It wasn’t meant to. BUT- given that everything in the universe(including photons), either consists of or has(depending on your favorite theory), an electromagnetic field, none should be able to unequivocally state, that magnetism would/could not affect the typical CDP’s operation, in some audible way. No one has all the answers!
91 responses Add your response
| Post removed |
rodman99999 It wasn’t meant to! BUT- given that everything in the universe(including photons), either consists of or has(depending on your favorite theory), an electromagnetic field, none should be able to unequivocally state, that magnetism would/could not affect the typical CDP’s operation, in some audible way. No one has all the answers! >>>>Well, actually not everything in the universe has an electromagnetic field. Such as acoustic waves. But more to the point, magnetism doesn’t. Magnetism is measured in Gauss. I.e., magnetic flux density. Electromagnetic fields and waves are measured in something else. Volts/m or Power, EIRP, or whatever. One can build a convincing theory for either thing - that magnetizing the CD can’t possibly work or that it could work. This is one of those situations where the ears decide. You are the decider. |
Acoustic waves are variations in AIR pressure from place to place and over time(pressurization/rarification/frequency). The air is made of atoms/molecules/matter. Where(exactly) did I say(or even hint) that magnetism and electromagnetic fields are the same thing? My premise is that magnetism may have an effect, on anything with an electromagnetic field. fyi: Most EMF meters measure the electromagnetic radiation flux density (DC fields) or the change in an electromagnetic field over time (AC fields), I repeat, "No one should be able to unequivocally state, that magnetism would/could not affect the typical CDP’s operation, in some audible way. No one has all the answers!" Actually, I should have added: or the operation of any component, in an audio chain. |
Should I ever have the slightest thought, of even beginning to speculate, concerning the merest possibility of agreeing with you, in the future: I’ll try to be more concise. Reminds me of an old saying: "I know you think you heard what I said, but- what you understood, wasn't what I meant."
Happy listening!
|
@rodman99999 @geoffkait The first article posted by Rodman99999 stated the relationship of photons to electromagnetic waves as succinctly as I've had the fortune to read. Saying "The magnetic field isn't made of photons. Photons are made of magnetic (rather, electromagnetic) fields. To be specific, photons are ripples in the electromagnetic field. So, a magnet is surrounded by a magnetic field. If the magnet is not moving, then the field is stationary, and there are no photons. Wiggle the magnet, and the field wiggles. If some of these wiggles propagate away from the magnet, then those are photons." |
hifiman5 The first article posted by Rodman99999 stated the relationship of photons to electromagnetic waves as succinctly as I've had the fortune to read. >>>>>The article, well forum actually, might have seemed succinct to you, but that doesn’t mean it was correct. It was someone’s opinion. Just some guy. If the magnet is not moving, then the field is stationary, and there are no photons. Wiggle the magnet, and the field wiggles. If some of these wiggles propagate away from the magnet, then those are photons. >>>>>As far as your understanding of wiggles moving away from a moving magnet being evidence of photons, well, I’d say that’s pretty absurd. In my opinion, of course. It would be unlikely you could see a photon moving. There are no slow photons. |
As far as I know, no one knows(thus far) of what a magnetic field is composed. Like gravity, the THEORY is it’s a deformation of space/time (or not *) , caused by the presence of matter, coupled with the, "quantum spin"(which is itself an inaccurate term) of certain particles. Like so many things in our universe, magnetism’s effects can be measured, but- the actual mechanics of it’s operation remains a mystery. As far as concluding that debate, one may as well try to nail Jello to a wall. Even WITH a knowledge of Special Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Physics(ie: QED, the "Jewel of Physics") and their attendant mathematics. (Let’s see: should I mention either electroweak theory, or, "virtual photons"? NAH!) As I’ve said, so many times, "No one has all the answers." My apologies, to the OP, if I’ve caused a ripple in this thread’s continuum. (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-electric-charges-and-m/) (* https://physics.aps.org/story/v7/st27) |
Had anyone else ever tried this stuff? https://www.musicdirect.com/equipment/ultrabit-platinum-clean-disc-combo If so, what were your impressions? |
A couple things, I just found, that may be of interest to some(SORRY again, OP): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYA0bntrjsk(comments notwithstanding) and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMFPe-DwULM(I love this guy!) |
I couldn’t agree more! Regarding my last post: I just thought you may be interested, in what your favorite physicist(my assumption) had to say on the matter! You did pose the question, " Just one more thing. The web site you linked to edu Illinois Physics forum of some kind, as I recall, made some statements that magnetic fields were composed of photons. Since magnetic fields are stationary how can they be composed of photons that move at lightspeed?" |
Actually, I find him trite and defensive. He could have explained that the atoms of magnetic material like magnets are aligned N to S or whatever and that nuclear forces are the STRONGEST force or whatever. Whereas as gravity is the WEAKEST force. This attitude of his is why he was ostracized when he was a member of the Rogers Commission investigating the Challenger disaster. I knew the guy who ostracized him, who was the director of the commission. |
Whatever, "field" might be measured, what’s being measured(far as strength), is the field’s energy level. If fields are comprised of, "nothing", rather than energy, E=mc2 is wrong. https://physics.info/energy/ Trying to define it, is another matter, entirely(no pun intended). |
Not sure where Rodman & Geoff are taking this thread, but regarding CD cleaning/treatment, I'll re-post what I wrote on that other thread (linked near the top of this one). The OP there took my advice and seems very pleased, so here it is again... I've spent some time on this, so I'll share what I've found... for what it's worth. In most cases, you only need to clean (or treat) new discs. Warm water & mild hand-soap will do about 90% of the job, but a good treatment will do even more (for better or worse - read on...). I've tried a number of CD treatments, Ultrabit, Liquid Resolution, Shine-Ola and maybe a few more. All provided 'cleaner' sound, but also added brightness to the sonic balance. Liquid Res. was the most neutral of those above (but no longer available). HOWEVER... the absolute BEST of all is L'ART DU SON. It not only cleans the CDS, it also provides a very natural sonic balance and almost seems to enrich the midrange. I use it on every new disc I buy. VERY highly recommended! |
Because i use the PS Audio DMP player, some of these issues are not critical as it reads and rereads the info and then puts it into a cache. However i use this product and it seems to improve the sound a bit, but of course it is NOT to be used on the optical side, but only on the label side.https://nordost.com/accessories/eco-3x.php |
for what it is worth i copied this from another AG thread. Thanks guys here's the response from Vin at Nordost Dear Glen, Thank you for your inquiry. Actually, one of the demonstrations we do at trade shows is to spray a CD with ECO3 and show the audience the improvement it makes. It is quite effective in lowering the noise floor and improving the dynamics of the system. When you use it on a CD you should apply it only to the label side. Even though it is water based, it will leave a slight film over many uses which is not a good thing on the information side of your disc. I hope this is helpful. Best regards, Vin Garino Nordost |
There is a whole ritual I perform for the CDs in current rotation. It is rather effort intensive and time consuming. I will absolutely not listen to any CD without a minimum amount of treatment. The Full Monty includes home freezer two days, full coloring of the disc, including data side, black tape stiffeners on label side, Liquid Resolution spray, and some other things that are beyond scope and better left unmentioned. Pop quiz: do they really use mold release compound in the manufacture of CDs or is that just an Old Wives Tale? |
https://www.uline.ca/BL_7402/Staticide-Spray What risk trying this home antistatic products on CD and cable surface ? Is it the same product use in the most expensive audio anti statique spray ? |
https://www.walmart.ca/fr/ip/Endust-259-000-Antistatic-Premoistened-Wipes-for-Electronics-Cloth-5-1-... And what about this one, is this risky to use on CD ? |
What I found to work best for me to clean, polish and remove static and fine scratches, on both CDs and DVDs, is a light spray of my Martin Guitar polish, wiped dry to a polish on the data side of the disc. I discovered this when we got some DVDs from the Library and found that some of the discs were so dirty, scratched and smudged that they wouldn’t play, without skipping or locking up. After using the guitar polish to clean and polish the discs, not only did they play through, the picture was very bright and clear. I started using the same polish on the data side of my used and older CDs, with the same results. Probably would be frowned on by some of the tech-buffs, but it works for me...Jim |
Dumb response
|
@sisyphus51 Dumb question? Why is anyone (still) spending large sums of money on Compact Disc. And, why are we (still) debating snake oil treatments to make them tolerable? Pretty much the same reason so many audiophiles still have a love for vinyl and enjoy periodically adding to their collections and spend good sums of money to buy nice gear to play them. Nothing so snake oil about most of, or at leas a good share of, the products we use to clean and take care of our valuable collections. To each their own...Jim |
I’m afraid there’s more to it than just cleaning and taking care of the CDs. That’s kind of the whole point. It’s because the REAL CD treatments, you know the ones, Optrix, Liquid Resolution, Auric Illuminator, Jena Labs, L’Art du Sond and a host of other sprays, liquids and enhancers actually IMPROVE the sound, not just clean the CD. Hel-loo! And the fact that they do improve the sound DEMONstrates a couple things - (1) CDs are not (rpt not) “perfect sound forever” and (2j even through the physical data on the CD cannot be altered the reading of the data by the CD laser can be improved. For starters the polycarbonate layer is only around 90% transparent. |
Weebeesdad - Sorry for the low response. I try not to visit these forums too often. The answer is that L'Art Du Son makes BOTH a CD cleaner/treatment and also a vinyl cleaner. I've never tried the vinyl treatment, but I hear it is good. I use the CD treatment on every new CD I buy. When I first tried it, I would listen once before treating the CD (to judge the difference). I've long-since stopped doing that, as it improves every CD to some extent or another. I've found that (physically) very well-produced CDs, like XRCDs and Reference Recordings are improved less dramatically than most. I hope that helps |