Awesome Audiophile Snake Oil

but the best is this "teleportation tweak"
http://machinadynamica.com/machina60.htm

everything on there is great but I'm still standing by the Tru-Tone Duplex cover as the most balls-out

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_3/marigo-labs-signature-3d-mat-7-2005.html

oh wait though codename turquoise is pretty fucking rad

Brilliant Pebbles is my favorite one on that site i think

From cidepress' link, this was amusing:

"Where most audiophiles would agree, however, is that tweaks are a minor aspect of system building. Defined by the dictionary in Microsoft Word® as "a slight adjustment or change in..."

italics mine.

http://machinadynamica.com/water.gif for brains

Somewhere, audiophile dude pushes the leather sofa away from the wall, sees four-socket outlet, shrieks.

Well, these are great, but you don't have to spend a lot of money to improve sound:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/Free_Techniques/Free_Techniques.html

Holy shit the Teleportation Tweak! We are dealing with <i>balls</i> here, gentlemen. Big, round, shiny balls, of finest brass, lovingly hand-polished to a mirror shine by a taskforce of brilliant Sound Artisans. These balls can be yours for the astonishingly low price of $680 (Big Shiny Brass Balls are not subject to our 30-day money-back guarantee)

it doesn't actually take any courage to be a con man, is the thing. you just have to really, really hate everybody.

The interesting thing about these tweaks is that they abandon the pretense of scientific support. Whereas w/ feet for speaker stands in Stereophile or whatever they'll be some physicist explaining how the damping works, here's it's just like, Hey, put this magic clock in the room and it'll improve the sound. I love it.

Sorry, maybe I'm Billy-doesn't-get-it, but is this site real or an elaborate spoof?

I had initially assumed spoof, but I followed some links and poked around and it appears to be real, or at least elaborate enough a spoof to include three or four different sites. Stereophile had an article on some of these tweaks a few years ago anyway:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/10415/

even if it is a spoof there's certainly enough real snake-oil products with extremely similar purposes/explanations

here's a collection of some more: http://www.ilikejam.dsl.pipex.com/audiophile.htm

i know someone who swears by this ....
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=280182123367&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=018

"extremely flat"

I don't even know what "a richer, fuller sound, with less emphasis of detail" means. it's supposed to be a good thing?

My latest tweak = this chair;

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/Photo624.jpg

i'm actually buying a glass platter for my turntable. i might even buy that mat for it. i'm a sucka 4 luv.

actually the chair i'm assuming was a joke, but honestly i was suprised how much getting speaker stands and "correctly" positioning my chair i listen in and the speakers in the room made a HUGE difference in how good things sounded.

The chair's totally not a joke; it's expensive and comfortable and easily moved but it's not likely to make me fall asleep in it (no headrest); if I'm comfortable and awake, I can concentrate on listening more. I bought it (almost) with the sole intention of it being a 'headphones' chair.

But yeah, basic physics says position your speakers correctly and sit in the right spot; you simply don't get stereo-imaging without it.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/03/audiophiles-cant-tell-the-difference-between-monster-cable-and/

...a coat hanger.

that's AMAZING.
audiophiles are some weird people, man.

actually the chair i'm assuming was a joke, but honestly i was suprised how much getting speaker stands and "correctly" positioning my chair i listen in and the speakers in the room made a HUGE difference in how good things sounded.

-- M@tt He1ges0n, Thursday, December 13, 2007 11:39 PM

totally true

actually properly treating one's room acoustically would probably do a better job than moving your chair and speakers about

is there already a company selling audiophile interior house paint?

because if there is, I should start selling audiophile EXTERIOR house paint.

(xpost)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cb/Dbsts2.jpg

I was much, much less impressed with this enormous fucking Naim set-up than I should have been given how much it ought to have cost. Sure it went LOUD, but sound-wise I wouldn't swap it for my own system, I don't think.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/IMG_0126.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/IMG_0128.jpg

Is it just perspective on that first photo, or are your speakers nearly at shoulder height?

Oh, no - is that a Cyrus CD player? Or tuner? And why isn't everything on Mana shelves? That's why it doesn't sound that good. And has it been on continuously for five years? Another biggie with Naimists. (Seriously, that doesn't look like a great room for those huge - and amazingly ugly - speakers).

What's the turntable - Nottingham Spacedek or something? Oracle Delphi?

mp3s out a old marantz amp someone gave me and 15 y/o bottom of the line cambridge soundworks speakers all day babay

although i did love to read sudiophile magazines when i worked at a bookstore just for the lulz

The speakers are nearly to chest height - I'm 5'8".

The Cyrus is just a DAC for his wireless streaming thing. Dunno what the turntable is. The room is big but odd; it's a loft that used to be three bedrooms. There's a (low) double bed behind the speakers, plus a desk, which is where I slept (not the desk) (although that picture was taken at 6am so sleeping wasn't exactly urgent and key that weekend).

Yeah, I really wish someone had just given me a peek into my co-habiting/flat in communal block/married-with-kids future when I was handing over the moolah for all my gear in 1996-97. I wish I'd just got something good/2nd-hand with a small footprint (Cyrus CD/integrated, ProAc speakers, something like that; maybe a Pro-Ject record deck, old Marantz cassette deck, NAD tuner, cables from Maplin) and STOPPED there. Think of all the photographic gear I could've bought with the money saved if I'd just contracted that particular hobbyist bug a decade earlier!

(Ah, DAC for wireless streaming; the Naim box-stacking is kinda insane - external power supplies for everything. Makes my Audiolab pre/mono arrangement look positively understated).

The speakers are Naim DBLs. They weigh about 15st each. Retail these days at £15k. When he got them, in 2000, they should have been £12k. He got them for £4k cos they were "shop-soiled" - the band he's in had an arrangement with Naim and they'd been using them as a playback set-up when they recorded an album in a country house, and the guitarist's dog had taken a bite out of the bottom corner of one, or something.

I'm kind of glad I've had a brush with stuff that's seriously high-end because it's warned me off a bit. Our flat's not that small, but it's a flat nonetheless, and, you know, I want stuff on the walls and holidays and a new camera and stuff maybe too.

I think my main response to audiophilia these days is that the best way to make your hi-fi sound great is to play better records on it.

actually properly treating one's room acoustically would probably do a better job than moving your chair and speakers about

How so?

the best way to make your hi-fi sound great is to play better records on it.

b i n g o

if anyone is looking for really great speakers that won't break your bank....i bought these about a year ago and couldn't be more pleased with them...they are really surprising given the price and size:

Epos ELS 3 mini monitors:

http://www.musicdirect.com/product/73457

i run them with a Cambridge Audio integrated amp w/Cambridge phono pre-amp.....

My turntable is a Rega P1 -- one thing on that i would recommend is buying a glass platter and also i replaced the original ortofon cartridge with a Denon DL 160 cartridge which is a fucking amazing cartridge for the price...

For CD player I run a really really old NAD one that I got off craigslist for $35...it works pretty well, has a hard time tracking CD-Rs but will play them after awhile (it's from 87 though so I guess there weren't even CD-Rs then)

Post more pics of slobs in garrets seasoned with with ridiculous sound systems and ugly furniture.

I really like the coffee table.

I think my favourite way / place to listen to music these days, rather than the big sofa and NAD / Cambridge Audio / Tannoy / proper rack & stands set-up in the living room, with everything anchored in a nice triangle, blah blah, equidistant from rear walls, speakers toed in, is the hotch-potch system in the back room, with the knackered Marantz CD, 20-year-old Marantz amp, DAC, and diddy Q Acoustics speakers. Cos I have space, peace, my comfy chair, books, headphones, no TV or console to distract.

Those are the kind of speakers you buy to justify having previously bought Monster Cable.

What's the sensitivity rating on those things? It might be all show, but they certainly look like they could bring on an involuntary bowel movement.

Specifications
Frequency response (in room)

17Hz - 20kHz 3dB

Sensitivity

92dB/1W/1m

Impedance

4 Ohms (minimum)

Power handling

200W (music programme)

Dimensions H x W x D

1200mm x 650mm x 400mm

Finish options include

Cherry
Maple
Piano Black [to special order]

like i said before, it's been my impression that tru-skool audiophiles think monster cable is for philistines and ppl that buy stereo equipment at best buy.

It's just a damn swindle, is all.

Tru-skool audiophiles do think that. I've never seen Monster cables mentioned in a hi-fi mag. Not that I read them that often. I have one Monster cable, and that's a 3.5 stereo mini-jack to 2 phono thing, for the iPod dock.

It's the new gold-plated CD.

The main rig's cabling: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/IMG_0267.jpg

The little rig's cabling: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/IMG_0268.jpg

Urethane is named after Kevin Sorbo's urethra

pls stop posting about that person. thanks.

xps I think that describes two different modes of reducing vibration between things, not sucking it out of the air. I’m sure it would prevent e.g. sound from bouncing off a surface (which is also a coupling thing) but I strongly doubt you’d unwrap a sorbothane mat and the room would go quiet.

people I think we all need to consider this incredible breakthrough: I present the ground box.
https://www.entreq.com/en-GB/products/ground-boxes-17667704
Sceptical? What if I told you that

By attaching an Entreq ground box with Eartha cables to your gear, you can eliminate high-frequency pollution, resulting in more detailed and clear music. You will experience a better flow, more air, and improved dynamics.
It's like driving a car with the handbrake on and then releasing it, everything works smoother.

oh I need a whole bunch of these

they tried not to advertise their prices but I can't be deterred in my pursuit of a box with some plates in it https://www.futureshop.co.uk/brands-category/entreq/entreq-grounding-boxes

reminds me of an orgone box https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgone

New username harvested from the ground box website...

hat tip to the "Eartha" cable name

i thought this was amusing/cool, was researching these headphones and there's nothing special about this review other than the fact the two reference tracks cited by the author that they used were Psychic TV and the Mekons instead of the usual warhorses

https://www.soundguys.com/beyerdynamic-dt-700-pro-x-review-60868/

haha those are good choices! great sound on both tracks

ums that's kinda funny and reminds me of a guy i crossed paths with in my music retail days...
he read all the audiophile snakeoil mags/features and so would hear about the highest fidelity recordings ―stuff made by established experts who, no snark, knew exactly what they were doing― and that ended up being quite a bit of experimental music. pretty funny to see a guy buy all the hdcd rolling stones reissues, along with his special order of the david sylvian blemish remix album (it got high marks in terms of fidelity).

yeah some of them have more diverse tastes than you might think and even the reference album canon evolves over time, like I see Random Access Memories and Mezzanine by Massive Attack a fair amount now, the first Norah Jones record..Buena Vista Social Club

True story, aged 17 in 1987 I was introduced to Laurie Anderson’s Mister Heartbreak by a hifi store person demoing speakers I could never afford using “Gravity’s Angel”. Drums sounded spectacular but the track itself blew my mind.
Didn’t buy the speakers but I bought the CD when I found it a few months later.

all the cream electrets and shakti stones can make you forget that some of these fellas actually Love Music

t/s only being able to listen to the mofi catalogue in hi fidelity or whatever you want on your cell phone speaker

I'd have to think about that tbh

yeah, same. genuinely good philosophical problem to pose in this topic!

not a moment's hesitation, phone

oooh I am definitely hesitating - once I would have been phone no question - but after tasting the succulent fruits of mid-fi sound reproduction it is hard to settle for tinny distortion and no bass

maybe this is just my body's way of telling me it is time to get better acquainted with the Supertramp discography

Scrolling through the Mofi artist list on the site there are about a dozen I'm interested in ever hearing again. I don't care if At Folsom Prison sounds like I'm in the cafeteria, I want to hear it once a year, tops. I will take my phone over becoming a Deadhead out of necessity.

I see hundreds of albums I'd gladly listen to (and this isn't the full catalog):

https://www.discogs.com/label/35095-Mobile-Fidelity-Sound-Lab

hi please feel free to make fun of me for asking a real question about a real thing in here but idk anywhere/anyone else that might have any clue what i'm talking about...

do ya'll know why (on mostly pre-digital) recordings in the "silence" before the song actually starts, you can still hear the song starting? on some really dynamic recordings (mostly jazz) that go from quiet>LOUD quickly in the middle of the song, you can also get a tiny, nearly inaudible, preview of the impending loud part just a second or two before it hits. what is this phenomenon? it seems like it was (is?) a vinyl thing?

anybody know what i'm talking about?

smdh at using "Godstar" instead of something off Dreams Less Sweet, the one they did with Zuccarelli holophonics

xpost I think that’s a tape thing

yes it's called pre-echo or something, basically bleedthrough, it's a tape thing

yeah, it's the tape head reading the next layer of the tape through the current layer (because tape is coiled around a dowel)

or however you'd say that, wound, words are hard

okay...
excuse my persistence, and ty for the answer, but i'm having a hard time understanding how that tranlates to me being able to hear it on john coltrane recordings when i listen on spotify.

the masters everything comes from are tapes right

^^

so wait... that "pre-echo" is in the master too? like if i was listening to the actual master tape, it would be there too?

that blows my mind in highly cosmic, existential ways but i'm weird. ty everyone for answering. would love any deepdives into the topic if you know any.

weird shit, man

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-echo

https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/pre-echo-present-on-lp.229120/

sleeve according to wikipedia at least preecho refers to digital compression artifacts. the tape phenomenon is “print-through” - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Print-through

thank you!

Digital tapes can also be affected by contact print effects in a phenomenon known as "bit-shift" when upper or lower layers of tape cause a middle layer to alter the pulses recorded to represent binary information.

/\freaking me out.

^^ one of many reasons why Albini hated DAT iirc #onethread

i am genuinely unsettled by it. in a purely wordless emotional way that i can only compare to the feeling experienced by the phrase "uncanny valley." but it's an entirely different vibe because it's some real ghost in the machine shit.

tyvm for those links btw

yeah this is a total rabbit hole

DuPont[3] in conjunction with Otari[4] invented a form of thermal magnetic duplication ("TMD") by which a high-coercivity metal mother master tape was brought into direct contact with a chromium dioxide copy (slave) tape. The coercivity of the mother tape is higher than that of the copy tape, so when the copy tape is heated and brought into contact with the mother tape, the copy tape gets a mirror image of the signal on the mother tape without the mother tape losing its signal. The recording on the mother tape was a mirror image of a valid video signal. Immediately before the copy tape came into contact with the mother tape, a focused laser beam heated it to its Curie point at which its value of coercivity dropped to very low values so that it picked up a near perfect copy of the mother tape as it cooled.[5][6] The mother tape was made using a special reel to reel video tape recorder called a mirror master recorder[7] and was held inside the machine in an endless loop. This system could achieve speeds of up to 300 times playback speed in NTSC VHS SP mode, 900 times in VHS EP mode and 428 times in PAL/SECAM tapes.[8]

DAT tape always struck me as a "worst of both worlds" idea

DAT was a godsend to concert tapers, so I can't disparage it - it totally had its uses.