Mitigating the Bubble

Did tubebuffer just make a reappearance?  The fractured syntax might suggest that that was the case.

Yes. He started a thread about starting a new life (Turn New Leaf Over).

All the best,
Nonoise

None of this matters because the product is being removed from the market. I may buy another stash and store away before he pulls the plug. To bad..

Knot current lee at this thyme.

As an outsider who does not get all the insider soap opera stuff, I must say, there are some vivid imaginations in this thread. Is anyone's stereo powered by a perpetual motion machine?

Did tubebuffer just make a reappearance?  The fractured syntax might suggest that that was the case.

@ghasley 

I missed the part where he was helping her...

I thought as you did, that Chris was, putting it mildly, not treating Krissy fairly.  Then somewhere along the line I thought @theaudiotweak, or maybe it was Chris, implied that Chris was really helping her.

I am hoping that Tom will just spell it out clearly, in simple words, is Chris helping Krissy in any way or is he the protagonist as far as she is concerned?

 I could talk for an hour about all of this but it would also take me hours to type this all out and then days of the same type of questions from badger boy keeping me from my nap time. The power cord eye think was coated in the nano flo then the surface was compressed to provide penetration of the nano flow thru the skin insulators which would then make contact with the actual conductors  A protective wrap was then placed over the treated surfaces below.. The thing that looks like a ferrite magnet at 1 end he says is not..If all eye just wrote is possible then that may suggest quantum tunneling of the nano materials thru the outer shield and surrounding the conductors. He said to me he did not remove the insulator on the initial power cord. Thats watt eye know. Now start with your battering rams.. Tom

I missed the part where he was helping her...Chris made comments about her late husband that were beyond comprehension. The public messaging seems to indicate she is not involved in any way, Chris's decision. That's like no longer being allowed to rep Enron.

Ha, definitely joking.  But this thread definitely is crazy.  From earlier posts I thought this Chris person screwed Krissy over, but later posts seem to be implying that he is actually helping her out in some way or another.

I have respect for Krissy, can someone clear this up?

This place is so crazy I don't even know if you are joking or not ....

@deludedaudiophile

Then you look at the claims below. 0.1nm and 2nm are encompassed by 0.01 and 10nm.

Sorry deluded, you just don’t understand scientific jargon, otherwise you would realize that 0.1 nm equates to .01 of a nano meter. It’s a whole new form of measurement.

Wow, @soarnatti , I wish I did look that up. That my be the worst patent I have ever read. There is a reason why you hire a patent lawyer if you don't know how to write one yourself. All kinds of ramblings about lubrication, but then nothing in the claims about lubrication. Then you look at the claims below. 0.1nm and 2nm are encompassed by  0.01 and 10nm. 

There could be something in this patent, but any lawyer or other scientist could not just drive a truck through it, but a whole convoy.

3. The process of claim 1, wherein the spherical nanodiamond particles have diameters between about 0.01 and about 10 nm.

4. The process of claim 1, wherein the spherical nanodiamond particles have diameters between about 0.1 nm and about 2 nm.

@theaudiotweak 

I recognize that I have been hard on the NanoFlo dude, mainly because of his power cord medicine show, but could it be that the contact enhancer that many of you believe improves your systems…could it be that rather than the hyposthesis that it is filling in micro pits in the surface it may instead be the abrasive is actually “roughing up” the surfaces. I could almost believe that the two imperfect conductor surfaces roughed up microscopically might randomly aid in certain connections.

Since no one, especially the manufacturer, has an explanation…its all guesswork. The power cord is still highly suspect. Has anyone “bought one”?

The other is this one, I thought everyone knew this one. 

Composition comprising nucleated nanodiamond particles

Well good one down and one to find.

The badger guy only badgered but didnt take the time to search on his own time. Thanks Soarnatti for your time. Tom

Not positive this is the same guy and don't see what this invention has to do with a contact enhancer either. 

Inventors:

Arnold, Christopher J. (Lombard, IL) https://www.freepatentsonline.com/6271614.html

Daytime television level @audioguy85 

Wow, this is nuts....

Did you use your eyes to search for the patent or his full name or his home state to narrow the search? Hint look on E Bay 4 more clues. Knot your brother.  Tom

"eye did" ... oh brother.

Eye seen it at 399 plus local taxes plus shipping from his crib two your crib.

Eye haven’t been on in a few days, but did a price ever get mentioned for this stuff? Ey’d read though the hundreds of posts but eye’m feeling pretty good about life so eye figured ey’d just ask again.

Look for the patent as eye did..do a patent search as eye did, he has at least 2 patents. The patents do not address this product. Tom

@tommylion,

You are posting on a forum. Everything you get in return is by definition solicited as you are putting it out there for public comment. I think most people don't appreciate being lied to. I think most people don't appreciate people defending charlatans.

And yet I show above where he claims part of the formula is diamonds ... imagine that.

Do you have a patent number of a link to the patent?

It is interesting you make that comment @theaudiotweak ,

Maybe you should tell nano-flo.

Easy marks.

...explains how he makes nano diamonds which he stated to me does not contain diamond.......

Based upon the entirety of this thread, perhaps a more appropriate name for this product, whatever it is, is Drano-Flo.

Perhaps cubic zirconia is a dynamite conductor?

Nano Flo contact enhancer does not contain diamond or boron doped diamond even though his patent granted in 2017 explains how he makes nano diamonds which he stated to me does not contain diamond.......

2 entirely different formulas and 2 different purposes..Tom. 

When I am interested in an audio product, and considering whether or not to try it in my system, I look for reports from those who have actual experience with it. I’ve already seen the ads and marketing blurbs, actual user experience is what I’m looking for. That’s one of the main reasons I frequent forums like this. Yes, of course I need to consider the credibility of those who report the experience, as should anyone else. Comments and opinions from those with no experience, especially when presented in an unsolicited and obnoxious manner, are just noise. I know I am not alone in feeling this way.

Correct mapman, but anyone with some basic research skills can research that boron doped diamond is not superconducting till <10K. Anyone can research the conductivity of detonation diamond nano structures and see they are vastly less conductive than copper or similar metals. They see the charlatan claim a 5mpg to 8mpg increase for a truck (maybe it was 5.5mpg) and do some basic research on vehicle contact and fluid friction losses and know that is impossible. They can learn a bit about thermodynamics and contact and fluid friction losses and know that his massive horsepower claim for a dragster is impossible. They can see his claim that the owner of a company died due to claimed carcinogen in his product and know that this is not a good person. They see the claim that he would provide test results be reneged on and know he cannot be trusted. They can investigate surface roughness of connector and similar contacts and make some educated guesses about what it would take to fill those gaps to improve conductivity.

My statements hold up not because I have the qualifications to back them up, but because everything I said in the last paragraph is true and easily researched and verified. Some of it was easy for me because of my background so I see the numbers and know what they mean without further research, but nothing beyond someone determined to learn.

That’s for sure.  Any schmuck can post anything about anything.  Themselves,  products whatever.  So can others. You get to play to tell the truth and decide who is the real deal. 

Any schmuck can claim all kinds of qualifications, and cut and paste all kinds of stuff to prove how smart they are, on an internet forum. The fact remains that you have no clue what this stuff actually does, or doesn’t, do, in the context of a high resolution audio system. You could find out (assuming you actually have such a system), but, unlike most of us, you are clearly NOT here to share your actual experience with other enthusiasts and/or learn from theirs.

The callous cynicism of buying a $7 power cable, dipping the tips in a mysterious liquid, and then throwing it up on eBay for $1500, then "reduced" to $1000, to me says a great deal about the individual involved, and also sends up all kinds of other red flags concerning any and all claims made.

The mistake made by some here is to assume that because they disapprove of the personality, marketing methods, testing procedures and previous history of an inventor, then the invention must be invalid and the testimonials must be lies put forward by shills. That's a huge mistake, especially when that assumption is driven forcefully and repeatedly with no evidence and a complete unwillingness to investigate.

I will state my qualifications again with more detail. I have a PhD in solid state physics and work predominantly in material sciences and have worked in the semiconductor industry and now battery industry. If you consider that a call to authority, good, it was.

Posting links to things you don’t understand and/or quoting things you don’t understand (and are ultimately irrelevant) are not moving this discussion forward. It is akin to all the Internet epidemiologists trying to justify their lack of being vaccinated by posting case rate data that demonstrated nothing more than their inability to put into practice basic math.

All these posts illustrate is a lack of understanding of relative conductivity, and how semiconductors operate, not to mention a lack of effort and research skills to discover that boron doped diamond becomes a superconductor at temperatures <= 10 KELVIN,

Elastic and mechanical softening in boron-doped diamond | Scientific Reports (nature.com)

Notice what is stated about conductivity below.. Not all materials combos are as simple as they may seem.

Sheridd2 thanks for the updates and I will add my own after my guests leave this Sunday...

Oh. the Kentucky Derby is on May 7 if any members are here in town send me a PM if you would like to stop over and hear my setup. 

Tom

Boron substitution in diamond modifies its physical properties, such as adding a distinctive blue color, best known in the Hope diamond²⁹. Boron-doped diamond (BDD) has been widely studied on account of its semiconducting or superconducting properties at sufficiently high doping levels^30,31,32,33. BDD retains the high thermal conductivity of pure diamond³¹, is inert to most chemical reagents, remains highly transparent over a wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum, and is resistant to high levels of radiation. These properties combine to make BDD an important material in potential semiconductor applications in extreme environments. Although the electrical and optical properties of BDD are well known³⁴, and the compressibility of BDD is indistinguishable from that of diamond in volume-compression measurements³⁵, the precise influence of moderate-to-high boron doping on the mechanical and elastic properties of single-crystal diamond has not been investigated.

Ah well, back to the Nano-flo.

I had a little bit left and previously I had shied away from doing the dual BNC cables between my cd transport and dac due to the equipment tending to ’mangle’ the wire point slightly by moving the tip away from the central point. It needs to be in the centre in order to mate into the female end. I correct this by using a long flat headed screwdriver and placing it at the appropriate place to straighten the wire to its correct position again. Because of this necessary procedure I don’t tend to touch the BNC cables but as this was the only part of my music system left untouched I did it today. Not too much straightening required afterwards to correct the pins and the process went quite quickly.

I turned the system on just to confirm everything was ok and music coming through both channels, which it was. Listened at low volume for about 15 minutes as I’m not a fan of turning equipment on and off quickly as it tends to shorten the life of the electronics.

Even at low volume and playing music just for a short time the amount of detail coming through was great, too early to say yet what impact this last update has overall, more listening tonight and over the weekend.

@whostolethebatmobile , stop trying to look like you know what you are talking about.

In the very best conductor surfaces, you are talking surface roughness 200+ nm. With audio connectors, I expect 2+uM. Nanodiamonds are <10nm, so we are talking at least 260+ stacked to fill in the voids (they are round), and that is assuming 100% material, but this is an oil carrier with indeterminate active material, so who knows what you will get. What you won't get is any improvement in conductivity beyond maybe, just maybe, some whiping of an oxide layer, but ... for that you would be much better off with something larger and angular as these would not cut through the oxide layer .. it's a fail all around.

As a bulk material? Who cares about the bulk material? It's the surface chemistry that is of interest.

@whostolethebatmobile ,

I assume those numbers did not mean anything to you.

Within the context of a contact enhancer, they absolutely are absolutely always insulators. Sans atmospheric moisture, they are for all intents and purposes, an excellent insulator. Even with atmospheric moisture, they are still about a Billion times less conductive as a bulk material compared to copper. I generally think of something a billion times less conductive than copper as an insulator.

deludedaudiophile, although nanodiamonds can assist conductivity, I am not convinced that the conductivity of nanodiamonds is particularly important for audio. I don’t even believe Nano-Flo is a contact enhancer. But I think it’s important to acknowledge that nanodiamonds are not always insulators, when that assertion has been the basis of your dismissal of their potential.

@whostolethebatmobile ,

Early in this thread (or earlier) I gave some of my background which is solid state physics current working on materials science for batteries and previously semiconductors. I won’t bore you with my degrees.

This is the problem when charlatans and good intentioned reference things they lack the background to understand. Diamond is an insulator. Detonantion diamonds even with a carbon layer, or gold surface treatment (they are working on that to improve lateral flow tests -- think Covid rapid tests), are still poor conductors. The conductive layer is thin compared to the bulk. Most of the conductivity comes from surface area, though in plastics you have different mechanisms.

A more appropriate article to reference is this one:

Conductivity of detonation microdiamond under pressure

The initial electrical conductivities were 2.5 × 10⁻⁵ and 2.5 × 10⁻⁷ Ohm⁻¹ cm⁻¹ under atmospheric conditions and in vacuo, respectively,

Note that higher value is from absorbing water (hard to do in oil).

Other studies showed even larger variation

The G value changed from 10⁻¹² to 10⁻⁵ Ohm⁻¹·cm⁻¹ at relative humidity range from 0% to 95%.

Since you are educating me on nanodiamonds and conductivity, perhaps you could relate these numbers to how they compare to copper?

Does it occur to people that there are people who understand these things in detail, certainly far better than some internet charlatan?

deludedaudiophile, nanodiamonds have a diamond core and an amorphous carbon outer layer with unique surface chemistry which can assist conductivity in an insulating matrix. If you’re unaware of this, read about it here :

Nanodiamond Surface Chemistry

No, I make the analysis the claims are invalid, because diamond is an insulator, then after I brought this up, the "inventor" tried to claim it was boron doped diamond which is a semiconductor which would still in a contact location be an insulator, and after that was raised, he tried to say the diamond balls were covered with gold .... it was quite obviously he was making it up as he went along. Then big claims about physical properties that a high school student could measure but which he had not.  The previous history of the inventor was one of lying. That is a big red flag for me. It should be for anyone.

The mistake made by some here is to assume that because they disapprove of the personality, marketing methods, testing procedures and previous history of an inventor, then the invention must be invalid and the testimonials must be lies put forward by shills. That's a huge mistake, especially when that assumption is driven forcefully and repeatedly with no evidence and a complete unwillingness to investigate.

+1 tommylion.

+1 tommylion and whitefishpoint1175