Vibration, isolation and electronics...

[Phelonious Ponk]

By the way, Steve, I think you and I have the best avatars. I'm just sayin'....

Tim

 

[fas42]

The elimination of noise so small that most audiophiles and recording pros never hear it has, in your system, resulted in expanding the off-axis frequency response of your speakers beyond what is credible, in imaging that simply cannot happen - in any room at any cost - in dynamic range that is inconceivable from a system the size of yours. I don't doubt that you have some understanding of electronics that exceeds my own, which is very limited. What you clearly don't understand is how, and how much, those electronics can impact audio reproduction. In that area, you've transcended engineering, even science. You're firmly in the realm of science fiction. The methods you're employing - even if they were dramatically more effective than they've ever been for anyone else - are simply not capable of yielding the results you're reporting. They are, in fact, barely related.

Tim, your repetition of this mantra is getting a bit tired, but I will respond at least one more time:
* "elimination of noise so small that most audiophiles and recording pros never hear it" - everyone has, it's the ugly crap you hear from your tweeter when you put ears too close
* "in imaging that simply cannot happen" - plenty of people can get it, check out the thread in Audiokarma
* "dynamic range that is inconceivable from a system the size of yours" - all systems have that sort of dynamic range, the trouble is that the sound is normally so messed at that volume that no-one would want to keep listening to it
* "clearly don't understand is how, and how much, those electronics can impact audio reproduction" - I clearly do, and there's no magic involved. For getting volume it's dead easy: get a Klipsch cinema speaker, at 108dB sensitivity, attach a $20 boombox and I'll guarantee your ears will be history in 5 minutes. Now, get a somewhat less sensitive speaker, opimised for quality, like a Zu, attach some weedy amp doing pure class A, under zero stress (tubes, anyone?) and out comes good, "big" sound. Easy peasy: no magic, no breakdown of science or engineering, fall off a log stuff ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

By the way, Steve, I think you and I have the best avatars. I'm just sayin'....

Tim

I think it's to do with the position of the fingers, expressing deep thoughtfulness perhaps??

Frank

 

[fas42]

Upgrading the TacT RCS PSUs made a very big improvement in the SQ.

Dan, thanks, but I probably won't have the time to digest what has been said on another forum at the moment. These are not brilliant descriptors, but would you say the improvement was in musicality, or dynamics, or both?

Frank

 

[microstrip]

I think people got tired of talking about vibrations so the thread started wandering (or was it vibrating?).

Mep,

No, you will see it is not wandering as soon as I someone asks where are the "technical proofs" of the effects of warmup on performance, the openly available data taken in blind conditions and the academic papers, etc that are needed to prove it is not bias expectation.

If you compare the technical data after 5 minutes warmup and one hour, you will find it the is objectively the same. Differences will probably be much less than what you observe for a 5% variation of mains voltage. But people seem much better prepared to accept the "magical" aspects of warmup than vibration effects or cables.

Another strange association is that some people easily find normal that tubes must have a longtime warmup - anyone who has been using a tube tester knows that after a few minutes the tube is stable - the difference in sound must be is due to the rise of temperature of the passive components.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim, your repetition of this mantra is getting a bit tired, but I will respond at least one more time

Is it? Well, Frank, I keep repeating it because it is the answer to your mantra. The only answer. I can't make it real for you, and you obviously can't make it real for yourself. So you just keep repeating the same fantasy over and over again. Look -- you just did it again! I won't give you the answer again, I can see it's wearing on you. Just fill in the blank: (insert reality here).

Tim

 

[mep]

Micro-I thiink it all has to do with mass and the number of components and the class of operation. A Class A amp is going to come up to temp quicker me thinks than a typical Class A/B amp because the tempertures are much higher with Class A. I have never been predisposed to think that gear must warm up to sound better. That has come through experience. My upstairs 5.1 system has a Denon AVR and it has never been turned off with the exception of power outages in all the years I owned it. I leave any SS component on 24/7. I have never owned a pure Class A amp and I wouldn't leave those power hogs on 24/7.

 

[fas42]

I can't make it real for you, and you obviously can't make it real for yourself

So we'll leave it at the "agree to disagree" level: the people who've "got" it will stay, quietly, on one side of the divide, and the ones who believe it is impossible to "get" it will stay on the other. That's fine by me, just a shame more people can't "get" it ...

On the warmup front, I used to be very religious also about such, did the 24/7 thing, finding that digital needed about a week to come good -- oh, dear!! Not quite as fussy now, usually an hour or so; main thing, as mentioned many times, is hammering the speakers: the MATT test made it very clear that warming up the suspension is key to getting good sound from cheaper stuff, at least for me. The friend with the Naim speakers has the same problem, but because the drivers are intrinsically of pretty good quality he gets better "tone" quality than me when his sytem is warmed up and cruising ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Agree to disagree would be nice, I suppose, but then you keep coming up with more...

finding that digital needed about a week to come good -- oh, dear!!

,,,what, in God's name, does THAT mean?

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

fas42

Few people here would agree that you are able to get what you say you got from your HTIB. Then, now you are saying that a 108 dB speaker can be driven by an HTIB .. What you showed us when you were pulling our collective legs were regular HTIB speakers not a horn based thing ...

Yours IMO is a very subtle type of trolling .. You look for and eventually find allies on specific subjects in general far out stuff but those you know some audiophiles here will consider and for a few posts or threads go in their way .. then you (feel compelled to) come up with some impossibilities and watch people react to it .. likely smiling or ROTFLYAO...
Having said this, that is the last electron I will spend on you. You are on my ignore list ...

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

fas42

Few people here would agree that you are able to get what you say you got from your HTIB. Then, now you are saying that a 108 dB speaker can be driven by an HTIB .. What you showed us when you were pulling our collective legs were regular HTIB speakers not a horn based thing ...

Yours IMO is a very subtle type of trolling .. You look for and eventually find allies on specific subjects in general far out stuff but those you know some audiophiles here will consider and for a few posts or threads go in their way .. then you (feel compelled to) come up with some impossibilities and watch people react to it .. likely smiling or ROTFLYAO...
Having said this, that is the last electron I will spend on you. You are on my ignore list ...

A fine idea, Frantz.

Tim

 

[fas42]

now you are saying that a 108 dB speaker can be driven by an HTIB .. What you showed us when you were pulling our collective legs were regular HTIB speakers not a horn based thing ...

Yours IMO is a very subtle type of trolling .. You look for and eventually find allies on specific subjects in general far out stuff but those you know some audiophiles here will consider and for a few posts or threads go in their way .. then you (feel compelled to) come up with some impossibilities and watch people react to it .. likely smiling or ROTFLYAO...
Having said this, that is the last electron I will spend on you. You are on my ignore list ...

Sorry you choose to ignore me, Frantz, but I got the idea that the aim of many audio forums in general is to bring "new" and different ways of thinking into the arena -- how many times do you see posts from people despairing that the industry as a whole is slowly decomposing into a self indulgent relic, of very little interest to the newer generations. So I'm just trying to do my bit to counter that!

To answer your points, of course a 108dB sensitive speaker can be driven to deafening levels by the HT. However, my speakers are probably around 90dB, the amps can do 20 watts, so peak volume between the speakers at 2 metres is around 105dB, straightforward audio maths. Plenty loud enough to produce impressive sound if the key bits of the system are working correctly. The thing is, I have heard so, so many systems not working working correctly over the years, that I, in my own little corner, have very little desire to hear any more of such ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

,,,what, in God's name, does THAT mean?

I would have thought fairly obvious, Tim. This is something that numerous, "normal", audio people have mentioned over the years, that the digital circuits, especially the ones in the early years, seemed to need long periods of time powered up to stabilise, that is, for the SQ to be at optimum. Which for many people, for many years, was a level that was on the borderline of being bearable ....

Frank

 

[fas42]

Talking of expectation bias, it would be very amusing to get some extremely highly regarded gear, speakers, amplifiers and such and do some cosmetic mods. Put a skin of bad veneer around the speakers, glue a Bose badge on front; add a cheap plastic box around the amp, etc, and stick a weird Chinese name on the bits. Play this for a group of audiophiles and state that this was a bit of rubbish that a relative had passed on to you. How many of the listeners would nod sagely, and agree how terrible it sounded, and ask how fast you could get rid of it?

Frank

 

[terryj]

Sorry, terry, life gets in the way; I got caught up in things to be done while answering your longish post. We met at your factory some years ago, my memory wouldn't be able to pick how many; you showed off a new speaker you were putting together at the end of the day, to demonstrate what you were aiming at, etc.

Hmm, interesting. You mean somehow, without fully remembering it, I owned a factory and was showing you some of my latest production models?

Damn, was I successful in business then?

Dear, oh, dear, what a twist. I acknowledged that capacitance changes may not be the primary cause, but suggested other second order effects could do the trick. In terms of measurements, like most people here I rely on my ears: if something sounds or works better because I address some issue related to vibration transmission then I use it: I don't reject it because I can't point at the precise technical explanation for what may be occurring.

Hmm, see any potential problems frank?

So, you fix these esoteric problems, yet have NO before and after measurements? Well, ones that can be trusted and quantified I mean.

Is that not the subject of numerous threads where money is taken by an 'upgrader', yet NO measurements are ever provided that show if anything has in act changed?

I believe there may be a few on this forum even.

So if you have audible problems then the "true cause" may not be understand.

As are some sentences I feel.

If I have it right, you are saying that a true cause may not be understood? Whatever that means.

But the main thing is that there are several things that are original, and I am not yet ready to give these ideas away. It's the old IP problem, I'm afraid.

It most definitely is NOT simple repacement of cap's and suchlike with designer parts, and throwing in ferrite bits here and there. It's a lot to do with getting rid of every critical connection which just relies on physical insertion to do the job, doing major surgery on how the power supply is stabilised (that's mostly IP), stopping vibration affecting crucial cabling (hmmm, where did I read something about that ...), and filtering out garbage from the mains (also IP)

Frank

Terryj-The reason why we let things go with Frank is that we have found out over time that when you try and drill down into his core to get answers, it's like pushing down on jello. It just gushes out the side and you never get the answers to the questions you ask or you just get more hocus-pocus. Frank was just asked to provide a picture of the inside of his wonder machine and he won't do it. Why? Because either he has done nothing, or it is so butchered up he would be embarrassed for anyone to see what he has done (which is pretty much what he said).

Please, just terry.

Well, maybe. Don't forget the importance of IP. I might address that a tad later.

Well, thank you, microstrip, case dismissed!!! Of course, it is not politically correct to continue with the "charade", so for normal listening you must now throw away the weedy speakers and attach an appropriate manly one to the Krell ...

Of course, the thought for doing the reverse now occurs to me: why not get a miserable, zero cred amplifier, doctor it a bit and then attach it to mega expensive, impressive speakers and see if you can fool those same friends. Gee, there could be something in that ...

Holy dooley, I've just got a great idea! Why not get weedy speakers, doctor a miserable amp and get really impressive sound!! Hey, I hope no-one else has thought of that yet!

Frank

Seriously Frank, think that has NOT been done? And yes, usually the audiophile goes with the looks, EVERY TIME. Heck, you don't even have to plug the things in! Jon Dunlavey took great delight in telling people all he had to do was get his assistant to hold up some thick cables, and bend down. ALL expressed amazement at the improvements.

Of course, no cable was changed at all during the process.

Need me to dig up a Dave Moulton article on this very thing?

Tim, your repetition of this mantra is getting a bit tired, but I will respond at least one more time:
* "elimination of noise so small that most audiophiles and recording pros never hear it" - everyone has, it's the ugly crap you hear from your tweeter when you put ears too close

As far as I can see frank, you seem to be the only person around here that marvels and listens to the speakers from a few inches. Ok, if that is your gig cool. How do you then jump from that and apply it to all?

* "in imaging that simply cannot happen" - plenty of people can get it, check out the thread in Audiokarma
* "dynamic range that is inconceivable from a system the size of yours" - all systems have that sort of dynamic range, the trouble is that the sound is normally so messed at that volume that no-one would want to keep listening to it
* "clearly don't understand is how, and how much, those electronics can impact audio reproduction"

Basically unable to be responded to, it is all gobbledygook. You may THINK you know what you are talking about, or even you do, but as sure as hell no-one else here does.

A perfect example of 'your language'.....

To answer your points, of course a 108dB sensitive speaker can be driven to deafening levels by the HT. However, my speakers are probably around 90dB, the amps can do 20 watts, so peak volume between the speakers at 2 metres is around 105dB, straightforward audio maths. Plenty loud enough to produce impressive sound if the key bits of the system are working correctly. The thing is, I have heard so, so many systems not working working correctly over the years, that I, in my own little corner, have very little desire to hear any more of such ...

Frank

Yes Frank. At what distortion levels? I have suggested to you in the past to download the free REW program. It can measure distortion levels of the drivers at any given frequency.

Of course, you use your ears and eschew measurements.

Talking of expectation bias, it would be very amusing to get some extremely highly regarded gear, speakers, amplifiers and such and do some cosmetic mods. Put a skin of bad veneer around the speakers, glue a Bose badge on front; add a cheap plastic box around the amp, etc, and stick a weird Chinese name on the bits. Play this for a group of audiophiles and state that this was a bit of rubbish that a relative had passed on to you. How many of the listeners would nod sagely, and agree how terrible it sounded, and ask how fast you could get rid of it?

Frank

Been answered earlier, and it works in reverse too. Put the brand name on a POS, and watch the accolades follow.

Anyways Frank, can I tell you I am curious about these hints at IP?

Apart from it turning out that you are here under false pretences, we can, if we all work at it, turn it into a win-win situation for all.

Why not ask the mods if you can have your own manufacturer subforum? Look at how good that arrangement would work for all.

You can, in honest conscience, continue the market research you seem to be currently engaged in, and be on hand to spruik the (future) product to your hearts content. You can work out the best marketing strategy BEFORE committing to the market place...find the best advertising phrases etc etc. On that front can I offer a bit of my own advice?

I think it would be clever, and very effective, to trawl thru a dictionary or thesouras (sp?), and simply pull out scientific concepts. they do not have to apply to the filed of audio, all that matters is that they sound scientific. Then, just arrange them in the manner which best rolls off the tongue! what could be simpler.

I dunno, for example let us just take a few and see how good this technique is.

Atomic, wave, function, attenuation, algorithm...just a few off the top of my head as I type.

Ok, now what sounds good? Gee, the first few just write themselves eh? Atomic wave function! Heck, throw in amplitude and we are starting to cook with gas!

Anyway, that is my bit of help.

The reciprocal benefits? Well, you gain by having a dedicated subforum where you can go to town to your hearts desire, and any and all other threads might no longer be, hmm, invaded?

OR, you can start a thread of your own, and maybe approach with a new attitude. Maybe start showing us some measurements as but one example? You claim the HTIAB 'has no distortion', well let's see the measurements.

Plus or minus 10 db (say), well I'd call the a pretty distorted output of the input no? (the definition of distortion).

Either stop claiming, and show us. Or, stop complaining and pretending that it is US that are 'hiding our heads in the sand'.

It is you.

Unless you can give me better specifics on when we met, and it is not looking too good so far, I'd have to say that once again you are misguided.

There IS still a slim chance we have met, but what we have so far is very garbled indeed.

 

[Steve williams]

Why not ask the mods if you can have your own manufacturer subforum? Look at how good that arrangement would work for all.

two chances at that Terry.......slim and none

 

[mep]

Terry-You are a Johnny-come-lately to the Frank show. At one time, Frank was asked by one of the principles to start his own thread and post his wacky ideas there so he wouldn’t bother the thread that he was disrupting. So Frank started his own thread and was essentially talking to himself which he doesn’t have a problem doing until he gets bored.

Of all the excuses used to not provide information that is asked for about all of the miracles he has performed, the IP excuse is the least plausible. The value of that IP would be worth less than the current net worth of Bernie Madoff.

We have all been down the dirt road with Frank and it is a dead end. My advice is to save your breath or keyboard and ignore the things that are said because you will never get adequate answers to legitimate questions. It’s like being in a fun house and trying to find the way out.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

two chances at that Terry.......slim and none

Oh, I dunno, Steve, if history is any indication, he'd only get 2 or 3 participants. Might address the problem. By the way, since I hit the Frank "off" button, I now see him only through the lens of Terry. It's better. Or at least more entertaining.

Tim

 

[RBFC]

Guys, let's do things this way. If you have nothing to discuss pertaining to the thread topic, simply join a different conversation here. Of course, you may feel free to address any points about audio in any thread.

Thanks,

Lee

 

[terryj]

Guys, let's do things this way. If you have nothing to discuss pertaining to the thread topic, simply join a different conversation here. Of course, you may feel free to address any points about audio in any thread.

Thanks,

Lee

Hi Lee (and mark et al, including frank of course)

It's a tough one eh.

Not for one second did I really think he would get his own subforum. Or that he would start his own thread (I missed any earlier one if he did)

But really, is there a polite way to say 'sod off'? And that is what makes it so tricky and tough.

I have absolutely NO desire for frank to stop posting, and I recognise I have even less right to tell him to shut up. He has every right to post what he wants.

But, what to do when he starts posting the same stuff in more and more threads? this happened a few months ago, then it stopped for a while, now it is building up again.

Really, it IS a huge 'moral' problem for me. The only excuse I can give in my defence is that it is NOT an attempt to stop his exchange of views, rather to stop only the continual evasion and refusal to provide evidence of any description.

This is probably now coming across as a 'direct flouting' of Lee's appeal, but I do want to point out that I have only responded to what has already been written in the thread...besides I am still wanting to find out when I met frank!

If this cannot be discussed due to "IP", then don't discuss it at all. After all, it cannot then be 'helping the masses improve their systems' can it.

So, as I said, tricky.

Except for any further data from frank about our meeting, this WILL be my last post in the thread, and Lee I am not ignoring or disagreeing with you.

Thanks.