Schumann Resonator

Mahgister - you are not nuts. Like you say, you are conducting experiments in a lab type environment. You are not imposing a lab look into your living area like Chuck McGill on Better Call Saul. Sounds like you are having fun which is what this hobby is all about. I like hearing about your experiments.

It consumed Chuck's life and literally drove him nuts.

Double blind tests eliminate any bias, so long as they are conducted properly, which is not easy. Warm up times, adding or removing (or not changing) the variable, playing the passage exactly the same way, having the moderator not inadvertantly disclosing cues at whether or not they did anything, etc. An offhand comment about something sounding muddy when a speaker was moved off a cable elevator does not cut it.

If something does not have a logical description of how or why it works, then we should be skeptical. If something does, then it is up to the individual to determine the effect on the sound and if any, if it is worth the expenditure. 

The easier it is to understand the logical description by someone with a basic understanding of science and the scientific method, the greater the probability that it is worth consideration. People who dismiss double blind testing obviously do not have that and can't imagine an experiment on how to measure gravity's effect on falling objects for example, they just beleive it. Do they even know that the force due to gravity changes on the moon? Do they even care? 

Mahgister - you are not nuts. Like you say, you are conducting experiments in a lab type environment. You are not imposing a lab look into your living area like Chuck McGill on Better Call Saul. Sounds like you are having fun which is what this hobby is all about. I like hearing about your experiments.

Thanks for your kind words...

For sure my goal was not an experiment...It was reaching satisfaction with my gear... With no money i never even know that it could be possible... The first steps begins by accident but in the journey i begin to understand what matters and why...

This is what i called the working controls in the 3 working embedding dimensions of any system...

Then the universal advice to upgrade begins to reveal to me his ugly face: an illusion half the time ....

Because it is more important to tune the gear at his right level of optimal working than buying new one....

Simple...

Who say that loudly?

I am not interested either by buying " tweaks" they are most of the times too costly and none of them solve by itself the problems in all 3 working embeddings dimensions... In the opposite the sum of all my low cost devices did it to a great extent all together...

Then i am anything save "nuts".... My audio dedicated room is "crazy" but it is NOT a reason to dismiss my conclusions....

The control over a free room for my experiment was my only real advantage over most people....My gear is good but average....

My sound is not average at all tough at the end... It is the best sound this average system could deliver and it is way more than what we think possible... It is the reason why i could affirm with confidence that most owner dont know what the gear  they already own is able to deliver in the right conditions....

@mahgister,

"This is not a QUESTION of price.... This is a question about simple possible low cost methods used to control vibrations, electrical noise floor and acoustic settings..."


I think it's fair to say that all 3 of these concepts have been accepted by and large by audio enthusiasts.

The only difference of opinion seems to be in the extent of their importance and the degree of the 'treatment' required.


@mijostyn,

"I just recently downloaded a seismometer app. I can put the phone down on any surface, tap or bang around and see if it registers on the phone. How cool is that?"



Actually I did the same thing to see if it was possible to measure the effectiveness of different forms of isolation under my speakers.

I downloaded the Physics Toolbox Accelerometer app (there's probably even better apps out there) and then spent some time learning how to use it. Unfortunately I then ran into one of my perennial problems of system set-up - namely a willing aide or accomplice.

Those of us who have partners genuinely willing to help conduct such experiments can count themselves very fortunate indeed.

So I failed to take it any further. Nevertheless such technology could prove extremely useful, especially for anyone with a turntable.

I think it’s fair to say that all 3 of these concepts have been accepted by and large by audio enthusiasts.

The only difference of opinion seems to be in the extent of their importance and the degree of the ’treatment’ required.

The sole fact that some disparate factors are well known without the concept and exact description that unite them is not sufficient to create clear understanding...

My concept creation is new: controls of the three working embeddings dimensions of any audio system, mechanical,electrical and acoustical...

The three factors are not new... Uniting them in a unique concept , the embeddings controls, make me able to affirm that the tuning of a system exceed by much the system itself....Speaking of "tweaks" is hiding this fundamental fact behind secondary addition to a system...Embeddings controls are the crux of audio on par at least with electronic design gear and they are NOT secondary addition by far...

Then we can point clearly to the deceptive and deceitful market concept of "upgrading"...

For someone with little experience the acoustical embeddings is the most impactful and the most important....

My two are arriving today from Amazon Prime.  If they enhance my audio experience great.  If not, maybe they will lower my blood pressure :)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2656447/