2. tech-talk
  3. 147563-110926

Vibratory or Not?

This is a discussion that for me began on the Stereophile forum which went horribly wrong in my opinion. I was wondering though if this same topic could be discussed here as it comes up a lot in one form or another. My background has been about vibratory tuning as far back as the 70's work in the recording industry and continued into home audio and beyond. The audio signal is one that can be easily tuned, I doubt there is much room there for debate, but we will see, it's Audiogon after all. This being the case I have always concluded that the audio signal is vibratory so has anyone I have ever worked with. It's a common and sometimes even daily practice for someone here to make a vibratory adjustment changing the sound which is obvious to all.

On some of these forum threads however you will see posts saying to get rid of the vibration, without any explanation as to how to remove vibration without altering the audio signal. Every vibratory move I have ever seen done changes the performance of the sound. I've also been a part of the variables of the audio signal during play in real time. If the audio signal is not vibratory how does it change?

I invite you to discuss the vibratory structure and nature of the audio signal.

thanks, lets keep trolling to a minimum please

michaelgreenaudio
michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
1,019 posts
 

Geoff when you were instructing with "oscillating or vibrating" memos saying that the audio signal is not either but sighting an alternating current. You do realize that AC is measured in oscillations don't you? In fact in electrical engineering you are taught that AC is vibratory current.

BTW audionuttoo "Certified Professional Engineer and Class A Master Electrician" is pretty high up on the food chain of engineers.

Sometimes I get a little kick out of you and kosst, as you both try to marginalize our teaching here at the tune without knowing our collective schooling. It's kind of a joke amongst us when we talk about "audiophile experts". We usually find that the audio internet EE's who boast the most actually have the fewest courses under their belts in reality, or the most dated.

MG

geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
“Oscillation” not equal “vibration.” You need to define your terms. Words mean different things to different people. - Bob Dylan
michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
1,019 posts
 

Hi Geoff thanks for the reference. Here's why I ask.

 "However, in terms of sound quality the height and internal pressure can vary."

Absolute isolation does not vary. Something that varies is not isolated.

"because there are a lot of variables involved"

Again if we are speaking about "vibratory or not" variables relates to vibratory adjustables.

The reason I wanted to be very clear on your responses is to make note that the responses you gave were completely in line with the audio signal being vibratory, tunable and not isolated from the fundamental interactions.

MG

geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
I never said isolation was absolute. Where do you come up with this stuff? It sounds eerily like Star Sound. 🤡 all these words you’re throwing around have different meanings to different people. So discussions can get bogged down rapidly. When you assume something it makes a fool out of me and Uma Thurman.
michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
1,019 posts
 

"“Oscillation” not equal “vibration.” You need to define your terms."

Now I feel we are getting somewhere as far as terms. Is your main objection that you feel "oscillations" and "vibration" should not be in the same camp?

MG

More to discover