Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: You realize, just saying it doesn't actually mean that it doesn't. posted by jea48 on May 24, 2016 at 17:41:26
This discussion is not about wire directionality, it's about why a magnetized CD (assuming that's even possible) interferes with the sound. If you wish to debate wire directionality feel free to start a thread on the subject. I'm only asking for evidence or even a theory to back up your claim that magnetism is bad for the sound. One sentence will suffice.
Quote from Link below:
The three-dimensional graphs to the right were generated by a SPECTRA PROFET analyzer. The vertical axis represents time, the horizontal line shows frequency, and the height of the crests equates relative amplitude in dB.
Graphs 1 and 4 are pre, 2 and 3 post demagnetization.
According to the company's comments (which suffered marginally in their translation from the Japanese original), the 1kHz signal in graph 1 shows not only edge non-linearities but also white blank fields believed to be caused by reading errors.
Additionally, there are irregularities and excessive amounts of small crests in the 2 to 5KHz region.
After demagnetization, the 1kHz component shows up perfectly solid, the former signal dropout portion filled in and the upper edge non-ragged. The non-linearities in the upper bands turned uniform, and the height of the crests increased.
Furutech's engineers believe this is visible proof of improved S/N ratio and a reduction of read-error distortions.
Graphs 3 and 4 show an actual music signal, with graph 3 post-demagnetization. The encircled areas clearly show filled-in signal and increased crest height, indicating -- according to Furutech -- both improved data retrieval and once again extended dynamic range.
In other measurements accompanying my printout of their e-mail document, Furutech measured music signal in the areas of output power level, THD and S/N ratio. After treatment with their admittedly newer and improved RD-2 unit, output power level increased by 0.58dB, THD decreased by 1.12% and S/N ratio improved by 0.181%.
While these attempts at quantifying degaussing effects are genuinely laudable, they do show up as rather diminutive quantities generated by state-of-the-art machinery. How about our ears? (As it turns out in many experiments, human hearing often perceives things we can't -- or don't know how to -- measure while the reverse can also hold true.) To minimize the placebo effect, I dug into this tech data after my listening impressions had formed. Which moves us now from having this easy pie to consuming it.
Subjective human response
I started off with Zoltan Lantos' Eclipse [TR-2010], a phenomenally otherworldly solo violin album. The effects were subtle and obviously not repeatable with just one copy. Still, I felt certain that the RD-1 had shaved off a certain edge. The violin's overtones and 16 sympathetic strings were cleaner but lacked a degree of harshness, glare or raspiness. Let's call it enhanced smoothness without loss of resolution, perhaps a 10-15% improvement.
Can you relate to musical curtsies, the kind of formal movements period movies depict during baroque dancing? "An Sumnia" is one of my favorite tracks on Thierry 'Titi' Robin's Un Ciel de Cuivre [Naive Y225091], an authentic Gipsy caravan celebration around an -- imaginary -- camp fire. This track -- which by now I know by heart -- features a limping 5-based rhythm that the musicians execute with a very distinct "curtsy", a kind of elastic miniature suspension of the beat. The sense of "sub-beat" subtlety post-treatment was significantly enhanced as though whatever the degaussing had accomplished improved the tune's timing cues.
Another phenomenon pointing at the prior violin example was a change in the singer's metallic timbre so prized by the Gitanos. It didn't seem subdued but sounded more naturally the result of a human throat rather than electronic grittiness. I also involuntarily reached for the Bel Canto preamp's remote and cut volume by 1dB on its display.
When I got around to reading the above engineering data, I wasn't entirely surprised to see the claimed 0.58dB increase in measured output. I can't say whether the overall volume seemed louder or the peak output differential stretched. My reaction was simply spontaneous and unmeditated. This makes it inherently more trustworthy than elaborate justifications during explorations as fraught with potential exaggeration as these.
Trying El Potito's Mia pa los restos [Nuevos Medios 15 688], the before/after difference was similar to Robin's. Rhythmic events had more tautness and intrinsic tension, and minor inflective accents seemed stronger. Exploring other CDs, I eventually concluded that the improvements with complex material seemed more pronounced, as though more complicated signal equated more raw substance to be cleansed of whatever the RD-1 removed or straightened out.
Reserving final conclusions for the follow-up report when the RD-2 arrives, I'll leave you with the following comments today: The Furutech device does not work gratuitously in the frequency response domain. Different listeners would immediately latch onto aberrations or changes. Rather, its gentle touch affects the realm of timbre, rhythmic coherence and overall musical gestalt. That latter is hard to quantify. Let's just say that sounds assume a closer likeness to feeling real. On certain tracks this appeared more overt than on others, such as the background restaurant cues of silver ware moving in trays on Cielo's concluding bolero. Hearing the common rattle of silver ware had that unmistakable rightness of ... familiarity? (Yes, reviewers do dishes, even though their daily intake of musical calories is sometimes less than it should be.)
What's it mean?
I'm reminded of an old, well-worn simile - that of multiple window panes each adding their own fine contributions to distorting what is seen. As we remove one pane after the next, clarity continues to improve. But something more profound happens when we get to the last one. The degree of visual distortion removed is no larger a step than any of the preceding ones. Still, our senses, when finally admiring the landscape without any glass buffer but directly, undiluted, respond disproportionately strong. The change goes beyond simply seeing. It's become a more complete experience. Which of course is true - now we feel the air, smell the breeze and shoot it endlessly afterwards.
Something of that sort happened with the Furutech time and again. Hard to explain yet rather reliably felt. A cop-out weenie of a description? Perhaps, but it' the best I can do for now. Check back in a month or two when Harmonic Technology, the new importer, has the RD-2 in stock. At that time, I will also experiment with treating interconnects and other cables. They apparently can be coiled inside the RD's well and treated just like a CD, DVDs, metal terminals and sundry other goodies. For now, I confess to being rather taken by this device. Unlike the Bedini whose potential benefits eluded my ears more often than not, fellow pilgrim Sturdevant really is onto something here. If he wants this thing back -- and of course he does unless his vacation turns permanent, lucky devil -- the extent of my grief shall be the real arbiter of Furutech's invention. To be continued.
If you're trying to convince me that you can't understand my question you're doing an excellent job. Look, stop for a moment, take a deep breath and listen to my question rather than giving me this whole so-called explanation you copied from somewhere. And one that actually doesn't address my question.
The question is, what does a magnetized CD do to degrade the sound? You can answer that it affects the laser or it affect the circuitry for the laser servo or that it affect the signal. But that is what I'm looking for.
I'm not interesting in all this rigamarole how the CD gets magnetized. I'm already giving you that (for the purposes of the discussion). Show me anything that suggests, theorizes, indicates or illustrates that something in the player is affected by the magnetic field that would be SUFFICIENT to degrade the sound. I am letting you assume the CD is magnetizable. Now, it's your job to give some evidence, any evidence that the magnetic field is BAD and that demagnetizing the disc is GOOD. Keep in mind the magnetic field has to be BIG ENOUGH to actually affect something, it's not sufficient to say well, there is some minuscule teen weeny field a few micro Gauss bigger than the Earth's magnetic field.
NOTO BENE - Even the article you linked to admits THE DIFFERENCES IN MEASURED DATA ARE TOO SMALL TO BE AUDIBLE. Hel-loo! Wake up and smell the coffee!
Ah, name calling is your way out. I didn't see that coming. I guess it was only a matter of time before your brain imploded. My suggestion: go back to school.
That you were still unable to answer my question is duly noted.
What was the question?
What is the answer?
I am not going to do your homework for you.
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: