Perfect Path "Solutions" (PPS) eMat

Sounds like the moral of the story is people should spend thousands of dollars on things that nobody can explain and just have at it because some guys on the internet hear things.

At least people can buy into conspiracy theories for free.

oregonpapa-

millercarbon ...

• "Frank, you are too kind. He is the one, probably just about the only one, I would have to disinvite."

Not me. I’d love to have the guy over for a listening session. Within the first few notes, he would have a look on his face as though he had just eaten a crap sandwich. No doubt he would try to save face by finding fault with the system, but once the session was over, he would leave and never be able to forget what he had heard. And the best part? He would try to match the sound somehow but would fail miserably, and would be chasing it for the rest of his arrogant little life. :-)

By the way Miller, I still laugh every time I think about your late-night phone call when your greeting was ... "Frank ... I had to call someone who understands!" That was truly a classic.

Frank.

That's the problem in a nutshell. All these different things we try, everything from components and cables to HFT and PPS, they all improve the sound in ways that we talk about in very similar terms. Imaging, detail, dynamics, extension, etc. But they also improve the sound in ways that are also somehow different. The Gate and Total Contact are very similar in character to each other, and sort of similar yet very different than the improvement brought by anything else.  

There really is no explaining why. We can hardly even describe how. But we sure do know it when we hear it! It's that spine-tingling sensation of a reality. Lately I've been using Townshend Pods and they do get me some of that. But there again the nature of the change is somehow subtly different.

The beauty of it is they all go together. Nothing clashes, everything adds.  

Nor do we have the problem so many others talk about, where they think the system got better but then complain how certain records all their faults are revealed and they are now hard to listen to. Every single one of my records sounds so much better than before it is hard to believe.  

I know it. You know it. I know that you know it. Pity some of these so-called audiophiles can't get that. Question is, the one in particular, are you really so sure he would even know it when he hears it? Would he even hear it? I don't think so.

Einstein, why don’t you take a quick look over in the Crazy, crazy, crazy thread under Audio Clubs. You will find that the predominant theme there is that no one even wants to have a drink with you.

Audio2design is a pleasure to read compared to you. I hope you get that. I wonder what other audio site kicked you out that you stumbled here.

Color me not a fan.

Search my posts over the last 19 years, you will not find me having said a negative thing about anyone before.

@glupson, Hey, it is time for you to make a comment! 

I missed millercarbon's last comment. We need to get you a soap box millercarbon. Better yet a TV show! You would make a great preacher. That says a lot coming from a atheist:-)

Golly, that is an awful room, awful loudspeakers too. It seems that Dr Toole has a lot of knowledge but terrible ears or maybe he does not earn enough in his profession to be able to afford the good stuff and I am not saying that in a bad way, it is true for a lot of us. We do the best that we can. 
We should all be proud of our systems but I do not understand this constantly "tweaking" business. I will go years, sometimes a decade before doing anything and When I make a change it is always a big one like new speakers or amps. I kept the same turntable for 40 years although I had some others over the past decade. My version of a tweak is a new cartridge. I've had the same room for 28 years and it was treated acoustically from the start and has not needed any additions. Now with new speakers coming and new more dense carpet things will change a little so I will have to take new measurements and maybe adjust crossovers. I suppose making digital changes is a sort of tweak but I can see exactly what is going on. There are no illusions here. I am programming the system to do exactly what I want.
I hate to say this but, I think people with less elaborate systems are constantly looking for inexpensive ways to improve their systems and fall pray to marketing hype. That does not explain the Hallograms at $1600. I suppose that is cheap relative  to an $85,000 amplifier.
@audio2design, now you are not only harsh but politically inappropriate.
You don't need to beat people up because the have no idea what they are doing. Just notice the group of comedians lined up against you.
It is the old science vs religion conundrum. So, keep up the good fight. It is a lot of fun watching them squiggle around the facts. They can not get their heads around the fact that some of us do not have to hear an item personally to know it does not work. Guys, it is just knowledge and experience. It is very easy to take advantage of those that have neither.

Don't let this mad devil get to you mahgister, he is arrogant beyond belief and incapable of any thought other than how to insult everyone else while aggrandizing himself.  

He misses everything we love about music. Notice he never, ever talks in terms of how things sound to him. Anyone like you, me, Frank, anyone good at listening, that is how we talk. We talk about how it sounds. How it sounds in our rooms right here in the real world. All the arrogant clown ever talks about is how it can't because, reasons.  

Listeners like us, we learn what we can, buy what we can, build what we can't buy. But mostly we try and listen, throw out what doesn't work and keep whatever does. Regardless of what it was or who said it or how big a degree they have. If it sounds better we do it. If it doesn't we don't.  

Here we are enthusiastically engaged in the pursuit of better sound, and we have the temerity to judge our success at getting better sound by.... enjoying the better sound we get. Sound his tin ear can't even hear. No wonder the poor man is seething in rage all the time. So relax. Let him go. Not worth your time. Certainly not worth mine.

As usual Mahgister, your replies are essentially misguided, the effect of too much confidence, and too little knowledge perhaps or are you just rushing to your keyboard without taking the time to think things through?


Read more, think more, and type a whole lot less!

I will point out a few paragraphs which you conveniently glossed over or did not understand. I will also note the size of Dr. Toole's listening space (which was a long time ago), and how that compares to oregonpapa's and the closeness and high reflectance of those surfaces.

The dramatic change happened when the precedence effect broke down and two images were perceived – that was a problem. The strength and spectrum of any reflection depends on the strength and spectrum of the sound radiated in that specific direction by the loudspeaker, and by the frequency-dependent acoustical performance of the reflecting surface. If you look at (a) in the preceding diagram, the adjacent side-wall reflection is the sound radiated at close to 90° off axis from the loudspeaker. This is much attenuated in most loudspeakers, and is motivation to angle the loudspeakers to face the listener.

the very neutral, essentially omnidirectional, Mirage M1s

You figure out why this is important.

Because of the designed-in irregular scattering surfaces, the heavy carpet and thick felt underlay brought the reverberation time down to under 0.5s so the room sounded much less “live” than one would think.

Figure 7.1 above shows the first reflections in a stereo setup, and in an LCR arrangement. Anyone claiming that a phantom center image is superior to a real center loudspeaker has some persuading to do. The phantom-image situation is significantly muddled, and most listening situations are not perfectly symmetrical. As we will see later, eliminating all of the reflections does not solve the fundamental problem with the phantom center; in fact it makes it worse.

That last one is for MC and others ignorantly claiming that a center channel is not needed for movies.

As an illustration of how much loudspeaker technology has improved over the years, these data on the JBL Pro M2 indicate that whatever one’s opinions of loudspeaker/room interactions were in the era of the UREI, they cannot be the same in the era of the M2, and any similarly “neutral” loudspeaker.

And this is specifically w.r.t. the Legacy III’s which were somewhat average at the time and have significant issues with the integration of the two different technology tweeters, and would not be, as Dr. Toole mentions above"neutral". They have a significant anomaly where the two speakers crossover.

- No front wall reflection control
- No first reflection control
- The reflections off the glass table
- The reflective equipment between the speakers
- The lack of symmetry due to the windows on one side, and the wall/records on the other side
- The blinds (that will rattle)
- The reflective pictures on the wall
- The reflective (curio/china cabinet?) in one corner behind the speakers, but not the other

You description to bash the experience of oregonpapa is not fair...

Try to apply this analysis to the room picture in this article....
This is the room of Floyd Toole, one of the great acoustician in the world...

Almost all you just said apply to HIS room pictured here...

Wrote to him that he is an idiot in acoustic....

Try that with him....
😁

https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation


I dont say that Toole is right about the positive use of reflections i only say that Acoustic of room is NOT what you think it is....

Then before judging other pick a mirror and think about reflections in another way....

i am sorry to be harsh.....😊

If I ever decide to teach again on the side, I will certainly be using this thread as a lesson in perceptual bias and how strong an influence that can be on someone such that they can convince themselves that older and rather average speakers in an absolutely horrible acoustic space, can be the "best sound ever". Those token Hallographs are not going to fix all the acoustics issues that include, but are not limited to:

- No front wall reflection control
- No first reflection control
- The reflections off the glass table
- The reflective equipment between the speakers
- The lack of symmetry due to the windows on one side, and the wall/records on the other side
- The blinds (that will rattle)
- The reflective pictures on the wall
- The reflective (curio/china cabinet?) in one corner behind the speakers, but not the other

I am quite serious when I say that if you sold all that fancy (an expensive) AR gear and bought a half decent receiver and invested 1/10 of the money on the sale of the AR gear and put it into effective acoustics, the overall sound would be better, if not a lot better. Oh it would not be perfect, but you are so far from that now, that anything would be an improvement.

And no, I don't need to "hear" this system to know what a mess it will be. 8+ wrongs do not make a right.


You could also call this perhaps harsh Mijostyn, but obviously provoked.

millercarbon ...

• "Frank, you are too kind. He is the one, probably just about the only one, I would have to disinvite."

Not me. I’d love to have the guy over for a listening session. Within the first few notes, he would have a look on his face as though he had just eaten a crap sandwich. No doubt he would try to save face by finding fault with the system, but once the session was over, he would leave and never be able to forget what he had heard. And the best part? He would try to match the sound somehow but would fail miserably, and would be chasing it for the rest of his arrogant little life. :-)

By the way Miller, I still laugh every time I think about your late-night phone call when your greeting was ... "Frank ... I had to call someone who understands!" That was truly a classic.

Frank.

You speak an infinite deal of nothing-
The Merchant of Venice

Doubley Dumb Dilbert Dudes. Right from the hand of Shakespeare. Only he could have written such a description.   Tom

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake;
Slice of mat and wire of fuse
Liquid cables juice we use
Diamond needle on tone arm sing
Scratching and  popping an audiophile dream
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.

With apologies to Willie

There is a method to break down the contents of the mat and blend into another binding agent and directly apply those benefits to many parts of my system and elsewhere in my room. Tom

But likely not of Papa's audio system ....  Relatively average speakers in I would expect a substandard acoustic space. Sorry papa, I would tell you exactly what I think and you probably won't like what I say. Now Mijoystyn, you can say I was harsh.

docknow,

Of course, people will start asking to name some of the improvements. Once you reach 5689, Audiogon server's fuse may decide to quit.

docknow,

Prince Charles is green with envy.

not

@glupson: I was inviting a potential criticism by being so quantitative.  I should have just said countless.  BTW, I made 3 rather large improvements to my system yesterday (cable routing, room treatments and adding an LPS).

I fear you have been distracted by the number and missed my point in that part of my response.  Oh Well !!

As you may have guessed, I am royalty ...

docknow,

"I have made thousands of improvements to my succession of systems over the last 45 years, with each one having a very audible improvement and this trend has not diminished."

If it were only 1000, it would be 22+ improvements a year. That is an improvement every 16 days for 45 years without a vacation ever. In case you ever left your home for a few days and "thousands" really means "thousands" amd not merely a "thousand", you may be talking about an improvement every few days. Let’s say every 3-4 days. Assuming that you cannot be correct every time over 45 years and that some attempts did not result in an improvement, you might have tried to fiddle with your system for 45 years every day when you were at home.

I am truly curious.

What kind of career do you have to allow you such a luxury of time for tweaking your audio system? I doubt that Prince Charles would be able to pull that off.

millercarbon ...

The only non-PPT enhanced system I've ever heard that came close to the kind of realism we are getting was Randy Cooley's room (Optimal Enchantment) at one of the audio shows. Randy always plays tasteful music during his demonstrations. He was using all of the ARC reference stuff, the big Basis turntable, and Vandersteen's best speakers. The retail value of Randy's demo system had to be several hundreds of thousands of dollars. And yet, my modest Legacy Signature IIIs are pumping out sound like that. Even better actually.

Frank

That must have been some setup. Imagine if he had even just a little of the good stuff in there! That's what gets me. When you get up into the stratosphere level of funding I would sure hope the sound is to die for. When in reality more often than not it is merely impressive. People who haven't heard simply do not know. That is why I am so keen on getting people to come hear, and then also to post comments.

All anyone has to do is read my system comments. That's not me. That's other audiophiles. When you read the comments from a guy who is into digital and looks askance at analog and yet is saying things like While I was there I was wishing for a more analytical sound but when I got home I was really missing that sound he was getting, you and I know what he's talking about. But no one else does. 

Sad to say, utter complete lack of knowledge never stops them spewing their unfounded opinions, more often than not as fact. 

And here you are again, passing judgment on something you haven't personally experienced. You didn't hear Randy's demo system, and you certainly have never heard my system either. 

If you're ever in my area ... Southern Californa, Ventura County specifically, you're welcome to come over for a listening session. The only requirement is that you don a triple layer of adult diapers prior to the session beginning. I don't like stains on the ceiling and carpet.

Frank

Frank, you are too kind. He is the one, probably just about the only one, I would have to disinvite. 

docknow,

"@glupson: Why poor Randy? Sounds like he had a great system!!"

I thought so, too, but then it seems that oregonpapa's modest thing is better than Randy's. Randy tried, just to be outdone.

@audiodesign: I do truly "think" that.  BTW, in my way of thinking, "believes" are for church.

With that clarification ... it is a big goal, but I have found that big goals help facilitate small successes towards the goal and keep one from getting off track.  It is clear to me that such a goal is still a long ways away.  I have made thousands of improvements to my succession of systems over the last 45 years, with each one having a very audible improvement and this trend has not diminished.  If we were getting close to the goal of an audio "time machine", I would posit that each step closer would get smaller and more difficult.  Since that has not been my experience, I have come to wonder if the distance to my goal is still quite large.

Either way, there are going to be many paths that might take us to that goal and our collective wisdom and experience will get us there faster.  That is part of the value of communication and sharing here.

PS-this thread was not a waste for me.  I learn something and improve my knowledge and brain from nearly everything I do.

docknow ...

 

• "Sounds like Randy's system gave oregonpapa a glimpse of what is possible and therefore what he should strive for."

That's exactly it. When I heard Randy's demo, it had the most three dimensional, and most realistic presentation I had ever heard from an audio system. A replication of that sound has been my goal ever since. With all of the PPT products in the system, especially The Gate, my system is finally there ... and well beyond. 

Frank

audio2design ...

• "If the best sound you have ever heard was at an audio show, then I don't see how I can take any of your personal listening experiences seriously. There is one thing listening rooms at trade shows all have in common. They sound bad. That is not at all surprising given what it takes to acoustically treat a room for what can be considered great sound."

"Most" rooms at audio shows sound bad. This we are in agreement with. However, Randy Cooley's room was exceptional. Well, at least what he was getting out of the demo system was exceptional.

And here you are again, passing judgment on something you haven't personally experienced. You didn't hear Randy's demo system, and you certainly have never heard my system either.

If you're ever in my area ... Southern Californa, Ventura County specifically, you're welcome to come over for a listening session. The only requirement is that you don a triple layer of adult diapers prior to the session beginning.  I don't like stains on the ceiling and carpet. 

Frank

If you truly believe that @docknow, then this thread is a waste. If you think these things are the path to a "live" performance, then you will never get there.

@glupson: Why poor Randy?  Sounds like he had a great system!!

Also, kudos to oregonpapa for having something similar.  His success takes nothing away from Randy's system.  It is not a zero sum game.  Sounds like Randy's system gave oregonpapa a glimpse of what is possible and therefore what he should strive for.

It would be my wish that we ALL had amazing systems that have the "time machine" quality that takes us back to the instant of the original performance/recording.  I think that is what most of us want, and we should all be working, collectively, to make that possible.

The only non-PPT enhanced system I've ever heard that came close to the kind of realism we are getting was Randy Cooley's room (Optimal Enchantment) at one of the audio shows.

If the best sound you have ever heard was at an audio show, then I don't see how I can take any of your personal listening experiences seriously. There is one thing listening rooms at trade shows all have in common. They sound bad. That is not at all surprising given what it takes to acoustically treat a room for what can be considered great sound.

"And yet, my modest Legacy Signature IIIs are pumping out sound like that. Even better actually."

Poor Randy.

millercarbon ...

The only non-PPT enhanced system I've ever heard that came close to the kind of realism we are getting was Randy Cooley's room (Optimal Enchantment) at one of the audio shows. Randy always plays tasteful music during his demonstrations. He was using all of the ARC reference stuff, the big Basis turntable, and Vandersteen's best speakers. The retail value of Randy's demo system had to be several hundreds of thousands of dollars. And yet, my modest Legacy Signature IIIs are pumping out sound like that. Even better actually. 

Frank

"A magnet when you think about it is nothing more than a static electromagnetic field."

Does this apply to "moving magnet", too?

I have used TC and was very, very happy with the results.  Had I know Tim was sick and there was uncertainty about future supply, I would have bought many, many tubes of it. I have had to disassemble and move my system multiple times now and the magic is receding :(

My Legacy Signature IIIs have every available surface area covered in PPT Mats. Yep, it looks weird, but the improvement in sound was really significant and well worth the effort. I listen in a low-light environment, so the mats on the speakers don’t bother me at all.

Last night the system had Janice Ian front and center ... almost like I could reach out and touch her. Also, I listened to a private recording of the L.A. Phil performing Tchaikovsky’s Second Piano Concerto transferred directly from the master tape. It was like I was being transported right into the concert hall ... and the piano was dead-on tonally. Simply amazing. 

Frank

That's the most amazing part, that spine-tingling feeling of "it's right there!" Just can't get that any other way. Not that I have found. And I have tried a LOT of different ways! 

Isn't it funny though, that guy, he's actually getting close, but never will get there because of his awful attitude. Won't ever even know what we're talking about. Sad. And yet, hilarious!

Due to the magnets, this is what happened when I put the the mats on the back of my speakers (I also have a second system with Legacy Signature IIIs).  On the rear bottom where the crossover is located, it elevated the bass response.   On the rear behind drivers, it elevated the mids and tweeters.   So, it did have a profound effect, just not one I wanted.   Much like using Synergistic Research HFTs.   For non-magnetic reasons, the HFT-X under my tweeters just enhance the highs too much for my system and the HFT regular in the rear enhance the mids too much (enhance meaning making prominent).  I have tried Mats on power panels, isolation transformers and other equipment.  No go but they always made a difference, quite prominently.  So I recommend trying them out to see if they enhance the sound you want.  

oregonpapa4,355 posts01-24-2021 11:42amMy Legacy Signature IIIs have every available surface area covered in PPT Mats. Yep, it looks weird, but the improvement in sound was really significant and well worth the effort. I listen in a low-light environment, so the mats on the speakers don’t bother me at all.

The surface area of Legacy Signature III's is about 2400 square inches (removing a reasonable allocation for the drivers).  The PPT Mats are about 75 square inches (from tweakaudio website).  That means that each speaker would require 32 of the mats to cover the speaker.  2 speakers would required 64 mats.  At a price of $300 for the original, that is $19,200 in mats. Now I have no doubt if you bought 64 you would have gotten some discount, but I think most would question whether the best spent on the way to audio nirvana. 

My Legacy Signature IIIs have every available surface area covered in PPT Mats. Yep, it looks weird, but the improvement in sound was really significant and well worth the effort. I listen in a low-light environment, so the mats on the speakers don’t bother me at all.

Last night the system had Janice Ian front and center ... almost like I could reach out and touch her. Also, I listened to a private recording of the L.A. Phil performing Tchaikovsky’s Second Piano Concerto transferred directly from the master tape. It was like I was being transported right into the concert hall ... and the piano was dead-on tonally. Simply amazing.

Frank

So after hearing Frank tell me they work great on speakers I tried it and sure enough they do. But having a Mat taped on the side looks dumb, even for me, and besides the outside of the cabinet is pretty far from the drivers and wires. So the drivers came out and the Mats were cut up and wrapped around the driver magnets. Huge improvement. Much better.

A magnet when you think about it is nothing more than a static electromagnetic field. No different in principle from the fluctuating electromagnetic field we call music. No idea what your small magnets are doing but around great big speaker magnets they are great. Worked great on the Talons, working great on the Tektons. 

There is one place the PPE products DO NOT work correctly-MAGNETS.  The E-Mats absolutely made a sonic difference in my system even though I didn't use them.   My system has small magnets in various locations in my system which are proprietary (no, not the HUGE in line magnets of High Fidelity cables) with paired metals.   

"...almost ALL customers buying these products were satisfied..."

It does say a lot about customer satisfaction, but does not say anything about performance of the product. Those two are not the same issue.

Many people continue liking products that are not the greatest in many ways and many people dread products that perform well.

Any rethoric coming from you will never change the fact that almost ALL customers buying these products were satisfied...

Then without any means nor desire to verify by yourself, except suggestion, supposition, and sophism, you insinuate that all the buyers communicating in these threads suffers collective hypnosis or collective placebo effect....

Like turntable owners suffering from deluded ignorance of a theorem...

You stir a pot of yours that is very revealing of you....Not of the product that i never bought myself anyway....

But i prefer to trust people testimonies than "deductions" around a void of experience....

let alone measure it to show effectiveness

How in the hell do you measure for example the effect of a piece shungite compressing the sound when put on an amplifier?

With an apparatus devised by your genius? Try your ears....

I dont doubt that a scientific explanation of these fact exist by the way, but i dont know it myself and i doubt that you know it....

Anyway you will not even try, you only trust a few equations written in a book you learned longtime ago....But reality dont hide behind few equations...It is only a veil or some glass man put in front of his eyes to use nature...Useful indeed but it is not reality, some equations are only arrangement in the mariage of man and reality....

Your attitude is to science what religion is to spirituality more a burden than wings....




«My equations are not your tamed dogs but dragons» An anonymus mathematician to an anonymus engineer

«Why dont you have any mathematical books in your house asked a journalist to Alexander Grothendieck? I never read mathematical books, i wrote them...» -Real anecdote

«Where these equations nobody could even dream about comes from, ask Geoffrey Hardy to Ramanujan ? From the goddess Namagiri Thayar in my dreams answered the greatest mathematician since Archimedes and Gauss...

The mat is a silly concept that does nothing but massage the brains of the people that waste money on it.

You will note Mijoystyn I have never called the product silly. I even gave it the benefit of the doubt it does something.  In that aspect I am not being harsh at all.  I don't for a minute believe the company that produced it had any ability to effectively create an effective EMI absorbing mat let alone measure it to show effectiveness. That is not being harsh or talking ill it is just what it is.  A review of their website while active was probably a good reflection of their capabilities.


Now the claims that are made about said product those are totally silly.  I didn't even realize how silly till someone pointed them out in this thread. I thought they were joking. Turns out nope.  That is a reflection on the people making the claims, not the purveyor of the product.

Here's some information that may be helpful:

http://tweakaudio.com/EVS-2/Perfect_Path_Technologies.html

http://v2.stereotimes.com/post/perfectpath-technlogies-total-contact/

Frank

@mooncrikit  I am using 4 of the original emats as well as TC from PPT everywhere in my system but none of my searches have linked to a "Perfect Path Solutions" company or anything from them except a review from MC of TC from PPS which was obviously a PPT product.

Care to share one?

some of us understand the tech so we don’t wander randomly hoping for that next increment......and clearly the tech frontier is evolving, expanding and as yet does not fully explain music, let alone music reproduction.

enjoy the music

but never embrace the Nazi or those who support them

what did King Dotard say “ stand by “.....

Some of us are iconoblasts.

(no millercarbon, Google will not make it quick, you have to know the words)

Einstein was an iconoclast. Not just me saying it either. Do a search. An iconoclast is one who breaks down old ideas. You old idea guys can carp all you want about why he's there. I'm TELLING you why he's there!  

There's basically two kinds of people here: Ones who listen, and ones who blather. The ones who listen tell others what they hear. The ones who blather tell others what they think. If only they could hear, then they could participate. We are after all audiophiles. Literally those who love sound. They are technophiles, those who love technology.  

Poor saps, don't even know they are on the wrong site.

@ mooncrikit
I suspect only two people have knowledge of the "intricate details" of the PPT mats, and one isn't with us anymore. I don't think that knowledge is necessary though, to understand that they do work. I have multiple mats of the second and third generation.  I believe they get incrementally stronger with each generation.  I have met no one who actually owns these mats who doesn't find a significant increase in presence and breath in their system.  I personally don't care how they are manufactured, but since I have spoken with Tim and Krissy many times through the years, I do believe these were home grown products.  Few luthiers make every single part of the the guitar, although some do.  Noble is one luthier who does.  Most will purchase machine heads and other minor items and build the majority of the guitar themselves and make something unique.  The real question you should be asking, is where can I get some.  When these products were sold by PPT they had a money back guarantee.  I doubt there are many used items on the market.  Good luck.