Nah-- get the real buzz from your system(s)!--I'd go the Te Puke Thunder or Peruvian Marching Powder
!!BBBBBruceD
This will make your head spin... Synergistic Research Atmosphere
- Thread starter Peter Breuninger
- Start date
Nah-- get the real buzz from your system(s)!--I'd go the Te Puke Thunder or Peruvian Marching Powder
!!BBBBBruceD
Your creating a nice story, but it is fiction. There was originally a plan to do measurements from the very beginning, and discussion about borrowing another one not disassembled for that purpose before anyone starting talking capacitance. The people involved of course know about capacitance, and it appears there is simply not enough of that to make any difference of any importance. The derisive dismissal in post #24 from the tear down was from someone with a knowledge of how electrical signals propagate. Hence the dismissal. The measurement is just dotting i's and crossing T's really. But in the interest of completeness is going to be done.
I would also note the only empirical evidence is advertising copy and sighted listening impressions which are notoriously unreliable. An understanding of the electrical signals involved in audio and how they go across a wire are much more reliable. No this wasn't research grade academic investigation. Then the device construction hardly requires it. But in a few days there will be measurements to see. Keeping an open mind is all well and good, but as the saying goes: keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out. If the method of this thing working is something truly esoteric then it would be incumbent upon the makers to show how that mechanism works. The construction looks as if it would do nothing.
The original owner purchased it and thought it did nothing. So he had experience. Admittedly he was skeptical of this company due to their past products. He then took it apart. They will next measure another one (I don't think he expected it to be close to nothing inside or he would have measured it first). So how is this "without experience"? How does de-construction, measurements with a spec to find out what the unknown materials were, and eventual electrical measurements not qualify as careful examination? True they first posted a dismissal, I suppose it would have been better to complete all steps before posting anything. It just happened in a natural way I think. The results, the construction and the appearance of nothing in it to work probably surprised those involved.
I guess that is where we disagree. The alternative to relying on listening impressions is a pseudo-scientific approach under which a working hypothesis is singled out and vetted, conveniently ignoring any other. For example, SR has referred to the device as a transducer, implying conversion from one form of energy to another. Since the powdery substance appears to be a crystalline material, some form of piezoelectric effect could be at play, resulting in selective losses in the original electric signal. If you have ever tried putting crystals next to your system, you will know that they do affect the sound (of course, not necessarily in a positive way). I do not think the measured capacitance would reflect this.
It is puzzling to me that some people in this hobby, which centers on an auditory experience, are unwilling to attach any faith to what their ears tell them.
There is a link in that other thread giving an idea of the size of piezo-electric effects. The level of such an effect in the device as constructed would be so small it won't make a difference to matter. If it somehow does, it will show in the measurements.
The unwillingness to put faith in simply listening is due to very well researched propensities of the human hearing system to hear what isn't there. So the puzzle to some is how such high level faith is held after so many demonstrations it is not warranted.
I would assume that since finding a positive sonic effect in new audio equipments involves a monetary expenditure, psychological biases would work against finding such a positive effect, no? (This is of course assuming that you can try before buying, as is the case with products by SR)
For some yes, for some no.
Some listen before buying. But if they are in the right situation think they hear something and purchase it especially with a nice seemingly credible person telling them "hey listen to this, it really helps with the enjoyment of music". Others without the chance will try something like this with the idea I have 30 days to return it. Once the money is spent many will be biased to 'hear' the money was well spent.
I'd be fascinated to know what the objective crowd consider shams, and what are considered legitimate, based on scientific principles.
From what I gather from Keith, he considers even different DACs irrelevant, and has no time at all for cables, grounding etc.
In my case I get major benefits from grounding, balanced power, SOME cables/power cords, SOME racks. I've had NO impvts from Blackbodies, Harmonisers, tuning/resonance bowls, bits of tin foil etc. Those latter I do maintain healthy skepticism on, SR stuff might fall into this list.
So I'd love to know what the arch objectivists here rate for measurable function, and which they consider pure snake oil.
From what I gather from Keith, he considers even different DACs irrelevant, and has no time at all for cables, grounding etc.
In my case I get major benefits from grounding, balanced power, SOME cables/power cords, SOME racks. I've had NO impvts from Blackbodies, Harmonisers, tuning/resonance bowls, bits of tin foil etc. Those latter I do maintain healthy skepticism on, SR stuff might fall into this list.
So I'd love to know what the arch objectivists here rate for measurable function, and which they consider pure snake oil.
As one of those objectivists (believe me I was not long ago a hardcore subjectivist) I would tell you a few things I do believe in:
Grounding (To me the reference must be as pure as possible, I need my 0 Volt to be that)
Power Quality (Good, plentiful, distortion free AC power)
DACs
Electronics (Preamps, amps , electronics in general sound very different )
Vibration control for Turntables
Room Treatment (makes or breaks a system)
DSP for Bass only would prefer to address the rest of the spectrum through mechanical (Acoustic Treatments means)
Multiple subwoofers
Vast, clean power for the speakers
Frantz, I don't disagree w/anything on your list, I've modified everything you allude to (Westwick 8kVA balanced transformer, Entreq grounding, DSP bass on my Zu spkrs, magnetic feet under my tt etc etc). Not sure how this squares w/your ally in this argument, uber objectivist Keith. He disses DACs as all roughly equal sounding, grounding as a massive sham, amps as much of a muchness etc etc.
Like you I have massive skepticism of SR stuff, any demo would have to produce results above and beyond, not just a tonal variation.
But human psychology/confirmation bias/placebo plays a big part in EVERYTHING we perceive, even measurable phenomena (patients doing better w/pills of their favourite colour, even though different colours are the same medication etc), matters of taste (mass market food having the same ingredients as expensive cottage industry brands) etc etc. Wherther SR confirms to this, or really is a phenomenon as I believe Entreq grounding firmly to be, is an interesting q.
While we're at it, are we going to criticise Shunyata, Stillpoints etc as being part of a massive subjective snare?
Like you I have massive skepticism of SR stuff, any demo would have to produce results above and beyond, not just a tonal variation.
But human psychology/confirmation bias/placebo plays a big part in EVERYTHING we perceive, even measurable phenomena (patients doing better w/pills of their favourite colour, even though different colours are the same medication etc), matters of taste (mass market food having the same ingredients as expensive cottage industry brands) etc etc. Wherther SR confirms to this, or really is a phenomenon as I believe Entreq grounding firmly to be, is an interesting q.
While we're at it, are we going to criticise Shunyata, Stillpoints etc as being part of a massive subjective snare?
Let's not in this thread.
One company and one product at a time, please.
That's too funny!
Objectivists, I'm still waiting for personal lists of tweaks that are to reasonably be considered, maybe due to measurable phenomena, and those that people view as pure snake oil. For me, tech that improves power/reduces noise is the main area that accessories have helped with that I can't go back to doing w/out - in my case, Westwick balanced power, Entreq grounding and Sablon power cords. I do have intellectual issues w/standalone items that claim to influence the "atmosphere" around components, having never got positive results e.g. Lessloss Blackbodies, Steinmusic Harmonisers, Pete Belt stuff. I'm minded that SR stuff would fall into the latter category.
I'll keep you guys posted... Ten Denney is arriving tomorrow to personally install the Atmosphere.
Did you take any measurements to prove and explain that sound improvement? Otherwise we will think it was just bias expectation - surely proportional to the square of the effort of lifting the weighty cinderblocks!
Similar threads
