Question to Bybee Speaker Kit users. Did you add them at the input to the crossover or to each emitter?
39 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
With basic skills and tools it's very easy to install Bybee's on the terminals of most speaker drivers, get better effect, and for much less money than the Speaker Bullets. I just built a pair of Cirrus Whites (very high resolution speaker) with Silver Bybee's on the RAAL tweeter and regular Bybee's on the Accuton woofer. I have to say I was sceptical there would be any improvement, but it was undeniable. I'll need to do more controlled testing before I'm convinced of their value. But first test and impressions were very favorable. |
Mapman wrote, "THe concept of quantum purification the Bybee products reference seems real and potentially useful, similar to concepts of eigenvector and eigenvalue that I am more familiar with in multispectral analysis type applications, but how this is applied in the Bybee products for home audio to accomplish said results is unclear to me. How is it better or different than a simple resistor for example? Maybe some of the experienced EEs or claimed quantum audio application experts that frequent agon could comment and help shed some light." Well, apparently Bybee is keeping the operational details of how his products work and what goes into the making of them very close to his vest. Can't say i blame him. You wouldn't want advanced technology to get into the wrong hands, would you? In any case I'm pretty sure we can rule out simple resistors. |
THe concept of quantum purification the Bybee products reference seems real and potentially useful, similar to concepts of eigenvector and eigenvalue that I am more familiar with in multispectral analysis type applications, but how this is applied in the Bybee products for home audio to accomplish said results is unclear to me. How is it better or different than a simple resistor for example? Maybe some of the experienced EEs or claimed quantum audio application experts that frequent agon could comment and help shed some light. |
Can I resurect this thread with a question. I not only find the physics of the Bybees baffling, but their hierachy. The manucturer seems to replace one with another and the differences are'nt clear on the website. For example, what is the difference between the SE Speaker bullets and the Golden goddess SE speaker bullets, or is there a difference and how much better is the Golden Goddess type? |
I have Ref 3A Grand Veenas, which come with some Bybee filters wired internally, although not as expensive or the same as what you are referring to,so perhaps this comment is off base. I really enjoy the sound of these speakers and I've owned lots of speakers in the past including stacked Quad 57, sngle pair of 63, Martin Logam CLS, Rogers LS3/5a, Tannoy Ardens, Meadowlark Herons,VR4,Acoustat3,to name names. Some pretty exotic speakers,but no filters. So maybe the Bybees are why I like my current speakers ? If you can try before you buy and feel they are worth the investment do it, but for that money you could buy a used pair of Grand Veenas. |
The landscape has just changed, apparently. I believe Tweek Geek is now selling the same product in an undressed up presentation in the form of a u-installit kit that is placed beween the speaker terminals and XO of the speaker, one each for positive and negative leg. Price approx. $1100 per speaker, as I recall. |
Bybees contain a low ohm resistor. And if the designers of said loudspeaker needed to use one they would have. They will alter sound, could it improve it? Maybe but to me its just a over price resistor worth a few $ and just another unnecessary part in signal path. And if loudspeakers of proper design completely unneeded.If one wants to tweak why not just buy some resistors and mess about? But I know folks who do such tweaks have already made up there minds on the value of such. And since spending much they will hear the positive change mostly due to placebo effects and the old I changed something so its got to be good. What ever happened to comparing changes to original or measuring. Most who do these mods just slap them in and say there great never comparing to any base just the subjective it sounds better to me. |
I had the chance to listend to a highly modified pair of Acoustat's Spectra 6600s with bybee's and without there was a difference are they worth the money YES they are to the person that can afford them but for me i don't have that kind of money BUT if i did i would go for them without a doubt,but for now i will stick with my modified Acoustat's 1+1s and i'm satisfied of what i already own, but always looking to push the envelope,more mods coming will it ever stop YES when i'm dead. |
Have not heard bybee products as of this point. Yet just because something cannot be proven does not mean it is snake oil. Much of science relies on the big bang theory with no explanation as to what went bang or how it got there. Have been thinking about bybee products for awhile which how this post came to my attention. Just wanted to post something to indicate that the lack of science or any other explanation does not remove the lack of effect |
I too felt a cynicism about the Bybees before I tested them. I should note that I have no experience with any Bybee product except the Super Effect modules found in the Ultra Power Cord and the Speaker Bullets. I am not a dealer, just a music enthusiast. I shared the bullets and power cord with a well experienced audiofile here in Albuquerque. He is a diyer, having built a set of Orions and matched sub woofers, and later fabulous sounding line arrays. We tried them in and out; at various points in the signal line on various speakers, equipment, and music. He told me each time, each trial his system had never sounded better. Frank is more of a skeptic than I am about fads and tweeks; experienced in the field for more then twenty years. My experience is that of a musician with ear training from a very early age, and performance for many years into adult hood. I play French Horn, currently renewing with my Classic Guitar, and dabbling with the Bag Pipes. My skepticisim is based on what I hear; ears I find very trustworthy. I hear a difference that is important to my ears when listening critically as a musician and just for simple relaxation. I have spoken to one of Jack"s early Beta testers who told me that he and friends find the difference to persist to a point that has allowed them to sell off high cost interconnects and speaker cables and maintain a purity of sound that is still better then higher cost systems without the Bybee. Dick Oshler has a review and explanation of the Speaker Bullets in the June/July TAS; worth the read. I think the critical ears of the designer of the Reference 3A Grand Veena included the SE Bybee for a reason in spite of price. Note: only one per speaker direct wired inside. Just some humble thoughts, I hope others can try them for themselves, watch for used here on agon to cut the cost,maybe. Rod |
Thanks Larry, Obviously we share similar aural pleasures, thanks also for giving me the impetus to think over where I stand between the so called dichotomy of the "rational" and the "irrational" and of course also thanks for having had the patience to read through that lengthy diatribe of mine above. |
Detlof, I agree with you completely that just because there isn't a reasonable explanation that does not mean there isn't a real effect. Take the aspirin. How it works was actually determined many decades after it was invented and after it had alleviated probably billions of headaches. The Bybee stuff could be effective even if the ultimate explanation turns out to be something different. I personally have no standing to demand rational explanation and behavior based on rationality. Given the overwhelming "object" measurements, there is no satisfactory explanation for why I personally prefer tube amplification, over solid state, particularly the high distortion single-ended variety. |
Larry, I agree with you all the way you know and I am just as wary of being sold snake oil like any other sensible person, which I hope that I am. In fact I am the first to doubt my own hearing, because in younger years I was with a group of colleagues who did research on the validity of testimony,of what people saw, experienced or rather think they experienced. The result of this research I have never forgotten and it taught me to be very careful and question and question again what my senses tell me. Not always, that would be stupid. (If I see a beautiful woman, I see a beautiful women, well knowing that beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder) But in this question which we are discussing, it would be advisable to question and to question unrelentingly. Like you, I would prefer a rational explanation of what is happening and what I am perceiving. But with the Bybees I have to give up. I was taught physics once, but Quantum physics are beyond me and I cannot form an opinion. If what my ears tell me, and with little "experiments" in front of my rig, friends etc will in their own words tell me more or less the same, I will have to be grudgingly content. However, like you, I would also like to have a reasonable explanation of what in fact is going on, when you submit the Bybees into your system. I find it interesting to note, that in general, the description of what is happening points into the same direction: Namely that there is a difference and that instruments sound more "natural", more like real music. So speaking in scientific terms, there is some empirical evidence which can be seen as pointing into the same direction. There is no theory however why this is so. All attempts to explain do not really satisfy. Bybee himself says, that he has no explanation for what is going on on the subatomic level, where he says his modules function. Here the circle seems to close for some : No explanation for what is happening is indeed close to snake oil. Because if snake oil works, it is only in the mind of the believer. No dirty tricks even needed here, auto-suggestion will do the work for you. We all know, how strong such an effect can be. Also in the case of Bybees: They are very, very expensive, so they must be good and if they are good, I must of course hear a difference for the better. Therefore, if someone would accuse me of having fallen into that trap, all argumentative powers I would summon for my defense would not suffice to convince my adversary, because even if he would hear the same thing as I, he could still argue that he has obviously fallen prey to the same illusion. Collective auto suggestion is a well known phenomenon. You cannot discount even that possibility. So what to do? To my mind we have to admit, that if the Bybees work, and there is some evidence which could point into that direction, we cannot explain why. We have the choice of thinking that it is all fraud, because we can't explain it, or on the other hand, accept that the world is full of phenomena which exist but we (still?) don't know and cannot explain satisfactorily how they function. Our own body, at least quite a large part of its intricate interplay, especially on the "electro"-chemical level belongs to this category. There are quite of lot of people, who think that all that cannot be rationally explained must somehow be sham. Hence they tend to look down on the "believers". What they fail to see, is that they are also believers. Believers in what is basically a theoretical concept of reality, which works very well in practice but just simply is not the whole reality. That's why, John, I reacted a bit touchy when I read your first post. As you can see now, so I hope, I respect your position, actually share it, when it gets down to the nitty gritty. I will insist however that there is also dignity in an attitude, which, seemingly naive, is open to be surprised and taken in by phenomena, which cannot be explained. Call it a childlike openess for miracles, which remain only miracles of course, as long as we cannot explain them. Critical rationality in the explanation of world phenomena demands respect of course. Last not least due to the efforts of generations before us laying the foundations of Natural Science, without which modern life would not function. The other attitude, which I am defending now, demands respect as well, because of its courage to be able to be open and to believe and to have the strength to bear and live with the gap between belief and knowledge. Last not least of course also for having the guts to take it, being proven a fool and mistaken. Those two attitudes are often taken as absolute opposites, you are either for the one or for the other side. In fact, I feel, they should not oppose but complement each other. Each on its own is obviously not enough. The discussion about those Bybees to me show this up very nicely. (Sorry to be so longwinded, in case you managed to read until here (: ) Cheers |
Detlof, I don't doubt you heard what you claim you heard. But, it still is important to have some idea as to why you got that particular sonic result. It is possible for a scoundrel to put out something that modifies the signal using common circuit elements, such as resistors or capacitors, etc. Some listeners would hear a positive result, because that was what that system needed for that particular listener's taste, but in most systems the result would be a negative or no change. If it helps, then it is worth having, but, if that result could have been reached with $.50 worth or components, instead of many thousands of dollars, that is a rip off. With respect to the Bybee stuff, I plan to hear for myself, even if the description of how it works sounds extremely dubious. But, I would like to know if anyone has explored its basic electrical properties (i.e., not its claimed quantum physics effects). I once had a friend who distributes audio gear demonstrate a powerline conditioner that plugs into any available wall socket. He got it on a trial basis had knew nothing about how it worked. We all could easily hear that it had a positive effect on the sound. He asked me how I though it worked. I speculated the following: when the switch was put in the "on" position and the LED was lit, it was actually out of the circuit and doing nothing; when the switch was in the "off" position, it was actually on and putting out interference to screw up the sound and give the impression that the "on" position was a big improvement. He thought that was pretty funny, but, as for me, absent any plausible alternative explanation, mine was a pretty reasonable guess. |
Here are a couple of reviews and thoughts about what and why the Bybees do what they do. I don't know if these guys were influenced or bought in some way, however what they described I thought I heard well before I read their thoughts and I wasn't bought. I generally buy only what my ears tell me. http://www.bybeetech. com/reviews.asp I just reread all the reviews to be found at this address given and find them , compared with my experience of these things, a bit exaggerated. However all point into the direction which I also heard and am still enjoying. To me the effect is slight, but it is certainly there, no matter what the sceptics might think or say. |
Johnk, I don't see how it is obvious what these things do? Do you actually know what they do, or, are you saying that they obviously alter resistance, capacitance and/or inductance as would any other kind of circuit element, even though you don't know specifically what kind of element they are? I have my suspicions that they are acting like conventional filter elements, but, I don't know what they actually do. So, if you know what they really are or do, share it with us. |
Yes; dirt, a few wires and sometimes bad solder joints which have to be redone and please John, I did not imply that you should not stand by your post, because it may after all be justified. I am not the one to judge that. My ears could well be subjective and mistaken and your opinion would be supported by the main stream of EEs. What got my back up a bit, was HOW your post came along, that's all. Cheers and happy listening (sens Bybees (: ) Detlof |
I was waiting for a post like the one above. Aolmrd don't let yourself to be distracted by this kind of patronizing and subtly arrogant talk. Try, listen and decide for yourself, because often enough, though not always, those who somehow insinuate us ignorant and uninformed may possibly be looking not at us, but, mostly unwittingly be said to their benefit, into a mirror. (Now how is that for subtle arrogance, remember that song in "Annie get your Gun", long, long ago??) One thing is sure though, that stuff is wildly overpriced, no doubt about that. For that I don't need to know speaker design or how electronics work. |
Rod, I wouldn't know if stators are less effective here, however this idea goes against all theories and reports from the field as to how stators are faster and more naturally revealing, than most cone speakers because of their build. ( Their weaknesses lie elsewhere ) No matter. There is no doubt about it, that the Bybees work and that they are beneficial if inserted to most systems. So basically we are in agreement. As you put it: "No argument, good discussion." |
I wonder if certain transducers respond better to the Bybee Effect? I've only used them on the speakers mentioned above so far (and in my review) and I think most reports are on "conventional transducers". Note that Jack Bybee feels the Super Effect modules are at least 4x more effective then previous products. Are electrostics less effected or less revealing of the Grunge/distortion that the Bybee's purport to diminish; 1/f ? No argument, good discussion. |
With all respect to Rod, who of course is free to feel "bowled over" as he puts it, I would like to repeat that I was pleased by the effect of the bullets which they had on my system, I bought a pair after all, but on my stators the effect was not that huge. I have been using Bybees of all shapes and sizes right from the beginning when they first came out. I have always noticed a positive effect, no matter where I put, or soldered them into.It generally made the music a tad more "real" to my ears. Swapping ICs or rolling tubes had however generally a greater effect in the sense of being "bowled over". The reason for this seems to me, that by doing so the entire musical presentation of your system can be changed. Not so with the Bybees, their effect is such, that the voicing of your system will be the same, but there will just be a tiny bit "more" to heard of what your system -within its limits - has to offer, is capable of. As I said, the musical presentation seems to be a bit more real to these here old ears. By the way, the best way to test the effect of these devices I found, is not only to compare the sound with or without them in the chain, but to compare just one channel with and the other channel without them on a mono recording in your stereo. You will notice the effect quite easily, because the channel with the Bybees will have more presence somehow. You can even increase this effect slightly, by using more of these things until there is no more difference discerned. Again, the overall effect is slight, but certainly there. If it is worth the cost lies in the ears of the listener. Cheers, |
Oh ,also, The New Grand Veena has one Super Effect Bybee Module in each speaker, on the mid range and tweeter I think. Spectron has a new factory upgrade on the current Musician 3SE with 2 SuperEffect Bybee and one regular Bybee module in the Amp. These are OEM of course as the SuperEffect Bybee module is not available for diy. Rod |
Mike Garner has them at tweekgeek.com. I was bowled over by the Bybee Super Effect products. We used the bullets on the topend of NHT V3T speakers. This was a clear wow with A/B on and off for clarity and space and smoothness. I guess if it doesn't sound different than it isn't worth the price of admission. IMHO, YMMV. See my audiogon review of the Ultra.PowerCord for further thoughts and details on a similar product. Rod |
I had the opportunity to try out a pair on my Quads and later on the Sound Labs. They did make a difference, which is difficult to describe. There seemed to be more presence, everything throughout the entire frequency band seemed to sound a tad more "real", a very slight veil was gone, which however I did not know existed at all before.It is not an upgrade which will bowl you over and I find it, considering the costs, only something for deep pocketed perfectionists and it does need a very highly resolving system in the first place to make its presence felt at all, which at best is slight, however noticeable and bringing you a fraction of an inch closer to the real thing. Is it worth the cost? I wouldn't know.......... |
