep the other set of batteries untreated. Listen outdoors using the untreated batteries, get used to that sound, then replace the untreated batteries with the 'treated' batteries and listen again. After you have listened for some time using the 'treated' batteries, go back to using the untreated batteries again and see if you can listen with the same pleasure !!!!

Regards,
May Belt.

 

Good one! nt, posted on March 23, 2008 at 10:57:43
clarkjohnsen
Reviewer

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

 

You don't need, posted on March 23, 2008 at 15:48:58
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 an MP-3 player: Since the Belt theories claim the effect is on the listener, have your SO talk to you outdoors and note if their voice quality changes.

QED

STu

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 23, 2008 at 17:26:20
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 There would still be the difference between walls and no walls. In our house there are really bad acoustics and sometimes I can not understand my wife in normal conversation from across the room because the sound is reflected and echoed in strange ways.

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 24, 2008 at 03:44:28
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 But that suggestion of yours would still not enable Nirmala to recognise that batteries are a problem - a problem regarding good sound !!
Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 24, 2008 at 21:34:11
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 Among other things, Nicad bateries have a higher impedance and voltage when freshly charged and the voltage drops after an hour or so. This does change aspects of sonic quality. Have you investigated the physical parameters of the batteries you use?

Stu

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 25, 2008 at 13:08:59
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Why would you wish to particularly select out Nicad batteries in this discussion ?
With my reference to batteries having an adverse effect, I am meaning ALL batteries.
We were alerted to the adverse effect of batteries on sound over 25 years ago by the adverse effect of simple pen torch batteries in our listening room !! ALL batteries are a problem.
Regards,
May Belt.

 

You could pretty easily record your wife and listen to her in both environments..., posted on March 25, 2008 at 21:49:02
Wellfed
Audiophile

Posts: 11226
Joined: January 11, 2008
 But then again, you might just say to yourself—what's the point? ;-)

I haven't checked out the laundry suds tweak BTW, would you mind proposing some type of experiment for me to try in late April? Would there be any potential benefit in treating a large slipcover on the sectional I'm seated on in my listening room? Perhaps that's a bit ambitious; you tell me.

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 25, 2008 at 23:31:21
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 Nicads were just one example, but all batteries have different discharge rates based on their chemistry,. The issue is that have you explored the possibility of the chemical reactions being affected by the external processes applied and how does it affect the sound quality? Alkalines differ from the early zinc batteries, Lithium has different characteristics, etc. For the sake of simple curiosity, and because you claim to be engineers, I was wondering if measurements have been performed and perhaps a difference between battery types noted and commented about. They all do perform differently, you know, but removing all batteries, would render the experiment void, wouldn't you think?


Stu

 

Been doing a little experimentation with, posted on March 25, 2008 at 23:42:53
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 negative ions. The suds thing is actually probably producing some negative ions in suppressing static, as do most anti-cling additives like Downey fabric softeners.

In my case, i was given a phiten wrist band which claims to use a titanium compound (probably TiO2 which has catalytic properties when exposed to UV) to help with my left arm which underwent a fistula. One noticeable aspect to the wrist band, other than helping circulation (my hand feels noticeably warmer), is that my car stereo has better bass, lower midrange and dynamics. Hanging my arm, wristband on, outside the window shows a reduction in the same frequency response range. Interesting....

The phiten craze is quite popular where I live, and I have seen stories about the Major League Baseball players using it (necklaces, etc.). My sister in law who is a nurse actually recommended it. They make clothing as well as a lotion out of it, too.

The titanium oxide is quite interesting in itself. There is a company marketing a compact fluorescent bulb coated with it, claiming that it has antibiotic properties. Other than a pigment for white paints, it also has usage in anti fogging and self cleaning glass and other interesting properties

Stu

 

RE: You could pretty easily record your wife and listen to her in both environments..., posted on March 26, 2008 at 09:38:52
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 The simplest initial experiment is to treat an old bed sheet with the laundry additive (you just add it to the rinse cycle) and then wrap your body in it while listening. The laundry additive makes the fabric into a very effective reflector of EMF, so by wrapping your body with it, you would be protecting yourself from any stray EMF that otherwise would strike your body. I don't sit wrapped up in a sheet all of the time while listening but it does work well as an experiment. The laundry additive is especially helpful for people who are unusually sensitive to EMF, so there is no telling if it will work in this application for you or for anybody else. As always YMMV.

Once you have determined if there is any benefit, you can treat the slipcover and any clothing you tend to wear while listening. The treatment lasts until the next washing, so I focused on treating items I only wash occasionally like blankets, sweaters and coats.

You can also treat fabric and then wrap or drape sources of EMF with the fabric (of course being careful not to trap the heat generated by electronic devices). I did this for some of the sources of EMF in my room such as my computer.

I will be curious to hear your results.

 

RE: Easy test of Belt theory, posted on March 26, 2008 at 10:15:50
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 I realize I am not leaving all of the trappings of modern civilization behind with this approach, as I do bring some electronics out with me into the backyard. I wonder if you have a sense of how close the batteries have to be to affect me when I am outdoors. Would the effect be less if the electronic device with batteries is say 3 feet or more away? I could use an extension cord on my headphones to create even more distance, so maybe I will experiment with that also.

Unfortunately the MP3 player has built in rechargeable battteries, so while I can try the freezer treatment on the entire unit, I can not do an easy A/B test by just switching batteries.

I do intend to freeze the batteries of the new laptop I just ordered which will be part of a new portable system I intend to use for listening outdoors, and also I will freeze the new headphone amp I also ordered in order to treat its built in rechargeable batteries. I will aslo treat them both with the cream-electret I ordered from you awhile back.

I like the whole idea of spending more time outdoors anyways, so I am excited to be moving in this direction. I listen to headphones 95% of the time and also use a computer as my source, so recreating my system as a portable I can take out in the yard has been relatively easy.

 

If I may be so bold, posted on March 26, 2008 at 10:19:57
geoffkait
 to point out that Belt devices have precious little to do with RFI/EMI or electromagnetic fields. I.e., nothing to do with RFI/EMI getting into the equipment or getting into the person.

 

RE: You don't need, posted on March 26, 2008 at 11:51:21
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Different batteries may behave differently but ALL batteries are identical in one respect - they all have a polarity !! You cannot have a battery without it has a positive and a negative - i.e a polarity - irrespective of what substance it is made of or it's size or it's shape !!

The same with magnets. ALL magnets have a polarity, you cannot have a magnet without it has a North and a South !! It does not matter whether it is a horseshoe magnet or a round magnet (for loudspeaker drive units) or a long bar magnet polarised end to end (with a North at one end and a South at the other end) or a long bar magnet polarised through it's depth (with a long North face and a long South face at the rear) - ALL have a polarity.

And, in our opinion (and experiments), it is our (human beings) reaction to these polarities which prevent us being able to 'sign off' our environment as 'safe'.

And, yes, the different substances which different batteries are made from will have an effect on the sound but these different substances will be affecting the environment in which we live (and listen) and therefore our reaction to those different substances will be different.
Nicads will sound different to Alkaline which will sound different to Zinc which will sound different to Lithium batteries - and YOUR reaction to each of those substances will be different and you will react more adversely to some substances than to others whilst at the same time reacting to their polarity !!! 'Treat' them and you will gradually lessen the different adverse effects.

Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: Been doing a little experimentation with, posted on March 26, 2008 at 11:54:16
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 >>> "One noticeable aspect to the wrist band, other than helping circulation (my hand feels noticeably warmer), is that my car stereo has better bass, lower midrange and dynamics. Hanging my arm, wristband on, outside the window shows a reduction in the same frequency response range. Interesting...." <<<

Of course it is Interesting - surely it should be more than that unclestu !! I would think that because you are what would be regarded as a 'professional in audio' and therefore, as a 'professional in audio', you should now begin to realise that any customer entering your showroom or demonstration room wearing a similar wrist band would affect the sound in your demonstration room - then, when they leave, the sound would not be as good !!!! Surely, as a 'professional in audio' you should be investigating anything which can affect 'sound' and not merely commenting that it is 'Interesting' ?

We have been doing things like that and experiencing things like that for over 25 years !!!

After making our remarkable discoveries over 25 years ago, we realised that, with Hi Fi retailers intending demonstrating ours (and other manufacturers) State of the Art Hi Fi equipment, that it could not be left to the vagaries of the various Hi Fi retailers not being aware of just what can affect 'sound'. So, we set about attempting to describe to them what is happening - in exactly the same way that Ivor Tiefenbrum had done earlier, when he had realised that passive loudspeakers, spread willy nilly around retailers demonstration rooms, were adversely affecting the sound of the loudspeakers actually being listened to. And, as I have explained on numerous occasions, it was our investigations regarding Ivor's observations which resulted in our major breakthroughs re audio. Our investigations led us to appreciate just what an adverse effect on 'sound' that magnets and batteries have !!

You can apply a strip of our Foil to the back of your wrist watch, or apply a small amount of our Cream-Electret to the face of your wrist watch and improve your sound !!! Remove your wrist watch from your wrist and take it out of the room and the sound will not be as good. And, before you make your usual comment that our Foils MUST somehow be dealing with RF interference, then we also have simple 'treated' CLEAR FILM which is equally as effective - is NOT a Foil and therefore cannot remotely be considered to be 'dealing with' RF !! Nor does our Cream-Electret 'deal with' RF or EMI or Static !!

What I find surprising is that you are only now experiencing such things as you have just described. Such things as you (and I) describe were a 'P.W.B party trick', carried out by many audio equipment reviewers in the UK on unsuspecting visitors to their homes way back some 20 years ago !!!!!! Why has it just now come as a surprise to you - surely if you (as you do) claim to know anything about us, you should know of these things already ? A similar 'party trick' was done with 'treated' spectacles (treated spectacle frames) i.e listen wearing 'treated' spectacles and the sound would be good, then remove those spectacles, listen again and the sound would not be as good !! All this has been common knowledge to so many people for years.

One serious point unclestu. The wrist band was NOT affecting the signal carried by the car stereo - it was affecting YOU and how YOU resolved the sound information already in the car - information already presented into the car by the car stereo but which YOU had not been resolving correctly (before wearing the wrist band) !!!!!!!

My next question to you is "When you come to remove the wrist band permanently, what are YOU going to do to maintain that better sound from your car stereo ?"

I will turn your other question to me back to you. "What exactly are YOU going to measure that will tell you why your sound from the car stereo was better with the wrist band inside the car and worse when the wrist band was held outside the car.?"

I can already anticipate your next question to me. "If, as you say May, that the wrist band is affecting ME and how I resolve the sound, surely the sound would be the same with the wrist band both inside the car and held outside the car - as I was wearing the wrist band both times ?" My answer would then be "When the wrist band was in the car, even though it was on your wrist, it was STILL affecting that (inside the car) environment. When you held the wrist band outside the car, you changed that (inside the car) environment - and it is the (inside the car) environment you are reacting to. Change that and you change the sound."

Regards,
May Belt.

 

You bring up an interesting philosophical conundrum, posted on March 26, 2008 at 20:59:33
unclestu52
Dealer

Posts: 6982
Location: Hawaii
Joined: March 5, 2005
 In Western philosophy, well, in quantum mechanics, anyway, the world is drifting into entropy. In such a state there will be no polarity or dualities: the down side is that there would be no music either.

In the East, the concept of the world being in duality is well established: yin and yang, night and day, male and female, hot and cold.... Life in most Eastern philosophies is recognizing that duality.

It seems that you are advocating a 'destruction', if you will, of such dualities, rather than understanding of them and living with them in daily life. To eliminate all polarities means no music, really, as sound is a compression and a rarefaction, again dual polarities.

Or perhaps you are simply advocating an elimination of electricity? Tube gear operates primarily on positive polarity. Solid state gear will often have a B+ and and equal B- voltage; does that mean that solid state sounds inherently better than tubes?

Many questions arise from your statements.


8^)

Stu

 

RE: You bring up an interesting philosophical conundrum, posted on March 27, 2008 at 06:36:40
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
>>> "It seems that you are advocating a 'destruction', if you will, of such dualities, rather than understanding of them and living with them in daily life. To eliminate all polarities means no music, really, as sound is a compression and a rarefaction, again dual polarities." <<<

Where on earth have I ever advocated a destruction of such dualities as polarity ? Our approach (Peter's and mine) has ALWAYS been to try to understand them and live with them in daily life !!!!

Why is it that some people can understand a particular concept and others cannot ? I only wish I knew which particular technique one could use to enable people to understand. I would even do public handstands and somersaults if I thought that particular technique would be successful !!!!!!

To begin to understand, the place you have to start is the observation. Both you and I, unclestu, have some agreement in the area of observation because we both know the many things which can affect the 'sound'. In that particular respect, the problem you and I have is with others who do NOT know, who have NOT observed what we have observed and who say that we must have imagined it !!

Where I part company with you is that you want everything you have observed (which changed the sound) to have changed the audio signal - or the acoustics - or the static - or !! Whereas our observations and subsequent investigations show that there is something else going on - which is not affecting the audio signal or the acoustics or the static but which affects the 'sound' !!

In THIS particular discussion you are seeing a choice of polarity or no polarity - and seeing it from a purely technical point of view i.e either you have it or you eliminate it - in which case, as you say, there would be no music !! What you are NOT seeing is the concept that you can have the polarity, realise what must be going on, realise that it is the human being who is doing the reacting to the polarity and take steps to alter what it is that the human being is reacting to WITHOUT ALTERING THE ACTUAL POLARITY !! You are seeing things as black or white - there are no shades of grey. There is, in your narrow view, either darkness or a blinding light (if you don't want the blinding light, then all you have left is darkness). In your viewpoint there are no sunglasses, no varying shades. Hypothetically (in order to make a point) in your viewpoint there are no techniques which Nature uses to allow you walk from darkness directly into strong sunlight without screwing your eyes up completely.
Carrying on with that (sight) description. We see the modern environment as creating harsh, blinding light which we (human beings) are reacting to by screwing up our eyes (which is a technique which Nature - through evolution - developed to solve a problem when the eyes first developed) - which then means that we cannot resolve (see clearly) everything which is in our environment. In order for us to see (resolve more clearly) what is in the environment then you use techniques such as polarised lenses to filter out the glare !! The harsh, blinding light is STILL there, in the environment, but you - the human being - with such as polarised lenses - can resolve (see clearly) far more of what is in (and has been in) the environment all the time !!

Neither the darkness or the harsh, blinding light, in the environment, have been ALTERED.

I just don't know any other way to get you to at least consider a different concept than the concept you have - i.e that 'it must be affecting the audio signal, or it must be affecting the acoustics, or it must be affecting static, or' !! All I know is that something has to happen to you first - you have to be stopped dead in your tracks - you have to experience the sound changing where you cannot explain the changes from within conventional technical electronic or acoustic theories. THEN you will have to look for explanations to explain your observations !! We are now back to square one - the observations !!!

Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: You bring up an interesting philosophical conundrum, posted on March 27, 2008 at 23:36:26
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 Hi May,

I don't think the sunglass analogy holds up too well as clearly the character of the signal has been changed dramatically prior to hitting the sensors. Far more analogous to using a volume and tone control.

Anyway, I'm just butting in to mention that I've been trying your reef knot recommendations for a few weeks. You won't be surprised to hear that it does indeed seem to change the sound especially in the cable feeding the stereo from the computer, I didn't notice much effect from a passive cable tied and laying around. Tried it several times but concluded that I liked the sound better without it. Naturally I was somewhat amazed (but not surprised based upon your posts) that I heard any change. Suspecting switcher noise problems I am now running a large clamp-on ferrite bead just past the cable and that caused a small but nice improvement. I've now gotten used to that sound and will try the knot again tomorrow and see what happens. So your breath, or I guess keystrokes, weren't totally wasted.

Regards, Rick

 

RE: Easy test of Belt theory, posted on April 4, 2008 at 13:03:42
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 I have reinvented my headphone system to allow me to easily carry it outside. I bought a Dell laptop with Vista and Burwen Bobcat to use as a music server, and then replaced my home headphone amp with a portable Lisa III amp. I am using a simple Trends UD10 as a USB DAC, and I may eventually try some other options for a higher quality DAC, although I must say the DAC in the Trends is not bad at all.

My initial experience reinforces my earlier test in that the music sounds richer and clearer when I take my rig outside. It is easy to do the A/B testing with the music playing continuously, by just getting up and walking inside while carrying the laptop with me. I have the DAC and amp in a plastic box that the laptop sits on.

And it is also simply inspiring to be out there with the trees and the blue sky. We have a beautiful backyard in a fairly quiet neighborhood, so what a treat to be listening to incredible sounding music in a such a setting. Even if the sound quality had not improved, I think I would still love this change.

The next thing I am going to try is a pair of in ear monitors for their sound isolation effect. Even though our neighborhood is relatively quiet, there still are planes overhead, dogs barking and other noises that can interfere. The bird songs are not so hard to take though. My current Audio Technica W1000 closed headphones block some sounds but not all of them.

Again, I would love to hear if anyone else tries this experiment.

 

RE: Easy test of Belt theory, posted on April 13, 2008 at 10:22:19
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 I finally got around to freezing my laptop batteries and the new Lisa III amp I purchased with its built in rechargeable batteries. In fact while I was at it, I froze my entire system including all of the cables and my Trends UD10 DAC and the new Etymotic in ear monitors with Apuresound's upgraded cable I got to blockout external sounds outdoors. Everything that is except for the laptop....I can't bring myself to put a $600 computer in the freezer!

Even though I cant really do any A/B testing, my system sounded the best it ever has this morning. I love free tweaks that work!

 

I agree completely with this part:, posted on May 30, 2008 at 17:34:28
tomsyl1
Audiophile

Posts: 302
Location: Hawaii
Joined: April 26, 2005
 And it is also simply inspiring to be out there with the trees and the blue sky. We have a beautiful backyard in a fairly quiet neighborhood, so what a treat to be listening to incredible sounding music in a such a setting. Even if the sound quality had not improved, I think I would still love this change.

I listen to 80% of my music outside via FLACs streamed through a Sonos system to an external USB DAC, minimonitors and various small-footprint amps. My back yard is a semi-jungle and I live within earshot of the ocean. There's always a sea breeze, even at night. I've heard some unusual acoustic effects in what is essentially a quasi-anechoic environment, but more importantly, I enjoy the music more because I'm in that environment. So I really understand and agree with your point. Why lock yourself inside with your stereo when nature is just steps away?

 

RE: I agree completely with this part:, posted on June 21, 2008 at 20:29:44
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 Even if the best part is simply being out there taking in the sky and trees, the sound does improve also. Today was one of those days when for some reason my system just did not sound right. I was listening indoors as it was still a bit warm in the evening after a high temp of 103. But when I could not take the disjointed sound anymore, I went out and sat in the shade with my semi portable headphone system. Within a few minutes, the same songs I had been listening to inside started sounding very musical and involving.

It did seem as if it took a few minutes for the full effect, so maybe there is a kind of gradual adjustment to the absence of EMF and other adverse effects in the house.

 

RE: I agree completely with this part:, posted on June 22, 2008 at 06:14:40
May Belt
Manufacturer

Posts: 681
Location: Leeds UK
Joined: March 16, 2005
 Nirmala, in my Part Three article in Positive Feedback Online I quote quite a bit from one of Enid Lumley's articles. As I say in my article, what Enid Lumley wrote all that time ago is as relevant today as it was when she wrote it !! There is far more 'going on' in the modern environment, having an adverse effect on our 'sound', than merely EMF.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue37/belt.htm

Regards,
May Belt.

 

RE: I agree completely with this part:, posted on June 22, 2008 at 08:22:04
Nirmala
Audiophile

Posts: 168
Location: Arizona
Joined: December 4, 2002
 I do think it is much more than EMF. I just mentioned that as one of the influences I get some distance from when I go outside, but it does seem like there are many things limiting my ability to hear the music when I am inside. Although the strange thing is that there are times when the music sounds great inside also and then the next time I sit to listen, it will seem like something has gone amiss. I listen in my office and there are always things coming and going in the environment, so it could be as simple as a few new CDs (with their cases and barcodes) that came in the mail (as per your suggestion a while back I store most of my CDs in the garage since I listen to the music off of a computer hard drive).

Also I am starting to think that EMF gets too much of the blame, as I have already done a lot to counteract EMF including 25 Stetzer filters, an Earthcalm device, an ElectroClear quantum device, reducing and shielding the sources of EMF in our house, switching to a completely battery powered system for my headphones, and recently adding an Earthsafe Schumann Resonance device. And yet I still experience these fluctuations in the sound of my system.

So there seems to be evidence for the Belt theories in how my system still improves so much when I take it out in the backyard even with all of my efforts to reduce the effects of EMF. There must be other influences that are reducing the quality of the sound when I come inside. I am going to play around a bit more with the Earthsafe unit, but I may end up returning it and trying some more of the products on the Belt website instead.

Yesterday the sound improved dramatically when I went outside, even though it was very quiet indoors and outside I was hearing lots of background noise including our air conditioner, some loud cicadas and occasional traffic noise. So much for a black background! But the music itself was so much richer and clearer that it still sounded better outdoors.

 

Page processed in 0.031 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 ]