SID - Sound Improvement Disc from Germany

[jls001]

Hi jls001


Of all the tweaks and audiophile cords that i have heard, the acoustic system resonators are the most dangerous. All other cords and tweaks i have tried may or may not have worked but the resonators placed wrongly can completely mess up the sound to the extent that you cannot listen to your system. And when i say placed wrongly it it is to the magnitude of a couple of cms. They are that sensitive. Trust me a 10 lakh system can be made to sound like a boom box by having a resonator placed wrongly.

And surprisingly when placed correctly, the difference is only in better harmonics. The soundstage actually does not increase but the feeling of space between instruments increase.

@Prem: These are the 16-cube rosewoods (sugarcubes) from Frank Tchang, right?

I have read the 6moons review of the cubes after you first mentioned it in one of your posts, and they also seem to agree that it is very finicky about correct placement. And they also agreed about how effective they can be. As per his website, the principle behind the sugarcubes seems to be to calm down the air turbulences.

Now, how it works is a mystery I would love to understand. I don't think even the guy who made them would be explain it in the conventional scientific manner. But work it does.

Apparently even his speakers use the same "breathing holes" and no internal damping materials. I think even his very pricey wooden racks use the same principle.

PS: have you by any chance heard his speakers? He makes fairly big claims.

 

[sbg]

Hi manoj.p/jls001
...The dulling of the picture when seen operated through the mains is largely because of the pollutants in the power. Now change the power cord on the computer to a so called audiophile power cord. ....

I was under the assumption this was only because of the power supplied to the panels back lighting (LED,Cathod ray) changes ( to what ever small amount) and at times gives you flicker when the power is insufficient.

 

[alpha1]

I am actually thinking that if in these kind of tests one cannot prove that a wadia state of the art player is not better than a sony dvd player, then there is something seriously wrong with these kind tests.

When the day comes they can prove that there is a difference between two vastly different components, I will believe in blind tests of these type.

You want the tests to churn out results which are concordant with your beliefs.
Otherwise you will label the test as a failure/waste?

This is what is called as Bias in testing.
And this is why we have double blind testing.
To remove biases.

This brings us to the point that T.E.G. is making.
If audiophile = concerned only with sound / sound quality.
Then whatever sounds good - only that should matter.

Whether that "component" is cheap or expensive, good looking or bad looking, has great reputation or bad reputation ... etc NONE of these should matter.

Once again, Double blind testing removes all such biases, and the emphasis is only on ONE THING - how does it sound?

 

[prem]

Hi jls001


I could never get the 17 cubes to work. I only use them on my glass windows. I do not know how to make them work elsewhere. Anywhere else i try it messes up with the timing of the music.

I have not heard his speakers. I use his cables. I was seriously considering his rack but could not figure out how to have it shipped at a reasonable cost.

In all his stuff, he works on liberating the harmonics. That appears to be his central philosophy. He does not seem to like anything which damps or absorbs. Jacob of Rethm also shares a similar philosophy.

 

[prem]

Hi jls001


The rosewood cubes are different from the resonators. The resonators are his main product. The resonators play at a different level. The cubes at least on a glass window cleans up some of the ringing. Thats been my experience. Again like his resonators, the cubes cannot be placed anywhere on the glass. Placed wrongly they again mess up with the timing. Placing them in the centre of the glass is a reasonably safe bet.

 

[prem]

Franck Tchang recommends a 9 resonator set up for the room. I guess only he knows how to set it up optimally. Getting 5 resonators to work is a herculean task. All the resonators interact with each other and create an air zone. If one can set up the 9 resonators correctly, i believe walking into the room feels like you are entering an acoustically treated auditorium.

 

[prem]

Hi sbg


I am not technically qualified to answer your question but you will in all probability see an improvement in the photograph quality by moving from a standard computer power cord to a so called audiophile power cord

 

[jls001]

Whether that "component" is cheap or expensive, good looking or bad looking, has great reputation or bad reputation ... etc NONE of these should matter.

Agreed.

But can I have a nice looking amp, please:lol:

I remember a Finance class where our teacher told us about his HoD in a previous institute, who engaged his fellow Professors and Asst Professors in an exercise to arrive at a car buying decision, using a rigorous method that was taught as part of the MBA curriculum (I forgot the name of this method) to compare features, costs, benefits, long term ownership costs, etc. The champion car as per the comparison was Fiat 118NE.

A week later, the HoD sheepishly announced that he had bought a Maruti 800. Reason: his daughter liked it over the competition.

Moral of the story: there are many intangibles to contend with in life. Like W/GAF, for instance. And one's own choice based on the looks of a component. Whether the black fascia will be jarring with the silver fascia of other existing components (colour coordination, you know). How well it will fit into the listening room. Will the listening room have sufficient space (for a large speaker, for example), etc.

Bring on the blindest of tests! But I get a feeling the above intangibles will have a major weightage in taking the final call But then that's just me.

 

[manoj.p]

Agreed.

But can I have a nice looking amp, please:lol:

Nice looking amp? there is only one - Emotiva. Next is Mcintosh.
Rest are industrial looking.

 

[jls001]

Nice looking amp? there is only one - Emotiva. Next is Mcintosh.
Rest are industrial looking.

Emotiva? No, for me.

Macintosh? Yes, especially the ones that sport dual and triple meters. I am hoping to audition a Mac in the near future (for fun only). The last one I heard was a vintage and in poor shape but it still sounded good.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Hi manoj.p/jls001

Power cables also affect video picture. To know if your power is dirty do a simple test. Connect your laptop to the mains and checkout a photograph. Disconnect from mains and see the quality of the same picture on battery power. In most cases the photograph seen through the battery operated mode will be more clear and vivid. The dulling of the picture when seen operated through the mains is largely because of the pollutants in the power...

I am really not sure about the technicalities here, but I guess you are not, either --- and I do think we should be, before making such assertions.

With my laptop, when mains power is removed, the display gets brighter. My technically-uncertain guess is that this has nothing to do with cleanliness of power supply, and everything to do with the voltages being supplied to the screen. In fact, I have always thought it a design fault, as the machine ought to work on lower voltages to conserve battery, so it would make more sense to dim the screen.

I can say that my PC display shows no difference whatsoever when working on the UPS batteries.

Of course aesthetics matter. Perhaps, to the purest of pure "audiophiles" they should not, and, perhaps to a few, they don't. But, wouldn't some of those who go for the crate-with-components-sticking-out equipment admit to liking the look, the image, as well as their chosen sound? Ownership is a complete experience, and owner satisfaction includes more than just listening. Let's feel free to admit that --- but when tests and reviews are supposed to be about the sound, then what is wrong in removing the other aspects?

 

[jls001]

With my laptop, when mains power is removed, the display gets brighter.

Laptops have separate settings for screen brightness on AC power and battery power. Your's is brighter for battery. Ideally, you should set it for lower brightness on battery to conserve battery power.

But for the suggested test, brightness on both mains and battery must be equal.

 

[prem]

Hi Jls001

Actually when you switch to battery on a laptop, on most laptops there will be a slight dimming effect. This is done to save battery power. What i was suggesting was at the same brightness level.

 

[jls001]

Erm, uh, ahem....

I was waiting for the rationalististas to come up with their data and objectivist-approved test methods.

Anyone, please?

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

You haven't read the words blind test often enough in the past day or two?

Albeit posted on another thread, let me throw in here, too, this quote from Stereophile's 45th-anniversary interview with its founder:

Do you see any signs of future vitality in high-end audio?

Vitality? Don't make me laugh. Audio as a hobby is dying, largely by its own hand. As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls (double-blind testing, for example) that had legitimized every other serious scientific endeavor since Pascal. [This refusal] is a source of endless derisive amusement among rational people and of perpetual embarrassment for me, because I am associated by so many people with the mess my disciples made of spreading my gospel. For the record: I never, ever claimed that measurements don't matter. What I said (and very often, at that) was, they don't always tell the whole story. Not quite the same thing.

Remember those loudspeaker shoot-outs we used to have during our annual writer gatherings in Santa Fe? The frequent occasions when various reviewers would repeatedly choose the same loudspeaker as their favorite (or least-favorite) model? That was all the proof needed that [blind] testing does work, aside from the fact that it's (still) the only honest kind. It also suggested that simple ear training, with DBT confirmation, could have built the kind of listening confidence among talented reviewers that might have made a world of difference in the outcome of high-end audio.

The Interview at Stereophile​

 

[jls001]

I was actually hoping to learn more about how blind tests, single, double, or whatever the flavour, is conducted and how and why their's is the only true method. Further, it would be nice to know more about what it is that is measured scientifically to prove the superiority one component over another similar component, especially cables (since many audiophiles seem to bear a grudge on obscenely priced cables smeared with snakeskin oil).

I read Stereophile on a fairly regular basis, and believe that their mix of subjective reviews accompanied by measurements (in many reviews, though not all reviews), is a sound approach indeed. By the way, across the pond on the other side of the Atlantic, HiFi News and Record Review does much the same thing, though only a very small subset of their measurements are actually published in the print version, the remaining being made available on their website.

I don't understand the sudden reticence when asked to come up with scientific and objective methods and data. Nevermind, the thread is still open in anticipation of outpourings of information and knowledge that will hopefully educate us all.

PS: J Gordon Holt who has been quoted here is a well respected and successful editor, but his words are not considered the only Gospel anymore, if one is to go by recently published (in Streophile) opinion of one of its most characterful writers (Dudley, who else).

PPS: I still think a judicious mix of subjective and objective is the way to go (though I'm jumping the gun here).

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

The question is, which system is that cat locked in the steel box listening to? Does it know? Which does it prefer? Is it still alive? Can we know?

(Sorry... it's late, and just enjoying some previously unheard detail in a record I've known for forty years, and it's superb. Oh, sure there's room for subjectivity )

 

[jls001]

Throwing some more "magic dust"/"snakeskin oil" into the mix, again from Germany:

Stein Music Harmonizers: Steinmusic H2 Harmonizers And Magic Stones A uniquely original approach to a better sounding listening room. Review By Wayne Donnelly

I couldn't find the Stereophile review online which I remember reading in the print version. The reviewer claimed that it works as claimed in his room.

Supposedly "stretches" air molecules, making it easier for sound to travel in the room, and "obliterating" room boundaries.

Another product from the same stable: SteinMusic Magic Diamonds | Harmonizer System

A higher version: Steinmusic Blue Magic Diamonds

Another one - claimed to work at the quantum level (Herr Werner Heisenberg would be pleased): Steinmusic E-Pads | Audio Upgrades and Tweaks

 

[alpha1]

I was actually hoping to learn more about how blind tests, single, double, or whatever the flavour, is conducted and how and why their's is the only true method. Further, it would be nice to know more about what it is that is measured scientifically to prove the superiority one component over another similar component, especially cables (since many audiophiles seem to bear a grudge on obscenely priced cables smeared with snakeskin oil).

I read Stereophile on a fairly regular basis, and believe that their mix of subjective reviews accompanied by measurements (in many reviews, though not all reviews), is a sound approach indeed. By the way, across the pond on the other side of the Atlantic, HiFi News and Record Review does much the same thing, though only a very small subset of their measurements are actually published in the print version, the remaining being made available on their website.

I don't understand the sudden reticence when asked to come up with scientific and objective methods and data. Nevermind, the thread is still open in anticipation of outpourings of information and knowledge that will hopefully educate us all.

PS: J Gordon Holt who has been quoted here is a well respected and successful editor, but his words are not considered the only Gospel anymore, if one is to go by recently published (in Streophile) opinion of one of its most characterful writers (Dudley, who else).

PPS: I still think a judicious mix of subjective and objective is the way to go (though I'm jumping the gun here).

There is a very easy way to experience the blind test.
Download foobar 2000 audio player.
foobar2000

Then download the ABX plugin into the plugins folder: foobar2000: Components Repository - ABX Comparator

Right click two tracks (say one is wave file, and another one is mp3), and take the test.

ABXY test goes like this:
A and B are reference materials.

X and Y are unknown materials.

You have to tell whether X is A, B is Y
OR
X is B, Y is A

ABX test - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So how would one go about doing the same for Snake oil?
One circuit will have snake oil, another circuit path will not have snake oil.
Thus you establish two references.

And then you have another circuit "X" which may have snake oil / or may not (this will change randomly with trials).

You have to identify whether the circuit X is snake oil one (by comparing snake oil reference) or non-snake oil (by comparing to non-snake oil reference).


Its not that complex - all you require is wires and switches.



So what exactly is measure SCIENTIFICALLY?
Its the confidence levels.

If you get 10 rights and 10 wrongs - you are guessing.
If you get 20 rights and 0 wrongs - you are not guessing and there is definitely a difference.

What happens if you get 0 rights and 20 wrongs?
You could hear the difference and did it wrong on purpose.

***
If you wish to do a DOUBLE blind test, then you should not even know what the reference A and B are. That is you shouldn't even know that A = snake oil, B = non snake oil. You will know them just as references. And then go about matching X with A or B