Talk but not walk?

Regards to the dated Pioneer receiver:

MG took his time and converted this amp into a variable music machine that now can easily rival the very best of the best.

@jf47t,

Please provide a list of what equipment you believe to be the best of the best.

While at Axpona (this year) I listened to a pair of mono-blocks in two totally different environments designed by Rick Schultz of High Fidelity Cables and assembled by Peter Israelson. Peter is a member of Star Sound and has walked in your shoes prior to me. He is one of the most gifted and knowledgeable people I met in HEA and just think, MG “left him go” too ⌣.

This amplifier design uses Magnetic Conduction Technology where magnets and nickel tubing are used to pass signal and not copper wire (MCT is protected by US patents). These two gents are very good friends of mine as we share technologies and knowledge for the advancement of sound and audio. Bias aside, I consider this amplifier design a must hear and a strong contender for that ‘best of the best’ from my highly opinionated and extremely limited list of finest sounding electronics.

Sorry to state j47t, but the materials used to build the Pioneer chassis and chassis mass disqualifies the capability of holding a proverbial sonic candle in comparison to this design. Obviously these amplifiers are expensive to own. In fact, they enter the MG world where not only is HEA dead but so are large chassis electronics - dead. There were three pair sold since their debut in January of this year which puts MG’s claims to question.

If the reports and observations provided by gulpson concerning the Pioneer power conductors sticking in the AC outlet without a surrounding casing are correct and the public is permitted into the building; makes for a great case in search of a building inspector, fire marshal and if there is ever an accident of any kind, a good attorney. Cancels the insurance policy too!

There is the removing of the chassis cover again and we are awaiting an answer as to how that works in relationship with tuning techniques as previously requested?

You create a lot of wind… but zero answers to any questions on technical and/or mechanical function.

Robert

@geoffkait

>>>>So, let me get this straight. You guys apparently have a mission statement

Yes, in a nutshell... 

Mission and Vision:

To create and establish a newfound science from understanding the detrimental effects caused by vibration ultimately affecting the operational performance of any equipment utilizing or manipulating power through its operation. Establishing a higher level of product operational efficiency while reducing power consumption.

and standard operating procedure to let the vibrations flow freely, right? And this mission statement and SOP obviously precludes the use of vibration isolation, right?

Yes and yes,

In fact, if I can be so bold, you guys actually believe that vibration isolation is not (rpt not) possible, correct me if I’m wrong.

Yes,

“True isolation” can never be achieved in real world applications. In audio, there are various techniques that alter sound through isolation principles however “true” isolation can never be achieved (physics, laws of gravity and motion and Coulomb’s law) in 'real world applications'.

So, are you guys claiming a scientific conspiracy of massive proportions that the project to detect and observe gravity waves LIGO uses a complex and comprehensive system of vibration isolation (they say is) required to isolate and stabilize the optics and other critical parts of the experiment from extremely low frequency vibration?

No.

We spent little time analyzing LIGO as we are in the music, sound and audio industries where this multimillion dollar experiment has no bearing on our business and - no sound.

However, even LIGO requires mechanical grounding supports for function as a non-isolation resonance energy transfer support system is used to champion their isolation techniques in a 'real world application'.

Everyone and his brother knows shape is an important aspect of isolation and energy control. That is why the Super DH (Diamond Hardness) Cone is superior in performance to the Jumbo DH cone which is the same basic size but slightly different shape. We’ve known that for more than 20 years, probably more than 25 years.

First, we are not claiming to be the originator of variable shapes.

Our research is taking us towards what is “not” totally understood regarding shapes related to vibration, interfering energy, resonance transfer and product function.

Secondly, hardness has very little to do with our technology where damping factors and mass related to material science combined with mechanical grounding techniques are more the focus.

My question for you is; what does hardness have to do with attack, sustain and decay qualities related to sound reproduction equipment or musical instruments?

We find that the "harder is better" approach to materials related to musical applications has drawbacks. The harder materials generally elevates pitch and narrows frequency range when applied to sound reproduction equipment, musical instruments and fails miserably when combined with a Sistrum geometry.

Robert

audiopoint,

Thanks for reading my post. What I meant was that it seems like just wires stuck in the wall outlet. However, pictures are not that clear and that outlet is in the back so there may be something else that is there and which I did not notice. That is why I asked about it. If there is such an unnoticed thing involved, I would guess it has something to do with the orange-colored receptacle wires appear to be plugged in. It is truly intriguing to see it so I thought I would ask about the story behind it.

You are way more technical than some of us so you may understand differences in materials and what to expect from certain configuration much better. Your praise of those amplifiers is interesting although I have to admit I got lost in the description of why they work in a certain way. Still, I would keep my mind open that someone very capable could, indeed, make a Pioneer receiver sound great. Seems unlikely, but we will not know until we try. And try we cannot unless we know how to make it that good.

On a totally different note, but fully connected to that poor nostalgic-looking Pioneer we are dragging into this mess, I have another question.

Many of the modifications/tuning/tweaks are on a very small level, yet they are allegedly producing significant changes in sound. Earlier in the thread, there was talk about removing covers, freeing capacitors, etc. with some theories how and why it may work. Removing a cover from a receiver, let it be this Pioneer for this purpose, exposes it to much more dust. Would the layer of dust on electronic parts influence the sound in any way? Does anyone have any theory about it? In case it does, would dusting it off be considered a tweak, tuning, or something third? If it does not influence the sound, why doesn't it?