2. misc-audio
  3. 128728-1324

A Big DIY Bang for Your Buck?

I believe in getting the biggest bang out of my audio buck that I can. I don't know about you but my audio budget is actually limited. I find it interesting when I hear about folks spending a zillion on the best magnetic cables and then someone comes along with some new cable technology like new liquid-infused cables that equal or best the magnetic cables at a fraction of the price. Some makers of magnetic and other cables may want you to believe that a patent pending means there must be something there that ordinary Joe Audio could never make himself. My experience leads me to say -- don't believe it.

I have been using neodymium magnets for years in my cables and around my system to improve SQ -- at a fraction of the cost that makers of magnet-containing products charge. OK, mine may not be at the very top of the performance chain when compared to those expensive products, but who cares? I have managed to get stunning returns for a pittance. It would have cost thousands, or tens of thousands, to obtain similar results from various makers.

The same applies to audio makers with a patent pending (or an actual patent) who market little aluminum audio resonators the size of pimples. I make my own resonator pimples for about a buck apiece -- with stunning results. I saved over $4,000 making 70 of my own. Maybe they are not at the very top of the performance chain compared to those expensive products, but who cares? I am very happy with results that are far beyond what I expected when I started out.

I am having a lot of fun doing DIY projects at home that reap wonderful results at a small fraction of the cost charged by audio makers for their similar products. Have others had similar experiences making their own audio products at home? Can you share your DIY experiences with us?
sabai
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
I already stated the signal IS affected by magnets. Just not in a good way. Let me give you an example. If you remove the steel I.e., magnetic door from the circuit breaker box the sound will improve significantly. Putting the magnetic door back on degrades the sound. Plus the reason manufacturers went from steel chassis to aluminum chassis was primarily a sound issue. If you like the sound of magnetic chassis then steel chassis is for you.

sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
geoffkait,

You're right. The signal is affected by magnets. Just not in a good way. In a very good way.

I am not touching my breaker.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Herman
Geoffkait: Someone mentioned magnets were being used to cut down on RFI/EMI. That’s an interesting idea in light of the fact, no pun intended, that RF is comprised of photons which as we know have no magnetic charge.

to which Herman replied,

EMI stands for ElectroMagnetic Interference. RFI stands for Radio Frequency Interference which is comprised of electromagnetic waves, not photons.

Try to keep up with the discussion. Electromagnetic waves are comprised of photons. All electromagnetic waves. Light, X-rays, radio waves, what have you. They’re all photons.

then Herman wrote,

I’ll leave it to the group to decide who is correct.

That's mighty decent of you but I think we’ve already seen what happens when you let the group decide. 😩




herman
2,254 posts
 
OK, you have me on a technicality about photons but you are still wrong at the most fundamental level.

As you can see from the quotes below and many others, if you care to look, photons are usually reserved for visible light.

The term photon (meaning "visible-light particle") was coined for these energy packets.

from http://prasoondiwakar.com/wordpress/trivia/origin-of-word-photon

The word photon can be broken down to Greek word phōs, which means light. Phōs can also be related to Sanskrit word bhā or ābhā which means light.

When you discuss RF you usually don’t hear any discussion of photons, just the electromagnetic wave.

In any case they are all electromagnetic waves so any contention that RF does not have a magnetic component is just wrong

from http://www.universetoday.com/74027/what-are-photons/

Photons are basically the most visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.

from http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/photon

The photon is the fundamental particle of visible light.

In some ways, visible light behaves like a wave phenomenon, but in other respects it acts like a stream of high-speed, submicroscopic particles. Isaac Newton was one of the first scientists to theorize that light consists of particles. Modern physicists have demonstrated that the energy in any electromagnetic field is made up of discrete packets. The term photon (meaning "visible-light particle") was coined for these energy packets.



photon[foh-ton]
noun1.a quantum of electromagnetic radiation,

A photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic field including electromagnetic radiation such as light, and the force carrier for the electromagnetic force


As always, it is interesting to see how some twist the science to suit their needs. In this case, latching onto the nonmagnetic nature of photons to justify a position while ignoring the fact that it is also an electromagnetic wave. I apologize to those who are more interested in the end result than the science behind it. 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
No, you’re the one that’s wrong at the fundamental level. Light is photons and electromagnetic waves. That’s why light travels at the speed of light. It’s also why audio signals in wire travel at near light speed - because the signal is comprised of photons. Audio signals would travel at the speed of light in a vacuum. Everything that’s in the electromagnetic spectrum is comprised of photons. Light, all radio frequencies, gamma rays, X-rays, audio signals in wire. They're all in the electromagnetic spectrum AND they're all comprised of photons. Follow?

More to discover