Would you pay 3k for this?

Big Red Machine · « **Reply #240 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 05:03 pm »

http://noteablebowls.com/index.htm

http://www.bodhisattva.com/index.htm

Interesting. Thanks Scotty.

Bob in St. Louis · « **Reply #241 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 05:11 pm »

Interesting indeed, but would you want them in your listening room?

Big Red Machine · « **Reply #242 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 05:15 pm »

I have a soft spot in my heart for sympathetic resonances.

Ethan Winer · « **Reply #243 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 05:49 pm »

Quote from: opnly bafld on 27 Dec 2008, 04:37 pm

He is narrowing the definition of distortion to fit his point of reference. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distortion

I'd call it clarifying a technical detail.

From the Wiki page you linked:

Quote

Audio distortion
In this context, distortion refers to any kind of deformation of a waveform, compared to an input. Clipping, compression, non-linear behavior of electronic components, modulation, aliasing, and mixing phenomena or power supply inefficiencies can cause distortion ... In most fields, distortion is characterized as unwanted change to a signal.

I don't see anything there about sound being focused as it's reflected from a corner. Or the addition of sympathetic resonance.

--Ethan

opnly bafld · « **Reply #244 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 06:12 pm »

I'm sorry for the off topic.
I really don't know anything, I even have speakers w/o tweeters

that I think sound better than many so called Hi Fi speakers.

Back to the original topic: Would you pay 3k for this?

Big Red Machine · « **Reply #245 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 06:57 pm »

No. I'd go $399 if I knew it worked.

opnly bafld · « **Reply #246 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 07:10 pm »

Would you pay 3k for this?

Quote from: Big Red Machine on 27 Dec 2008, 06:57 pm

No. I'd go $399 if I knew it worked.

I would rather add $500 and get George's speakers and subs.

Lin

hmen · « **Reply #247 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 09:23 pm »

Even if it works as advertised, I'm sure I could find dozens of other ways to improve my system more for less money, so I wouldn't pay $3000 for this.

zybar · « **Reply #248 on:** 27 Dec 2008, 10:15 pm »

Quote from: opnly bafld on 27 Dec 2008, 07:10 pm

Would you pay 3k for this?

Quote from: Big Red Machine on 27 Dec 2008, 06:57 pm
No. I'd go $399 if I knew it worked.

I would rather add $500 and get George's speakers and subs.

Lin

Thanks Lin.

Vinyl-Addict · « **Reply #249 on:** 29 Dec 2008, 09:19 pm »

Did the offer to let one of the A.C. members perform an in-home audition fall by the wayside. Did I miss something?

Philistine · « **Reply #250 on:** 2 Jan 2009, 03:05 pm »

Anyone try these yet?

We have a manufacturer who is willing to run trials, if there's no interest on the west coast then I'm open minded enough to try them out.

darrenyeats · « **Reply #251 on:** 2 Jan 2009, 03:36 pm »

Quote from: Stephen Scharf on 26 Dec 2008, 05:08 pm

No, I don't think the placebo effect could be responsible. I don't believe in it anyway with respect to audio system enhancements.

In my opinion you're believing in something illusory. It's a proven fact that the placebo effect applies to hearing.

Quote from: Stephen Scharf on 26 Dec 2008, 05:08 pm

I do believe what I hear, though.

In fact, there is no way to know the placebo effect is or is not happening other than through listening tests. There is no contradiction between believing in your hearing and believing in the placebo effect.
Darren

Brown · « **Reply #252 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 04:18 pm »

No not three thousand. A bit much. So they got the idea whilst in a Buddhist Temple from resonating bowls. Based on Helmholtz resonators. Hmmm, patents? science? chanting? If it was say under $400 with a 30 day money back guarantee, I would humor myself with an audition. Pricing kills everything.

doug s. · « **Reply #253 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 04:48 pm »

Quote from: Brown on 5 Jan 2009, 04:18 pm

No not three thousand. A bit much. So they got the idea whilst in a Buddhist Temple from resonating bowls. Based on Helmholtz resonators. Hmmm, patents? science? chanting? If it was say under $400 with a 30 day money back guarantee, I would humor myself with an audition. Pricing kills everything.

pricing kills everything? its ridiculous pricing is the only way this can sell. folks will buy it cuz it's expensive, not cuz it works. otherwise, it would cost 1/10th the amount, and it would sell well on its functional merits...

i yust received an original resonating bowl for christmas; i hope it's not screwing up the sound, as it's in my listening room. mebbe i should banish it to the garage? or hire someone to properly locate it?

doug s.

mdconnelly · « **Reply #254 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 04:49 pm »

Regardless of whether it works (or how well it works)... it's a tough sell at $3k. I commend Ted and SR for offering the free evaluation period and I take Ted's word that those bowls are difficult/expensive to manufacture. Because it's difficult to understand how it works, it is equally difficult to accept that it's worth $3k - even if we do invest the time to try it.

Hey, a lot of us were (are still?) skeptical of the efficacy of various tweaks but the threshold of one's willingness to try something does correlate with price.

Big Red Machine · « **Reply #255 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 05:01 pm »

I bought 3 Tibetan Singing Bowls instead. They are vey difficult to manufacture as well and you can buy different notes. They are pretty mesmerizing when you strike them with their little hammers. Can't say any change in the sound of my room, but it will give folks plenty to jab me about come Saturday's GTG. ahummmmmmm ahummmmmm

richidoo · « **Reply #256 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 05:16 pm »

Robert Harley has some nice comments about SR ART room treatments in his RMAF coverage in current TAS magazine. Says it increased soundstage dramatically, and implied that he missed them when removed.

*Scotty* · « **Reply #257 on:** 5 Jan 2009, 09:21 pm »

Hi Big red,I picked up 3 handmade bowls as well. I am not through testing where to position them and whether they have any effect or not on the sound the the system

. The single large bowl in the photo has a G#2,Eb4,D4 for rim tones and Eb4,Bb5,A7 tones when struck. The G#2 is 103.85Hz and the A7 is 3520.0
The medium bowl is an F#3 fundamental rim tone with secondary ,C5,F#6 tones. When struck it is an F#3,Bb4,A5,F5,F7,C5,C7. The small bowl is an Eb4 fundamental with an A5 overtone. The tones the bowls produce was determined with a handy piece of software called AP Tuner 3. See link http://www.aptuner.com/cgi-bin/aptuner/apmain.html Some interpretation was required when reading the tuners results. The large number of overtones produced by the bowls tends to confuse the Tuner,you hear more overtones than the tuner will respond to. It doesn't want to settle on a single tone unless it is the loudest one of the many it hears. A spectrum analyzer would be handy to have.
The point is these particular hand made bowls will resonate at a large number of frequencies covering 103.85Hz to 3520.0 and I think if they were going positively influence the room acoustics this might be a necessary attribute.
Scotty

Stephen Scharf · « **Reply #258 on:** 7 Jan 2009, 04:52 am »

Quote from: richidoo on 5 Jan 2009, 05:16 pm

Robert Harley has some nice comments about SR ART room treatments in his RMAF coverage in current TAS magazine. Says it increased soundstage dramatically, and implied that he missed them when removed.

The ART system DOES work; I auditioned it, and my experience of it is that it increased soundstage dramatically, as reported by Robert Harley.

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #259 on:** 7 Jan 2009, 02:22 pm »

For the ridiculous, there will always be the ridiculous. Haven't auditioned . . I just like sayin that.