[Dan Banquer]

As a rule I generally don't post in manufacturers forums nor do I post much at all these days. However this thread caught my attention and I decided to respond. I strongly suspect that this is another version of grounding problems as most folks will ground to the chassis at many different points and this will generally cause added noise as ground currents are not proceeding directly to their return. The non conductive chassis prevents that and in a partial sense avoids that issue.
Below is a post from years back that still appears to apply.
d.b.
P.S. Hugh; If you think this inappropriate for your forum and this discussion, please feel free to delete it.


GROUNDING PRACTICES IN CONSUMER AUDIO

As many of us have observed over the years grounding practices in consumer audio have for many of us been a frustrating experience. Compatibility/Synergy are consistently major issues, as well as safety, reducing ground loops, noise and interference. Designers are equally frustrated by this problem. Some of us wish it would go away and others attempt to deal with as best as we know how. There does not appear to be much of any standardization that I, and many others are aware of. Many of us who work in the electronics industry outside of audio who have observed the posts from audiophiles, designers and dealers scratch our heads in near disbelief.
The following is not only an outline for reducing these problems, but a wake up call to this end of the industry. The following is for the application to consumer unbalanced audio, and could well be a possible outline for positive discussion and direction. It is also a way to use Earth Ground to our advantage instead of a problem.
Chassis Grounding:
The following is a technique used in instrumentation for low frequency applications.
The chassis will be earth grounded via the earth ground at the three-prong outlet. The audio signal ground contained in the chassis is not connected to the chassis ground. This will require the design to be electrically isolated from the chassis ground which is easily solved by using nylon stand offs to mount pc boards and isolated bulkhead RCA jacks. (I am going to break this rule later on but bear with me for the moment). The above forces the design to be star grounded at the return of the power supply, which is always good practice to reduce noise and ground loops. However, this does leave the present configuration susceptible to interference from the inputs. This interference can be reduced by the using a simple common mode ac line filter at the AC input and using either a well shielded coax or microphone cable at the line level input. This configuration also poses an additional problem due the fact that we now have two different grounds with two different potentials. In the past I have observed this problem when using a certain brand of rotary switch for a volume control. The rotary switch was not well isolated internally and had enough of a leakage current so that noise was developed when it was used. Moving to a different vendor with higher isolation devices corrected the problem. I have not observed any problem with standard switches for on off applications or anything similar.
I have applied this technique to basic audio chain of equipment consisting of an outboard DAC, line level pre amp, and power amps using the chassis and grounding design I outlined above. The transport that I presently use is a modified consumer device and is equipped with a two-prong plug. The system also has an FM tuner and an old pre amp that is used as a phono pre amp. Both of these devices are standard consumer issue with a two-prong plug. I have observed no compatibility issues with the older style units.
As I outlined earlier I am going to break this rule at one point. The line level pre amp now has a connection from the return of the line stage pre amp power supply to the chassis of the unit. I have now connected earth ground to the analog “center point of the system.” This did not cause a ground loop at all, and to be more precise, for CD playback the inherent ground loops that are typical for unbalanced circuitry simply disappeared. The FM tuner and the old pre amp appear to be unaffected by the center point earth ground. A welcome addition was that the rotary switch that had a leakage problem because of the two different potential levels described earlier no longer had the problem due to center point earth ground.
The use of the system center point earth ground for low frequency applications has been in the textbooks for at least 30 some odd years and has been applied to other low frequency applications. Applied at this level to a simple chain of audio playback equipment. CD playback now has reduced hum and hiss to levels more akin to balanced design than unbalanced design. Playback of FM tuner and Phono pre amp remains unaffected.
One thing that has surprised me relates to the issue of low frequency applications. I was expecting to find problems with the digital portion of this playback chain. I have not found one to date but I think this needs to be investigated further when time allows.
A note to all of the tweakers who read this: I am not recommending any changes to existing designs; in fact I would discourage it.
To DIY folks: You may wish to rethink some of your present chassis/grounding schemes.
To the rest of the industry; this is a subject that not only deserves discussion but an active participation to reach acceptable standards.
The grounding system described above will not address the problem of toroidal transformers mechanically vibrating due to either DC on the AC lines or as I have observed on occasion, low frequency oscillations.
Dan Banquer
R.E. Designs

[Russell Dawkins]

andyr,

Peter Qvortrup is the man involved with the British arm of Audionote.

The man I referred to was Hiroyasu Hondo, a very forward-looking man making exemplary moving coil cartrideges since 1978 and silver wire ICs for the last 25 years at least.

http://www.audionote.co.jp/index_e.html

He died in January 2006 at the T.H.E. show in las Vegas.

http://www.audioevidence.com/cgi-bin/news/newsscript.pl?record=25

[gooberdude]

In terms of the notion of wire cry, or vibration along wires...that's absolutely true for power cables but i've not read or heard about it in terms of hookup wire.


A good friend engineers large AC current installations for factories and puts huge collars on the power lines that come into the facilities, even constructs concrete platforms to bolt the collars to (8" diam power cables!).    He claims that without the beefed up measures the cable would swing wildly like a firehose & kill everyone around.

I figure current in general vibrates, right?    AC is difft than DC too in this regard, probably, no?   crazy that it would affect such small components.     But then again, that's what has put Mapleshade on the map, and from what i gather its these internal vibes (inherent to the operation of our gear) that their tweaks and methods drain/control.

[AKSA]

Thanks Dan,

Much obliged, your comments make a lot of sense, and yes, it's very appropriate!!

Geoff,

I loved this:

Wood is the new black.....

This demonstrates quite a skill with the language, I loved it.  Try this one in reference to recent federal rumblings in NT:

'Black is the new Babies Overboard'  (A Hugh comment, deeply topical in Oz at present, with thanks to Geoff.)

Kyrill,

I relate very strongly to this comment from you:

Ok, but every perceptible improvement in high end is a victory, so i am very curious for every  improvement that i can hear, even the tiny ones

Strongly agree.  This is how a product of any technology matures.  All improvements are incremental.  In a field as highly competitive as high end, we can expect very small increments within the same technology.  Only when the technology changes substantially can we expect a giant leap in quality.

In my view there is plenty of room for improvement.  I've heard very few systems which truly recreate the actual sound field of a live performance.  They are a long way off as anyone with good audio memory and the wit to close his eyes when assessing a sound can tell you.

Then you say this:

As an academic researcher myself albeit in organizational studies, i have long long time ago lost my faith in the objectivity of most researchers and their institutions..for instance the complete non-objective presentations of research data to proof we humans warm up the climate

Man, did I love this one....  Talk about political incorrectness, go straight to the top of the class, Kyrill!!

"Man can never succeed in creating a social organism.  He can create only a social organisation, and that loosely configured and somewhat unstable, something which pales in comparison to the social organisms of the insect and animal world"   After Aldous Huxley, circa 1936.

Far and away the biggest influences on greenhouse emissions are volcanic eruptions and the attendant dust which blots out the sun.  And what of the four oceanic apoxic episodes which have occurred in the last 650 million years?  What caused them?  Is it not about time for another, and will not profligate emission of carbon become a problem which will solve itself as world oil reserves, already low, are depleted?

I viewed 'An Inconvenient Truth' recently and came away wondering why Al Gore did not highlight the whole of pre-history including all the ice ages, and not just the last couple of million years since the last one.  Hmmmm.......

Great discussion, love it, thanks Guys,

Cheers,

Hugh

[JLM]

All modern humans, but engineers and scientists in particular, are prone to address only what can be explained in scientific terms.  However engineers and scientists can hear, see, taste, etc. and can appreciate what is derived from those senses almost like a human (at least as an engineer, I think I can).    

[Seano]

I just build boxes out of wood because it's easier.........and prettier.  Now you're all telling me it's supposed to sound 'better'? Hmmmm.  What happens if we settle on 'different'?

As for the subjective/objective debate.....truth is rarely objective.......and, as such,there is rarely any such thing as 'objective' when it comes to science or electrical engineering.  Only the measurements are objective.  The analysis of those measurements, regardless of the field, are ALWAYS subjective........because the analyst always applies his or her interpretation.....and there is no such thing as an objective interpretation......it's always based on an opinion formed from a subjective examination of personal learning and experience. 

The most important thing is to remember that regardless of wether two answers to the same problem were arrived at via objective or subjective analysis............neither are necessarily wrong..........just different.

[jules]

To quote Hugh:

"Man can never succeed in creating a social organism.  He can create only a social organisation, and that loosely configured and somewhat unstable, something which pales in comparison to the social organisms of the insect and animal world"   After Aldous Huxley, circa 1936.

Far and away the biggest influences on greenhouse emissions are volcanic eruptions and the attendant dust which blots out the sun.  And what of the four oceanic apoxic episodes which have occurred in the last 650 million years?  What caused them?  Is it not about time for another, and will not profligate emission of carbon become a problem which will solve itself as world oil reserves, already low, are depleted?

I viewed 'An Inconvenient Truth' recently and came away wondering why Al Gore did not highlight the whole of pre-history including all the ice ages, and not just the last couple of million years since the last one.  Hmmmm.......

Ah so many issues Hugh  . In my youth I was something of a fan of the romantic Huxley type view that the animal kingdom somehow made human achievement "pale in comparison" but I think the knowledge we have gained since then has been somewhat leveling for both us and the animal kingdom. I'd also add that for all the admiration shown on paper by Huxley, that was an era when biologists showed scant respect for the animal kingdom in other ways and thought it quite ok to shoot rare animals in the greater interest of having a museum specimen for posterity.

As to the issue of Global Warming ... well that's very OT isn't it but the thing that strikes me about it, without expressing a view here, is that I can think of no time in history where there has been a need for the general populace to have a grasp of such a complex interactive nest of issues. Aside from CO 2 concentrations, ice age cycling, continental drift, pre-historical desertification and other changes in plant and animal life one of the fundamental matters here is that any reasonable argument has to be based on an understanding that 800 million years of history is a reality. There are of course, many people who believe that the world has only been around for a few thousand  years and many, many more people who might accept that the world has been here for more than 800 million years but still find difficulty in grasping how vast that timescale is.

And on wood ... yeah, stuff the science, if it looks better it sounds better, right  !!

jules   

[kyrill]

Seano:  Now you're all telling me it's supposed to sound 'better'? Hmmmm.  What happens if we settle on 'different'?

Jules: And on wood ... yeah, stuff the science, if it looks better it sounds better, right  Wink !!

Gentlemen gentlemen

If i could afford it i would give you a record of a Sibelius violin concert conducted with shiny aluminum violins. They look so beautiful
or a Beethovens piano concert with a gorgeous polished steel piano

and if you like them both why not a concert of steel piano and aluminum or plastic violins together?

There is still truth in the old saying:  "Bring wood*  to be a trumpet and angles sing
ask iron to try a violin and heaven cries.."     

*reason why paper based speaker cones still sound most natural

[Johnny]

Great topic!
As one who prefers to make things of wood, I'm thrilled to have an excuse to avoid metal chassis work!

OT, sorry, but I just can't let this one go...

I viewed 'An Inconvenient Truth' recently and came away wondering why Al Gore did not highlight the whole of pre-history including all the ice ages, and not just the last couple of million years since the last one.  Hmmmm.......

Ummm 

Could it be because the issue being considered is not the whole of Earth history, but that anthropogenic sources have increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere in the last 100 y at a rate that is unprecedented (by orders of magnitude) in the Quaternary and well beyond, and the fact that, unlike the last 800 my, there are now billions of human beings on this Earth, most of them poor and otherwise vulnerable, who will be severely impacted by even modest perturbations to average climactic conditions, resulting in serious repercussions for those of us more fortunate ones?

Earth history is not in question, indeed it informs the current research on climate change. If this point is not not being taken clearly by obviously intelligent people, then the climate scientists, and the likes of Al Gore, need to find a better way to present the data.

It is widely accepted (by climate scientists) that Earth and its biological systems will do just fine if we do nothing to attenuate the rate of CO2 increase. It will evolve and adapt to changing conditions just as it always has, but at what cost to the human race?

[Seano]

Kyrill, without putting words into Jules' mouth I suspect we were both thinking much the same thing.

A wooden doesn't necessarily sound better than a metal box.  It just sounds different.

'Better' is a value judgement. It's subjective.  Jules' comment re beauty has it nailed - if it looks better then it must be better.  This is something we all understand isn't always true but we are all victims regardless (Alfa Romeo comes to mind for some reason ). 

'Different' is my attempt at an objective judgement.

[kyrill]

Seano

I appreciate yr diplomatic "urge"to say it just sound different,
but a plastic or aluminum violin no matter how beautiful polished the aluminum is,will sound downright ugly  not different, an iron piano awful, a wooden trumpet, well eh different, probably like a strange flute..

Johny

no nooo iwill not be seduced in a scientific debate,  but the outcome will be that politicians under the influence of years of pressure from environmentalist groups, popular journalists and now public "opinion" find it suddenly opportunistic to belief that indeed we humans are guilty in warming up the earth. we dont, i am happy to say.
All models ( the co2 model) which indicate or worse "proof" otherwise are manipulated in their cause and effect relationships. Scientist actually institutions, want to proof what they want to belief and the human race has a big love for doom scenario's. objective scientists ( approx. 10% of the articles) have the courage  NOT to conform ( ape like characteristic) but pay the price to be neglected or being ridiculed ( no death penalty like in the medieval ages) even when in a simple way they show with data that THE model used to show our guild is wrongly applied.  All of this can be find in the internet in 6 minutes

Ah well we humans are a very interesting breed, but love for truth, as a society...we never had

plz notice i dont go into content, so i experience my reaction as a firm strong position not to take up the handkerchief and go into debate 

[Daygloworange]

hi Geoff

good thinking

But there is another player: mechanical resonance "
 pure mechanical resonance. The copper will resonate with the music in its "ownway"
Think of this
make two identical violins, one of wood and one of copper. which sounds the most musical? Scientifically this you cannot prove why one should sound more beautiful than the other. But the human ear has its "build in references" and these "references" mostly reflective -the ear wants to hear "itself"- prefer the wooden violin.


A copper enclosure will do the same but will introduce in the end  "copper sounding"  electical noise. How beautiful will be a copper sounding violin? But still better than an iron one and much better than an aluminum one and very better than a plastic violin , urgh..)

I appreciate yr diplomatic "urge"to say it just sound different,
but a plastic or aluminum violin no matter how beautiful polished the aluminum is,will sound downright ugly  not different, an iron piano awful, a wooden trumpet, well eh different, probably like a strange flute..

I think you're making a lot of assumptions here. Piano's have cast iron frames(that weigh several hundreds of pounds) that house a wooden sound board. There are carbon fiber/plastic resin violins that sound quite nice. Wooden trumpet? It wouldn't be practical.

You might want to reconsider. There are a lot of instruments that are being made with non traditional materials with great results. Don't take my word for it.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/Today/2003/12/06/278255.html

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/13/4/8

  YoYo- Ma   carbon fiber cello

http://www.luisandclark.com/testimonials.php

  Carl Palmer  cast alloy drums

http://www.paiste.com/news/viewnews.php?newsid=13

   Griffith composite active bracing system

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/toolkit/ss_04-e.html

  Carbon fiber drums

Carbon Fiber, aluminum, titamium, powdered metal, graphite, nylon reinforced plastics, phenolics are just some examples of non traditional materials that often exceed wood and other traditional materials in acoustic instruments.

Too many urban myths exist as to what an instrument needs to be made of, in order for it to be considered a seriously good instrument]

Cheers

[AKSA]

Sean,

I agree with your comment.  With apologies to Kyrill, I do think 'different' should be the new 'better'.  Given the obvious subjectivity of musical tastes, and it's music we listen to (I live in hope......), then there will be a diversity of tastes, and, correspondingly, a host of strongly felt opinions.

Wood makes us all feel better, we feel a kinship with objects which were once alive;  in my local business area there are three cafes within 25 yards of each other.  The decor is, alternately;  stainless steel, chrome and hard tiles;  marble, some wood decor, lots of glass;  and mostly timber decor, dark tones, leather, and swirly, organic floor coloring.

The built environment has much influence on our thinking, if only subliminally, so I favour the last.  The coffee is up to par in all three;  really, since I go there with friends for conversation, the decor, the so-called 'atmosphere', is more important.  I'm confident that these sorts of subconscious choices influence our musical tastes too.

John,

Thanks for your input, this post was seminal:

Could it be because the issue being considered is not the whole of Earth history, but that anthropogenic sources have increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere in the last 100 y at a rate that is unprecedented (by orders of magnitude) in the Quaternary and well beyond, and the fact that, unlike the last 800 my, there are now billions of human beings on this Earth, most of them poor and otherwise vulnerable, who will be severely impacted by even modest perturbations to average climactic conditions, resulting in serious repercussions for those of us more fortunate ones?

 

Agree unequivocally.  Did Gore put it that well?  I don't believe so.....  he obfuscated, and at times lost me with his ponderous, evangelical delivery.  I'd read recently his Tennessee mansion used 221,000 Kwh of electricity in 2006;  I run a household of four and use around 4000 a year, 55 times less.  Hmm, I hope this is not true, blows his cover I feel.

As for the billions who will be impacted, sadly this is so true, but viewed from Mother Earth's perspective, there are now simply too many people (people are to the planet what maggots are to the sheep!), and it's possible a correction is imminent......  Recently in the South East of Victoria, a large lakes area just inland of the sea was, after several years of crippling drought, inundated with torrential runoff from a northerly mountain range, and coastal towns were swamped, with an estimated 5 billion dollars of damage.  These extreme events, hitherto extremely rare in our recorded history, are beginning to look like Bangladesh catastrophes.

We have arguably reached a point where the slow reaction time of (democratic) governments, weighed down by corporate lobby groups, is perhaps not fast enough to redress the growing carbon imbalance, particularly where the will of the people is enfeebled by their obvious pleasure riding in stately motor carriages.  For myself, I should be terribly distressed if someone told me I could no longer drive my gorgeous Toyota or ride my exhilarating Kawasaki.  Recently I drove a friend's 6 litre V8 sedan - man, was that a buzz!!  If it doesn't burn fossil fuels, it's no fun at all.    

I'm heartened, John, by your comment that the world will adapt either way.  Now that's a convenient out for the legislatures around the world, isn't it?

Where were we?  Ulp.....  sorry, OT.

Cheers,

Hugh

[kyrill]

Hi Daygloworange

Of course they exist, but your examples are ( avant garde/experimental) "musical" instruments

I have seen plastic guitars and blue and green and chrome coloured altviolins, they all have their own particular sound and they will never ever win the hearts of the many, when they were derived from examples of the wooden family. 
a quote form yr posted article  http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/13/4/8 about why the Stradivarius sound so beautiful " The choice of high-quality wood for making instruments has always been recognized by violin makers, and well seasoned wood is generally recommended." oh and i agree fully with the rich potential for carbon as a replacement of wood in acoustical instruments If well made ( lot of science) they may even exceed wood. Dried wood is 50% carbon based
so a different story for drums for instance. It is alright to make all kinds of sounds and there are very weird instruments with very ehhh "different" sound ( thx Seano , all have their place in a "niche" of the musical world as it should be.

But dont belief they ( except good carbon fiber)  " exceed wood"   in sweetness or "naturalness. That doesnt mean they dont have their place. many jazz rock artist play the electric violin, mostly not made from wood.

But a speaker or an amplifier actually the WHOLE setup is not for experimental music alone or a rockband alone but must be able to be as neutral as possible to create the whole spectrum of the musical universe including natural instruments classical orchestra and the human voice
Not the ordinary main stream hifi setup. i dont care about those ones as they were never designed to get the listener emotionally involved or to express the "soul" of the artist   masterly captured in its recording.
 But for a high end setup  wooden resonances win easily the hearts and minds if you take care to listen and to do an A/B comparison for a high end setup because they are the best* to reflect this captured soul
Ah well this my opinion, and of Mark Wheeler and of Ghandi ( if he would still live) and of too many others, but that is not a reason by itself 

* They will create certain carbon fibers that exceed wood but they will be very expensive

[Johnny]

I was going to ask OT, where would one get copper foil for ones gorgeous wood housings. The possibilities are endless, a woodworkers dream, matching diy amps and speakers   

but google delivers up many options like:

http://store.electrical-insulators-and-copper-ground-bars.com/

All that gorgeous Cu 

John,

Thanks for your input, this post was seminal:

Could it be because the issue being considered is not the whole of Earth history, but that anthropogenic sources have increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere in the last 100 y at a rate that is unprecedented (by orders of magnitude) in the Quaternary and well beyond, and the fact that, unlike the last 800 my, there are now billions of human beings on this Earth, most of them poor and otherwise vulnerable, who will be severely impacted by even modest perturbations to average climactic conditions, resulting in serious repercussions for those of us more fortunate ones?

 

Agree unequivocally.  Did Gore put it that well?  I don't believe so.....  

Thanks! I think 

he obfuscated, and at times lost me with his ponderous, evangelical delivery.  I'd read recently his Tennessee mansion used 221,000 Kwh of electricity in 2006;  I run a household of four and use around 4000 a year, 55 times less.  Hmm, I hope this is not true, blows his cover I feel.

Amen 

As for the billions who will be impacted, sadly this is so true, but viewed from Mother Earth's perspective, there are now simply too many people (people are to the planet what maggots are to the sheep!), and it's possible a correction is imminent......  Recently in the South East of Victoria, a large lakes area just inland of the sea was, after several years of crippling drought, inundated with torrential runoff from a northerly mountain range, and coastal towns were swamped, with an estimated 5 billion dollars of damage.  These extreme events, hitherto extremely rare in our recorded history, are beginning to look like Bangladesh catastrophes.

We have arguably reached a point where the slow reaction time of (democratic) governments, weighed down by corporate lobby groups, is perhaps not fast enough to redress the growing carbon imbalance, particularly where the will of the people is enfeebled by their obvious pleasure riding in stately motor carriages.  For myself, I should be terribly distressed if someone told me I could no longer drive my gorgeous Toyota or ride my exhilarating Kawasaki.  Recently I drove a friend's 6 litre V8 sedan - man, was that a buzz!!  If it doesn't burn fossil fuels, it's no fun at all.    

I dunno. This looks pretty good to me
http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=4560
0-60 in 4.5 sec. Lotus?  Guilt-free adrenaline?


Hugh, I sense a market based philosophy behind this and other posts. Its leading me to question my own perspective  Bravo! 

I'm heartened, John, by your comment that the world will adapt either way.  Now that's a convenient out for the legislatures around the world, isn't it?

Aye, and maybe the legislatures will be scuppered and we will arrive at the highest form of government, Anarchy. Or a post-human world. As a natural scientist I could embrace it. If it wasn't for the kids, I'd say why not?

[AKSA]

John (and other poor souls listening to my 'market based' drivel!),

Aye, and maybe the legislatures will be scuppered and we will arrive at the highest form of government, Anarchy. Or a post-human world. As a natural scientist I could embrace it. If it wasn't for the kids, I'd say why not?

Now there's a dual paradigm, spoken like a true ideologue!!  If you were close by, I'd give you a hug!!   

The problem with anarchy is that unfortunately, and don't take this personally, I have to kill you.  You see, you have my food, and I want your chariot.......

Shades of Gaza?

Hugh

[Johnny]

Shades of Gaza?

Touché! 

So glad we understand each other

[Daygloworange]

Hi Daygloworange
Of course they exist, but your examples are ( avant garde/experimental) "musical" instruments

They will become more mainstream, inevitably, when the romantic notion of the supremacy of wood as the ultimate material stops being perpetuated by people too afraid of change, and people wanting to sell their 6.3 million dollar violins. I bet you if you commissioned an "avant garde" maker to construct a violin with a 2.3 million dollar budget for prototyping and R & D( the going rate for a number of Strads lately), you'd get one heck of a gloriously sounding violin.

" The choice of high-quality wood for making instruments has always been recognized by violin makers, and well seasoned wood is generally recommended."

A redundant and rhetorical statement. I don't know why they would even write that. You can't make anything out of "green" (unseasoned) wood. It'll split, twist warp. No instrument was ever made with unseasoned wood. Strads were simply different sounding because the wood was denser in Europe due to colder than average temperature over the period of time that the harvested trees used in his violins were exposed to. Wood density due to the spacing of the growth rings is an important factor in soundboard resonance( and can be much more consistently repeated using composite materials and manufacturing techniques).

so a different story for drums for instance. It is alright to make all kinds of sounds and there are very weird instruments with very ehhh "different" sound ( thx Seano , all have their place in a "niche" of the musical world as it should be.

But dont belief they ( except good carbon fiber)  " exceed wood"   in sweetness or "naturalness. That doesnt mean they dont have their place. many jazz rock artist play the electric violin, mostly not made from wood.

There is nothing weird about the sound of carbon fiber drums. I've heard them. I've played them. There is nothing unnatural about how they sound. Most snare drums are made from materials other than wood. I don't know what constitutes a "natural" sound. That is a very subjective term. Wood drums are of composite contruction. There is the wood, and the glue that holds the laminations together. Then there is the finish that is sprayed on to them. ( The finishes used are often polyester based and similar to resins used in carbon fiber composite construction). Carbon fiber drums are a composite of carbon ( the building block of all life organisms) and resin as a glue that holds the laminations together, and comprises the outer finish. Not much different.

But for a high end setup  wooden resonances win easily the hearts and minds if you take care to listen and to do an A/B comparison for a high end setup because they are the best* to reflect this captured soul

If you are suggesting that audio components must be comprised of wooden resonances to sound good, then that's a romantic notion I don't share at all. In fact, I couldn't disagree more.

Cheers

[Geoff-AU]

Agree unequivocally.  Did Gore put it that well?  I don't believe so.....  he obfuscated, and at times lost me with his ponderous, evangelical delivery.  I'd read recently his Tennessee mansion used 221,000 Kwh of electricity in 2006;  I run a household of four and use around 4000 a year, 55 times less.  Hmm, I hope this is not true, blows his cover I feel.

I have mixed opinions on his piece.  It does provoke a good deal of thought but is also verrrrrry one-sided.  However, I think this is because he is an American, preaching primarily to Americans (and secondarily the rest of us).  Most Americans are only dimly aware of the world outside their borders so presenting them with a balanced argument would only confuse them.  They need drama, pretty graphs and scissor lifts.

As for his house - it does seem like a huge amount of electricity (and natural gas, too).  The claimed mitigating factors are that it's also a home office, it has extra security because of who he is (and possibly extra staff, I'm not sure), and that they buy green power to compensate for their usage.  However, I've also heard that this green power is really only a carbon offset program which might not achieve anything useful.  It comes down to who you believe, really... I would have thought that the intelligent thing to do would be to use less energy in the first place, and secondly to make that energy come from renewable sources.

[kyrill]

ah i can read dear Daygloworange
you have not listened yet to high end gear without metal enclosures. it seems your approach is theoretical

You misunderstood me on the topics with drums. They are for me the exception. The wood story is not valid for them,

your original post gave mostly 2 counterexamples
of non wooden origine
1) drums ( 2 pictures)
2) carbon fiber acoustical instruments

In my introduction ( to make posts shorter and the topic was about enclosures and not instruments)  I did not mention that carbonfiber ( still a young science and still in development) is a good wood replacement and may even better it sweetness and pleasant sounding. I also did not mention the effect of lacquer

 I do agree with your two examples , my point of view still holds, so what is your point?

warming up debate:  you may read http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/HL758.cfm ( it is a she) and there are dozens of other scientist who,  from their point of view support this.
a central conclusion is this " Now, just remember this one thing from this talk, if nothing else: That layer of air cannot be bypassed; that layer of air must warm if computer model projections are accurate in detailing the human-made warming trend from the air's increased greenhouse gases. But that layer of air is not warming. Thus the human-made effect must be quite small."

Also more and more data is coming in that this warming up  happens in the rest of our solar system too, ( mars)
i have searched the internet for a scientific counterargument to the content of her article, not the end conclusion, but could not find it.I could only many attacks to her conclusions not an attack to the way she came to her conclusions. maybe i searched not good enough?