[Ethan Winer]

I hope nobody minds if I call BS on that "data." I'll be glad to discuss if anyone wants. First topic for discussion: Who cares what they might do at 300 KHz?

--Ethan

[Browntrout]

Hello Ethan, I would be interested to hear what you make of the first graph showing the difference across a wide range of the room treated against untreated. Room acoustics and treatment is something I'm only starting to get into having more or less finalised my stereo and all this is of interest to me. I have an open mind to new things.
   

[Philistine]

I found the Dagogo review very disappointing to say the least, for a controversial product such as this I would prefer to see a thorough detailed review similar to those that 6Moons carry out on similar products.  Even though my position on this is way to the negative side of neutral, I'm still open to consider that some acoustic phenomenon may be in effect.  The review was very short with no significant explanation of why the reviewer made the recommendation, leaving me more skeptical than before and making it more unlikely that I will try the product(s).  It needs to be reviewed by a credible reviewer and/or by a credible AC member.




     

[arthurs]

I thought Woodsyi was getting some of these to check out....?

[Ethan Winer]

I would be interested to hear what you make of the first graph showing the difference across a wide range of the room treated against untreated.

Do you mean the graph on page 9/17? There are two problems with that graph. First, the graph labels imply it is showing a reduction in ringing time, with about 30 percent less ringing between 63 and 80 Hz. This is not physically possible given the size of these devices. not even with nine of them in the room. The data simply cannot be real.

Second, the text below the graph says it shows the response, which is not the same as ringing decay time, so whoever wrote the text does not understand what the graph labels say or mean.

--Ethan

[youngho]

Holy crap, the system under test cost a total of $8000 worth of those resonators used simultaneously. The methodology is poorly described. One has to wonder whether the 70 Hz peak is a floor-ceiling standing wave and whether the difference between the two curves might be simply related to a shift in the position of the SPL meter. However, Alton Everest does present some data about how a Coke bottle can act as a Helmholtz resonator, albeit one of extremely limited bandwidth and amplitude.

If you're looking seriously at that report, you really have to ask yourself "Would you pay 8k for this?"

[Ted_D]

I would be interested to hear what you make of the first graph showing the difference across a wide range of the room treated against untreated.

Do you mean the graph on page 9/17? There are two problems with that graph. First, the graph labels imply it is showing a reduction in ringing time, with about 30 percent less ringing between 63 and 80 Hz. This is not physically possible given the size of these devices. not even with nine of them in the room. The data simply cannot be real.

Second, the text below the graph says it shows the response, which is not the same as ringing decay time, so whoever wrote the text does not understand what the graph labels say or mean.

--Ethan

With all due respect (?)

I did not conduct the measurements, nor were they for my acoustic resonators, so I cannot say wether or not they are "sound". However treating a room using acoustic resonators works, and works very well. The fact they are "small" has nothing to do with their effectiveness (or lack there of). However your myopic obsession with "size" and preoccupation with "largess" seems to indicate a certain insecurity.

Thomas Edison railed against AC trying to shlep DC power to the world- Westinghouse won that battle

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

[satfrat]

I would be interested to hear what you make of the first graph showing the difference across a wide range of the room treated against untreated.

Do you mean the graph on page 9/17? There are two problems with that graph. First, the graph labels imply it is showing a reduction in ringing time, with about 30 percent less ringing between 63 and 80 Hz. This is not physically possible given the size of these devices. not even with nine of them in the room. The data simply cannot be real.

Second, the text below the graph says it shows the response, which is not the same as ringing decay time, so whoever wrote the text does not understand what the graph labels say or mean.

--Ethan

With all due respect (?)

I did not conduct the measurements, nor were they for my acoustic resonators, so I cannot say wether or not they are "sound" however I know 100% for a fact that treating a room using acoustic resonators works, and works very well. The fact that they are "small" has nothing to do with their effectiveness (or lack there of). However your myopic obsession with "size" and preoccupation with "largess" seems to indicate a certain insecurity. Were I you, I too would be insecure. After all who will elect to destroy the aesthetic of their living rooms when a more effective, more cost effective, and discrete option is available?

Thomas Edison railed against AC trying to shlep the DC power to the world- Westinghouse won that battle

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

Ted, you need to understand Ethan Winer has a history of trying to discredit his competitors here on AudioCircle. It's as tho the Acoustic Circle is suppose to be his circle at times. Now I for 1 don't have a clue as to your products effectiveness or not but I would rather read about the viewpoints from members who have actually tried your products than that of a acoustic competitor who like to fashion himself as the voice of acoustics. Ted, your only review to date was pretty weak at best. Hopefully something more substantial will appear at some point?

Cheers,
Robin

ps, I do own multiple sets of Synergistic active component video cables so I have a high respect for Synergistic Research products!

[Ted_D]

I would be interested to hear what you make of the first graph showing the difference across a wide range of the room treated against untreated.

Do you mean the graph on page 9/17? There are two problems with that graph. First, the graph labels imply it is showing a reduction in ringing time, with about 30 percent less ringing between 63 and 80 Hz. This is not physically possible given the size of these devices. not even with nine of them in the room. The data simply cannot be real.

Second, the text below the graph says it shows the response, which is not the same as ringing decay time, so whoever wrote the text does not understand what the graph labels say or mean.

--Ethan

With all due respect (?)

I did not conduct the measurements, nor were they for my acoustic resonators, so I cannot say wether or not they are "sound" however I know 100% for a fact that treating a room using acoustic resonators works, and works very well. The fact that they are "small" has nothing to do with their effectiveness (or lack there of). However your myopic obsession with "size" and preoccupation with "largess" seems to indicate a certain insecurity. Were I you, I too would be insecure. After all who will elect to destroy the aesthetic of their living rooms when a more effective, more cost effective, and discrete option is available?

Thomas Edison railed against AC trying to shlep the DC power to the world- Westinghouse won that battle

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

Ted, you need to understand Ethan Winer has a history of trying to discredit his competitors here on AudioCircle. It's as tho the Acoustic Circle is suppose to be his circle at times. Now I for 1 don't have a clue as to your products effectiveness or not but I would rather read about the viewpoints from members who have actually tried your products than that of acoustic competitors who like to fashion themselves as the voice of acoustics. Ted, your only review to date was pretty weak at best. Hopefully something more substantial will appear at some point?

Cheers,
Robin

Robin,
I had nothing to do with the review (the reviewer purchased his Acoustic ART System at the RMAF). I can tell you however that we have several reviews in the works- we will just have to wait and read the outcome.

To all who may be interested, Synergistic Research will be demonstrating the Acoustic ART System at the upcoming CES in Vegas in the Venetian Tower 29-227, and 29-229. One suite is for live demos, the other is for Club SR. Show up after hours (no more then 30 minutes after : ) and I'll pour you a glass of wine, beer, or a Martini extra dry in Club SR- just pick your poison.

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

[zybar]

Ted, you need to understand Ethan Winer has a history of trying to discredit his competitors here on AudioCircle. It's as tho the Acoustic Circle is suppose to be his circle at times. Now I for 1 don't have a clue as to your products effectiveness or not but I would rather read about the viewpoints from members who have actually tried your products than that of a acoustic competitor who like to fashion himself as the voice of acoustics. Ted, your only review to date was pretty weak at best. Hopefully something more substantial will appear at some point?

Cheers,
Robin

ps, I do own multiple sets of Synergistic active component video cables so I have a high respect for Synergistic Research products!

Robin,

Your assertion comment about Ethan is simply not accurate.

Ethan has been a very positive addition to AC (especially in the Acoustics Circle) and he simply calls bullshit when he sees it.  I have seen him get along with our other Acoustics experts here at AC (even when they all might not agree on a particular subject).

I think it is also important to point out that Ethan is very well respected in his field (not just here at AC) and is viewed as an "expert".  RealTraps has published third party measurements (from qualified labs - not just reviews) to back up their product claims.  To me, this shows that his assertions are more than theory, they are a reality.

FWIW, I have performed measurements on the various RealTrap products I own and found them to perform as advertised.  I can't say that for some of the other acoustics products I have purchased and/or tried form other vendors.

George

[satfrat]

Ted, you need to understand Ethan Winer has a history of trying to discredit his competitors here on AudioCircle. It's as tho the Acoustic Circle is suppose to be his circle at times. Now I for 1 don't have a clue as to your products effectiveness or not but I would rather read about the viewpoints from members who have actually tried your products than that of a acoustic competitor who like to fashion himself as the voice of acoustics. Ted, your only review to date was pretty weak at best. Hopefully something more substantial will appear at some point?

Cheers,
Robin

ps, I do own multiple sets of Synergistic active component video cables so I have a high respect for Synergistic Research products!

Robin,

Your assertion comment about Ethan is simply not accurate.

Ethan has been a very positive addition to AC (especially in the Acoustics Circle) and he simply calls bullshit when he sees it.  I have seen him get along with our other Acoustics experts here at AC (even when they all might not agree on a particular subject).

I think it is also important to point out that Ethan is very well respected in his field (not just here at AC) and is viewed as an "expert".  RealTraps has published third party measurements (from qualified labs - not just reviews) to back up their product claims.  To me, this shows that his assertions are more than theory, they are a reality.

FWIW, I have performed measurements on the various RealTrap products I own and found them to perform as advertised.  I can't say that for some of the other acoustics products I have purchased and/or tried form other vendors.

George

Sorry George but I disagree. As much as Ethan Winer is respected in his field, it doesn't give him the right to continually slam his acoustic competitors in the Acoustic Circle, a place that's open to all manufacturer's, not just Real Traps. And the fact that you own his products doesn't carry much weight with me about your opinion concerning his comments on competing businesses IMHO. Let him get his own Circle if he wants to rant about other products,,,, NOT IN A COMPETING MANUFACTURER'S PRODUCT THREAD!!! It's bad form IMHO.


Cheers,
Robin

ps, I ALSO own Real Trap products.

[zybar]

Robin,

This thread wasn't started by the vendor or manufacturer of the product that is being discussed, so I don't think it is in bad taste to have any of the "Acoustics Experts" on AC (Ethan, Bryan, Allen - to just name a few) chime in.  This is especially true when AC members are specifically asking for their thoughts and opinions (on the product and in terms of explaining data).

George

[satfrat]

Robin,

This thread wasn't started by the vendor or manufacturer of the product that is being discussed, so I don't think it is in bad taste to have any of the "Acoustics Experts" on AC (Ethan, Bryan, Allen - to just name a few) chime in.  This is especially true when AC members are specifically asking for their thoughts and opinions (on the product and in terms of explaining data).

George

Well we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this George, I'm probably jaded anyways from all the years of Ethan's bickering with Nathan of Eighth Nerve over the effectiveness of his products which I btw own and highly appreciate.  This isn't a 1 time thing like you'd want folks to believe, there's track record of Ethan's opinions popping into thread concerning competing businesses. So we'll simply see things a little differently on this subject. Ethan himself "hope nobody minds",, well i do.

I've had my say, right or wrong, and I'll not dwell on it further. 
Cheers,
Robin

[Vinyl-Addict]

Ted, you need to understand Ethan Winer has a history of trying to discredit his competitors here on AudioCircle. It's as tho the Acoustic Circle is suppose to be his circle at times. Now I for 1 don't have a clue as to your products effectiveness or not but I would rather read about the viewpoints from members who have actually tried your products than that of a acoustic competitor who like to fashion himself as the voice of acoustics. Ted, your only review to date was pretty weak at best. Hopefully something more substantial will appear at some point?

Cheers,
Robin

ps, I do own multiple sets of Synergistic active component video cables so I have a high respect for Synergistic Research products!

Robin,

Your assertion comment about Ethan is simply not accurate.

Ethan has been a very positive addition to AC (especially in the Acoustics Circle) and he simply calls bullshit when he sees it.  I have seen him get along with our other Acoustics experts here at AC (even when they all might not agree on a particular subject).

I think it is also important to point out that Ethan is very well respected in his field (not just here at AC) and is viewed as an "expert".  RealTraps has published third party measurements (from qualified labs - not just reviews) to back up their product claims.  To me, this shows that his assertions are more than theory, they are a reality.

FWIW, I have performed measurements on the various RealTrap products I own and found them to perform as advertised.  I can't say that for some of the other acoustics products I have purchased and/or tried form other vendors.

George

Sorry George but I disagree. As much as Ethan Winer is respected in his field, it doesn't give him the right to continually slam his acoustic competitors in the Acoustic Circle, a place that's open to all manufacturer's, not just Real Traps. And the fact that you own his products doesn't carry much weight with me about your opinion concerning his comments on competing businesses IMHO. Let him get his own Circle if he wants to rant about other products,,,, NOT IN A COMPETING MANUFACTURER'S PRODUCT THREAD!!! It's bad form IMHO.


Cheers,
Robin

ps, I ALSO own Real Trap products.

I don't understand your attitude toward Ethan in this thread. He was ASKED by a member what he thought of a graph. He answered the question, simple as that.

[warnerwh]

It would seem to me that the arguments have much to do with known physics.  If one person or another disagrees there's the math which will confirm pretty much everything regarding acoustics and treatments.  Putting all the facts on the table in front of everybody seems like a better way of discussing products than giving opinions or facts without empirical data.  Anybody disagree that known physics of acoustics isn't well documented?

[Ted_D]

I feel my response to several of Ethan's posts over on the Stereophile forum merits sharing with the Acoustic Circle.

warnerwh- my post on the Stereophile forum addresses your last post.

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=55469&page=0&fpart=23&vc=1

Yours in music,
Ted Denney III Lead Designer Synergistic Research Inc.

[satfrat]

Sounds like the same song that's being sung here to me. Just from what I've seen through out the years here on AudioCircle, I'm not surprised in the least that it's happening elsewhere.

I hope everyone who believe George's stance on Ethan Winer's "professionalism" will go to Ted's link and read all 23 pages! Please focus on all the Winer cheap shots and one liners,,,,,, there's a lot of them through out that thread, then read Ted's reply on page 23. I couldn't have said it better, hell I wouldn't even try. Hea, George and I see things differently but from this 1 thread, I'm feeling mighty confident in mine. This isn't a stance on the credibilty of the Acoustic ART System but it is a stance on forum integrity or the lack threreof. You be the judge. I made my mind up a long time ago.


Cheers,
Robin

[PumaCat]

Hi Folks,
This is my first post here on AC:

I'm going to jump in here because I found this thread from another post in the Stereophile forums.

I started a similar thread on the Synergistics Research ART system w/o knowing of this thread here, which pre-dates my thread (in fact, I did not know of the existence of AC at all until tonight).

First, let me say that Ethan has been posting the same sorts of arguments on Stereophile as here; that this system of resonators cannot work because of their size. This is single-minded thinking based on a the precept that functionality can be achieved only one way; in this case that resonance control can only be achieved by damping materials of a certain size and area.

This single-minded approach towards functionality simply is not true, and Altschuler's TRIZ was created on the understanding that there are many different ways to achieve functionality.

Like on the Stereophile thread, there a great many people here who are saying this system cannot work, even though they have literally no experience with the system whatsoever. This reminds me of people saying that Copernicus was incorrect in saying that the earth revolved around the sun, when it was perfectly clear the sun revolved around the earth.

Some posters claim this system cannot work on the basis of physics, and yet not one these posters has derived and posted any transfer functions demonstrate that this system cannot work. If you say the laws of physics say it cannot work, then you should back up your claim by showing the equations that demonstrate they cannot. 

Well, I have experienced this system, and it DOES work. Here is my description of my experience with it from my post on the thread I started:

I heard the ART "prayer bowls" at Music Lovers in Berkeley. One of the sales guys was waxing enthusiastically about how they improved the main listening room. I should point out that this is a professionally designed listening room, well-damped, with all the trimmings, tube traps, those Shakti Hallographic jobbies, in my personal opinion, the main listening was a quite a good room (not the very best I've heard, which is at Audio Visions in SF, but quite good).

I asked him to show me what he was talking about and he led me over to these little bowls. I looked at these thingys and rolled my eyes...yeah, right.

He insisted I try them out for myself. So, with them set up by the Synergistic rep, I put Melody Gardot's Worrisome Heart in the CD transport and hit play.

I was listening to the music through a pair of Sonus-Faber Amatis, a purdy dang nice speaker system if there ever was one. I think the amps were Spectral DMA360 monoblocks. The CD player was a Luxman, and the preamp was a Spectral, also, though I don't know the model number, but likely it was a DMC-30SL, as this was the high high-end room. Cables looked like really expensive Transparents, or something of that elk, er, I mean ilk.

So, gotta say, Melody sounded pretty darn good, very airy, spacious, natural-sounding. Great imaging and soundstage, big, wide, and open. Her Worrisome Heart album, BTW, is killer, you should all rush out and buy it, it is absolutely superb, and a great recording/mastering job, too.

I listened to the first two tracks, and then got up and took all the prayer bowls, down including the Vibratron, which looked like it was a part missing from Robbie the Robot of Forbidden Planet fame. Or maybe it was something Robbie would have whipped up, along with some booze for Earl Holliman, but, I digress...

Anyway, with all the bowls taken down, the same music did sound different. For one thing, the imaging changed. Melody was right in the middle between the two speakers with the ART system set up, and she was over to the right speaker with them taken down. Also, the soundstage seemed to be smaller vertically, and the overall sound quality was darker and more compressed-sounding; it sounded like the sound was scrunched-down a bit, if that makes sense. It also was not as musical w/o the prayer bowls.

Everyone has their own definition of what comprises value for money. For me, the degree of improvement was not worth $3000, or anything close to it, for that matter.

But, the system most definitely DID sound better with them in place. I wouldn't part with 3 large for this system, but if somebody gave them to me, I would use them.

I'll just wrap up by saying that I agree with a number of Ted's comments in principle. There are experiences and perceptions that we have that are very real but are very difficult, if not impossible to measure.

I can think of one example that is an experience that likely all of you have had, but cannot be explained by reductionist science (and hence, measured).

Yet this phenomenon is very real for all of you that have experienced it.

[PumaCat]

A little background might be in order: I'm a professional scientist; a molecular biologist with extensive experience in human molecular genetics.

I'm also a certified Six Sigma Black Belt, and my current role in the biotech company I work for is co-teaching Design for Six Sigma to R&D scientists, engineers, and product managers. I've been published as first author in peer-reviewed journals e.g. Science and The Proceedings for the National Academy of the Sciences.

I'm just posting this background to establish that I'm very definitely the kind of guy that believes in measurement and cold, hard data.

That being said, I'm fully cognizant of the fact that there perceptions, experiences, and phenomena that occur in this world and universe that cannot be explained by reductionist, hypothesis-driven science. But it doesn't mean they aren't real nonetheless.

Some of these are certainly measureable, it's just that we haven't figured out how to measure them....yet. Some may never prove amenable to measurement in the way we currently perform science.

[Browntrout]

Thanks very much for posting that Stephen.