Reviewing the Furutec Demag

[amirm]

Oh sure: http://www.sixmoons.com/audioreviews/furutech5/demag.html

"Working with the DeMag revealed something else that is quite a concern. Demagnetizing a CD or DVD improves the sound, period. The point being, you better repeat the treatment every time you spin a disc. As stated earlier, the rotation of the disc in a player causes the disc to get magnetized. At the time we tested the Furutech, we also had the opportunity to compare two other "magic" disc enhancers, the Nespa #1 and Nespa Pro by Nanotech. Both treat a CD or DVD permanently and with great results, by applying strong flashes of light as you can read in earlier reviews and in an upcoming coproduction with Srajan. Besides a difference in light power between the #1 and Pro, there is a difference in how the two Nespas hold the disc. The Pro uses a push'n'click release where the #1 uses a magnetic puck. Yes, a magnet holds the CD/DVD down while it is being treated. This method is also used by nearly every manufacturer of top-loading transports.


So here's the $64,000 question. Is it a good thing to use a magnet for holding discs down since we have seen that demagnetizing that same disc improves its sound qualities? Once again, the answer was in the listening. A pair of identical CDs were treated with both Nespas at comparable settings and played. The difference was very clear. The Pro treatment sounded better. Now we DeMag'd the Nespa #1 CD and compared it to the untreated Pro version. You guessed right, the #1 treated and degaussed CD bettered the Nespa Pro-only disc. This non-scientific experiment is good enough for our conscience to henceforth be very careful with letting anything magnetic into the vicinity of a CD/DVD.


Does from this follow that owners of CDPs with magnetic pucks won't benefit from degaussing? We don't know for sure yet but we fear that this might be true."

 

[amirm]

And from the same review on cables:

"After a dose of degaussing, the cables went back in the system and the results were clearly audible. Just like with treated CDs, a veil or haze was lifted and more and finer details were able to make it through to the listener. After this positive result, all other ferrous cables in residence had their time on the grey platter. Results varied but remained noticeable. The cause for variation has to do with how a cable is shielded and terminated. Cable ends by design are the most open parts."

 

[mep]

Fair enough. CD guys like it too. Has anyone reviewed the Furtech and claimed it didn't do squat? Or are we just hearing from people who have never owned one or heard LPs/CDs that were treated and are howling about how it can't work?

 

[Ethan Winer]

Has anyone reviewed the Furtech and claimed it didn't do squat?

That's a great question. I am serious. Another great question would be, "Has anyone who heard an improvement with the Furutech also heard an improvement from every other 'scientifically unlikely' tweak they ever tried, such as directional audiophile fuses, replacement AC power cords, cable elevators, and so forth?"

--Ethan

 

[garylkoh]

I'm going to have to listen to these files on my he-man rig and see if I can hear a difference. Playing them back through my shick-stick computer speakers isn't cutting the onions. By the way, I just received the latest edition of TAS and HP gave the furtech 5 stars and called it indispenisble. JA stuck his neck out and so did MF. So did MikeL (though with a different model that does the same thing). I'm thinking there is something to it. Those that live in digital glass houses sans turntables and LPs shouldn't be the first to cast stones at something that appears to be based on dubious claims/science and yet just might make a difference.

This is where the DBT crowd and the measurement crowd are going to have a field day..... Playing back through my computer and in the background-music system in the office, I couldn't hear a difference either. My he-man rig was completely dismantled and brought to the club meeting so I don't have it set-up yet.

As MikeL said, he didn't think that PCM could capture enough of the nuaunce of the signal to show up the difference.

However, even standing behind the screen operating the turntable I thought that I heard the difference with the de-magged LP. Several members of the club thought that the de-magged LP made more of a difference than the analog-straight-thru vs digital-loop-back. We can also measure the difference, because the channel imbalance on this mono LP was less after de-mag than before.

I'll have to do more listening before I'm convinced that the de-magnetizing an LP really works. I'll try to do some more recording, but I'm not convinced that my recording chain is as transparent as Bruce's Korg unit.

 

[mep]

This is where the DBT crowd and the measurement crowd are going to have a field day.....

Gary-I swear there are some people that you would actually have to hit them in a head with a sledge hammer in order to prove to them that it would hurt. Explaining F=mxa probably wouldn't cut it. Showing them the sledge hammer and explaining how hard you were going to swing it probably wouldn't cut it. Nope, you would actually have to hit them with it.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

This is where the DBT crowd and the measurement crowd are going to have a field day..... Playing back through my computer and in the background-music system in the office, I couldn't hear a difference either. My he-man rig was completely dismantled and brought to the club meeting so I don't have it set-up yet.

As MikeL said, he didn't think that PCM could capture enough of the nuaunce of the signal to show up the difference.

However, even standing behind the screen operating the turntable I thought that I heard the difference with the de-magged LP. Several members of the club thought that the de-magged LP made more of a difference than the analog-straight-thru vs digital-loop-back. We can also measure the difference, because the channel imbalance on this mono LP was less after de-mag than before.

I'll have to do more listening before I'm convinced that the de-magnetizing an LP really works. I'll try to do some more recording, but I'm not convinced that my recording chain is as transparent as Bruce's Korg unit.

to add a bit to my previous comments; i still occasionally use the Tourmaline Gun to treat Lps, but i never de-mag any more. i can hear the effect but it's not enough to be worth the time and effort for my listening.

part of the reason for that is that as my system and sources have improved in performance both de-mag'ing and Tourmaline gun treatment have had less effect. i have no clue as to why that is. the biggest drop in percieved performance effect was when i switched from the EMM Labs SE digital to the Playback Design MPS-5. the MPS-5 was a significant step up in digital performance over the EMM Labs, but i got a bigger 'lift' with the Tourmaline gun with the EMM Labs. i suspected that somehow the Esoteric drive in the MPS-5 did something positive that the EMM Labs transport did not. but that is a total guess on my part.

part of the reason i don't want to participate in any tests on the de-mag process is my previous expereinces with it. i know what i hear but i've already beat this dead horse.

 

[garylkoh]

to add a bit to my previous comments; i still occasionally use the Tourmaline Gun to treat Lps, but i never de-mag any more. i can hear the effect but it's not enough to be worth the time and effort for my listening.

part of the reason for that is that as my system and sources have improved in performance both de-mag'ing and Tourmaline gun treatment have had less effect. i have no clue as to why that is. the biggest drop in percieved performance effect was when i switched from the EMM Labs SE digital to the Playback Design MPS-5. the MPS-5 was a significant step up in digital performance over the EMM Labs, but i got a bigger 'lift' with the Tourmaline gun with the EMM Labs. i suspected that somehow the Esoteric drive in the MPS-5 did something positive that the EMM Labs transport did not. but that is a total guess on my part.

part of the reason i don't want to participate in any tests on the de-mag process is my previous expereinces with it. i know what i hear but i've already beat this dead horse.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. Based on the difference I heard, I wouldn't want to delay needle-drop for the minute or so it takes to de-mag the LP either.

Nevertheless, thank you for loaning us the unit. I think that what's valuable is what we learn during the process of discovery, sometimes more than the discovery itself.

 

[mep]

i know what i hear but i've already beat this dead horse.

But some people don't want to stop beating the dead horse until there is nothing left but teeth, hair, and bones. Is anyone on this forum going to listen to the files that Gary posted and listen to them on a good digital system (is that an oxymoron?-just kidding) and report back on their findings? Ethan's already *busted* this myth without listening so his opinion doesn't count. Oh Tim...

 

[amirm]

Fair enough. CD guys like it too. Has anyone reviewed the Furtech and claimed it didn't do squat? Or are we just hearing from people who have never owned one or heard LPs/CDs that were treated and are howling about how it can't work?

Let's not play that card please . My stance in this thread is simply to examine the data put forth and what it can or cannot mean. The company doesn't just say "try it and see if it improves your sound." It goes to claim the reasoning and provides "measurements." It is that, that I am critiquing and investigating. We don't need to own the device to have that conversation.

To the extent recordings are put forth, we can also examine that as I did earlier. All fair game for discussion.

 

[amirm]

But some people don't want to stop beating the dead horse until there is nothing left but teeth, hair, and bones.

This thread is going on because of the advocate on the other side of the fence. The rest of us find it fun to go along . It is not like Ethan or I created the thread or the topic.

Is anyone on this forum going to listen to the files that Gary posted and listen to them on a good digital system (is that an oxymoron?-just kidding) and report back on their findings? Ethan's already *busted* this myth without listening so his opinion doesn't count. Oh Tim...

I am not home so can't listen to the new files. But did listen to the first set and was one of the few who did and spent the time to dig into them. It took me a few hours of work to do that. And i observed the quality difference. Not sure why the cry for fairness in light of the effort I put in relative to a device of this sort.

 

[garylkoh]

I am not home so can't listen to the new files. But did listen to the first set and was one of the few who did and spent the time to dig into them. It took me a few hours of work to do that. And i observed the quality difference. Not sure why the cry for fairness in light of the effort I put in relative to a device of this sort.

When you get home, would you mind doing the same analysis on the files I posted? May be all it will prove is that Bruce is a far, far better recording engineer than I could ever hope to be. I could hear the difference in the two files that Bruce posted on my computer laptop, and I couldn't hear any difference in the two files I posted.

 

[amirm]

Yes, sure.

 

[mep]

Amir-I don't understand. I thought the purpose was also to listen to LPs/CDs/cables that have been treated and see if anyone hears a difference. Do you care if people hear a difference or do you just care if it can be scientifically proven or disproven? I thought it was a fair question to ask, and you don't have to own one one of these devices if you have a chance to listen to something that has been treated. Everyone on this forum now has the opportunity to hear two samples provided by Gary and report back if they hear any differences.

Just as I now know that whenever you say "I strongly disagree with you" that you are politely telling someone you think they are as sharp as a bowling ball (usually me), I also don't think that your little smiley faces that you put at the end of a sentence always denotes happiness in any way shape or form. It probably should have some fangs hanging out of the frown.

 

[mep]

This thread is going on because of the advocate on the other side of the fence. The rest of us find it fun to go along . It is not like Ethan or I created the thread or the topic.


I am not home so can't listen to the new files. But did listen to the first set and was one of the few who did and spent the time to dig into them. It took me a few hours of work to do that. And i observed the quality difference. Not sure why the cry for fairness in light of the effort I put in relative to a device of this sort.

I went back and reread this thread from the start. I forgot greg started this food fight. What is the point to this whole thread??

 

[Gregadd]

AMiIR stated

-...This thread is going on because of the advocate on the other side of the fence. The rest of us find it fun to go along . It is not like Ethan or I created the thread or the topic....

i

I'm not sure what this means. The only thing I have advocated is that we refrain from name calling and keep an open mind about things we don't understand. I don't see anyone advocating anything else. While I remain skeptical there appears to be cause for furhter investigation. Prof. Roberts was concerned about the magnetization of a rotating disc as early as 1840. Farradys law documented those effects. We don't know that Fururtech does not have evidence that thier product works. They may re them as proprietary. Anyone marketing a product need only show that it works. If thier customers start demanding thier money back then the fun will start.

 

[Gregadd]

I might add that Ethan is not a neophyte to the Demag argument as documented by a very lengthy heated debate with Michale Fremer on the Stereophile Forum.

 

[Bruce B]

Well I pulled the 2 original files into my workstation, lined them up sample to sample, inverted phase on one of the tracks and got an overall RMS value of -58dB That's pretty significant.
Now the problem I ran into is that within 45-50 seconds, the samples were no longer aligned. I would contribute that to turntable speed fluctuation. You can hear it waivering as the samples would get further and further apart and the sound would get louder and louder.
But as I stated earlier, when the samples DO line up, the difference is quite loud.

And as I stated above, i've tried this with CD/SACD and could not hear or see a difference when comparing files.

Inverted phase file

 

[cjfrbw]

A smiley with fangs. I like it.

 

[Gregadd]

Well I pulled the 2 original files into my workstation, lined them up sample to sample, inverted phase on one of the tracks and got an overall RMS value of -58dB That's pretty significant.
Now the problem I ran into is that within 45-50 seconds, the samples were no longer aligned. I would contribute that to turntable speed fluctuation. You can hear it waivering as the samples would get further and further apart and the sound would get louder and louder.
But as I stated earlier, when the samples DO line up, the difference is quite loud.

And as I stated above, i've tried this with CD/SACD and could not hear or see a difference when comparing files.

Inverted phase file

I accept tht a difference was heard.I just don't know why.