AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Critic's Circle (Equipment Reviews) => Source Component Reviews => Topic started by: nathanm on 4 Mar 2003, 06:32 pm
-
The setup:
Shanling CD-T100 w\upsampling on
Shanling's Digital Out to Y-adapter to 2 Homegrown Audio RCA silver lace cables
RCAs to SPDIF inputs of each DIO.
Two pairs of identical Phone-To-RCA cables from analog outs of the DIOs into the two inputs of a Norh SE-9 driving a pair of Norh Prism 6.6 speakers (before I blew one of them up that is)
Input switch on SE-9 allows for instaneous A\B switch between stock and Tube-O-Lator DIOs.
I listened to many different CDs with these DACs and have come to the conclusion that the modded DIO sounds 99.9% identical to the stock DIO. In other words, the Tube-O-Lator provides no meaningful difference, much less an improvement.
Having said that, I think I heard something which I would describe as a change in height of the soundstage and perhaps a slight softening of the upper mids. But please, that comment means next to nothing. It's like less than one half of one percent. A dozen other things could account for such a small change. It would be like changing three pixels in a 1600x1200 pixel image.
You wanna know what made MORE of a difference in my listening test? Moving my head closer or farther away from the back of my leather chair. That doesn't even cost you 40-55 dollars! What a great tweak! :lol:
Now you could say, "Well geez asshole, you were so skeptical about the magic elixir of COURSE you are gonna say there's no difference just to make yourself look good!"
To which I would reply, "No, I wouldn't."
I would be happy to tell you if flipping the switch made some kind of music magic happen, but it didn't. It sounded identical. Now here's the part where people say, "Well your system is just not revealing enough!" To this I say :finger:
I want to thank Wayne at Bolder for providing the service for free for my evaluation. It was very kind of him. He claims the stuff takes 20 days to "cure" so I will humor this request and report on any changes I hear in the near future. I also plan on getting non-audiophile input. But for now I have to say that there is a slim to none difference in sound quality between the two. If anything I think the 7V output is causing occasional clipping of the amp, but this could be my imagination. Overall the sound was pretty good, if a bit "hard" meaning the midrange was a bit hard on the ears. But I did have it pretty loud.
The moral of the story; if you generally like your DIO now don't bother with this stuff. A similar effect can be obtained by wearing red socks instead of white when listening. The jury is still out on the more expensive mods done to this DAC, ones which at least make some practical sense such as different jacks and lowering the output.
The REAL problem with the ART DIO is it's complete and utter failure to deal with even small amounts of electrostatic discharge! I've never seen ANY piece of gear that was this sensitive to static! It's quite amazing!
-
My, My, that was eloquent.
Nice work, Nathan. :roll:
Wayne, you are one very brave man for allowing Nathan to review your work. Didn't anyone warn you?
I would like to offer some perspective on Nathan's review. I own a Perpetual Tech P-3A dac with Level 2 Modwright mods and a P-1A, both powered by a Monolithic Power supply. When Nathan and I compared these components to his Shanling CDP straight up, my recollection is that Nathan did not feel there was a significant difference, while I thought there was a considerable difference. Nathan will correct me if I'm wrong in summarizing how he felt, I'm confident of that.
Does this mean that I can hear better than Nathan, does it maybe mean that Nathan is much more difficult to impress, or does it mean that I imagine differences and Nathan does not?
I also think one needs to consider one's listening preferences and whether the recorded material makes any differences in components relevant.
-
I think it means that Nathan is deaf as a post after listening to all that heavy metal over the years :D
J/k - thanks for calling it as you heard it :!:
-
I have no problem with Natan expressing his opinion on a product I offer.
I realize he may not be as critical, as some of us are, over differences in gear.
I do have a couple of problems with the way he set up the comparison and I have PM'ed him about this.
I heard a difference after I treated Nathan's DI/O. If he doesn't, that is fine with me.
I have two other people, both very accomplished DIY types, who are also evaluating the Tube-O-Lator product. Hopefully they will post their thoughts shortly.
I have also applied the product to a few DI/Os within the last week. Again, hopefully the owners of these units will add their comments.
I will have a MENSA DI/O at the Midwest Audio Fest with a treated and untreated board and chip so anyone who cares to can hear the difference, or lack there of, for themselves.
-
He used Y adapters, switching, and *gag* PSS cables. Nuff said
-
Jerry - What you are talking about has nothing to do with electronics and everything to do with personal, subjective opinion and emotional response to music. You cannot logically claim to hear auidible minutia on some CDs and not others. It simply makes no sense at all. We're not doing record reviews here, it's an evaluation of how one set of circuits decodes digital bits verses another one. Nothing more.
But okay fine, please tell me what annointed audiophile CDs are good enough to listen to, the ones that are SO much better than the crap I have. (and never mind that I didn't even mention what CDs I used!) CDs that will reveal that the stock DIO is good but the Tube-O-Lator is DRAMATICALLY better? Well I have news for ya'll: there aren't any such CDs.
Pez: Well okay, but how much more fair can you get than with an A\B test? Each unit had the same cables going to the same place. Switching? Umm...your Radii preamp has switches on it does it not? Or do you solder and resolder the wires everytime you wanna switch sources? Give me a break...
What praytell is a more fair comparsion; one that occurs instantly and nearly seamlessly, or one that occurs after a few minutes of swapping stuff around?
-
For starters use the same input. Switching inputs leads to to many variables. Also use the same cables. Not the same kind of cables, but the same cables to switch. Listen to the entire track from beginning to end and then switch to the other component.
Switching on the fly is counterproductive because again you're using switches and how, pray tell, can you hear a subtle difference if you are switching? You can't! you can only compare timbre differences. It's one of the biggest misconceptions in audio. People want to listen, switch, hear a timbre change and say "That one's better" It can't work that way. You are listening to two different parts of music with two different components. How are you supposed to detect a difference if you are not taking a common sample? Again you can't.
-
It is not for me to judge whether or not someone can hear a difference in something somewhat mystical such as this voodoo lacquer or even something more tangible like cables, but I went back and re-read the original post which you can find here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=1152
What I found interesting was that nobody knew what changes were being made, but the differences were clear to everyone. Now if only Wayne had the forsight to have two extra boards. One as a placebo and one with the voodoo lacquer. That would be the true three blind mice test.
If only nathan could have been there to tell the king he has no clothes.
-
Use a 2nd person to do the manual switching for you, while you stay in your "sweet spot" position. I notice that I am able to hear differences much more clearly when I am at a DAM shootout, with someone else doing the switching, than when I am at home alone and have to get up, do the switch, and then re-settle in to the sweet spot - the physical movement alters my equilibrium and the continuity of the listening experience.
I also prefer to listen to the whole song, then switch and listen to the whole song again. Over the years there are certain things I've learned to listen for and pick up on fairly easily. Don't be fooled, listening in this manner is a skill, and it can be developed, but it is not inherent or natural for people to listen this way - it is hard work and is not easy to do
-
Yes, I did listen to each track the whole way through as well as switching on the fly. I listened to a variety of CDs of varying subjective recording quality and styles of music.
Ideally you could make a CD that has a small section repeated over and over and perform the switch. Still, I think that is incredibly picky. If that was the case a guitarist could not tell what he was changing with the tone knobs because he was not playing the same atomically exact thing everytime he turned the knob. :roll: Come on now! The brain more than makes up for this tiny minutia. Recording engineers don't set EQ or levels during a mix by listening to a 3 second clip over and over again do they?
I haven't opened up the SE-9 but my guess is that there's just some cables going from the switch to where the signal goes into the amp circuitry. That would be there no matter what you do. The switch is part of the amplifier, I cannot take it out of the equation! Not possible!
So not only are cables capable of musical differences, but two cables from the same company are different too? Wow, folks better start taking a look at their manufacturing tolerances! :lol: How far shall we take this? Difference between the thickness of the gold plating on the connectors? Difference between the temperature of the wire? Difference in cable length in micron steps? You guys are zoomed in too much! heh!
Well anyway, I will swap them with a real digital shielded cable and see how it sounds.
Tyson: you are right about having another guy make the switch. I didn't have anyone handy at the time but I will try again later. I did get myself a yard stick so I could at least hit the switch a little closer to the speakers! heh!
Still, this type of fastidiousness in testing parameters seems to undermine the merits of the gear in question don't ya think? I mean, if it was so great, shouldn't it be more obvious? To anyone? Not just people who listen to these things as a hobby? Why should I have to get out a microscope to see if one photograph is more pleasing than another? Hmmmm...
-
Don't be fooled, listening in this manner is a skill, and it can be developed, but it is not inherent or natural for people to listen this way - it is hard work and is not easy to do
Now to that I say "nuff said"! MUWHAHAHA!!! :P Audiophile listening, unnatural? Amen my brothers, amen.
-
No more "un-natural" than the apprectiation a musician derives from music that the common dolt does not. :)
It's the way a fine cigar tastes and smokes that excites the connoisseur compared to the swine who cannot tell the difference between a fine Cuban and a Swisher Sweet. :wink:
-
I'm just wondering if the Y-adapter itself didn't affect the test.
I can see the benefits of having someone else switch for you.
I wouldn't think a different set of the same model of cable would make a lot of difference unless the hours on the cables were drastically different.
-
Hm. Out of curiosity, how many of the people posting in this thread (apart from Wayne) have done a comparison between a Tubolated DIO and a Non-Tubolated DIO? Preferably a stock one.
-
I have, but on the Mensa dio.
-
Nathan,
I agree, the way I listen when doing comparisons is COMPLETELY different than the way I listen when just enjoying my music. One is very, very analytical mode of perception focus, the other is very relaxed. Apart from comparisons and shootouts, I don't have much use for analytical listening.
-
You compared two Mensa DIOs, which were identical in every way save for the Tubolator?
-
Not two dios, Better. We compared the same dio with two different boards. One treated with Tubeolator the other without.
-
Where's your review?
-
John,
What Jason, Tyson, Mike Galusha and I compared was what was described in my forum. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=1152 One Mensa DI/O and two digital boards and two LT-1362 op amps. One digital board and one chip was treated, the other were not. I did not tell the guys what I had done. I just said I had done something to the digtal boards. I first asked if there was any difference between the boards and then if they could describe it.
There have been no comparisons, to my knowledge, except Nathan's, between two separate DI/Os, one treated and the other not.
-
I didn't post a review, but here's the short and sweet. It made a difference, but not enough to constitute buying the stuff opening my equipment, painting it on etc. I found it was a smoother sounding result, but if my system does one thing well already it's smoothness. If you want to squeeze that extra bit of velvet out of your system try isolation and cables first, tubolator second. JMHO
-
Real good guys.You have managed to really put a big :?: in my mind. :duel: :banghead:
Nathan ,I wonder what you are using for speaker's and a system? :?:
For myself I am thinking of getting a normal stock version before sending mine back just to see what difference I am hearing. :mrgreen:
I will reiterate a point I made to the unbeliever's at AA where I go to haggle over non issues and where people would not believe in any change."System's seem to be more sensitive then other's depending on speaker's and what their source components are!"
This tube-u-lator stuff is going to far if you ask me.There must be an effect if 4 people could hear a diff ,but to what extent is the question?
Nathan says he did not hear or it was very slight improvement to which I would say is fine.Being into audio for 27yrs. now I believe that circuit design and components make a majority of a difference ,more than a paste or whatever anyways.
At present I am wrestling with weather there is diferences that can be present with cryo'd cables which is enough to deal with,but I am still thinking of trying the paste anyways. :tempted:
-
I figure the effect is similar to using isolation feet or spikes, or whatever with your gear. The tube-o-lator would seem to just dampen vibrations “at the source”, the D/A chip or output chip, etc, and logically would seem to give many of the same benefits as using other types of vibration control.
-
System transparency and listener perception are both at play here. Each of us also places a different value on a given improvement in sound quality. I have heard of positive results from 2 separate trials of Tube-o-lator, so I am inclined to try it myself.
Also, keep in mind that the performance of a system can be the sum of many small improvements.
-
hello,
most of the time with these types of products your system has to be of relatively high quality to hear any differences. also the recordings that you use must be good quality.
i really like my rock recordings, however they just don't reveal inner nuances of music compared to be quality recordings.
btw i agree with a previous post i post most of my money into components.
regards
rod
-
I agree that pop/rock recordings don't have as many nuances to reveal as maybe jazz or classical. Where I think products like Tubeolator will help is that they can make the typical pop/rock recording more listenable.
-
I didn't go back and check but wasn't sibilance improved upon by the tubelator (in the DAM shootout)? I had a sibilance problem that mostly went away when I added a pair of Empirical audio holosonics to the pre/amp. It's still there minorly because my source IC's aren't the best (actually they're pretty damn good since they didn't cost me a penny) but I believe it is the bullet plugs that are making the difference here. Which brings me to the tubelator: If it is said to improve something such as sibilance in a system (sibilance is very annoying) and it does then it is definately worth it. If you're system sounds good w/o it then I would think it would be that last, cherry on top upgrade thing. Didn't Tyson say that the lube could be pasted elsewhere for improvement, such as the Le Amps? What about the output stage on a tube cdp (Jolida cdp)?
-
MatthewM,
I have found that harsh, leading edge, transients are "mellowed" out with the use of the lacquer. We did find the sibilants were reduced in the Norah Jones track we played.
It is NOT a "paste" or a "lube" It is a slightly thickened, lacquer-like, liquid. It is lightly applied with a q-tip.
It is suggested for use on the D/A convertor chips and opamps. It is suggested that it be used mostly for front-end gear.
I have no idea how it would work on the chip used in the LeAmp. Mr Altmann has said that it may change the sound too much when used on output devices in certain amps. He does not elaborate.
I am not at all familiar with the circuitry of the Jolida CD players. If it is similar to the nOrh CD-1 in it just uses the tube stage as a buffer and op-amps to do most of the work, then the Tube-O-Lator may work just fine.
I have found that Bullet Plugs do reduce "glare" in interconnects. I had a fairly bad sibilance problem with my HT that was reduced when I changed my interconnects from an open, braided design to a shielded, twisted pair.
-
Another product which operates on the same principle of controlling resonances at the component part level are Marigo Audio Lab VTS Tuning Dots : http://marigoaudio.com/absolute2.htm
Has anyone tried these out with positive results? Conceptually it makes some sense to me and one wouldn't have to slather goop over the component innards.
Beez
-
Beez,
One does NOT "slather goop" all over the place.
One lightly paints the surface of an IC. You just need a light coating to affect the sound, in my experience.
The dots and blu-tack and mortite all work to dampen vibrations from outside the device. The laquer works, IMHO, to dampen INTERNAL micro vibrations caused by all the little junctions inside the hunk of silicone changing state from on to off. I could be completely wrong on this, but it is a theory that makes sense to me :roll:
-
The laquer works, IMHO, to dampen INTERNAL micro vibrations caused by all the little junctions inside the hunk of silicone changing state from on to off. I could be completely wrong on this, but it is a theory that makes sense to me
It makes sense to me too man. . . Too often, people forget about internally generated vibration, and just focus on something they can't do anything about. I guess that's just an audiophile way to approach it. hehe
B
-
i don't see how this laquer can dampen internal wibrations - aren't the chips plastic? how can the stuff get absorbed *inside* the plastic?
re: nathan's experiences, i'd suspect a modded di/o would likely highlight any changes this product produces, more than a stock di/o, from my experiences with my di/o when stock, compared to when i modded it. the modded wersion is just so much better, & more revealing, it could well be possible that any benefits of damping op-amps & digital chips could be masked by other deficiencies of a stock di/o.
doug s.
-
i don't see how this laquer can dampen internal wibrations - aren't the chips plastic? how can the stuff get absorbed *inside* the plastic?
I am not sure that you are on the right track with this theory. The lacquer undoutably changes the resonant characteristic of the IC. It doesn't have to damp it per se. When you add something elastic to the top of a chip like Blu-Tak, you are changing the resonant characteristics of an IC, but you are also inhbiting the internal vibrations from getting out. They are merely bounced back into the chip rather nastily.
The lacquer probably makes the chip vibrate in a more linear fashion, and at different frequencies than the untreated chip. I have found that this is also the case with wood when applying lacuer, or finish.
B
-
Clearly the biggest sin in the audiophile world is to say you did not hear a difference. Apparently people would rather hear "this product is phenomenal!" or "this product ruined the music totally with awful grunge!" God forbid you should say it did nothing or very little. Then gee, something must be wrong with that guy's system! Something must be wrong with his hearing! He did the test totally wrong! The music he used is not capable of revealing differences! The switch on the amp screwed up the whole test! Surely such and such product MUST make a difference!
Go buy this stuff and apply it to YOUR gear and see if you hear anything. Or if you want, anyone is more than welcome to come over to my place to hear the exact same setup. Send me a PM and I'll give you directions! I would recommend doing so before you bust my chops over my methods or any other hair-splitting audiophile nervosa details. Cause I looked all around the room last night, and I didn't see any of you naysayers there.
Funny how nobody runs around like a chicken with its head cut off, trying to explain away the findings when someone posts a positve, glowing review. Funny how there are no questions or accusations directed at the reviewer or his system then. Write a nice positive review and here comes everyone patting you on the back, "Great job Joe, good review!" But say, "Hmmm, I really didn't think it did much" and you are immediately suspect and your gear called into question.
It's bullshit hypocrisy and you all know it.
Anyway, last night I switched over to my Norh 3.0s since I blew up the Prisms (oops!) and both DACs were sounding great. The speaker change was very easily noticeable. The 3.0s imaging in the new room was very good. I really like this little speaker. I used an actual digital cable, no splitters! Boy what a HUGE improvement... No just kidding. It sounded really good I thought. But you shouldn't believe anything I say, because of course my system is crap and the CDs of choice did not pass through committee. Obviously the Tube-O-Lator DAC is supremely better and everything else is just not letting me hear it. Oh and I better buy me some some annointed jazz CDs, obviously they are the only ones holy enough to make comparisons possible. Lord knows the unamplified, all-acoustic folk music I was listening to by Pentangle doesn't count.
-
hey nate, chill - i feel yer pain! :wink: seriously, i don't take any issues at all w/yer results, & i also anticipated the backlash ya got. i happen to disagree w/all those naysayers - i like *my* theory best! :lol:
seriously, i tink ya owe it to yourself to hear a modded di/o, if yure using a stock wersion. a lot smoother *and* more resolving of detail, while throwing a better soundstage. don't get me wrong - i liked my stock di/o - best digital i'd heard in my system, & 1st time i actually *liked* redbook cd. i liked it enuff to tear into it & do the upgrades everyone was yapping about. and, they're definitely worth it.
b, regarding your theories about differing resonant characteristics, well, i'm sure that laquer vs putty will affect different things in different manners, but i doubt anyone knows for sure exactly what's happening here on this small a scale. it's yust as likely as not, that blu-tac could absorb internal wibrations, preventing them from being "nastily bounced around" inside the chip. also likely that a clear laquer, from a paint store, may have yust as much benefit as the tube-o-lator stuff, or blu-tac. or, perhaps one of these three choices mite have the best efect depending on which chip, which equipment, etc... no one knows for sure. even the tube-o-lator vendor admits as much. he's not sure himself, why it works, or whether it would be beneficial, or even harmful, in some applications...
doug s.
-
I hear ya Nate. There is quite a bit of audio snobbery even here in audiocircle not to name any names. (http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=236) There is tons of childishness as well with regards to some want to think they have the best system, the best components, whatever and anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid, deaf or deluided. Actually then need to pull that something out of somewhere. (http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=229)
Don't sweat it, these are precisely the people who's opinions mean squat. There are plenty of people hear who enjoy audio and are far more mature.
-
Any comparison/listening is system specific. So
a. Nathan tested in DACs in his system. If he were to choose between 2 DACs clearly he would go for cheaper one :) The insinuation that his system is crap is crap :mrgreen: . As far as his testing is concerned I donot think cables from same company would sound radically different..however if Nathan wants he can improve his comparo by getting someone to switch DACs as Tyson suggested. Dunno why he should be slammed :roll:
b. Many of us (at least me) do NOT concentrate, focus, brood, think, listen to minute details & be ANAL when we listen. Have the same attitude towards comparisons (okie maybe concentrate a bit) coz ultimately whatever product you end up with- you will be in a relaxed setting. I have been guilty of this in my previous comparo with with Camelot DAC and Modded DIO. I did all of above (rather focussed on finding a difference) and later realized that that is not my listening behaviour in normal setting. The differences were there but I could be happy with either one in my normal listening behaviour. I have found differences with other products which made startling difference you cannot ignore-and then the $$/features play out :idea:
and
c. Our ears/brains are unique. Appreciate them and enjoy audio!
My $0.02
Cheers,
Kishore
-
Hello all, Obviously new to the site - have been lurking for a while however to get the tone of the site. Really like the fairly simple but yet colorful interface. Standard greetings asdie - I wanted to pose a couple questions regarding the "goop." I am a man of science and at the same time a man of personal taste. I have recently purchased some Norh Prism 4.0's and I am running them on my previously purchased NAD T700 series amp ( theatre stuff ). I am looking to improve my stuff as time goes on - and thus my curiosity with the art. Some of the stuff you all suggest has me bewildered.
This whole discussion is very interesting - I have a big sticking point before I buy into it - why is it not possible to measure with some means the change? It should be a simple thing to do. I have a great understanding of component impact on quality but the application of some sort of vibration dampener on a purely electrical component has me at a loss. The physics just do not make sense to me. A capacitor with a lower ESR I can understand - a loosely wound coil vibrating I can understand. Paint on the top of a component - I need some understanding.
Next on my todo list: New Amplifier - old one for HT and one for Music.
-
I think the point that has been overlooked here is that this is a "tweak", and does offer some improvement, but not as much as a speaker or amp or even an IC upgrade would offer. These tweaks are good to focus on only after you have made the "big" improvements to the rest of the system. After you are happy with the quality and sound of your system, tweaks help to fine tune it. So it's a question of priority. If Nathan were looking to improve the sound of his system, the tube-o-lator would not be the top of my list for recommendations.
And, if you can't hear a difference, then there's no reason to keep it, end of story.
-
Jig
I had the same question about mesureing the effect of vibration on the output to see what change had ocurred.Can't remember what was said about it.
The measurement would have to be very expensive and sensitive to the effect I assume.Alot of effects on audio equiptment is hard to validate as in the difference in cables being one of them.If you look on other bb's you will see the diverse opinion's about it.
If the Laquor is effective when damping internal Vibration then there must be merit to the stuff.I wonder if another Tweek I have heard is just as effective,using Super Glue.Not willing to try it but it had been mentioned and tried elsewhere.Maybe the stuff has a rubber or DE-Ionization property.
http://www.audiotweaks.com/collection_descend.htm
There is a world of tweeks that are used in audio.You might spend a year to see what ,why and if some of those work. 8)
-
Nathan, I understand you're upset, but can you please point out where someone said your system is crap? Let's not exagerate here. Am I suprised you didn't hear a difference? No. Does that mean I think less of you or your system? No. Who can piss further you or I? Who cares!
The point is maybe, just maybe the stuff does make a difference in other systems and posting global statements like "The moral of the story; if you generally like your DIO now don't bother with this stuff. A similar effect can be obtained by wearing red socks instead of white when listening." Is (to say the very least) entirely misleading. Come on you know and I know that tweaks, voodoo, and isolation can have differing effects completely dependant on equipment, listening room, and *gasp* dare I say listening material????? It cuts to the heart, but it's true.
-
Nathan:
If you are pissed at me for asking what your system consist of don't be I was just wondering?
Tweeks are tweeks and some things I really do not hear an overall difference in,but I think there are merits to trying like SPeaker cable lifts.I was not about to spend $200 for some to see so I painted some pencils and used them instead of paying for some.If there is a diff it's minimal to my ears.
One thing that can't be over looked though .Someone else mentioned that tweeks add to the overall presentation to the system.So adding tweeks might add to overall performance and not just one tweek can reduce or improve overall sound!
Just a thought! :wink:
-
Seems like Jason has a problem with any review that doesn't agree with his own opinions...
Any review has to be taken in the context of how it was done, etc etc etc, blah blah blah. At the least, this is useful to someone who might be thinking that this magic goop is anywhere on their priority list unless their system is already finely tuned.
As far as the followups go, the effect they've had on me is to move this junk all the way to the bottom of my "things to try" list. Just above Shakti stones. Why bother with something that's a) technically dubious, and b) just gets a load of people bitching at you if you don't gush about how good it is? Sorry Wayne, and BTW thanks for the offer to let me try it, I'm glad I didn't take you up on it.
Cheers
JohnR
-
Appreciate the input. Indeed you are correct - it can take a good amount of time to make these decisions - especially when we are talking about the type of expense associated with it. My existence is centered on figuring out why and how things work - so it is no stretch for me to question this as well. The laquer/epoxy in a tightly wound coil is to reduce vibrations. These vibrations could in theory effect the output of said coil - if they occurred. My big problem is this - the inside of a digital circuit is purely that - digital. Vibration means nothing to a gate. If this were the case - many of the common electronics you know and love would fail to function properly at given points in their life cycle. I am continually struggling with the line between audiophalacy and audiofact. I want a beautiful sounding system - as I am sure we all do. I do not - however - want to be acquiring questionable technology. I read a great audio component magazine last week that had some really impressive graphs showing various technical aspects of X Amp versus Y amp etc. Some of the graphs I found interesting but of little auditory impact. Other graphs I found very interesting. I was ecstatic to see actual data however. It is a given that people desire different things - and some people like the color blue and others red but in this situation - until someone shows me some rational physics - I am at a loss for convincing. I am sort of concerned that people can commit to things like this with such little background.
If nothing else - I wish to get an understanding of peoples decision making process when acquiring gear. If I am to base some of my purchases on peoples opinions I want some physical backup to go along with it. If I told someone that jumping off a bridge into a lake 600 below was fun and healthy who here would question me and who would believe me?
There is a world of tweeks that are used in audio.You might spend a year to see what ,why and if some of those work. 8)
-
Hi Nathan,
well done for sticking to your guns, very few people can acknowledge the fact that not every mod is awesome. However I mean no disrespect to the mod in question, it may well work, but very few people spend money and then have the courage or ability to admit that it wasn't really worthwhile.
Thanks
Raj
-
Seems like Jason has a problem with any review that doesn't agree with his own opinions...
It made a difference, but not enough to constitute buying the stuff opening my equipment, painting it on etc.
It seems that Jason could care less about "tube-o-lator" and more about giving a product a fair shake, but if you want to put words in my mouth John. I guess it's easier to make me look like the bad guy than to truely quantify what I have said here. What Jason has a problem with is when he is smacked in the face for no apparent reason. But hey what can I say other than Fuck you.
-
If I told someone that jumping off a bridge into a lake 600 below was fun and healthy who here would question me and who would believe me?
Well where the hell where you when that DOE guy had those people all wear NIKE sneaker's and commit Hari Kari in San Diego? :lol:
==============================================
I thought this was a damping tweek and you bring up a good point! So if there are people hearing a diff what is it due to?Could it be eliminating elctronic charges that can interfer with the transfer of electrons.Interference?
Some tweeks are obsurd! :stupid: This I know and the audio community are filled with them.How many times do you hear or read of a revolutionary product that falls by the wayside the next year?There are a few I have seen in my day.
There is nothing wrong with being a skeptic especially when it comes to tweeks .Changeing electronics will give you a better then any tweek shall ever do IMO.
===============================================
You mentioned that you are in pursuit of better amplification.What are you looking for.I am on the same quest.Monarchy,Aragon,McCormick and Odessey look like the best cost effective amps to myself.I have a modified B&K I really like and it outperforms Rotel and a few other's hands down.I might even try to get a few more.
Try to keep your HT seperated from your 2 ch. playback in your system for best results.
:drums: :dance: :bomb:
http://cgi.audioasylum.com/systems/3684.html
-
Pez: No I am not pissed at anyone in particular but if we wanna talk about misleading statements I think your first reply was the most foolish of all. You immediately dismissed it out of hand just because I used a splitter and a cable you didn't like!? It sounded extremely silly I thought. But no, it didn't piss me off per se.
Hey, how do you know wearing red socks makes no difference? Have you ever compared red vs. white socks?! Let's get the DAM on that shootout ASAP! :P
All that needs to happen is for more people to demo this laquer. As far as I know only like 5 or 6 people have "heard" this stuff. All but one of those are friends and friends of the guy selling it, so it's no wonder they're all on the same page. No, I am not acusing any of you guys of being in Wayne's pocket, but let's be serious - you guys like to get together and swap cables around on weekends, so that's an entirely different type of listener than people like me. I write my reviews for people on the fence who aren't entirely sure if this hifi stuff is a bunch of bullshit or what the deal is. Obviously it won't be to the satisfaction of people who listen with electron microscopes on their ears. I still feel my comparison was valid; splitter, switch, cables that Pez thinks are "yucky" or not.
When you wanna charge people 55 bucks for .5ml of stuff that nobody really knows what it does or how it works I cannot help but call shenanigans. If that isn't a call for skepticism I don't know what is! :mrgreen: <-- Hey look, this little fella has been treated with Tube-O-Lator! :wink:
-
The simple statement here is Nathan did not hear any difference in his system between a new DI/O and a older DI/O that I "treated".
When I received his DI/O I listened to it before I treated it and after. I heard a difference.
I would not offer a product or a mod that I cannot hear a beneficitial difference in.
Before I spent any money on this stuff I asked 3 other people, whose ears I trust, to see if they heard anything.
They did.
I feel the difference I hear is worth the small amount of money a treatment costs.
Nathan doesn't.
Fine.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have sent samples of the lacquer to two other folks who are seriously into DIY audio. They have both built and modified quite a bit of audio gear. I expect to get some initial feedback from them by this time next week.
I have had reports from an audiophile in Asia who is very impressed with what the lacquer did in his system.
If you want measurements and explanations, I don't have them.
All I can say is I heard enough of a difference after using this lacquer to spend a fair amount of money buying a quantity of it to sell.
For those of you who wish to hear the difference, or not, themselves, please come to the Midwest Audio Fest where I will be happy to swap digital boards around for you.
-
Nathan said: "When you wanna charge people 55 bucks for .5ml of stuff that nobody really knows what it does or how it works I cannot help but call shenanigans. If that isn't a call for skepticism I don't know what is! "
Now there's something I completely agree with! Yeah there ain't no explanation and their sure as hell is little evidence either way, but damn I can't deny that I heard a difference. :? I won't be buying the stuff anytime soon, but hey, I haven't bought a lot of stuff that I've tried. Thank God, my debt is bad enough. :rotflmao:
-
hello,
most of the time with these types of products your system has to be of relatively high quality to hear any differences. also the recordings that you use must be good quality.
i really like my rock recordings, however they just don't reveal inner nuances of music compared to be quality recordings.
btw i agree with a previous post i post most of my money into components.
regards
rod
ijust read this post. i'm going to have to proof read what i'm typing, hopefully everyone decyphered what i meant.
regards
rod
-
But hey what can I say other than Fuck you.
Well, you could send me a PM accusing of not being polite to you :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
I look forward to seeing your response next time sometime attempts to discredit one of *your* reviews. Nuff said :roll:
-
Pez wrote " But hey what can I say other than fuck you. I just one to say. I imagine we all are educated people and is a shame that someone write this kind of language in this forum. I am not an expert in music or electronic, but I really enjoy this forum and everything that I learn almost every day. if you do not know how to behave, please is not too late.
-
I still feel my comparison was valid; splitter, switch, cables that Pez thinks are "yucky" or not.
Nathan,
I've not doubt that your system if plenty good enough to reveal differences made by small tweeks such as this.
I also think that whatever one listens to for comparisons shouldn't be something that's "reccommended" for comparo's. But it should be something you're very familiar with. Who cares what it is, you should just be familiar with it.
I think though that the one problem was the method you were using to compare the 2 DI/O's.
I agree, it sounds like the best way to test such things. I in fact did damn near the same thing to test a Digital I had Wayne build me.
I pulled out one of my LD players that had 2 PCM outs. Hooked up the Bolder digital on one PCM out and my old Monster on the other PCM out. As I was using the PCM signal I listened to a CD that was of supposed high quality and switched between the 2 inputs on my receiver. I was not familiar with the CD, or with listening to 2 channel sources on my system as I don't ever listen to 2 channel. But it was supposed to be good to listen to when determining differences.
I had a hard time telling between the two.
I was a bit disappointed to say the least. How was a custom digital that cost $100 more than the Monster not really any better? It was built with Silver Eichmann's & Cryo treated. Yet it didn't seem to be much different than the $35 Monster I'd been using.
So I mentioned it to Wayne, as well as my testing method. He mentioned that I was testing the cables wrong, and that I should only test them with one hooked up at a time. I didn't really see why it'd make a difference testing one at a time or running them both real-time and switching inputs.
So I tried listening to one at a time on material I was very familiar with, a copy of The Fifth Element on Superbit DVD. I played a chapter or two with my old Monster. Then I pulled out the Monster & plugged in the Bolder Silver Bullet Cryo'd cable.
:o
It took all of 10 seconds for me to be able to tell the difference. The Bolder was a huge improvement over the Monster. But I couldn't tell before as I wasn't testing them properly.
Wayne mentioned he'd PM'd you about the testing method you applied. Try doing it again as he suggested. Maybe you'll be able to tell then, maybe not.
I'm certainly not trying to dismiss your setup or software. Hell, most of my setup is dismissed by "audiophiles" as crap, so who am I to say anything about anyone else's gear.
I'm just saying you should try a different testing method. If you've got questions as to why it'd matter how you tested the DI/O's, Wayne should be able to explain for you why it matters. He told me what I'd done wrong and why, but I don't remember it all right now.
-
Hi Nathan,
well done for sticking to your guns, very few people can acknowledge the fact that not every mod is awesome. However I mean no disrespect to the mod in question, it may well work, but very few people spend money and then have the courage or ability to admit that it wasn't really worthwhile.
Thanks
Raj
Thanks Raj, but technically I only spent 10 bucks on shipping the DIO to Wayne. He did the treatment for free just because I was being such a pain in the ass and he wanted an outsider opinion. Well, he got it! :wink: Although I usually only like to spend my audio toy money on things with shiny metal on them, had I spent the 55 bucks for this stuff I'd probably be thinking about the other stuff I could've spent it on. I dunno, like a pair of pants or some groceries.
Heck, I'll be the first to tell you something I bought isn't anything special. Makes no difference to me! :)
-
Bubba,
I have replaced the Y-connectored HGA cables with a shielded digital cable but I have not yet bothered to plug the outputs of the DIOs into the exact same set of jacks on the back of the SE-9 because I think that is truly and utterly a non-issue. But I will try it anyway. I hope to do a test with other people's input. I still think it would be 10x more fun to compare speakers than two 99.999% identical DACs!
I totally believe in doing "real world" testing. The cross the t and dot the i stuff is fine for guys in lab coats, but I am just the customer, ok? I wanna stick the equipment in the system just the way anyone else would and not be fretting about how thick the plating is on the RCA jacks. Sheesh!
I will also gladly compare the unshielded to shielded digital cables. I was not aware that incoming "hash" made such an effect on the sound. I would think that if said hash was so bad the music would skip or cut out, right? Well, it does if you rub your feet on the carpet. Why nobody has addressed this particular issue with the DIO is beyond me. Where are the faraday cage mods? Where are the liquid nitrogen immersion mods? Where are the DIO cable elevator tweaks? A 3 inch long Y-adapter destroys fidelity but static doesn't? Hmmmm...
-
When you wanna charge people 55 bucks for .5ml of stuff that nobody really knows what it does or how it works I cannot help but call shenanigans. If that isn't a call for skepticism I don't know what is! :mrgreen: <-- Hey look, this little fella has been treated with Tube-O-Lator! :wink:
That's totally uncalled for. Your attitude is very similar to those who dissed you on this comparo :roll: . Take a step back-there are folks who believe that the tubolator has made a +ive difference.
Moreover, Wayne is not your typical salesman with BS- he believes in what he makes/sells AND (more importantly) is a fellow audiophile. If you disagree with him fine but don't go anywhere with such stupid comments.
There are tweaks without explanations which have created a difference among audiophiles-I know folks who swear by Shakti Stones, lifting cables (using wedge), dropping crystals in their CDPs to improve sound (hell branded Power Conditioners use this tweak) etc etc- I have not tried them-dunno if it will make a difference in my set-up-but these folks doing the tweaks are not morons..
Cheers,
Kishore
-
Oh geez Kishore, you're breaking my heart! :violin: Well you're right, it was uncalled for. But most comments people make are 'uncalled for' by other people now aren't they? But I'd like to call on you to make some comments. Specifically, I'd like to see what other exciting word shortenings you've got up your sleeve besides "comparo" and "+ive" :?: I can hardly wait! :P
Pez didn't seem to think it was a stupid comment, and he's a friend of Mr. Wayne. Not quite sure how you got the "morons" inference from that particular comment of mine, but hey maybe you're onto something...
-
Some tweek references!
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ymisc&1002498109&openflup&21&4#21
http://www.audiotweaks.com/collection_descend.htm
-
That's totally uncalled for. Your attitude is very similar to those who dissed you on this comparo :roll:
This whole damn thread is uncalled for from beginning to end. Just leave up Nathan's review, lock the thread and dump the rest of this garbage in intergallactic waste. :banghead:
-
Specifically, I'd like to see what other exciting word shortenings you've got up your sleeve besides "comparo" and "+ive" :?: I can hardly wait! :P
Really, Nathan, was it necessary to criticize the diction of Kishore, particularly when it was not at all a central point?
Guys, I'm sure we agree that its fine to disagree on whether a tweak is effective or not, and that there is no need to get mean about it. At the same time, there is a difference between being straight forward and being offensive.
-
Guys, I'm sure we agree that its fine to disagree
Quote the Simpsons: "I don't agree to that." :lol:
-
back to hopefully being not offensive:
Wayne ... I apologize for not recalling, but do you usually include any other dampening, with blutak or otherwise, of the crystal or op amp (or caps?) in your mods for the DI/O?
-
Good job Nathan!
I'm not suprised to see that this escallated to this level. The name calling is a bit ridiculous, but overall a very good debate.
I certainly wouldn't want this to be lost as "intergalactic waste".
I think it's refreshing for someone to stand up for what they hear especially when it goes against the grain :!: How dare you Nathan :nono:
Most of the time I think newbies are being railroaded into buying the latest craze because they are overwhelmed by all the positive reviews and the "if you buy anything else, it sucks" attitude. It would be nice to read more posts like this so that we can realize that there is obviously a more realistic balance of great, good, mediocre, and bad audio gear.
IMO, the tube-o-stuff is way over priced and I can think of many other things i'd rather spend my money on. This stuff grates my bones cause someone is getting rich quick on it! Come on $55 for half a ml!!! What is that...3-4 drops?
-
I normally do not add anything to the op-amp. Blu-tack IS NOT suggested because the op-amp is biased into Class A and runs very warm.
The Tube-O-Lator does not change the heat transfer characteristics of the IC.
I have added mortite to the crystals.
-
fyi, i have a blu-tac-type substance on my class-a biased lt1362 op amp, & have had no heat-related problems... as to its effectiveness, i honestly have no idea - i never bothered w/an a-b comparison. it made a bit of sense to me to do it, so i yust did it & left it at that... edit: oh ya - i also blu-tac'd the chips on the digital board...
doug s.
-
Specifically, I'd like to see what other exciting word shortenings you've got up your sleeve besides "comparo" and "+ive" :?: I can hardly wait! :P
I wonder if you ever used SMS for chatting...then you will be exposed to lot more " word shortenings" (if you want to know SMS-you will not hear frm me :nono: )
Nathan if you want colorful posts you can always go to pornolize.com though I am sure you do not need them for your posts :mrgreen:
Cheers,
Kishore
P.S.- Ok I admit it I hate fingering the Kybd (of all things) :lol:
-
Man, Everyone hates everyone else here. Very entertaining. :smoke:
-
Bubba,
I have replaced the Y-connectored HGA cables with a shielded digital cable but I have not yet bothered to plug the outputs of the DIOs into the exact same set of jacks on the back of the SE-9 because I think that is truly and utterly a non-issue. But I will try it anyway. I hope to do a test with other people's input. I still think it would be 10x more fun to compare speakers than two 99.999% identical DACs!
I totally believe in doing "real world" testing. The cross the t and dot the i stuff is fine for guys in lab coats, but I am just the customer, ok? I wanna stick the equipment in the system just the way anyone else would and not be fretting about how thick the plating is on the RCA jacks. Sheesh!
I will also gladly compare the unshielded to shielded digital cables. I was not aware that incoming "hash" made such an effect on the sound. I would think that if said hash was so bad the music would skip or cut out, right? Well, it does if you rub your feet on the carpet. Why nobody has addressed this particular issue with the DIO is beyond me. Where are the faraday cage mods? Where are the liquid nitrogen immersion mods? Where are the DIO cable elevator tweaks? A 3 inch long Y-adapter destroys fidelity but static doesn't? Hmmmm...
Most of the reasons I mentioned for testing would be to cut down on variables. Use only one digital cable, one analog from the DI/O, one input on your SE-9, and one power supply for the DI/O. Listen to an entire track that you're very familiar with how it sounds in your setup. Swap nothing but the DI/O itself and listen to the same track.
I'm not saying you've got to get seriously technical when doing this. But to just make the only variable the DI/O itself.
I'd even be willing to let you borrow one of my Bolder Silver Bullet Cryo'd Digital's to do the testing with if you like. I don't know what digital you're using so I don't know if one of mine would be any improvement or not. But you're welcome to try it out. I just ask that you try testing it as I just described (or however Wayne described as he knows more about testing methods than I do).
I'm very much wondering how much impact (if any) this stuff has. I've got 6 years of fine woodworking & finishing schooling as well as 7+ years of working as a coatings applicator. I find the idea that this particular coating does such amazing things that some other similar type of coating must not do (which it must be doing something that nothing else does, hence the high cost/volume it's got).
If you're interested PM me with your address & if you need a .75M or 1.25M to use as I've got both lengths. I'd have it out in the mail in the morning
-
Okay folks, I have performed a highly technical and controlled test using two listeners; myself and my friend Steve who is an accomplished singer who has performed in many choirs over the years as well as my friend Mark, an electrical engineer who designs and programs digital components at his day job. Mark acted as the switcher of the components while Steve and I sat in the sweet spot and listened to the music. (Steve's spot was sweeter than mine, but we at least sat aligned between the speakers.)
We compared the stock and tube-o-lator DIOs using shielded digital cable and swapping the analog output cables. We listened to the same exact 1:00 long sections of music from two different CDs in two different sessions using the Shanling's A-B loop function. I told them the audiophiles would yell at me if we didn't listen to the WHOLE song all the way through each time, but in the spirit of saving time Steve made the argument that wine tasters don't need to drink the whole bottle. Fair enough! :)
The first song was Pentangle "I've Got A Feeling" and the second was Simon & Garfunkle "Bleeker Street". 44.1KHz sampling rate was used on both tests.
The entire system had warmed up by playing Morbid Angel "Altars Of Madness" for 10 hours straight before the test. Only Mark knew which unit was which and wether or not he switched the DIOs during the changeover. We listened to the loop about six times for each different band and then gave our opinions. I felt one DIO sounded a bit smoother and the vocal was slighty more centered in the stage. Steve felt he heard a difference in "brightness" between the two.
We both failed to correctly identify the DIO we thought sounded different than the other. The loop I felt sounded smoother than the other was in fact the same DIO and had NOT been switched. Therefore it is safe to conclude that I was not hearing what I thought I was and that the brain was 'making stuff up' as it were. Towards the end of the test Steve said he could no longer tell which was which and that any difference was "negligible". We both heard underlying distortions in the Pentangle recording as the singer's voice got louder. There were also some small clips and perhaps a tape dropout that we both heard. Neither of us felt either one was any better than the other in the end.
The second test used the Tube-O-Lator DIO only. The only change performed was the switching between the Homegrown Audio Silver Lace interconnect and a shielded 75-ohm digital cable. The decision was unamimous on this test; we were both unable to tell a difference after repeated loops of the exact same sections of music.
What was agreed however was that the system sounded excellent. Steve, who has absolutely no knowledge of hifi audio, commented without prior provocation that he could pinpoint where the instruments and singer was in the soundstage. Mark was sitting next to the rack the whole time behind the speakers and he did not comment too much on the sound. He did however, have much to say about the issues surrounding the design of the DIO's circuits. He asked me to post any future comments about this for him.
I will post some pictures of the testing circumstances in the near future hopefully.
-
Nathan,
It was very good of you to repeat the test and to invite your friends over. :thumb:
We'd love to hear your friend Mark's views on the design of the DI/O's circuit. Do let us know!
-
Man, Everyone hates everyone else here. Very entertaining. :smoke:
No Jason, we just all hate you! :lol:
-
I've been too busy to notice all the posts that have been made here, and haven't read anything past the first page yet. So I'm sure I missed a lot of comments, but I want to respond to Nathan's reply to my post on page one:
Jerry - What you are talking about has nothing to do with electronics and everything to do with personal, subjective opinion and emotional response to music.
What are you talking about? Of course it is personal, subjective, and emotional. How can you evaluate the way music sounds without them? Are you trying to turn yourself into a piece of measuring tool and listen as an entirely objective instrument? That would be stupid anyways, because electronic measuring instruments do a crap ass job of determining what something sounds like.
You cannot logically claim to hear auidible minutia on some CDs and not others.
Yes, I do claim that the cd used for evaluating a component is critical. Some cd's are simply much better than others for evaluating differences in the way a component sounds.
It simply makes no sense at all. We're not doing record reviews here, it's an evaluation of how one set of circuits decodes digital bits verses another one. Nothing more.
Ok, Mr. listening machine. Keep listening to decoded digital bits. Knock yourself out. I will continue to evaluate a component by listening to the music and how I am effected on a subjective, emotional level.
Also, Nathan, I'm not sure what prompted your remark in the first place. Looking back on my post, I fail to see what was there that caused it.
Based on what you have been saying in much of your posts, I get the sense that you are on a mission to prove that most of what the rest of us hold to be true regarding high-end audio is myth and lacking substance.
While it is healthy to challenge those beliefs, I think your position may be just as biased in the other direction. This bias may color your expectations when you review components because maybe you want to support your theory going into an evaluation that there can't be any significant differences. Wire is wire. caps are caps. transistors are transistors.
Why are you yourself heading down that path of searching for audio nirvanna if you seem to be so cynical about so many audio idiosyncracies?
-
Jerry - What you are talking about has nothing to do with electronics and everything to do with personal, subjective opinion and emotional response to music.
What are you talking about? Of course it is personal, subjective, and emotional. How can you evaluate the way music sounds without them? Are you trying to turn yourself into a piece of measuring tool and listen as an entirely objective instrument? That would be stupid anyways, because electronic measuring instruments do a crap ass job of determining what something sounds like.
What I was getting at is that you made such a stink about "my" music based on past experience and I felt that you assumed wrongfully that I listened to the type of direct, digital, non-purist heavy metal recordings that you complained about so vehemently for the test. (this was not the case) I am saying that you seem to only to be able to discern these differences in gear when listening to music YOU like, stuff you have a personal emotional response to. When we are talking about how a piece of equipment renders music I feel a person should be able to put that aside and just evaluate the sound itself. Therefore I think anyone who claims to hear minutia should be able to hear it on stuff besides what's in their personal collection.
That is what I meant when I said: You cannot logically claim to hear auidible minutia on some CDs and not others.
Of course a really bad CD will not be the best indicator, but the claims made by many vendors out there would have us believe these tweaks and stuff offer more "musicality". If the stuff is so great I think it is fair to assume that such claims are referring to ALL music and not only certain CDs which have the divine blessing of the vendor.
Based on what you have been saying in much of your posts, I get the sense that you are on a mission to prove that most of what the rest of us hold to be true regarding high-end audio is myth and lacking substance. While it is healthy to challenge those beliefs, I think your position may be just as biased in the other direction. This bias may color your expectations when you review components because maybe you want to support your theory going into an evaluation that there can't be any significant differences. Wire is wire. caps are caps. transistors are transistors.
Well, if I were on a "mission" as you say, it would be a mission to distill out the bullshit which flows from this industry like a firehose. A mission to separate fantasy from reality and get to the stuff which really matters. To try and not scare away people from this particular hobby by continually heaping praise on every little thing out there. Audiophiles are like transformers; you put a little voltage in one side and out the other comes a huge jolt! They'll hear little things in the sound, but the way they describe it sounds like a BIG thing to someone reading the description. I think that kind of thing is counterproductive. I'm just trying to get an idea of the scale of changes that any piece of gear provides.
Why are you yourself ading down that path of searching for audio nirvanna if you seem to be so cynical about so many audio idiosyncracies?
That is incorrect. I am NOT searching for "audiophile nirvana" because such a thing does not exist. I am searching for a bunch of cool looking gear that rocks and makes the sounds I wanna hear and have fun in the process. I do not believe in any such thing as "the absolute sound", I only believe in "what sounds damn good". Some mysterious goo that you put on ICs doesn't seem to fall under that category as our tests showed. That is not to say nobody will hear a difference, all it means is that this stuff does extremely little to the sound in our opinion. I hope that more technical evidence comes out on this stuff.
Also, I do enjoy razzing the golden ears folks for it's own sake. Ya bring in some technical people, a little logic and making fun of audiophiles is like shooting fish in a barrel! :lol:
I will say though, that my experience is showing that the human brain is responsible for much of these things, and not their actual existence in the physical and\or electrical world.
-
No Jason, we just all hate you! :lol:
psssst...... Hey Josh........
TAKE A BITE OF THIS!!!!!!!!
(http://members.aol.com/nightdog35/images//smiley_fart.gif)
and just for safe measure
(http://members.aol.com/nightdog35/images//smiley_gun_shot.gif)
:P
-
Don't make me bring out spanky!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=251)
-
question is who's more crazy!!!!! :evil:
(http://members.aol.com/nightdog35/images/smiley_axe.gif)
-
You're the only looney one here, I just got the bigger toys.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=214)
-
Gotta Luv Free Entertainment :lol:
-
I owned the Bolder modded ART Di/O DAC and sent it in for the Mensa and Tubolator upgrade. I have never listened to a stock unit. Nor have I listened to a mensa without the tubolator application.
The effect of the mensa/tubolator upgrade on my system provided a more relaxed , natural presentation of the music. Decay of piano notes seem to fade just a little longer. you can hear the quick breath Norah Jones takes between phrases while singing, that little gulp for air.
Big band horns are much more dynamic while you can really hear the taughtness of a bow stroking a string.
There is also a soundstage that seems to extend and wrap around me during excellent recordings.
I would characterize the sound as if you went from watching a film with dim lights on in the theater with the previous version ( much better than a TV)
but now watching in a completely dark room with the mensa/ tubolator version.
How much of the difference is due to the mensa or tubolator I do not know.
I would reccomend getting the upgrade vs. the previous moded version.
Thanks,
Doc
-
I owned the Bolder modded ART Di/O DAC and sent it in for the Mensa and Tubolator upgrade. I have never listened to a stock unit. Nor have I listened to a mensa without the tubolator application.
May I ask why you decided to modify the unit without hearing a stock version first?
The effect of the mensa/tubolator upgrade on my system provided a more relaxed , natural presentation of the music. Decay of piano notes seem to fade just a little longer. you can hear the quick breath Norah Jones takes between phrases while singing, that little gulp for air. Big band horns are much more dynamic while you can really hear the taughtness of a bow stroking a string.
So none of these things you heard before? If Norah Jones is taking breaths whilst singing (as singers are wont to do :wink:) then it's because that stuff is on the recording. I highly doubt the Tube-O-Lator had anything to do with it. Perhaps you yourself felt more relaxed when you listened to this song? Unless the Mensa modification turns off a compressor\limiter that was otherwise enabled somewhere in the chips it cannot make piano notes decay longer, nor make bow strings 'tauter', nor horns more dynamic; but I can certainly see how one would hear those things if they were consciously listening for them and enjoying the musical content. I thought I heard things too with this stuff, but they were not there.
There is also a soundstage that seems to extend and wrap around me during excellent recordings.
Again, was this not heard before? You've established that a recording was "excellent" before any help from the DIO, correct?
I would characterize the sound as if you went from watching a film with dim lights on in the theater with the previous version ( much better than a TV) but now watching in a completely dark room with the mensa/ tubolator version.
I would imagine you would have a better experience if you actually did dim the room lights. It's a mood thing; it works for me too! :)
How much of the difference is due to the mensa or tubolator I do not know.
But apparently it was worth $200 sight unseen? :?
I would reccomend getting the upgrade vs. the previous moded version.
Hmmm...I wonder who is more the witchdoctor, you or Bolder Cables? I know the latter does have skills in voodoo magic! :mrgreen:
I'm really glad you like your system WD, and I'm sure Bolder will be enjoying upgrading theirs as well with your money.
-
While getting the Tube-O-later mod without hearing the unmodded would give one no frame of reference for how it affects the sound, it does make sense in one way to order it that way in the first place as opposed to shipping it back to have it done later. It's bound to be cheaper than an extra circuit of shipping. Besides, it doesn't cost that much, and I doubt it could hurt the sound. :wink:
-
I'm really glad you like your system WD, and I'm sure Bolder will be enjoying upgrading theirs as well with your money.
ooooh ...now you've done it! hahahaha you kill me nate :!:
:nono:
-
So none of these things you heard before? If Norah Jones is taking breaths whilst singing (as singers are wont to do :wink:) then it's because that stuff is on the recording. I highly doubt the Tube-O-Lator had anything to do with it. Perhaps you yourself felt more relaxed when you listened to this song? Unless the Mensa modification turns off a compressor\limiter that was otherwise enabled somewhere in the chips it cannot make piano notes decay longer, nor make bow strings 'tauter', nor horns more dynamic; but I can certainly see how one would hear those things if they were consciously listening for them and enjoying the musical content. I thought I heard things too with this stuff, but they were not there.
I'm really glad you like your system WD, and I'm sure Bolder will be enjoying upgrading theirs as well with your money.
Nathan,
Its a no-brainer that better parts from the Mensa upgrade have the potential to help the DI/O do a better job of reproducing what is on the recording.
Just because you don't hear something doesn't mean it isn't there. People who hear differences when comparing components aren't necessarily deluded. And they aren't necessarily straining to hear the differences.
Do you resent that Wayne makes a profit? What do you do for a living? Do you have a right to have any money to spend on audio? Let us know - we'll decide for you.
-
The things Nate writes might be provacative and interesting if I hadn't heard it all before. . .
Be glad you don't hear a difference, it will save you money. Focus your energy on the things that you do hear a difference with (speakers might be a good start).
-
Thank you for your reply to my post.
I first decided to buy the upgraded unit without comparing to a stock unit because of:
A) a review posted on Audio Asylum
B) it was part of a system that won an award at CES
C) I had 30 days to return it,
D) I was to impatient to receive the unit , listen, send it to Wayne, listen, and then decide.
I agree that some of Norah Jones breaths are louder and I could hear some of them before my upgrade. I now hear breaths during certain phrases which were not as clear before. I offered this comparison to highlight that I found this upgrade to be more revealing with sounds that are very soft.
I do indeed hope that Bolder makes a profit from my purchase. If they use it to upgrade something in their system it is a reward for the fruits of their labor, just as my enjoyment of this DAC is a reward from the fruits of my labor.
If I felt I was disappointed I would promptly ask for my money back to get some other DAC. Thus I feel my reccomendation to readers of my post is sound. If their system does get the same results a refund is available from Bolder.
-
That last sentence should say if their system does NOT get the same results a refund is available from Bolder.
-
What's your system?CDP-AMP-Pre-Spkrs.?
TIA
-
Sorry for the ommission:
System -
HTPC > GW Labs DSP Upsampler > ART Di/O DAC modded by Bolder Cable>
Sunfire TG 3 > Paradigm Active 40 speakers
PC- various Virtual Dynamics Cables
PLC- Monster HTPS 7000 , cryoed wall receptacle
-
I have no experience with the MENSA, but I do with the sMart DIO.
I had a stock unit, which I sent to Wayne.
I bought another as a "stand-bye" unit to use while Unit A was being modified by Wayne.
When Unit A came back, I A/B tested it.
My audience were all non-audiophiles, but are classical musicians.
All of them could tell that the sMart DIO had less sibiliance, less glare, and more detailed, and better defined bass. In short, better separation of the instruments, as well as soundstage.
The decay of the notes on the piano was more realistic. (I play the piano).
Now, of course it CANNOT be compared to being alone in a concert hall playing a Steinway & Sons grand, but then again, I have yet to hear a system in my life that can fool me between the reproduced and the real & 'live.' javascript:emoticon(':lol:')
But I digress.
The following are a list of my stereo set up while doing the A/B test for my friends:
Modified Harman Kardon HD710 CDP [Used as Transport 1]
Stock CAL Delta Transport [Used as Transport 2]
Bolder Digital Cable with Canare RCA ends [Used as IC 1]
Monster Cable Digital Link 100 Digital Cable [Used as IC 2]
Monster Cable Sigma Retro IC [From DAC to pre-amplifier]
Aspen TLP/Nirvana Tube-pre-amplifier
2 pairs of 1m Monster Cable Sigma 2000 Interconnects (IC)
Harman Kardon Signature Series 2.1 5-channel power amplifier
2 pairs of 10' Monster Cable Sigma 2000 Speaker Cables
Mission 753 Freedoms Speakers.
Room treated with Michael Green Corner Tunes.
Large 2" thick Gabbeh wool rug hung between 2 speakers.
The Bolder Digital Cables clearly beat the pants off the Monster Digital Cable in a separate A/B test.
Then, I brought BOTH ART DIO units over to my friend's place.
He and his roommate too concurred with the impressions of my musician friends.
His set up:
Stock Marantz 63SE [Used as Transport]
Bolder Digital Cable with Eichmann connectors
Kimber Kables Hero [IC from DAC to pre-amp]
Audible Illusions Modulas L1 Tube-pre-amplifier
Kimber Kables Hero [IC from pre-amp to amp]
Pass Labs Aleph 3 Pure Class A Power Amplifier [Always on - important since it takes 24 hours to fully warm up (Nelson Pass's own words)]
Kimber Kable bi-wire shot-gunned Hero Speaker Cables
B&W 805 Matrix
Room Treated with 4 giant Jon Risch Acoustic Panels (3' by 5' !!!)
In short, according to at least 11 people, 9 who are skilled in instruments, all of them detected clear differences between the ART DIO and the Bolder Cable modified sMart DIO.
I do not think, for a moment, that Wayne sells snake oil. javascript:emoticon(':nono:')
Far from it. I think he does a great job, and prices his work reasonably.
Soldering and desoldering components is a royal pain.
I had friends ask me to modify their stereos with better components but I almost always decline because (A) their other components are not good enough in resolution to warrant the expenditure, and (B) you can't pay me enough to slave over your mid-fi unit with a desolderer and soldering iron.
If anyone thinks Wayne charges much, do a search for other companies on the web that does modifications, and you will discover just how much value you are getting with Wayne. [Hope this does not lead to a price-increase from Wayne javascript:emoticon(':mrgreen:')]
I am in no way "bosom-buddies" with Wayne.
I do not know him personally.
I'm just a very satisifed customer of Bolder Cables.
I am known for calling it as it is (read my other posts on Audiogon/Harmonic Discord & here).
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
benny
---
Look, one says to oneself, look how cold the world is growing. Some more years will pass, and after them will come gloomy solitude; then will come old age trembling on its crutch, and after it misery and desolation. Your fantastic world will grow pale, your dreams will fade and die and will fall like yellow leaves from the trees... (White Nights, Feodor Dostoevsky) :mrgreen: :lol:
-
Its a no-brainer that better parts from the Mensa upgrade have the potential to help the DI/O do a better job of reproducing what is on the recording.
That may be true, I haven't heard the Mensa mods. I did not address the Mensa mods, I only addressed the Tube-O-Lator mods. I would hope and expect that the hardware modifications are indeed doing something and making a measureable difference. I don't however think the Tube-O-Lator stuff does anything meaningful for the listener.
Just because you don't hear something doesn't mean it isn't there. People who hear differences when comparing components aren't necessarily deluded. And they aren't necessarily straining to hear the differences.
True, but in this case my test showed that it wasn't. I thought one sounded smoother and that the soundstage was different, but I heard the same unit twice. So yes, I was deluding myself. And delusions that people are eager to spend money on seems like a disservice to anyone. We WERE straining to hear differences and the ones we heard were within the range of 'slim to none'. I think that perhaps doesn't make a very good case for the product.
Do you resent that Wayne makes a profit? What do you do for a living? Do you have a right to have any money to spend on audio? Let us know - we'll decide for you.
Jealous of Wayne making a profit? Uh, no. If you must know I help publish model railroading catalogs by handling all the images; scanning, color correction, file processing etc. Not unlike audio, model railroading is the art of making illusions of reality. But I've never seen any marketspeak in that hobby as out-of-whack as in audio. Also, digital imaging is also very much like audio. The results of both can be measured and likewise the human brain can decide which version is more pleasing out of two very different images irrelevant of measurements. You can also fool someone into thinking there is a change when there really isn't by changing outside factors such as ambient lighting and surrounding colors. But I have yet to see anyone presented with two identical proofs and pick one or the other. I personally feel the eye is more sensitive than the ear.
It's wonderful that there's a return policy. But how can you undo the Tube-O-Lator mod? You can't as far as I know. Personally I hope they sell hundreds and hundreds of Tube-O-Lator mods. It's certainly cheaper than swapping all sorts of tiny parts out, and apparently, the most bang-for-the-buck improvement.
I still want someone to address the piss-poor ESD issues this thing has. What's up with that?
-
Has anyone compared Tubelator to nail polish or regular laquer paint? I'm not sure if I could hear the difference between a Tubelator treated machine and one without, but if I could, I wonder if regular nail polish would have the same effect? I could just see "audiophiles" claiming different colors having different sonic characteristics. "Ruby Red" is great for jazz but too "hot" for some early digital recordings..."Beaver Brown" (is that a color) is perfect to warm up some bright recordings..."Clear" is recommended for people who like a pure and uncolored sound...
On an unrelated note, has anyone watched the Penn and Teller show on Cable? It's very funny. They totally debunked the who bottled water scam. Sorry to hijack this thread. Just came to mind...
Jman
-
Perhaps "Hi-Jackman" would be a better moniker? :P Kidding... Don't fret it, we could all use a little hijacking from time to time. Hijacking the train headed towards the Land Of Mystery and Magic. The sad thing about your nail polish joke is that it isn't all that far from the truth! People do these things! Mebbe yust read past posts in this thread... Hey, tweaks are cool, they do no harm even if they make absolutely no sense. If folks wanna paint their speaker cabinet orange and say it sounds "warmer" be my guest! Put drink cups under your cables - have at it! Keep giving me more material! But as far as painting some chips on a board and selling it as a commerical product and claiming it will make the circuits sound more "musical", that I have issues with. Sure, it's ONLY 50 bucks, but so what? Still 50 bucks for nothing! I think vendors should be held more accountable that's all.
What we really need to figure out is how to get the placebo effect without expensive placebos! :D Heh!
-
I suppose one might as well also argue that reviewers should also be held accountable :roll: After all, a single listening test doesn't prove anything, it's just a data point.
Hopefully, there'll be other comparisons that are less contentious.
-
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:04 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose one might as well also argue that reviewers should also be held accountable After all, a single listening test doesn't prove anything, it's just a data point.
Hopefully, there'll be other comparisons that are less contentious.
John, I don't disagree with your statement, but when was the last time you read a review that took place over an extended period? It seems that only the negative reviews are the ones in which people contest methodology. Can't people just state their opinions without being attacked? I also must commend Wayne for not getting into the fray and joining the fun. There are many people (and manufacturers) who do not have his class.
J
-
Geez,if Nate was a pro reviewer I think castration would be sufficient.My speaker's were given a real shitty review by Dick Olsher in Stereophile that almost singularly destroyed Bill Kieltyka's Co. in the marketplace.He even asked to go out to AZ. from ME, to see what the problem was ,but he.Dick Olsher, would not have it. :finger:
They were criticaly acclaimed in other articles and were used as a reference by edititors of other mags.
There is another big disscussion going on at present over Bybee Filter's at Madison & AA BB's which were acclaimed by El Dicko also. :duel:
:flak:
It comes down to how critical your system is in my opinion,esp. your speakers.I think of myself as a purist and I think my system reflects that.Anything that colors the sound is out :wave: .
-
I could see why you'd want to hold a commercial mfgr or professional magazine reviewer "acountable", but applying that to a guy just voicing his personal opinion gives me the creeps. Just how would we "hold him acountable"? Sue him if we didn't like his opinion? We could ask for our money back; oh, wait, his opinion is free!
Castration for diagreeing with the crowd? :o Yikes! That seems a little harsh. Guess conformity would be the order of the day, then.
Such a tempest in a teakettle. I'm really shocked that a guy saying the Emporor is naked would get burned at the stake and criticized with such ferocity. Surely no one is that insecure as to be so threatened by one persons opinion?
I can't fathom what topic wouldn't be contentious given the hornets nest this has stirred up.
BTW, I have no idea whether the Tube-O-Lator has any value or not, as I haven't even had the chance to audition a DI/O yet. But I commend Nate for sticking to his guns and standing by his opinion. After all, could I respect a guy that gets bullied into recanting just to please the herd?
-
Can't people just state their opinions without being attacked?
Yes, I think that's exactly my point. In both directions.
Rob, if you are responding to my post, you missed the point completely.
JohnR
-
Guess I must have missed the post where Nate jumped peoples shit. He may have, but the bulk of the posts here are mobbing him for having the nerve to disagree, or at least this is how it looks. If it was me, after about the 7th page of having my hearing, system, methodology, et al attacked, I'd probably start hitting back.
I thought, John, that your insinuation was that we should stick to "safer" topics for review. If I "missed the point" or misunderstood you, then please feel free to correct me. As for your quote of Jman, that pretty much sums up my feelings, and my post as well. You must have missed that part. I just get frustrated by crap like this. I think it's a hundred percent truth that had he claimed it was the skeeter's peter, he'd have got a hearty pat on the back for his "well thought out review."
What I'm getting at is that I don't always agree with the prevailing opinions myself, but hopefully I can allow someone to hold an opinion contrary to my own without attacking them. I know that I don't always live up to my ideals, either, and everyong gets carried away sometimes.
Surely though we have some common ground here, don't we? Can we agree that his review doesn't actually warrant castration? :wink: I got your back, Nate!
Hell, if everyone prefers arguments to discussions, by all means carry on! I won't intrude upon your fun! 8)
-
Oh, I think the part I was responding to you as responding to me was actually you responding to ABEX, who may have been responding to me... or perhaps not.
:-P
My point, when I said:
I suppose one might as well also argue that reviewers should also be held accountable :roll:
is that I think the suggestion that vendors be held "accountable" is equally ludicrous. Kudos to nathanm for actually taking the time to do the comparison; now we all have one data point that says that no difference was detectable by nathanm on a unmodded DIO. We *also* have a data point (Pez, Tyson et al) that says that they did detect a difference on a highly modded DIO. And that's about IT. Anyone that really wants to know will have to try it for themselves, or wait for additional comparisons... not that anyone is likely to feel inclined to report it after this...
JohnR
-
Well I for one am not trying to jump his shit!
I think it is good to find a discerting view as some will be careful when concidering throwing $$ at something that might not be what they expect as for improvement.Audio is a very expensive and adicting hobby like computing.I cannot see buying things which I will not need when the $$ can be better spent someplace elsewhere ,where the improvement can be more marked or substantial.
If your system is not up to subtle changes and your hearing is impaired then it might be worth putting your $$ someplace other than this tweek.
Geez,I do not like spending $$ on any tweek I can build myself with little time,effort,meterial and cost.
JMO
-
Rob--The point was to be taken literally as to what can happen when reviewers step on a good component .The manf. had asked to come to see what might be the problem and was shutout which with the Stereophile's following can almost destroy a young Co..Which to a large account it did.Even after the article there were bad mentionings of N.E.A.R when being mentioned in the Phile.Very BIASed and unprofessional reporting!
In the case of Nate he had a differing experience.Simple as that.That is not to say it is not a worthwile tweek as some here have attested to by their comments.
I will probably get the tweek when I send mine back to be updated ,but because I think it will slightly enhance my CD playback.I think my system and speakers are sensitive enough to hear a difference,but I will never know if it is marked.
JMO
-
FYI you can buy the exact same DIO I heard. Just check the Trading Post! Listen to it compared to a stock one and see what you hear. Tell me I don't know what I'm talking about! Heck I may sell the stock one too; I can't get my SBLive card to talk to it anyway. Grrr.
It deserves a home in a more revealing system don't ya think? :wink:
-
hey nate,
i tink yer system is revealing enuff to show whether or not there are any differneces in the tube-o-lator or not. all except for the di/o itself. :wink:
as i mentioned before, i tink this kinda tweak would likely be more noticable in a fully modded di/o. i say this based upon my experiences w/my own di/o, which i modded in stages, as i read the latest-n-greatest stuff on the yahoo diomods site.
one of my last tweaks was to switch out already-modded holco reisitors w/riken ohms. the differences were similar to what was discussed re: the tube-o-lator mod here - ever-so-slight smoothing, & ever-so-slight increase in detail.
one of the sources i used to evaluate my di/o mods is a hawaiian slack-key guitar compilation; of which many of the recordings are wery closely mike'd. the sounds of the musicians' breath, moving around in their chair, etc, became ever so slightly more apparent, as the mods progressed. at 1st, w/a stock di/o, it was not really identifiable - yust sounded like analog hiss from the a-to-d transfer. i am not sure if only adding riken-ohm resistors to a totally stock di/o, would have been able to be discernable, tho it was when *i* did it, as it had already achieved a high state of resolving power...
ymmv,
doug s.
btw, ya owe it to yerself to listen to a modded di/o in yer system - it's a *lot* nicer than the none-too-shabby stock iteration... try it preferably w/an upgraded p/s, & separate isolation x-formers for dac & transport. try *any* dac-transport combo w/separate isolation trannies, imo...
-
I know this type of topic can get outta hand, and I sure don't mean to throw gas on the fire. On one hand the controversy is amusing, but this type of thing happens with too great a degree of regularity. Can't we all just get along? :P
JohnR, I agree, it's just Nate vs a few AC/HD longtimers. One can read their opinions and still be free to form ones own.
Without rehashing the whole last 10 pages, I guess the thing it boils down to is that there are some "sacred cows" that seem to bring down the wrath of the powers-that-be any time someone challenges them. Granted, being a dick about it also brings down the ire of those products supporters, too! 8) Being the warped guy I am, I admit to getting a kick out of seeing people get their panties in a twist: I think baseless assertions should be scrutinized. Hell, assertions with some base should be able to survive scrutiny too!
Alright, this post has been pretty interesting, but I can see I won't be of any help as the voice of reason! 8) I guess I'll just sit and wait for the next time Nathman stirs up trouble! :P
-
The point is NOT that differing opinions is wrong - that is a dangerous and misleading conclusion that would ultimately make this forum less valuable to all of us.
The point is that any review is a data point, not a conclusive fact on the performance of a product. Just because you don't hear a change doesn't necessarily mean that a product is snake oil and that anyone who hears something is deluded. At the same time, as Nathan pointed out, just because you do hear a difference doesn't necessarily mean that a product is better or that it will be an improvement in other people's systems.
I think that if we keep in mind that there are limitations to our ability to make conclusive observations of the performance of a component/tweak and post accordingly then we will all be able to get along more smoothly.
Cheers,
- Jay
-
I finally persuaded my EE friend Mark to comment on the DI/O listening test. Here's what he sent me:
A couple weeks ago I recieved an email from Nathan showing this stuff called "Tube-o-lator." I found it so amusing I quickly passed it around to various Electrical Engineers in my group. We all got a hearty chuckle and life went on. What surprised me was the number of positive responses to this stuff. I could not believe it. Nathan then took the challenge. He was graciously allowed to test the stuff. I respect the company for allowing Nathan to run this test. I expressed that if any difference was actually heard it would be due not to the goop but to some other variable in the system (ie: EMI).
Well the evening came about that we could run our tests and Nathan swore that we had to follow all the suggestions made on Audiocircle - even though I protested. To no surprise - the goop - did not pass the blind test. Steve and Nathan were unable to detect any difference between the two DIO's. The test from an electrical standpoint followed all of audiocircles suggestions ( minus the change in components ). I will admit - I lost it - I went on a rant.
I work in the Industrial controls and communications design business. I have designed many devices and have had to test those devices for emissions and susceptibility. The environment in which these devices work in could be considered electrically - an ugly place. We deal with hundreds to thousands of Amps passing over, around and through our devices. One of my current projects uses a 16 bit High speed AtoD attached to a 150Mips TI DSP. The DSP is doing Fourier transforms on the incoming signal in order to detect various electrical disturbances in the power waveform. With no high voltage applied we measure around 1 to 2 bits of noise coming from the AtoD. Our group has spent a good deal of time getting to this level of noise output. We have done things like routing our ground planes around our voltage regulators, eliminating long lead lengths, keeping traces as short as possible, eliminating loop areas, isolating digital circuitry from analog circuitry, attaching bypass caps etc. Now - if we could apply some goop to our chips to get us another bit of resolution, we would buy the company/"patent"/whatever and load it in 55 gallon drums. Then we would sell it to TI or whomever else needs better resolution.
I wanted to offer some interesting viewpoints on the DIO. Now I am by no means an audio engineer - I just know what works from an electrical standpoint. My first introduction to the DIO was in Nathans room. He showed me how the sound cut out when he moved around the room and got up and down from a chair (more than likely, static). We took apart the DIO so I could see what was inside. The first thing that amazed me was all the through-hole resistors STANDING ON END. Little antennas sitting on the board. If you are wierded up about goop then you should also be wierded up about all those loop areas. And as far as the ESD ( Electro Static Discharge ) - I am amazed at the effort put into the susceptibility portion of the product. If there is a simple fault like that - what does it say about the sound coming out of it? Conducted static shots I could understand for this type of device - but the susceptibility through air is kind of strange. Now I should be careful and point out that I am not sure who is responsible - the DIO or the CD player - but I believe the CD player worked fine without the DIO. When the DIO entered the equation - the problem arose.
Regarding the Tube-o-lator - The sad fact is that this snake oil is just that. If you think it makes you feel better in some fashion or another - I am very happy for you. Hopefully people will make more intelligent decisions on where to spend their money ( ie: better components - not crazy wires/goop ). And if you continue to spend your money on such things - then at least you do it with the knowledge that what you buy may not provide what was advertised. Knowledge is power - especially when it comes to us consumers.
Enjoy,
Mark
-
I'm guessing that:
a) Nathan manufactured the letter. (Although the use of the word "Fourier" implies a collaboration with someone else.)
b) No matter how much we all want this thread to die, Nathan finds ways to get it to the top of the list and "a" above was the only thing he could think of
c) Nathan is trying to drive the price of the DI/O down by using his EE "friend" to say how crappy it is made. After driving the price down he can justify buying another one and the tube-o-lator for the same total outlay as the currently priced DI/O
d) All of the above
-
Does not surprise me about the EE outcome.People that are not as anal about audio or have not lived with the system under test are not going to notice a diff in alot of cicumstances.Some people say they can hear down to 16Hz.A friend of mine is a radar tech and has better hearing then me on record,but when it comes music and equiptment I am more sensitive then he is.I think as time goes by you can become more observant to changes in systems then other's.I get blown away when I go to some salon's and the people that set them up cannot setup Subs correctly. :lol:
Now that is Nathan's experience and maybe there was not diff in his system and that is fine.All things cannot be measuremented also.
Does your EE friend hear differences in cables?I am not trying to piss him off or doubt his ability ,but there are those who for whatever reason are not as sensitive to changes in audio.Believe it or not some are renouned reviewers.
:roll:
Just a few thoughts! :wink:
-
How about e) None of the above. If I wanted to manufacture a post, I guarantee you it would be much funnier than what Mark said!
I'm guessing that:
a) Nathan manufactured the letter. (Although the use of the word "Fourier" implies a collaboration with someone else.)
Boy, I hope you're not implying that I don't know what "Fourier" means! Cause I assure you, I do! A Fourier is a kind of measuremented.
b) No matter how much we all want this thread to die, Nathan finds ways to get it to the top of the list and "a" above was the only thing he could think of
I am merely following up on what I said I would do earlier in the thread, nothing more. Granted, with a long delay - but he's been busy with other stuff.
The point is this: if an industry with electrical needs an order of magnitude greater than those in audio thinks such magical lacquer has no benefit then doesn't that doesn't say much for the validity of such a product? I know this might be shocking, but when it comes to electronics I like to run things by people that actually know this stuff. To me it's mostly a mystery. If I am going to spend money on something that's supposed to make my stereo sound better I'd like to know said tweak has some technical merit. Mark's post is also showing that the treatment is ignoring a larger problem in the unit, which is poor ESD tolerance. Precisely the reason I asked him about it in the first place.
-
If I wanted to manufacture a post, I guarantee you it would be much funnier than what Mark said!
I'll buy that! :lol:
Fourier was a French mathematician. He realized that any (well, almost any) periodic waveform can be represented as an infinite sum of sinusoidal waveforms. A Fourier transform is what is used to produce the equivalent (more or less) frequency-domain representation of a signal.
-
To manufacture such a letter seems beyond me.It would be sad and I do not buy that theory. :cry:
I think if anything it might bug him to the point he asked for his friend to make a statement to give validation to what he himself heard and further prove that his opinion was on the level.
If he stood to gain anything I think he would have reversed his findings.What does he stand to gain from this anyways ,but to align alot of Waynes follower's against him which would not make for a pleasent posting experience.
:nono:
JMO
-
Guys, there's no hidden agenda here other than separating fantasy from reality and debunking corny tweaks. It's got nothing to do with Wayne and his "followers", but everything to do with the illogical practice of throwing one's money at things which are most likely incapable of doing what they are advertised to do. That's all. The Tube-O-Lator was a very easy target you've gotta admit! :P Go to that webpage and read the claims of what Tube-O-Lator does for ya, it's a hoot.
Believe me, Mark and his pals are far more skeptical about esoteric audiophile tweaks than I am. I'm just the conduit between the world of hifi magic and of engineering. All I do is pass this stuff along to those guys and see what happens.
Also, I'm not looking for validation of what I heard. Mark didn't even listen to the thing, he was doing the switching of gear. But I did want the opinion of someone who knows electronics.
Allright, I'm done with this topic as I'm sure you'll all be glad to hear. :P I hope someone who works at Applied Research & Technology somehow found this site and is having a healthy gut laugh right now.
-
Hey Nathan,
I for one, appreciate your dilligence in trying to separate fact from fiction and reality from fantasy.
I haven't had a chance to folllow this entire thread, but have read the last two pages. You are lucky to have friends with such expertise. I think more clear minds and level heads are needed to keep the snake oil in check.
At the same time, I will not accept everything the EE's state as gospel. I think it's possible that they may look at an audiophile device with a predisposition of skepticism, which in turn may color their personal observations that will lead to conclusions supporting their skepticism. They rely on verifiable and measureable data, and if it can't be measured it cannot exist. Unfortunately, this does not always correspond to what the human ear and brain are capable of.
But I have to admit, when I visited the Tube-o-lator website, it sure raises lots of red flags about authenticity.
I love the phrase, "overtone spectrum". What in the hell is that? Is that for real?
-
Well there are other's that say similar tweeks work for whatever reasons.
One is putting Superglue on a chip.
http://www.audiotweaks.com/tweaks/tweak_255.htm
Thats not to say there is any validity in the tweek.
-
"overtone spectrum"
When you are listening to music yell at the top of your lungs and maybe that is Overtone Spectrum! :lol:
-
To manufacture such a letter seems beyond me.It would be sad and I do not buy that theory.
I think if anything it might bug him to the point he asked for his friend to make a statement to give validation to what he himself heard and further prove that his opinion was on the level.
If he stood to gain anything I think he would have reversed his findings.What does he stand to gain from this anyways ,but to align alot of Waynes follower's against him which would not make for a pleasent posting experience.
JMO
Guys, Guys, Guys
I WAS KIDDING. MY POST WAS A JOKE.
If I wanted to manufacture a post, I guarantee you it would be much funnier than what Mark said!
No question about that. If there's one thing about Nathans posts, it's that they are much funnier than that one.
-
Alrighty! 8)