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.