Perfect Path Technologies: Omega E mat

Many reviewers select excellent music for comparison, well recorded acoustical music, jazz and orchestral and they list their choices.  However, an equal number of reviewers use the "crap" recordings as Frank says that I hear at audio shows.  Patricia Barber, Diana Krall, et. al. are not recordings I want to use to base my audio opinion on and I don't want reviewers to use them either.  I'm sure there are some posters who like that type of recorded music but they shouldn't be using it to make definitive decisions concerning audio equipment.  

I don't understand trolls.  In the stock market, short position holders spew disinformation to drive the stock price down, sometimes killing the company.  Here, what does a troll get out of knocking products they have no intention of trying?  They have a screw loose.  

Someone did an extensive review on 1/29/2005.   https://www.audioasylum.com/reviews/Accessory/Rain-Tinge/Resolution-Enhancement-for-CD-and-DVD-playb...

However, noting the music that the reviewer liked, I find the review highly suspect.  

"favorites that Raintinge have a huge impact on and make them listenable to me (made my long day special)...

1. Hayley Westenra, "Pure"... - this is a very beautiful voice. The voice and hipnotic nasal resonance just instantly brightens my day...even at some hateful hours like 4 in the morning. You haven't lived until you experience this voice when it is accurate.

2. a collection of Sarah Brightman... - quite the same as Ms. Westenra and much more trained to sing more different notes and musical style.

3. Norah Jones, SACD... -with all the hype about extremely high resolution for a more accurate sound - it's just the same problem as all the CDs and other "optical" disks and just the same improvements when using the color system.

4. Diane Krall, SACD... -unusually sexy voice...it must be her amazing control of her nasal resonance...would she have a sexy voice if she snorts through her nasal like a pig? I told you before nasal resonance dominates female voice.

5. a collection of Jennifer Warnes... - she has the most delicate feminine nasal resonance. If she sounds like a man talking, you have a bad stereo. My favorite to torture test stereo for understanding accuracy.

5. the Innocence Mission, "befriended"... -(I bought 2 LPs!) if you 're into shy childhood story and geeky poetry like Morrissey and Simon & Garfunkle, this is the best with a beautiful voice that is as complex to play as Jennifer Warnes.

6 a collection of the Corrs, DVD... -It's almost like super models have a talent to sing. It is heart-warming when the color system made each sister look so pretty and similar in their sisterly kind of way (tough choice if I have to chose one of them).

7. Soda Club, "anthem alert", CD and DVD... - don't look at this DVD if you don't normally look at super models. Their voices are beautiful in their own way. It's what I usually hear everyday talking to girls.

8. Bond, DVD... - visually and sonically when using the color system, it is so good it hurts.

No RainTinge for me unless someone reviews it using better recordings/performances.

You said it toetapaudio.  Which is why I label number 2 posters as trolls, miscreants and people I would not want to associate with. 

I would like to know more about the Omega E mat too.  I surmise that it has a purely electrical function, working on RFI, EMF using magnetic properties.  But that's about all I can tell.   If it really works wonders for music, I'm a buyer.  For $600 each, I hope that it surpasses the SR blue fuse and is as sound enhancing as Stillpoints, Hallographs and SR HFT system as tweaks.

I was mistaken as to the use of the magnetism in the mat.  It is apparently only used for attaching to or attracting the mat to the device or surface.  Even the current mat is not large enough to cover my main power box which is 14" long.  Should I put the mat across the main breakers?  Should I put the sixth mat under my amps, isolation transformer or electrical subpanel which feeds my audio system?  Thanks

I just heard Frank’s audio system for the first time. He has the same speakers and CD player as I do, with a pair of Hallographs and 10 SR HFTs. Otherwise, our audio systems are different. I was enthralled with the dynamically robust, tonally colorful, rhythmically engaging, full frequency extension, fast transient and detailed presentation of music. We started with Yello-Touch, Ellington Jazz Party, Brubeck Impressions USA, Opera (Don Carlo), modern Pop vocal Allyson Round Midnight, jazz harmonica, guitar…a big serving of all types of recordings and music. The sound was outstanding, better than my system in detail and pace, lacking only in deepest bass since I have a slab foundation and he has a not too secure raised foundation (sucks the bass) and my room is about 3 times larger than his. There was that organ recital CD he put on that had really robust and tactile feeling bass.

However, after removing the triple Omega E-mats from under the CD player, pre-amp and amp, the sound became less engaging, less dynamic. It still retained most of its beauty but having multiple stacked mats made a significant difference. Since everyone’s system is different (his Audio Research gear has thick aluminum chassis, my pre/phono and amps have thin steel chassis for one big difference) there could be a difference in how many mats are needed to achieve the result I heard at Frank’s .

I stayed for a few hours despite the 100 degree weather because the sound/music was so engaging. I had only intended to listen to a few CD selections. I’ve only heard a few high end systems do what his does, maybe three per audio show and another in a friend's home. I credit the Omega E-mat for the difference. It was very obviously a huge benefit, as stacked in his system.  

Next is to test them on my system to see what a single mat per equipment/electrical panels does.

I feel confident in putting the mat inside the electrical panel. The outside panel is visible from my gate, set back about 35’ from the street. However, if I put the mat on top of the panel door, visible to anyone near my gate, they could just take it. I feel safer having it nearly enclosed by the panel door (which doesn’t seal closed after 40 years), magnetically clamped to a wall portion of the panel, draped across the breakers and sticking out about 1/4" on the other side of the panel (if I cut off 1/2" X 8", it would fit perfectly and I could close the panel door).

In my music room, I have a dedicated subpanel. I put the mat magnectically attached across the inside of it and across the breakers.

I don’t see how any heat build-up will ever occur in the breaker boxes. The exterior panel has been serviced recently by an electrician. The interior box is 25 years old.

If Tim says I’m better off putting the subpanel one outside the box, I’ll do it but I really don’t feel safe leaving the mat exposed to view on the outside panel.  Also, if I put the mat magnetically attached to the inside of the outside panel door still sticking out slightly, will it be as effective?

I have not experimented with the E Mat magnetic side down, away from a component or panel breaker box.

However, I can confirm that I tried stacking one pair of E Mats under equipment and in the panel breaker boxes only (I couldn’t use the E Mat under or above my mono block amps). There was a subtle but noticeable improvement stacking them under my thin bottomed preamp/phono stage more so than doubling at the breaker box panel, the isolation transformer or the CD player. Doubling E Mats improved the sound in all locations though.

I am witholding full comment overall until I have a few days trial with the E Mats because I don’t want to sell them short. The 24 hour improvement was significant. The 1 hour improvement was very important because initially, despite the previously noted improvements in resolution, transient response, frequency extension, dynamics and pacing, there was a glary, bright upper mid-range and a subdued, reticent sounding lower mid-range when initially installed at six locations. I found a simple solution to eliminate the bright/subdued mid-range problem by moving my SR HFT 2.0 side wall speaker locations down 1/4", which brought superb balance back (down to warm, up to brighten).

Now, as I indicated, I need to give the E-Mats time because it is usually the mid-range that adjusts last and I may have to restore the SR HFT 2.0s back to the initial pre-E Mat installed positions (same with breaking in new cabling).

I advise putting one mat on the breaker box panel. It affected all audio systems in my home (two main audio systems and two video/audio systems). I’d like to know what difference others find on their TV video screens. Colors appear more saturated. Has video resolution improved, my wife thinks so but I can’t tell.

The dynamics, frequency extension and resolution improvement were apparent immediately. Mid-range smoothing came next after 24 hours. That relaxed quality is what I’m waiting for.

My Yello-Touch CD is so much improved, better than on an $850,000 horn system I heard it on. A great test recording even if one doesn’t like the music.

I would need more E-mats to try under my SR Atmosphere XL4.  I might try it on top also since I dislike the Red ATM (too bright) and removed it from the room.  I only use the Atmosphere for some recordings.  With the E-mat and my latest IC cables, its sort of redundant except for unusual recordings and 78s.  

sbayne I am not using any signal enhancing devices that are electronic unless they are built into my power distribution boxes (part of the wiring, not additional products). I tried a few and determined that I didn’t need them or they had negative sound consequences (I don’t want to name them either because some friends are manufacturers of them). However, I know that the SR HFT system and Shakti Hallographs are essential for me to enjoy music in my slap echo ridden music room. They are acoustical treatments rather than electronic.

I have not tried the green ATM on the Atmosphere. Maybe it would be better. The red ATM is like too much HFT-X for my large listening room (25 X 23 X 12.5 plus equipment area). I haven’t turned on the Atmosphere since I installed the Omega E-mats. I'm into day five and the sound is very impressive, I just find that early stereo recordings appear to be more locked into the speakers than between them. This maybe a more accurate rendering of the recording or not. I want to give the mats more time and play with my Hallographs more (the HFT 2.0 speaker locations required just a 1/16" downward adjustment after Monday to balance the new mat sound, really small adjustment for a big difference).

I'm sorry I can't tell you what one or two E-mats will do to your system because I've only tried six at a time and 12 at Frank's home.  However, 6 are superior to adding an Atmosphere XL4.  

Hi, the E-Mats do not change the acoustics of the room; however, I just don't feel that the Atmosphere is improving the sound of most recordings now.  The increased clarity, image precision and frequency extension by the E-Mats negates the effects of the Atmosphere except for a few mono LPs and 78s where I want to add more ambience to the sound.  The HFTs are essential to my enjoying music while eliminating all acoustical room treatments other than the Hallographs.

tommylion, After one week, I haven't experienced any treble or bass anomalies, just mid-range for the first 24 hours.   The treble and bass improved immediately. It proves every system is different.

My wife and I notice more vibrant colors, maybe more 3-D like depth and sharpness on our TVs.  We tried an E-mat on top of our cablebox which sits on mini-ultra stillpoints and is plugged into an SR red duplex.  The results were that we couldn't see a difference.   Maybe we should try the bluray player but I don't want to take away even one E-mat from my audio system.  Just one E-mat on the main breaker panel improved the TV audio (outboard systems) with much deeper/fuller bass and overall improved sound.  

sbayne..Could you tell us what mil/strength specification of magnetic mats you purchased? They typically come as 15, 20, 30 and 60 mil thickness. Thirty mats are a lot of mats.

I can say that the E-mat after nine days, has fully resolved the mid-range anomaly whereby the upper mids smoothes out and the lower mids have strengthened.   A nice balanced sound. 

The first thing my engineer friend said when he heard my system with the E-Mats yesterday was how did the bass get so prominent and deeper.  He looked at the breaker panel mat and said it was a big kitchen magnet.  He also doesn't like Total Contact on micro-voltage locations but said it was okay on higher voltage locations like speakers and A/C plugs/outlets.  He was impressed with the improved sound through in my system though.

I wonder if using a 60 mil magnetic mat together with an Omega E-mat (stacked) will improve the sound.  Or stacking them or stacking E-Mats as suggested by Geoff with a 1/4" gap.  So many possibilities. 

Let me second my agreement with Mr. Bob about Frank's system.  However, he has radically good vibration isolation plates under all his equipment and apparently high end cabling.  His CD player is 98% as good as my EAR Acute which is about $5-6,000 with his CD player slightly tighter and deeper in the bass.  His speakers are highly resolving despite their age, especially with the tweaks.

Yes, but my questions go further.  Will magnetism enhance E-mats effectiveness?  Do E-mat work on speakers?   Heck, if kitchen mats work at all to enhance, why not use cheap 60 mil mats which are so much stronger than 20 or 30 mil mats?

Sbayne-I was hoping for your experience(s) with using big kitchen magnets.  Also, if they enhance E-Mats properties when stacked with them.

tommylion- I wonder how E-Mats work on speakers?   I didn't think that would be an appropriate application.  On my 5'6", 7 driver speakers, the drivers are located up to 5' down, the speaker terminals 5' down and the crossover about mid-way down.

How strong is the E-Mats affect on a speaker that size?   Would six stacked E-Mats be more effective on a speaker?  Would an E-Mat be effective covering speaker terminals?   

These are valid questions which could help audiophiles in improving their sound at lower cost (sbayne) or higher cost (tommylion), or not worth pursuing (no change in sound).  

I'm certainly not going to cut open an E-mat.  However, I have tiny alnico magnets strategically placed in my system where they are away from E-mats and use a certain metal to make them work, without the metal, the magnets damage the sound.  It is also proprietary to the inventor so I can't divulge it either.

The worst use of magnets I've heard many times are High Fidelity cables.  The more expensive, the more gigantic the magnets.  They sound awful.  My friend who had an $850,000 audio system in a $500,000 dedicated room just sold $100,000 worth of H.F. cables and replaced them with GroverHuffman cables for about $5,000.  It wasn't the money, it was the sound quality.  Like night and day.  

Unless sbayne finds otherwise, the question about the E-mat having enhanced properties with the use of additional magnetism remains.  Or does it worsen the sound?

I use a Walker Talisman to demagnetize my CDs and LPs every time I play them. The difference between a magnetized CD and a Talisman demagnetized CD is as different as using 6 E-mats when comparing a magnetized (several plays of a CD for instance) and a "Talismaned" demagnetized CD.  The Talisman is just a big pair of magnets but works like a powered tape demagnetizer unit, but is non-powered, easy to hold and use and small item.   I highly recommend it. 

I also have an Acoustic Revive RD1 which does a so-so job and which I purchased prior to the Talisman.  

Otherwise, the tiny group of magnets I use in inconspicuous locations use a special metal which interacts with it.  I doubt that it actually magnetizes the surfaces but probably does the opposite to great effect.  The proof is in hearing it. 

Geoff-The High Fidelity cables do exactly what you think of magnets added to cables, they increase the noise and distortion.  The former proud owner of them complained that his system lacked smoothness.  When I heard it, it sounded like garbage coming our of the AvantGarde Trios and 3 pairs of Basshorns.  All the instruments were like in bass relief, outlined but lacking in body with disjointed frequency range (separate lows, highs, mids).  After installing a more conventional (but an extremely elaborate and patented) set of speaker, A/C and IC cabling, his audio system sounded really enjoyable.  

Here is a quote from troutchoker on a cables thread " Here is a simple suggestion: if you think ANYTHING makes your music more satisfying then get it if you prefer."  Doesn't this sum up what all the posters who like E-Mats are doing? 

I don’t understand why some of you are so concerned with what other people think. Do what you like and just enjoy YOUR music. Enjoy."  Exactly.  That's what we are saying without knowing how or why E-Mats work.  

So, why does he hate a company who doesn't describe what they are selling, only that it obviously works for anyone who has tried the product?  

I'm sorry, it's not just my opinion, it's also the opinion of several friends who heard it at shows and both the system owner and a friend who is a audio electronics manufacturer at his house.  If it were only my opinion and no one else's I wouldn't have said anything.  I still think that massive magnets placed near cabling is a bad idea.

I have posted on a thread concerning the new Magico A3 speaker that I had not heard. I wrote that after auditioning and hearing Magicos of all types over the past five years, at least 15 times, that I find them highly resolving but uninvolving, not musically interesting (and certainly high priced). Two A3 owners jumped down my throat that I’m an idiot and have an agenda. The thread was started by a prospective A3 buyer who also did not like them (dark sounding) when he auditioned them. After a week, about a dozen audiophiles who heard the A3s came to the same conclusion as I did about the other Magico speakers. That they are not musically involving and wouldn’t own them. One of those A3 owners deleted his posts after the last several posts which supported the thread and my thoughts on it.

I mention this because I don’t hate Magico speakers. They are well made but not to my taste. However, the HFC cables are dreadful in every system I heard them in. Not musically uninteresting, just BAD! So, don’t believe reviewers. Here is an instance where you can spot either deaf reviewers or lying reviewers.

I guess my quoting  troutchoker back got him to delete his nonsensical post.

I have not heard the MC-0.5 modules.

I have heard the HFC cables at about half a dozen booths at audio shows in the past several years and the booths sounded bad.

I have extensive listening experience at my friend's high end system with and without them.  Don't believe everything audio reviewers post.  They are often wrong.  There are many reasons for this.  However, my friend purchased the $100,000+ cabling for a discounted price.  He thought he needed to boost the highs for his analog based system (Caliburn/Cobra) with a prior cartridge that he found dull.  He has since changed to a more neutral cartridge (I can't remember the name).  We also heard them with an Oppo 205 tubed/upgraded separate power supply unit with Blu-ray and CDs.  Every time he eliminated one set of cables (ICs, A/C, speaker cables) and replaced them with either Nordost Odins or my friends GroverHuffman cables, the system improved.  It was dreadful with the HFC in.  Supposedly, these HFCs were only the second from the top of the line cabling.  My friend sold them all.  He is a happy audiophile now and I enjoy listening to his "new" system.  

I'm not trying to insult buyers.  My friend bought them but does not have as critical an ear and thought they were okay with his dull cartridge but not his neutral one which is why is asked my friend and I over to hear what the problem was in his system.  Buyers are not gullible from reading reviews but from not hearing the products themselves; hence, the E-Mat which I everyone likes who have tried them is the best way to buy a product.  I am sorry that you don't like the HFCs you bought probably at a very high cost.  There are many alternative cables at lower cost.  Hopefully, you can get most of your cost back if you decide to sell them.  

After the experience with the Magico A3 where I had a dozen supporters of my view and only two owners (one who withdrew comments), I do not want to voice my opinion on an HFC thread.  I would be criticized as a troll.

It is obvious that stacking multiple E-Mats improves the sound/effectiveness.  

jafreeman   That is a good question-why do the E-Mats require or have a magnetic surface?  If they require it, would more magnetism (ordinary magnetic mats) improve the effect/sound?  Or are they benign in the E-Mat application and just easier to use in the E-Mat's preparation?  

From the GroverHuffman.com site: . "All cables incorporate my painstakingly designed state of the art carbon, tungsten, nickel shield that neutralizes Electro-magnetic influences on the signal both from within and without."   He binds the powdered carbon, tungsten and nickel with a glue than hardens on the mesh copper shielding.  The ribbon conductors are air core insulated within a teflon tube, whereby both tubes are shielded by the RF/EMI/magnetic mesh copper shield (and also results in very low capacitance).  This is an alternate way that cabling can eliminate magnetism effects (and painstakingly time consuming production method).  

I would not advise using E-Mats placed on cabling based on it's partially magnetic design.  

I'm mostly in agreement with you Geoff.  The last show with about 100 exhibitors had four really excellent audio systems.   Two were laughably bad (a glass enclosed speaker with a Kronos analog front end that was thin and bright and a wood cone two way speaker sounded hollow and dead).  Wouldn't you know it, some critics wrote how they enjoyed the worst sound at the show. 

Most rooms were okay but with sonic problems, some attributable to the room acoustics, some due to setup and some due to equipment (resulting in bright upper mid Focals, dark and funny sounding Magicos, etc.).   

But, everyone (including 7 or 8 critics who wrote about it) who has heard the Von Schweikert Ultra 11/VAC/Kronos room at about half a dozen shows were transfixed by the musicality of the reproduced music.  Funny, I didn't see any SR tweaks or E-Mats or other tweaks in the room-some ultimate systems just sound fabulous without them.  On the other end of the cost spectrum, a $7500 Volti horn speaker with a $9000 La Perla Audio integrated amp, $2500 analog w/a Dynavector 20x2 had people (like my wife and I) enjoying all types of music (jazz, orchestral, rock) for half an hour at a time.   That's a system I would try tweaks on like TC and E-Mats to bring more air and wider soundstage to it.

Geoff-I said painstakingly production method, hand-built, hand dipped in solution, individually drawn and textured signal conductors, etc.  The design has evolved over 15 years as well.  The designer keeps learning from electro-mechanical engineering audio discoveries to incorporate into his cabling, comparing it to commercially available high end cables.  At shows, he has about a dozen exhibitors change out an A/C cable or some ICs and they listen and ask him to leave the cables for the rest of the day.  Unfortunately, they often have competing cables that they are selling and cannot use them to the exclusion of their product lines.  Even Holger Stein of Stein Music and  tried and liked his cables but has his own to sell.

Here we go again, another Troll demeaning Frank, Tim. Robert and anyone who has purchased or tried TC or E-Mats.  He's posted terrible diatribes against us on TC and a few here with NO evidence, just his supposition.  Since Frank isn't being paid and isn't Tim's brother-in-law, what is "or something"?  If you don't like Tim's products and haven't tried them or want to try them, leave this forum, PLEASE!

Thank you tommylion.  I forgot to ask the moderator myself as I have done once in the past where the post broke the rules, was very defamatory and non-responsive to the thread topic.

I reached the two week mark today.  The evidence is clear that the E-Mat effectiveness increases over time.  I am using six E-Mats, to review, 1 on the main power panel, 1 on the audio subpanel, 1 under the Bryston BIT-20 isolation transformer, 1 under the Ear Acute CD player and 2 stacked under the pre-amp/phono pre-amp. 

I am stunned by the improvement in sound.  Just the improvement in resolution/clarity would be sufficient.  So many details and performance characteristics are illuminated that I never heard or previously paid attention to.  The music's the same but there is so much more to it to enjoy.  Actually, some recordings I thought were just okay are now fascinatingly interesting because I can hear subtle dynamic and rhythmic shifts that were previously obscured.  I thought I needed a high end new speaker to hear those details but now I don't.

Frequency extremes are better in a way that Frank describes as "a lower noise floor."  They just pop more. 

When I put my ear to the speakers, they are quieter.  I have 98db sensitive speakers and what today is considered large, hissy tube amps (well with a signal, without a signal their almost silent).  This hiss is way down in level.  From my seat 13' away, there was no hiss with a signal.

The only parameter I can't resolve is the stereo separation of early stereo recordings, especially jazz (many on Contemporary label).  My 1956 to 1958 recordings are now mostly left and right channel with a hole in the middle unless there is a soloist recorded in the middle.  Mono and more modern stereo recordings don't have this problem and completely fill the center between the speakers.  Has anyone else noticed this effect?  It maybe that those early stereo recordings or my speakers are not good at filling in the center for those recordings and E-Mats just clarify the recording technique.

The question I have remains what can 60 mil kitchen magnet mats do for E-Mats  stacked under or above them?  Can it enhance their effect, have no effect or have a detrimental effect? 

I forgot to mention the E-Mat affect on sound level and dynamics.  The sound level increased by about 20%, two clicks of 24 on my volume control.  However, the dynamic range also increased resulting in me playing music louder.  Playing music louder with the enhanced clarity doesn't seem too loud, just more realistic sounding.  The E-Mats are a wonderful addition to my system although I'm using six of them to achieve this result.

I'm posting this again for those you missed it.   07-19-2018 4:09pmI use a Walker Talisman to demagnetize my CDs and LPs every time I play them. The difference between a magnetized CD and a Talisman demagnetized CD is as different as using 6 E-mats when comparing a magnetized (several plays of a CD for instance) and a "Talismaned" demagnetized CD. The Talisman is just a big pair of magnets but works like a powered tape demagnetizer unit, but is non-powered, easy to hold and use and small item.  I highly recommend it.

I also have an Acoustic Revive RD1 which does a so-so job and which I purchased prior to the Talisman.  

Really, it takes two weeks to restore the full effect of the E-Mat and hours to lose the benefit?
I was able to find a better location for one E-Mat from my amps to either doubling the breaker panel and the pre-amp, of which the pre-amp was best sounding within seconds of placement.
Also, at Frank’s home, once we removed half of his 12 E-Mats, we heard the very significant difference immediately (better with doubled and tripled stacking). It’s scary to think what would happen if I doubled or tripled my E-Mat placement. Unaffordable too.

tommylion  Isn't it uncanny to have all the musicians contribute to the music.  Quite amazing.  Performances and music that were overlooked are now fun to listen to.  

I'm not certain of what's in a Bybee or why it works and we don't know anything about the E-Mat.  With only a single E-Mat trial on such a system, it maybe difficult to define a difference. 

However, without Bybees and using six E-Mats, the results are instantly apparent and after two weeks, greatly superior.  I'm having so much fun listening to recordings I thought were inferior.  I thought that the Quartetto Italiano Philips recordings (especially the Beethoven Quartets) were too distant and reverberant.  After the E-Mat installation and two weeks, the sound is more direct, more resolving of each instrument and more dynamic.  Great performances as well.

That Torus is about 30 lbs heavier than my Bryston BIT20.  What a monster!

I'm almost sorry to bring this up, but in my main audio system, there appears to be additional audio improvement after 3 weeks.  Is it possible that the effect increases between the 2nd and 3rd week as well, more than just subtle?  

Has anyone found that E-Mats effect improves over 3 weeks or more?  Frank has added and removed so many mats that I guess it would be difficult to tell in his system.  I have not moved my E-Mats for three weeks and the system just sounds better than ever the last several days.

Many manufacturers have facebook pages.  This could be a good idea too.

Tommylion,  I'm the one who heard additional improvement after three weeks in one place.  Frank has installed and removed up to 18+ E-mats and used more TC in his system which is why I wonder if anyone else has had my experience.  I don't care to remove them to find out.  My audio system sounds great and my TVs have richer color with more dimension (75" Sony 940D).  

Geoff - I have already providing specific reasons why my audio system sounds great in previous posts.  I was just reiterating that fact.  It sounds about 50% as dynamic and lifelike as the best system I've ever heard which I've mentioned on these boards was the $1.4 million Von Schweikert Ultra 11/VAC/Kronos system.  The E-Mats brought me a lot closer to that system in so many ways.  I'm sorry to say that the TC did not do as much and certainly not as quickly.  I haven't tried the E-Mats on my speakers or under my amps yet.  Apparently, the more you use, the better the results.

You are correct. The six E-Mats make a bigger improvement in the sound than adding my Bryston BIT-20 isolation transformer. which was a subtle improvement after I replaced the stock A/C cord (slowed and smeared the sound).  I do not plug my big tube amps into it and it can't handle the power draw and ruins the amp sound.  

Frank was fortunate to hear in person the group know as the Lighthouse All-Stars at the Hermosa Beach club in the 1950s.  His system reproduces the excitement of hearing those musicians in his living room.   

 

shadorne  You forgot the equipment racks, Stillpoints, Hallographs and Synergistic Research HFTs & duplexes.  What about my cabling?  All nonsense because I have bad equipment.  Ha Ha Ha  The only cause of slowing/smearing mentioned was the cheap ass 20 amp A/C cable which Bryston claimed was good until I replaced it with a GroverHuffman custom A/C cable.  

I can afford to tweak my main audio room.  My friends with systems approaching $1 million tweak as well including Schnezinger giga protectors and Innovator 2 Ultra Extreme junction boxes.  I guess they have bad equipment as well.  One built his audio room for over $500,000.  I guess he threw out his money.  

Very similar equipment and cabling in the living room with totally different (superior) acoustic properties have only stillpoint, fuse and duplex tweaks and it sounds excellent.

Ozzy - In my system, I noticed the biggest effect of doubling E-Mats was under my pre-amp.  There was a lesser effect (slight but noticeable) doubling them on the power panels, isolation transformer and CD player.  In Frank's system, there was a greater difference doubling or tripling E-Mats.  Why, I don't know.