Call me crazy but they (magic dots) work!

[Gordon Gray]

Hi Rich,

Thank you for your observations.

One item that I haven't mentionned is the fact that excessive volume can clearly "overload" my room. The best example is a piano, which is quite a transient and dynamic instrument. I'm sure that with additional absorbing room treatments, that would not be the case.

However, I generally listen in the 80 to 90DB range, which is more than enough volume for me to enjoy the music without identifiable ringing.

Also protects my hearing, which is always a good thing.

Hope all is well with you and family.

Gordon

 

[Ethan Winer]

The real point is this, Ethan. If Gordon is convinced he heard a difference for the better, at the end of the day that is all that matters.

Yes, but I feel obliged to pipe up when someone suggest that other people should spend considerable money on what I'm convinced is a useless tweak. I'll also remind everyone that I pipe up not just when a tweak claims to be "room treatment," but all tweaks I am certain is bogus. Such as the products sold by Shunyata, or magic clocks, ad infinitum.

There's a very big difference between telling someone they wasted their money, which is their choice and their right, versus advising others who genuinely want to know if this tweak or that is truly useful.

--Ethan

 

[RichTeer]

I think you guys are missing the larger issue here. First, it's not so much the ear itself, though that does vary and has distortion. But the real issue is how the brain interprets what the ear picks up. This is why music sounds good some days and bad others. It has nothing to do with AC power, I promise you. And if it did, that too could be easily measured.

Test gear can measure over a dynamic range of about 130 dB. It can see 5 KHz at -100 dB in the presence of 200 Hz at full scale. Ears are nowhere near as capable, as proven in my Artifact Audibility Report. I went to a lot of trouble to create those test files, and I'm 100 percent certain you'll agree with me if you only bother to read the article, then download the files and play them.

When test gear is calibrated the deviations corrected for are way below what anyone can hear. Test gear can easily measure a change in level of 1/100 dB, and nobody can hear that. Test gear can measure phase shift which people cannot hear. It can measure frequencies well above and well below what anyone can hear. Really, between test gear and human hearing it's no contest, no matter how many "degrees" are held by people saying the opposite.

--Ethan

The problem with the position of "measurements tell all" is that there is a built in assumption that everything that matters is being measured. I respectfully submit that this is not the case. As Einstein once observed: not everything that matters can be measured, and not everything that can be measured matters.

A few hundred years ago, everyone "knew" the world was flat because there were no measurements to support the "world is a sphere" theory. The flat-Earthers were kinda surprised about Magellan et al's discoveries to the contrary!

 

[jtwrace]

Yes, but I feel obliged to pipe up when someone suggest that other people should spend considerable money on what I'm convinced is a useless tweak. I'll also remind everyone that I pipe up not just when a tweak claims to be "room treatment," but all tweaks I am certain is bogus. Such as the products sold by Shunyata, or magic clocks, ad infinitum.

There's a very big difference between telling someone they wasted their money, which is their choice and their right, versus advising others who genuinely want to know if this tweak or that is truly useful.

--Ethan

Which tweaks do you recommend then? How about listing them from the least expensive to full room treatments? Seriously.

 

[Ethan Winer]

Do you like REW with a Radio Shack SPL meter? I've been using that but have found that the Radio Shack meter doesn't seem very repeatable. I take three measurements in the SAME spot and they are totally different. Thoughts?

if you run a sweep in REW and plot the result, then immediately do another sweep and get a different result, then something is wrong in your setup. Either that, or the sweep tone is too soft to be sufficiently above the ambient room noise. If the sweep is too soft, then traffic or a lawnmower outside will register and change the results. Otherwise, you should be able to sweep over and over and get the exact same graph within half a dB or whatever.

As for microphones, I've had a professional calibrated AKG microphone for many years. I've also used my RS digital meter with good results. The main problem with the RS meter is its high frequency response is lacking. But the most damaging room problems are below 300 Hz, and the RS meter is fine there. However, for only $40 you can get a Nady microphone which is much better than the RS meter. More here:

Comparison of Ten Measuring Microphones

-Ethan

 

[jtwrace]

Hmm. OK. I have done everything right as far as I know....I'm really thinking it's the mic. It worked fine the last time (months ago) I was playing around before this last change.

 

[Gordon Gray]

Mr. Winer,

Would you please stop putting words into my mouth and stop making things up.

I have repeatedly said that one should try and audition and if happy with the results given the price, then buy. Please reread my comments on this thread if you need PROOF.

I specifically stated in one of my posts that anyone who may be interested in this product contact Ron directly. I am confident he will allow a money back audition if the party auditioning the product is not satisfied.

I would never tell anyone to buy anything without an in home audition. That is how I have purchased literally everything in my system.

What is your flippin problem?

GG

 

[amey01]

Gordon, with all due respect, look at the hit count on this thread - 2,617 is absolutely staggering considering the subject matter. No need to apologise - people have obviously been loving it! A little bit of controversy goes a long, long way...

Happy listening.

Justin

My thoughts exactly - it's been a great thread. Keep it civil and don't get offended too easily.

 

[Ethan Winer]

A/B/X testing ... suffers from its own issues and is not the be-all end-all.

I'm not aware of any limitation with proper blind testing. It's the gold standard for all branches of science.

I also understand that many with a scientific and engineering background poo-poo anything that can't be proven with scientific measurements.

That's not my position at all. It's not that people like me demand proof of everything. Rather, we demand proof when all logic and common sense says a tweak should not do anything useful. This is a very big distinction! There is no known reason 16 teensy plastic dots stuck on a large window should have any audible effect on the sound inside the room. As skeptics say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If someone says they replaced their 50 WPC power amp with a 200 WPC model and the sound became clearer, I'd totally accept that.

Some products measure perfectly and still sound like crap ... Many products with nearly identical measurements can produce very different sonic signatures.

You know, I hear that all the time, but it makes no sense. Can you give a specific example of two devices that measure similarly but sound different?

I think that saying someone is crazy or living in a fantasy land because they state that they hear a difference in their system shows poor character ... I do find his responses are often a little egotistical and "holier-than-thou."

Yes, and if I ever did that I'd owe everyone an apology. But I never do that. All I can do is calmly explain the facts of audio science. I understand that some people take that as a personal attack, but that's not my fault.

There is no right and no wrong answer, only lots of opinions on a continuum.

Actually, there are right and wrong answers. I have no problem with opinions when they're informed opinions. But many people have strong opinions that are not based on solid understanding of the basics. I guess what I'm saying is that not all opinions are equally valid. We all may have an equal right to our opinions, but that doesn't make all opinions equally valuable. Sorry if that makes me sound elitist because it's not my intent.

Reducing any unwanted vibration or resonance in your listening room will result in better sound.

Not if the resonance is 90 dB below the music. In that case it's too soft to hear due to the masking effect. This is the real point, and why I keep urging people to read my Artifact Audibility Report.

--Ethan

 

[Gordon Gray]

Hi Amey,

I am doing my best to keep it civil.

However, when an individual claims that first, I live in a fantasy world and most recently, that I have been abducted by aliens and the aliens probed my anus, that's going well beyond the limits of a civil discussion.

And now per Mr. Winer's latest post, my opinion / observations are duly noted to be at the lower validity end of the food chain and his, of course, being at the top.

He states these things and then claims he's not trying to be elitist.

Oh please.

GG

 

[Ethan Winer]

The problem with the position of "measurements tell all" is that there is a built in assumption that everything that matters is being measured.

Absolutely! But it's not that we don't know what to measure. It's that most people have no idea how to interpret such data, so manufacturers don't include it. They also often omit important data because they don't want you to know. Polar plots of loudspeakers are a perfect example. You never see that for consumer loudspeakers, and most people don't even know there is such a thing. So instead people talk about this speaker or that "imaging" well, but without understanding how and why speakers can vary. Likewise, when was the last time you saw distortion data for a loudspeaker?

At the end of the day, everything that matters with audio is fully understood and can be measured.

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

Which tweaks do you recommend then? How about listing them from the least expensive to full room treatments? Seriously.

The only "tweaks" I could recommend are those that actually improve the sound. I don't consider room treatment a tweak because it's more a "construction" item. Maybe you could call it an accessory.

--Ethan

 

[jtwrace]

The only "tweaks" I could recommend are those that actually improve the sound. I don't consider room treatment a tweak because it's more a "construction" item. Maybe you could call it an accessory.

--Ethan

OK. So whch "tweaks" do you recommend?

 

[Ethan Winer]

OK. So whch "tweaks" do you recommend?

None that I can think of. But maybe I misunderstand the category. Better, you toss out a few and I'll tell you what I think.

--Ethan

 

[jtwrace]

None that I can think of. But maybe I misunderstand the category. Better, you toss out a few and I'll tell you what I think.

--Ethan

acoustic treatments we are leaving out then?

Digital Room correction

Shitaki products (I know spelling is wrong but those strange things that go behind the speakers that look like candle holders)

Quantum Physics Products

Bybee Tech products

Alan Maher Design products or Power conditioners in general

CD treatments (coatings and cutters)

High end racks including cable lifters

dedicated power lines

Cryogenically treated items (cables, outlets, tubes....)

modded equipment (the upgrade company, Reference Audio Mods.....)

I'm sure that some will add to this but this should be a start.

 

[tonepub]

You know, I hear that all the time, but it makes no sense. Can you give a specific example of two devices that measure similarly but sound different?

--Ethan

Almost every solid state receiver built in the late 70's...

They all measured perfectly with almost unmeasureable distortion, but we all know they sound pretty lousy.

There's no measurement for tonality. Some gear gets it right and some does not. How do you explain that?

 

[Brad225]

Yes, but I feel obliged to pipe up when someone suggest that other people should spend considerable money on what I'm convinced is a useless tweak. I'll also remind everyone that I pipe up not just when a tweak claims to be "room treatment," but all tweaks I am certain is bogus. Such as the products sold by Shunyata, or magic clocks, ad infinitum.



When you have the time would you elaborate a bit on what products sold by Shunyata you feel are in the same category with the magic clocks.

Thanks
Brad

 

[twich54]

There's no measurement for tonality. Some gear gets it right and some does not. How do you explain that?

Jeff, to me the explanation is quite simple........ some PEOPLE hear it right and some don't !!

Tonal balance, IMO, is an acquired ability. One which requires benchmarks of listening experiences upon which one can refrence from their memory bank.

If someone has never heard live music (preferably unamplified, IMO) and their sole listening enviroment is that of their radio in the car....well that leads us right back to my first sentence !

 

[Gordon Gray]

Almost every solid state receiver built in the late 70's...

They all measured perfectly with almost unmeasureable distortion, but we all know they sound pretty lousy.

There's no measurement for tonality. Some gear gets it right and some does not. How do you explain that?

Jeff,

That was an example I cited in a previous post. To date, Mr. Winer's observations on this particular topic has been moot.

GG

 

[User211]

I am reminded of an old Technics receiver I used to own. It was beautiful, with a nice wooden cage, lovely weighted tuning flywheel etc. You could tell the tuner section was very good - very sensitive indeed. The amp wasn't - brash and thin sounding at best. Very low THD, though. THD was all you looked at

Combine it with some Wharfedale Lintons and later Mission 770s, and your ears were in for a real trashing at higher frequencies. Ouch!