What are you two knuckleheads going on about, now?
309 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
“If I could explain it to the average Joe they wouldn’t have given me the Nobel prize.” Guglielmo Marconi Born: 25 April 1874, Bologna, Italy Died: 20 July 1937, Rome, Italy Affiliation at the time of the award: Marconi Wireless Telegraph Co. Ltd., London, United Kingdom Prize motivation: "in recognition of their contributions to the development of wireless telegraphy." Prize share: 1/2 WorkIn the late 1880s a previously unknown type of radiation was discovered - radio waves. It was found to have the same nature as light, but with a greater wavelength. Various physicists and technicians investigated whether radio waves could be used to transmit signals. In 1895, Guglielmo Marconi used radio waves to transmit signals over a distance of several kilometers. He developed the technology in subsequent years to achieve greater range. The foundation for both wireless telegraphy and radio had been laid. |
I read a great little book about Marconi by Erik Larson who is just a great writer IMHO. http://eriklarsonbooks.com/the-books/thunderstruck/ |
geoffkait, The thickness of the membrane(s) surrounding a brain was one of the parameters I had on my mind earlier in this thread about vibration. I would guess that Dura accounts for more than Pia and Arachnoidea together and would consider it much more significant during these discussions. Before you make fun of my language skills, consider the fact that your English seems to be slightly underdeveloped for a native speaker/writer. Try "Sounds familiar?" instead of "Sound familiar? next time. |
Marconi developed long range wireless communications over the course of many years, building larger and larger towers and more powerful transmit stations until they finally collapsed by their own weight. He had miscalculated that radio transmissions had to be long wave high power. At the time it was not known what an electromagnetic wave even was. No one knew. Marconi did not believe radio waves traveled in straight lines. He thought they followed the curvature of the Earth. As it turned out in the end the waves are very short and require only very low power. By contrast ELF (long wave) communications at wavelength of 75 Hz requires one million watts of transmit power. This is what happens sometimes, when people assume something and take it to the extreme. Sound familiar? |
there is a place for science and there is a place for trial and error and curiously both paths collide in this hobby. I'll not argue there is substantial science in the designs and builds of electronic equipment, though the 'exact' process by which it's associated parts are amassed into a highly resolving soul satisfying audio system has yet to be published which attends to every concievable modification, choice, or incongruity. how many filaments did Edison go thru before he found one that would last for more than scant seconds? then minutes? then hours and days? Edison even tried horsehair! ever wonder exactly where horse hair was on that list? as for reputed 'colorations' attributed to wood types, sometimes the audio needs coloration. or better said, 'colorization', or merely some added color. everytime Edison tried a new filament material that did not work he came one step closer to the one which would. often in the course of science remarkable solutions or results occur which took place entirely from happenstance or mistakes and they were as such not a part of the original method being attended to. Thankfully Edison's ideas on DC current/voltage were short sighted enough he lost out to Tesla and Westinghouse' approach for using AC energy. Tesla too had to swap horses in mid stream and he had the genius to build an induction motor with alternating coils and forego his plans on transmitting electricity thru the air . when in completely uncharted waters, how does one choose a particular direction, or know that direction is the best one with which to begin? even scientists have to guess now and then. indeed we all guess, speculate, and theorize, with everything we do. when we buy an amp for our speakers. cables for our amps. tubes for our tube gear. despite the inherent science in this or that's build or application, its all trial and error. guess work. although asembling an audio system then updating and or upgrading it to elevate its total performance is or can be quite involved and often tedious, sonic quality is a much easier and far simpler proposition. here the quality is a purely subjective accounting of the presentation by the one who pays the bills, and at times possibly the input from their better half. as for wood footers, their influence on the sound seems to be about density and the length of their fibers which make up the various kinds of trees being utilized. IMHO, Ebnony and Mahogany are my favs. however it do depend on the application, rack, device, etc.. RWV |
Hi Glupson Another thing you should consider is where we are. I for one am not going to get very technical here. Someone wants to come to my forum that's a different story, but here no thanks. As you said it's "amusing" and it's "tangled", but one thing it is not is qualified. Not saying that some of the people here are not qualified, but mixed among the insanity is not the right place for a serious conversation. MG |
It is possible to do something without knowing why it worked. The problem is when one tries too hard to explain why it works and gets tangled in that. At the same time, good theory is always a good start, but does not guarantee real-life outcome. There is nothing wrong with theoretical discussion, it is amusing indeed, and there is nothing wrong with having practical experience and not being able to pinpoint the explanation. Not every good car mechanic can explain details about physics that goes into car functioning on molecular level . Does anyone think less of them because of that? It is fun understanding how it all works, though. |
"@michaelgreenaudio- So Mike, you and your followers are ’walking the walk’ when it comes to electron vibration within a wire?? Please tell me how you’ve all managed to ’tune’ the electrons and are preventing them from vibrating. You know, since Geoff and I are only in talk mode about it. And since your hanging out with the people who are actually doing the things being talked about here. We're discussing a theoretical supposition I've tuned 3 systems today and about to work on my 4th. I think some of you are discussing theoretical supposition, but not me, I'm doing. Michael Green |
Let’s say you’re right, for the sake of argument. Let’s say electrons vibrate and let’s say they somehow distort the audio signal. But as you say, there’s nothing you can do about it. So, why worry about something you can’t do anything about? Especially in light of the fact there are SO MANY OTHER THINGS you CAN do something about. You might as well wonder why the signal of photons can travel at lightspeed through a solid copper conductor without being distorted by ramming into something more substantial than an electron, you know, like atoms and atomic nuclei. Follow?’Low noise transistors’ are an interesting concept. It is also interesting to note that a noise free transistor would not work. (ie , transistor 'fail', as in not work at all - no functionality) |
There are a couple of things I can think of right this second that are not amenable to vibration isolation or tuning, not completely. One is the scattered laser light problem. The other is the vibration of the thin wimpy out of round CD whilst spinning, its tendency to wobble and resonate make it exceedingly difficult for the laser to track the nanoscale data, actually impossible. These are both serious drawbacks to be jumping right into nano technology without knowing about them. Of course, the shame is nobody in the industry in the nearly 40 years has done anything about it. Assuming they even know about the problems, which they probably don’t. I think I can now say without fear of contradiction unless you’ve conquered those two problems you are in Nowheresville. |
@geoffkait , Geoff, please don’t mistake my supposition for worry. Electron vibration in an audio signal registers zero on my worry meter. It was just interesting to me to point it out. @michaelgreenaudio- So Mike, you and your followers are ’walking the walk’ when it comes to electron vibration within a wire?? Please tell me how you’ve all managed to ’tune’ the electrons and are preventing them from vibrating. You know, since Geoff and I are only in talk mode about it. And since your hanging out with the people who are actually doing the things being talked about here. We're discussing a theoretical supposition here, that if true, most likely cannot be prevented. How on Earth can you 'walk' that one? |
glupson1,999 posts04-26-2019 8:02pmCan a person teleportation tweak her/himself out of a solitary confinement? >>>>Jeff Goldblum was successful in transporting the baboon in The Fly from one pod to another so maybe there’s hope for you yet. |
Oops! looks like we’ve been interrupted by a message from our sponsors. 😬 Note to Michael: Everything is debatable and arguable. You just choose to be either unwilling to debate or unable to generate a reasonable counterargument. Repeating,”I’m right and you’re wrong” is not really a very effective method of argument. Have you given any consideration to taking a physics refresher course or two? As I’ve pointed out there is actually a lot of overlap between tweaking and tuning. No reason for the Us and Them mentality. Peace out. “Because it’s what I choose to believe.” - Dr. Elizabeth Shaw, Prometheus The Backfire Effect is the phenomenon that occurs when someone’s confronted with contradictory evidence or counter arguments to his preconceived notions of audio, physics, reality, whatever. He digs in even deeper and becomes more convinced his closely held beliefs must be right. |
Here's my recommendation, start hanging out where people are actually doing the things being talked about here. If you always stay in talk mode years pass by and you never get to the sound or the variables. Watching someone experience vibratory tuning you get to see the hobby change for them in front of your eyes. There's no debate, no argument and the proof is right in front of them to explore as much as they wish. MG |
Let’s say you’re right, for the sake of argument. Let’s say electrons vibrate and let’s say they somehow distort the audio signal. But as you say, there’s nothing you can do about it. So, why worry about something you can’t do anything about? Especially in light of the fact there are SO MANY OTHER THINGS you CAN do something about. You might as well wonder why the signal of photons can travel at lightspeed through a solid copper conductor without being distorted by ramming into something more substantial than an electron, you know, like atoms and atomic nuclei. Follow? At the same time less wire does mean less distortion caused by the directionality being incorrect 50% of the time. That much I will grant you. There are other losses and distortions in wire and cable, too. You know, dielectric material, purity and type of metal, geometry, etc. So, yes, less wire means less noise and distortion. |
Yes, the electron vibratory forces would be very small. But, since the electrons are inside the wire and is the signals transport system and the signal is flowing through-around, however- them, one could posit that this vibration would have an outsized vibratory effect that cannot be counteracted by any means. If the electrons are vibrating, and the audio signal is passing through them, how can it not cause the audio signal to vibrate? This could be another reason why your music playback system sounds so clear to you. Less wire and cables, less electron vibration in the signal path.... |
If an electron vibrates, which it might very well, even as a quantum particle, the total forces (sum of all f=ma) of the vibration of all the electrons in the wire would be very small compared to the sum of forces produced by acoustic waves and structural vibration, transformer vibration, etc. in the room. I.e., mass of an electron is exceedingly small. Thus, the sum of the electron “vibratory” forces is very small. So you can ignore electron vibration, assuming there is any. A similar question is whether or not the audio signal itself is vibrating AND whether it is vulnerable to distortion from local external forces. |
Question- When a signal passes through a wire, the signal-for lack of a better word-flows from the source to the speakers. The electrons in the wire do NOT flow. The are stationary. But, they do vibrate. Doesn't the electron vibration within the wire cause vibrational distortion? And if so, how can it be possible to negate the effect of that vibrational distortion? |
Maybe not so obviously, the walls of an ordinary room act like a drum head whilst music is playing. This drum head action is separate issue from standing waves and reflected waves and room echoes. There are some things one can do to alleviate this particular interference to the primary signal from the speakers without going too crazy. Some of these techniques can be used for Windows, too. Marigo VTS (constrained layer) Large Dots for walls. Tekna Sonic Dampers (now out of production, unfortunately). The product for taming speaker cabinet vibrations works great for room walls, too. Crystals (Brilliant Pebbles) are excellent vibration dissipators and can be used on room walls. You can find the maximum areas of flex 💪 on the walls by experimenting. Golden Sound Acoustic Discs for room corners also work on things like room walls, power cord plugs, electronic chassis, etc. |
I have fairly recently been in a room designed by Art Noxon of Acoustic Sciences Corporation, and build using his products. The walls are double layers of sheet rock with Wall Damp constrained-layer damping between them. I rapped on a wall with my knuckles, and the sound produced was like knocking on a brick---non-resonant. In other words, the walls produced no sound of their own (right, I know; don’t knock on your walls when music is playing ;-) . That’s "one" approach, another is to "tune" your walls until the room sounds "good" to you on any given piece of music. Sure, you may then have to "retune" the walls for another piece of music, but what price musical pleasure? All the wall/wall and wall/ceiling intersections of the room are fitted with ASC Acoustic Soffits, to absorb room mode standing waves/resonances. Because of that, the room is very "neutral", not imposing its’ own sound on that of the source material and hi-fi system. That’s "one" approach, another is to let those standing waves roam free, in the name of not "killing" ANY vibrations, mechanical or acoustic (’cause, you know man, music is vibrations). You may then take measures to "corral" those acoustic vibrations, to produce from the recordings you are playing the sound YOU want. It’s all about you, man. J. Gordon Holt was right about the generation of audiophiles that followed his. |
Dear geoffkait: If you are the same Geoff Kait who is the genius behind the Teleportation Tweak, I humbly apologize for any aspersions I cast upon your character. Long live quantum approaches to solving common hi-fi problems. Keep up the good work... Sincerely, Jay P.S. Also, I hereby apologize in advance for any cheap shots that I may take at you in the future. |
Interesting side note. In our bands practice room/ recording studio... Yes sounds grander than it was!. Covering all walls and ceilings I affixed egg cartons. In England used to supply eggs wholesale in eggcrates that were approx 24" square. The SQ in the room while practicing and our humble 4 track recordings sounded pretty darn good to us for the cost invested. |
Wow, people actually used newspapers as a part of audio manipulation. "Removing all telephone books, in fact all books and magazines and newspapers from the house does wonders for the sound."We must be living in the golden age of sound now. Not many phone books around, probably not even regular books. "Save the trees" |
michaelgreenaudio915 posts04-26-2019 3:25pm Hi Glupson If you read some of Johnathan Skull’s writing (I think it was he) he used cardboard boxes partly filled with newspaper for trapping his corners. Cardboard and newspaper (not so much slick print) can be fun to play with. >>>>Yeah, I’ve tried those. About 30 years ago if memory serves. Pretty straightforward energy dissipaters. We call those tweaks. They absorb standing waves in room corners, which just goes to show you that even acoustic vibrations should not all be allowed to roam free, if I can be so bold. The room just like the electronics and cabling requires forethought and a plan of attack. You might not have been paying very close attention, I have, to all the developments in room acoustics treatment that have occurred lo, these last 25 years or so. Really quite remarkable. Not saying your stuff isn’t good, too. But I digress. Back to the boxes with magazines, balled up newspaper, you can call them tuning if you want to. Poor man’s Tube Traps, whatever. Of course this wood and paper thing can work against you. Removing all telephone books, in fact all books and magazines and newspapers from the house does wonders for the sound. You can call that tuning, too, if you want. |
Hi Glupson If you read some of Johnathan Skull's writing (I think it was he) he used cardboard boxes partly filled with newspaper for trapping his corners. Cardboard and newspaper (not so much slick print) can be fun to play with. If you ever run across me talking about making pressure boxes, the originals were cardboard. Tons of uses for compressed paper, or even loose crumpled. Sometimes however cardboard and paper can be a curse in a system, especially if you live in higher humidity. Btw thanks for your questions and being patient with me many times. Sometimes when I'm up here I barely have enough time to squeeze out a few words before needing to run, and I appreciate it very much when the questions are clear and stated in a way that makes it easy to answer and also with good intent. So much easier to answer things with good vibes attached to them instead of the bad vibes that for people like me are the wrong experiences. I literally spend all my time inside of the tuning vibe solving sound situations for people or having my mind in the right place while writing articles or evaluating. Getting out of tune is a drag and sometimes when I see people here on head trips or have bad intent it's simply a waste of time and productive life. thank you Glupson MG |
I kind of doubt too many people these days swallow the old axiom that you have to spend a lot of money to get good sound. Furthermore I don’t consider high end audio to be all about super expensive systems. It really more about attitude and knowledge. We just saw Michael Fremer’s room with a $100,000 system and 100,000 records jammed in the room with the system. That is the opposite of high end audio in my book. If he doesn’t know better he should. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Give me a break. Your comment that your $14,000 system kills $100,000 systems is pure salesmanship puffery. Obviously, there are a great many rich audiophiles who are all thumbs. I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday. Knowledge is what’s left after you subtract all the stuff you forgot from school. He not busy being born is busy dying. |
Hi Glupson I think I'm a little tough on the industry because of the numbers of people who have come to me to start tuning, and then they end up feeling ripped off by HEA because HEA was not being straight up about how audio works and instead kept selling up till that music lover became trapped in a "fixed sound" world. Do you have any idea how many folks have come to me and replaced their 100,000.00 plus system with a tunable 8,000-14,000 one? A $14,000.00 system completely blowing away the big buck systems and to boot one that you can make sound almost anyway you want. people can use whatever words work for them but this is the world I live in daily MG |
michaelgreen, As a completely theoretical/semantic/babbling exercise, and to come back to the title of this thread, would you consider paper (think: stack of magazines or newspapers) placed somewhere where usual wood is commonly used for vibration control, as "using wood for vibration control"? I am not saying "do it", "what are your experiences", or anything like that. Just "would it be wood for vibration control", regardless of outcome. If it worked, that would be a cheap one. I am basing that only on "save the trees" statements that sometimes urge you not to use paper. |
michaelgreen, I do not think you used "big conspiracy", but that is how it feels reading your thoughts about HEA. Like some monster decided to fool everyone and started doing things to prepare for a scam that would follow. Kind of like detaching power cords to prepare for selling them aftermarket. That is how your thoughts about HEA development come across, at least some of your thoughts. Not that I have love for any industry, but it might have all just been a gradual and unplanned development. HEA may be getting smaller these days, I do not know the numbers, but it still seems that every day I read about a product from a company I have never heard of. And they happen to be more and more expensive. Maybe to accommodate for smaller numbers sold? I have no idea, just observations. |
Hi Glupson I only give the feedback I get from people who have lived through the experience. I don’t add to or take away from what is. I don’t have the time or desire to head down paths that burn up my time as you can probably gather. not sure I used the words "big conspiracy" did I, if so sorry that would have been a bit stretched MG |