Perfect Path Technologies: Omega E mat
toetapaudio ... https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis92idi-perfect-path-technologies-omega-e-mat-signal-enhancer-twe... 8" x 10" .75 pounds. |
“@tommylion When someone has enough experience with audio, information can be gleaned from reviews. I have paid attention to all of the reviews. They all form together to make an educated opinion of what the mat does and does not do. The statement I quoted just put the nail in coffin as empirical data to my theories. You’re welcome to enjoy whatever the heck you want.” jay23, I have no idea what you’re saying? |
@fleschler @ozzy Oregonpapa did not purchase 30 E-mats. He distributed the mats to other audiophiles but until he did, he tried them. I heard his system with 6 and 12 E-Mats. 6 are plenty to accomplish a radically good improvement in a system (at least my system and those previously noted). Did @oregonpapa pay for 5 of them? |
@tommylion When someone has enough experience with audio, information can be gleaned from reviews. I have paid attention to all of the reviews. They all form together to make an educated opinion of what the mat does and does not do. The statement I quoted just put the nail in coffin as empirical data to my theories. You're welcome to enjoy whatever the heck you want. @hifiman5 Well said, and you'll be happier in the long run. History goes in cycles. The majority of the industry pumping out and/or enjoying colored products will change. Eventually, people will realize this is the reoccurrence of a time like the Bose 901. Sadly, this may happen after some have passed away. |
aniwolfe, toetapaudio, I can only comment on the one Omega mat that I have in my breaker box. IMHO the Bybee’s and the Omega mat did not work well together. I think they cancel each other out. So, at my breaker box I have the one Omega mat and in my audio room with the 3 dedicated lines with (6) Furutech NCF outlets. I have plugged in 20 of the MC-0’5’s and they seem to complement each other well. However, I have not unplugged the MC-05s, that might make for a future experiment. And, it may change if I ever get more mats placed at the component end. I should also add that within each of the components I have a Bybee IQSE and SR ECT’s and the SR blue fuses ozzy |
It has been my experience, as well as others who owned and since sold HFC, even their ultimate cables, that the HF cables are terrible sounding. Putting pounds of magnets in line on RCAs and A/C cables is a terrible idea and sounds just as bad. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a worse sounding cable. My friend with a formerly $850,000 high end system just removed and sold his $100,000+ stable of HF cables and replaced them with GroverHuffman cables for $3800 and kept some Nordost speaker cables. Apparently, the Bybees may work similar to what I suggested for the E-Mat. As to pulling out poor sounding CDs, YES, many CDs I considered mediocre sounding are now sonically involving (the music was the reason I purchased them) with so much more information in clarity, openness and richer tonal qualities. I would say the worst sounding recordings improved the most while the best recordings improved the least. My 78s were really given a boost into their direct disc recording nature, limited primarily at the frequency extremes but providing richer tone and more dynamic swings. I can’t praise the E-Mat tweak enough after a month in my system. The SR blackbox and Atmosphere XL4 are toys compared to it. I wonder though, if the SR fuses and HFTs were required to obtain this vast improvement but I’m too lazy too remove them to test the hypothesis. Anyone out there using E-Mats with standard fuses and acoustically untreated rooms? |
I have some HFC MC-05’s and the eMatts, the Matt’s in my system were a better value, and returned much greater sonic improvement. I will be selling my HFC cables and stuff, I feel Tim’s products outperform, over deliver and increase my enjoyment better than all my previous tweaks combined. A true winner! |
@fleschler thanks for your reply and concerning a theory about how they work, perhaps they are along the lines of the Bybee Signal Enhancers, except the Omega E mat works without crystals (according to the designer) and from what everyone says more powerful, albeit more expensive. This is what is said of how the Bybee’s work: ”Like its sibling the Quantum Signal Enhancer, it’s activated by surrounding electromagnetic energy, but has also been designed and engineered to be more effective by creating an extended electric and magnetic field. Once activated, the extended electric and magnetic fields affects the polarity of all electrons and protons in close proximity; affecting their oscillation by making them more aligned with each other. This reaction creates an affect that makes the transfer or sharing of electrons between atoms more streamline and efficient. The results are a stunningly enhanced purity and energy of the video or audio signal. Of note, the active elements inside the iQSE are specially formed crystals that are resistant to damage and will never lose their effectiveness.” I believe @ozzy was using the Bybee’s until he tried the Omega E mat. Perhaps he can comment on the comparison. Also as someone else mentioned it would be interesting to hear from @ozzy how the mats work with and without the HF MC 0.5’s. I am currently using 10 Bybee Signal Enhancers ( the originals) and find them highly effective on the consumer unit, switch and router. This is where I’m advising my customers to place them since I have had some detrimental results under the equipment. Somebody commented earlier using these devices is like “ throughing out the baby with the bath water” and this may be the case but on power supplies they definitely lower the noise floor. The Omega E Mat reviews, however, suggests that you can use them universally. Perhaps users can comment on this. Thanks for your time and input. |
If I’m not mistaken, the inventor already addressed the magnetic field theory by revealing the new smaller mats are not (rpt not) magnetic. The large mats were magnetic only so they could be easily attached to ferrous surfaces like a breaker panel door. Generally speaking, don’t audiophiles generally try to eliminate magnetic fields, not introduce them? |
Geoff, where are you? This your field of expertise. Magnetic fields obviously effect the "field" immediately in its "range". Have a look at the magnetic fields working on ion particles on the North and South poles. So it is possible to "condense" the field of flow at a particular area to enhance it's effect on that area, which will effect everything downstream of it (and possibly the reverse as well). I would conclude it's effect to be an enhancer of the signal, much like the "sharpness" tag in Adobe Photoshop. Clever to be sure, but the price is steep for the technology. It would ne interesting if someone was able to place low strength magnets in a "dishrag", so they don't move about, and see if it had the same effect. |
“I have an alternative theory concerning the Omega E-Mat effect. It’s possible that the E-Mat orients electrons or other fields in a more efficient configuration. It takes time to orient the configuration and it takes time for disoriention to reoccur when E-Mats are removed. Only Tim Mrock knows if this is the way it works. Anyone have other theories? Anyone like my theory?” My theory is that it makes a quantum connection, across space/time, with the original musical event(s) 😉 |
I like the E Mat more than any idea of how it works---just placed my second mat 12 hours ago, let it sit for 8 hours--now listening. Things that are happening: a more dramatic low end, a quieter floor--as if the room just became a small cavern. How does the mat work--is it a power source or a receiver? Don't ask---this is a cutting edge idea that deserves its proprietary status. Now, no CD sounds bad. I'm pulling stuff out I put away years ago due to flat or lifeless sound. I can't find one of those anymore--wasn't the production so much as the playback--it's come a long way since. |
I have an alternative theory concerning the Omega E-Mat effect. It's possible that the E-Mat orients electrons or other fields in a more efficient configuration. It takes time to orient the configuration and it takes time for disoriention to reoccur when E-Mats are removed. Only Tim Mrock knows if this is the way it works. Anyone have other theories? Anyone like my theory? |
Unfortunately, my friend with the Scherzinger components will be breaking down his system as he is moving to Beverly Hills and has to build another sound room. He is away for the next two weeks so I'm not sure if his system will be intact. I heard the Scherzinger giga protector turned on and off and the difference is quite noticeable. Even my sceptical engineer friend who accompanied me said to leave it on as it sounded better. |
What does the application of TC and the mats do for my system? I do not know the technology behind it and I do not care. The products are applied and placed and I do not mess with it anymore. I used to listen to my system on the weekends mainly by myself. Now I find my myself listing nearly every night for about an hour to an hour and a half on my main system. I am limited by my work and family schedule. Further, my wife now listens to a few songs with me. She has never done that before in 34 years of marriage. We even dance a little when the songs are right. I have never asked her why, I just enjoy her company. I have also listed to a greater variety of music on cds in my main system and from my computer office system. I hated the glare of digital in both systems and it got annoying to listen to after about an hour. These products have made me happy, since I can enjoy the convenience of the digital format with a Lot Less digital glare. The products have also helped my office system Make me be more productive, because the music is more enjoyable for hours at a time. Thanks to those that have put themselves out there to get the word out, especially to Tim for the product development. I will probably get some of the smaller mats when they become available. Back to the music. rc |
| Post removed |
Frank I agree with everything you have stated. In my work with real acoustic instruments I have found that when a new adjustment or device is introduced into their system path way there is a period of acceptance and also of expansion of soundscape and dynamics. While this expansion of sound is like filling a tub with water or a balloon with air when the valve is released the sonic impression lingers until over a period of time it is gone. I have found the same of many audio devices and the same is true of the E Mats particularly in this comparison. Unless your fully aware and patient this ebb and flow of energy within a device or system or in the confines of an audio room may be difficult at first to absorb and understand. Many times its not just what you hear but what you see and feel in the musicians motions and expressions and this is best related in my room with both TC and the Emats. Tom |
@ozzy Sorry I must have missed your post from 7/26. I believe what you heard by reintroducing the mat was hearing more into the music. TC initially lowered the noise floor which increased the macro and micro-dynamics along with the soundstage. The mats increased those features even further at least in my system. I was just listening to Diana Krall and her voice was much more distinct, clearer and as if she was in my room! The sound of the instruments are more focused and positioned. The soundstage now appears to envelope my room as if I still had my surround system. |
Ozzy ... You’ve discovered one of the the mysteries of the Omega E Mats. As I stated in a previous post, initially, the mat actually degraded the sound of my system. That lasted for about a half day or so. Then the improvements started to appear. In discussing this with Tim Mrock, he concluded that it was because I had used an inordinate amount of TC throughout the system and elsewhere inside and outside of the house. It took time for both the TC and the Mats to gel with each other. I believe that there is some type of energy being thrown off by the Omega E Mats and that they somehow "charge up" the components that they rest under. Its kind of like pasting every part of a component with TC including the chassis, transistors, capacitors, and even circuit boards. Doubling or tripling up of the E mats increases the phenomenon. I believe that when the Omega E Mats, or in your case the one mat, is removed, the "charge" remains for awhile, then slowly dissipates. This would account for the initial improvement you heard in your circuit box with the mat in, and then not noticing much of a difference when the mat was removed, only to find a return to improvement when you returned the mat to the circuit box again. Call me crazy ... but I think these Omega E Mats have life. Same for the TC. I think Tim has hit upon a product/invention that will go way beyond the limited use we audiophiles will be putting it through. At this point, the improvements in the SQ of my system with the TC applications and the six Omega E Mats, have brought the system to the point that I have absolutely no desire to upgrade any electronics or speakers from now on. The system plays music that gets me totally involved in the performance ... and its as close to "live" music as I’ve heard from 99% of systems out there, including mega-buck systems. Its limited of course by scale ... but only by scale. By many accounts, my system is fairly modest price wise for "high end." I put a pencil to it the other night. Had I bought everything in the system new, with no discounts, the retail value would be in the $70,000 range, not including the TC and the Omega E Mats. Frank |
ronrags, From my posting on this thread on July 26, 2018. "So last night I removed the Omega mat from the breaker box and placed it in my car in the garage. 12 hours later I turned my system back on and did some deep listening. Primarily to evaluate the sound quality without all the previous items in the breaker box including now without the Omega mat. As I write this, I find that the frequency extremes are still the same. Perhaps the soundstage is a little flatter as is not as deep. However, not as much change as I thought there would be. Very interesting and confusing. Why did I think the mat initially provided an increase in the sound quality? So once again I reintroduced the Omega mat over the breakers. About 6 hours later I again sat down to listen. I found that… there was indeed a more satisfying sound. Huh? How? There was no frequency change, and not much change in the soundstage. Not anything that I could point specifically at. But the Omega mat did contribute to an overall deeper music appreciation. It is now my opinion that the Omega mat excites an emotional feeling. It is sort of a feeling of a live presence that was lacking in the recorded sound. I don’t know how or why but it was easy to hear once it was reinserted." I hope this helps. ozzy |
barbapapa, I cleaned the brush with 90% Isopropyl alcohol. I removed the other tweaks from the area that the Omega mat is applied (breaker box). Tim only sent a small sample, but that's what I asked for and I appreciate it. nkonor, I do like people thinking outside of the norm. That’s why I like Bob Carver products, Cerious Technologies cables and PS Audio components. And I give Tim lots of credit for coming up with such a creative tweak. But higher end components will bring in the best future trade in value as apposed to a paste on the connections. fleshler, I haven’t actually heard the Aries but they seem to get great reviews. oregonpappa, I understand what you mean about the size of the Legacy speakers. I guess that’s why I went to the Amazing Line Source Carver speakers they are tall but take up only a very small footprint. I will try to contact you. ozzy |
A little bit of tc goes a long way. I have used the tc and put the brush back in the freezer and when I used it again a week later there was still enough tc on the brush to do a couple more applications. I still have a lot of tc left in my tube and I have done almost my whole system. I will be applying on my tubes soon. I also have another e mat coming and will update everyone on further system improvements. Tc and one e mat have been a great investment for me in my system. |
Ozzy ... I don’t have the Legacy Focus speakers. I have the Legacy Signature III’s. Steve Fleschler has both the Focus’ and the Signature III’s. The Focus’ would overwhelm my room. I’ve heard both the Legacy Whispers and the Legacy Aries speakers and didn’t like either on of them. I’ve heard the Aries at several shows, and the Whispers at a couple of friends homes. At any rate, they’d both give me the same problem as the Focus’ would ... not room compatible. Besides, my Signature III’s are performing from a transparency point better than the best planer speakers I’ve ever owned at this point ... except I’m getting better bass and highs. For this, I give credit to both the TC and the Omega E Mats. The ARC REF-6 has tons of great reviews. The guys here on A’gon who have the REF-6 love it. Its the first real break-through that I'm aware of at this particular price point for ARC since the REF-3, which is what I’ve used since it was new. Ozzy, I can’t encourage you enough to explore the TC and the Mats further. If you want to call me I’ll describe what I’ve pasted with the TC that made such a huge difference in SQ. It took a LOT of TC to do the complete job though. Send me a PM and we’ll discuss. Take care ... Frank |
@ozzy Oregonpapa did not purchase 30 E-mats. He distributed the mats to other audiophiles but until he did, he tried them. I heard his system with 6 and 12 E-Mats. 6 are plenty to accomplish a radically good improvement in a system (at least my system and those previously noted). He owns the Legacy Signature IIIs. I own both the Focus and Signature IIIs. I don't like the Aries because of its limited seating (opposite of Whispers which have a very wide sweet spot). |
Ozzy, Thank You for being the " Calm in the Eye of the Storm " I agree, that improving core components is the best path to follow. Recently, modded my Technics SL1200G with a Triplanar Classic SE tonearm. Nothing subtle about this "tweak" No need to wait 2 weeks or 8 weeks to hear the improvement. No doubt about how or where to apply. No confusion at all. Put a record on and Enjoy. |
Oregonpappa, Thank you for your reply. I applied the TC to the 3 dedicated circuit breakers to my stereo system, and I have not removed it. I know Tim says he gave me enough for a whole system but its just not there. I did clean the brush after applying it perhaps that was a mistake. However, there is very little (if any) left. The Omega mat was in place for 2 weeks before I removed it. It has now been in place again for a week. I noticed that you have Legacy Focus Signature version speakers. I at one time owned the Legacy Focus. For the amount of money you had invested in the 30 mats you could have easily purchased the Legacy Aries speakers. Now that would have been a sure upgrade for you. I think that’s where shadorne and others including myself for that matter are coming from. Improvement of the core components over spending thousands of dollars on a tweak is a better cost option. P.S. I am looking at the Audio Research Ref 6 preamp. ozzy |
shadorne sez ...
How much more are you willing to pay for that "higher minimum standard?"
Should equipment manufacturers be responsible for the abnormalities in your room? Abnormalities that can be cured with certain tweaks?
As I said above, I could easily improve the sound of your costly system with a few simple suggestions without using any tweaks. Add the tweaks, and your jaw would hit the ground. This, with YOUR existing system, not my system.
That’s two questions. First, yes, we should accept that tweaks are necessary based upon positive reviews that have come before. Manufacturers can’t afford to apply the tweaks mentioned in these threads. For one thing, they don’t even know about many of these tweaks. Even if they did, the price of including them would be about four times what they cost the manufacturer and what they would cost you if you bought them on your own. Everything is marked up along the production and sales line. For example, if it cost a manufacture $2,500 to make a line stage, its sold to the dealer for $5,000. The dealer then retails the unit for $10,000. That’s reality. Second, yes we should demand a higher standard, and that’s what we do every time we plunk our money down for a component. Manufacturers build within a price point. Don’t want to sound redundant here, but how much more are you willing to pay for that "higher standard?" Most audio manufacturers have "flag ship" components for sale. Buy the "flag ship" models shadorne ... and you still haven’t dealt with room problems, vibration problems or any of the other myriad of problems created throughout this hobby that can be cured by tweaking. My suggestion is, if you haven’t heard the results of tweaks for yourself shadorne, then do so. Until you do, you’re just flying blind on these pages and talking out of your .... Oh never mind. Frank |
I believe we should hold component manufacturers to a minimum standard that is certainly higher than what is being accepted. I believe that it is NOT right that excessive amounts of tweaks should be necessary. If it is necessary then I really think one should question the original quality of the components. How can one say a component is excellent and high-fidelity if it cannot reliably and consistently produce audio accurately and with fidelity? I am questioning the fundamental philosophy around building a system. I am not trashing. Just questioning the choices being made. Should we really accept that an infinite number of tweaks are necessary for equipment to work well? Or should we demand a higher standard? |
shadorne’s take on this issue is ridiculous. I don’t care how good a specific piece of equipment is, or how great the entire system is ... significant improvements can be made with the proper tweaks. In looking at shadorne's system, I can readily see a number of changes that would improve his sound significantly ... without adding any tweaks at all. Then add the good tweaks and he'd finally be a believer. . Frank |
Guys his system(s) are there for you to see under his virtual systems page. He has some nice stuff and I have always liked the idea of using ATC powered speakers with a great source and preamp. I don’t doubt his rig sounds great. Would it benefit from TC and the mat? I think so. He has however taken a very smart approach to great sound in his set up. He does offer out an interesting proposition regardless of how old the claim gets. I think both he and the land of tweaks like the E-mat can live together for the ultimate rig. I would really enjoy his take on the E-mat and TC after actually using them in his system. Not sure this would ever happen? I would love to hear his rig! |
shadorne is a broken record (or skipping CD for younger folks). Anytime there’s a thread about any kind of tweak, he will show up, trash peoples equipment, and say everyone should just get gear like his, that is so well built and designed it doesn’t need “bandaids”, and will certainly not benefit from any tweak. He never actually tells us what he has, though. |
How does @shadorne not have a valid point to make? @oregonpapa says he was up to 30 E-Mats in his system at one time! Hey, I believe in cable differences, burn-in, footers, acoustical treatment of listening rooms etc. I have not used either TC or the E-Mat but I am not prepared to make a statement that they don't work to improve a system. I've been pleasantly surprised on numerous occasions with various tweaks that have rendered a benefit far exceeding my expectations. But... 30 mats? Come on. If you were trying to see how far the positive benefits could go I get that! I also commend @oregonpapa for doling multiple mats to his audio friends. That's a cool thing to do! By beating up on @shadorne for his skepticism about your reliance on these tweaks is a bit much and unfortunately, for me, puts a sour taste in my mouth regarding trying Mr. Mrock's products. From reading what @shadorne has said, it seems to me he is more of an audio fundamentalist in the sense that getting the fundamentals (equipment) right is the avenue leading to a fine system. A valid point of view, no? |
Ozzy sez:
1. I think I was up to 30 mats at one time. 2. Nope. I don't have a "financial arrangement" with Tim. 3. Have you heard the ARC Reference components, like the ARC REF-75se? 4. One mat is good ... but not enough to see what they can really do. 5. I'm now back down to six mats. Two are in the circuit breaker and the other four are under four components. Where did the other 24 mats go? They went to trusted friends, six each, to try before they buy. Simple, no? 6. Six mats are much better than one mat. 30 mats are better than six mats. :-) My suggestion to you Ozzy ... when using these products, both the TC and the Omega Mats, leave them in place while they do their thing. You stated that you received enough TC from Tim to do a couple of wires. How long did you leave the TC on the wires before you wiped it off? And why only a couple of wires when Tim sent you enough to do your entire system? How long did you keep the E Mat in place before you started moving it around? Please understand that I'm not trying to diss you here. I'm trying to get you to get the most out of the products, as most of us who have reported positive results have. Frank |
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. |
