Anyone HEARD the qol 'signal completion' device?

04-01-12: Pipedream
Not for anything but why does this matter ? Whatever it is doing or not doing is moot to me...
Just do not see the need to now how it does what it does. Really guys without a home demo all is moot. How can we put down something not heard in ones system ?

My post was motivated by nothing more than curiosity. I am not putting QOL down. If you read my comments on this thread on 2/27, you will see that I own a Meridian preamp that, like QOL, can manipulate the soundstage. As I mentioned in those comments, I enjoy the effect. So although I haven't heard QOL, I am favorably disposed to the idea. That puts me in the camp of likely supporters, not detractors.

As for my motives for asking, I happen to be an audiophile who enjoys knowing how things work, within the limits of my technical competence. For you, knowing how something works may be "moot," to use your word. I would invite you to consider that what is moot to you may be of interest to others.

Also, it's strange to me that you would challenge a person who asks a manufacturer who has already elected to participate in a conversation to talk about his product in a substantive way. Even if my comments were intended to be challenging - which they were not - it is perfectly within the limits of civil discourse to ask a manufacturer for the principles of his design and even the details of his implementation. The manufacturer is free to share as much or as little as he likes. Several well regarded manufacturers are very willing to share, and do so regularly, like Ralph Karsten of Atma-Sphere, Bobby Palkovic of Merlin, Steve Nugent of Empirical Audio, and Duke LeJeune of AudioKinesis. And since I'm already stating the obvious, let me also say...

Audiogon is a place for the free exchange of ideas and information. That's what I asked Larry for. Ideas and information.

Bryon

To date, exactly 3 of more than 120 sold have come back. There is one more currently thinking about it. In at least one instance the reason was financial, not performance related. 3 (or 4) out of 120+ is not bad in our estimation.

I suspect any product with a return privilege would be hard pressed to do as well.
Larry Kay

Very interesting speculation, Bryon. Two brief points in response:
1. By a broad definition, everything is a processor. No signal gets through anything, even a one inch piece of wire, completely unaltered, so everything "processes." We actually process less than any preamp, phono preamp, amp or CD player, DAC, or many cables. And much less than any transducer (speaker or phono cartridge).
2. Don't have any familiarity with Trifield, but note that regardless of spatial stuff, qøl™ also widens dynamic range, reveals more detail and more harmonics. However, back to spatial. In life, sound radiates spherically and the ear-brain interprets all of that. With hi-fi, it radiates hemi-spherically. With qøl™, you're back to the full sphere and the ear-brain hears that as being more like the real thing. That's what a few are hearing when they say the images seem to be more forward.
Larry

I haven't heard the unit, but I'm considering a trial. My hesitation is that I set my system up to achieve sound reproduction that is true to the original recording. That's been my personal definition of the absolute sound so far. It seems to me that if the QOL effect is better or more realistic, then some similar process would have been applied to the original recording (assuming its a good recording).

>Audiogon is a place for the free exchange of ideas and information.<

Not really.....