Jfz, you should also know that the Nespa everyone is talking about here is the $895 Pro version. |
Sksos, I thought there must be a substantial backlog of orders.
I have put off further copying using the RealityCheck until I have the Nespa to treat the originals. I know you don't think the RC is necessary, but I have got to hear it for myself. |
Leec, I believe you about your tests although I will try them myself, but from my understanding of how the Nespa works or is said to work, I would expect no improvement on a cd-r.
As I understand it the Nespa heats the cd and gets a closer bond between the silver cover and the substrata by removing space between the two occupied by gas. Since the cd-r has no overlay, at least as I understand how they work, I don't see how there could be any benefit. I would have expected a fourth disc where the original was Nespaed and then copied would have been best and that Nespaing the cd-r had no effect.
Since my vinyl is so good and digital is getting equally tedious, maybe I should only listen to vinyl. |
Steve, is the bulb inaccessible or wired in? Why is it not just possible to unscrew the bad bulb and replace?
Norm |
Steve, I think the Nespa is next. See: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1130940695&openflup&192&4#192 |
Tvad, yours is a curious post. Of course, tweaks and everything else in audio is also outside the world of audio. Even if it is the case that the Reality Check unit is the same as that available for a lower price, there are other units, namely most computers that fail to achieve what is achieved in this unit. Why? And if the RC unit is better than what appears to be the same, what would you conclude?
Similarly with the bright light and the Nespa.
Both George Louis and the inventor of the Nespa have spent time developing this and hopefully both will get a return on their successful developing it. Perhaps, the internet limits the return they can get and perhaps many will be discouraged from bothering given the limited return. If so, the internet will have killed tweaks and possibly all innovations.
Interestingly in the case of the CLC and the IC, where people cannot reverse engineer the tweak, they demand to be told how they work or refuse to be interested. Were I to be an inventor, I would, of course, tell such people to go to hell. |
Tvad. you missed my point. Innovation takes genius and money. As technology evolves, some will see it potential in new areas and take it there in the hope of making money as after all we are a capitalist system. They will set a price for their new product and make it available. If it does not sell, they lose. If it does, others will seek to benefit from the break through by improving on it or by cost cutting, such as making it in China.
The notion that you continue to propound, "exorbitant mark-up" is just sales rhetoric for those seeking to undercut the innovator's price as well as non-capitalist critics mimicking Lenin's notion of intrinsic worth.
We still do not know if the look alike burner is the equal of the RealityCheck burner nor whether the look alike cdrs are the same as the RC cdrs, but I suspect that many will try the cheaper versions as well they should.
My other point was that even if Louis merely repackages the burner and cdrs, before the internet this would never have been discovered. As such, the internet may discourage innovations or certainly make their shelf life much shorter. Those with access to cheaper overseas labor may be the only ones with the true potential to innovate, safe with the realization that their secrets can be kept. |
Wrong as usual and equally irrelevant. |
Sksos,
Steve, what do you recommend 30, 60, or 120? Can you overdo a cd?
Thus far I have only treated sacds as they have lost favor with me after experiencing duplicators. In a word, wow! |
Onhwy61, I have never found much benefit in deductive theories like economic theory. There never has been such a thing as free and quick dissemination of information, although the internet is moving that way with its search engines.
Perhaps Mr. Louis' genius is in trying various burners and picking the best for modification which he also conceived. No one has proved that the RealityCheck unit is just an off the shelf piece.
Tvad, we are talking past each other as usual. For some unknown and unjustified reason you believe the RealityCheck is unmodified and that the cd-rs are available at a much lower price. You also deny that the research that went into the selection of this burner for modification or these cd-rs, even if only for remarketing fails to justify any profit.
Your is basically a naive consumer's perspective that no one is entitled to a profit or that the profit should be what you judge to be appropriate. Lenin also believed this and, of course, it is the basis for communism.
Maybe George will sell no more RealityCheck burners, although my email would suggest this is not true, but it is also possible that those buying the cheaper unit, which George is also going to sell, fails to give them the benefits that others have gotten with the RealityCheck. I know this does not matter to you, and that you will continue harping that consumers are fools, a lament that many businessmen who tried to sell something that no one bought have often uttered. |
Tvad, too many "mays" and "apparently" in your argument. No, I am not calling you a communist, but yours is the same argument Lenin used. How the hell you determine what is an appropriate price I don't know. No, I don't try putting words in my students' mouths, but I do hasten to point out the felicitous arguments and assumptions. So consumers who buy the RealityCheck are fools because you find they did not do their due diligence? Who made you the judge?
I suggest we just drop this useless posting. |
You say, "So consumers who buy the RealityCheck are fools because you find they did not do their due diligence? In light of the recent information presented on AA, which points to the possibility of lower cost alternatives to the RealityCheck CD system, I believe it would be foolish for consumers not to do some thorough homework before spending their cash. You can't disagree with that, can you?"
Where did I ever say they should not, but I deny your judgment that if they buy the RealityCheck they are fools.
End of my participation in this useless discussion. |
This thread dropped off suddenly. I suspect because no one else has gotten a unit. I am impatient to do the Nespa of the original before RealityCheck copying myself. |
Puremusic, I do plan such comparisons, but there is also the CoolCopy duplicator. My life is also complicated by the fact that I just got an Esoteric X-01 limited ed.
Leec, if I recall correctly, never tried Nespa treating the original before duplicating.
Last evening I treated one sacd, which of course cannot be duplicated. I was shocked at the improvement. Once again I could listen to sacds. I should again point out that since I have a new player, I need to do a before and after test, which I did not do. |
Okay, Puremusic, I have done some comparisons that might interest you.
I used a cd by Nnenna Freelon called Live. She has a great voice and the backup is very driving. Also being live there is a clear sense of space. I had already made a RealityCheck cd-r using ClearDisc and ClearBit, the original fluids. I listened to the original which had been cleaned with these same fluids. I then Nespaed the original and listened to it. Then the RC cd-r, and finally that cd-r Nespaed.
The original is quite clean and pleasant. I arbitrarily will assign it a 1. I treated the original at the 60 setting, where 30, 60, and 120 are the choices. It was strikingly better, with more detail, sense of space, and improved dynamic. I would assign it a 1.5. I struggled with these numbers and do not really mean to imply that it was 50% better.
Next I listened to the old RC copy. Sometime I will make a Cool Copy cd-r as I have one now. Thus far I prefer the RealityCheck copies slightly.
The RealityCheck copy would get a 2 on my scale. It was strikingly more detailed than the Nespaed original and had greatly more detail and sparkle. It all so had the drive that I have always found with the RC process, if you stick with the original fluids. The bass was far superior than just Nespaing the original, and this disc has driving bass. There was a greater sense of soundstage depth.
Then the ultimate. I double treated the RC cd-r on the Nespa. The first was a run at 60 and then another at 120. My jaw dropped on hearing this. I was there. Her voice was so distinct and real. The soundstage was quite realistic with incredible detail and realism. I could hear those sitting near where she was singing. I would rate this as a 5, clearly greater than its parts.
My understanding of how the Nespa works would suggest it could be of no benefit to cd-rs as they have no metal layer, but it clearly works better on cd-rs. This is troublesome to me as I have been impressed with what the Nespa does for sacds, which of course, cannot be copied.
Tonight I will make another copy using the RealityCheck of the now Nespaed original. I will probably listen to it first and then Nespa the new copy. Again I am inclined to expect no improvement, but given my prior experience, I will not be at all surprised if further Nespaing adds further.
I know better than to generalize from a single disc, but that is the best I can do for now. |
Steve, I, of course, have not tried the 8500, but I cannot agree with you about the benefits of Nespaing the original and the copy.
I actually preferred just Nespaing the RC copy. Nespaing the copy of the Nespaed original did not change my opinion. I am greatly relieved about not having to redo the 60 cds I have already made. All I have to do is Nespa them.
I also did CoolCopy versions of the Nespaed originals but have not yet listened to them.
Basically the Nespaing of the RC copies greatly enhances the realism of the sound stage and gives bass more impact. I can fell the change in my listen chairs vibration.
In passing I treated an sacd that already was improved by Nespaing for 60. I redid it as others have recommended for an additional 120 (I don't know what the unit is here, but I think it is seconds). This greatly improved the one sacd that I treated.
I really have no idea given what I have read about how the Nespa works why it has any effect on a cd-r with no metal layer. Have you asked Nespa about this? |
I Nespaed another original and then copied it only to Nespa the copy. This was a Basie big band cd. This time the double Nespaed disc was better than where only the copy was Nespaed. How do I predict when double Nespaing will be better? I don't know, but I will probably not do the remainder of the 60 discs I have already copied.
Once again I used both the RealityCheck and the Cool Copy to make copies. These are the fifth and sixth discs where I used both, but only these two had been treated with the Nespa before copying. On both I prefer the RealityCheck as having a better leading edge and a better sense of the recording stage. I am selling my Cool Copy. |
Leec, I grant that using the RealityCheck cleaners and duplicator, which copies at a much slower rate than even the Cool Copy's Raw Disc copy, takes much time. But knowing how much better the discs sound drives me to doing the entire process.
I have AudioTop digital, RealityCheck original and RealDisc, and several older cleaners around. Of these the ClearDisc and ClearBit originals proves best. Perhaps at some later date I will try the 8500 after the others have been used. My disappointment with RealDisc has put me off for further experiments.
I had hoped that my first disc showed that Nespaing only the copy was best, unfortunately the second showed the benefits of copying both the original and then the copy,.
Now that my tests are done, I will be settling down to enjoying the fruits of this, including listening to vinyl. |
I have heard of such mods but am unlikely to try them as I think discs will soon all be put on to hard drives with a USB dac playing them. I have pretty good reasons to suspect that duplicate benefits to not pass to the hard drive. I would not be surprised, however, were Nespa benefits on the originals to pass to the hard drive.
I have found myself that computer copies of originals are not the equal of the RealityCheck duplicates and to some degree the Cool Copies. I don't know why this is true.
The power supply on the RC is quite small and must be even smaller on the CC. I also don't like using a transformer on the ac. |
Leec, I do think the Nespa treatment is more significant than duplicating and proper cleaning. Of the many cd-rs I have made already, I found one where Nespaing the original and then making a second cd-r and Nespaing it was better than just Nespaing the cd-rs I had already made.
Being lazy I decided to just Nespa my old copies. In every case there has been a further substantial improvement. I cannot, however, say that I will rely only on the Nespa. It may be a majority of the improvement you can make on cds, but I want it all.
I have abandoned the Audio Desk trimmer on all but my sacds as it make no improvement either on the copies I make of cds. It does improve the originals, but this doesn't seem to transfer to copies made of it.
Curiously the Furatech demagnetizer has a minor effect on cd-rs. Nothing of the magnitude of its effect on cds, however. |
There is a lid which when opened turns off the mechanism. There is also and on/off switch. Don't drop it in your bath while plugged in. |
