Schumann Resonator

1- it is cheap

2 it is an experiment not a market consumers products in a conditioning article in an audio review about a miraculous electronic new costly design to bought at all cost...

3 this experiment could improve many average system for peanuts

4 i propose an interesting complementary experiment for those not intellectually rigid and curious, with 2 different additions on top of the S.G.

5 it is not the first and best way to improve all audio system FOR SURE....A common place fact is not something we can use to bash the experiment....

6 but ONE of the best way to improve most audio system is not upgrading EITHER and may cost nothing at all and i prove it for myself: Acoustic active controls

7 those who bash a 20 bucks experimnent for no reason against all those who claim to like the effect of S.G. in their system and room are mostly consumers and sellers of costly hyped audio products or member of the "Skeptic sun day scientists boy club»

8 i am affilated with none of these groups

9 ANY electronic component in a system introduce noise of his own ’ a S.G. or a new amplifier, it is an engineering fact called a TRADE-OFF... we must deal with this trade-off our own way and in our own system to decide for or against....I did....By the way there is no system immune to the house noise floor ...But we can decrease it...I did....

10 read point number(9) 2 times to digest this nut of science ...

I have built systems that have inherent noise levels above absolute silence,

Not to rain on your parade Douglas_schroeder, it is quite the accomplishment I am sure, but don't all systems have inherent noise levels that are above absolute silence?

To be frank i dont understand a so much STRONG "irrational" reaction and bashing of a so fun and cheap experiment, an a rewarding one for many in the past, with even possible new discoveries if someone dare to experiment?

For sure some people can register no effect in their system and room and for them because of the many factors involving the different noise floor levels coming from mechanical, electrical and acoustical sources... And the discriminative hearing history of each listener being another one...

There exist only one answer to the rejection a priori : prejudices coming not from science but from "scientism" and from patent "sellers" habits here or owners of costly gear, who dont like the idea that audiophile experience may not be so costly at all...

Am i forgetting another reason?

The truth is simple tough, audiophile experience righfully implemented MAY cost peanuts.... Sorry for those who dont like the truth.


Acoustic is Queen in Sound and Music, not electronic design...It is only his useful mate for some kind of reproduction via Fourier method.... 😊 But learn by yourself that this Queen is hermaphrodite and does not need this mate at all cost....

Dont conflate the 2 .....The cost would be very high in all meaning of the words....

And dont believe only in science, like some in religion, learn it at your own level: experiment yourself the truth.....



«Man is greater than science because he dont conflate knowledge with understanding and understanding with truth»-Anonymus Smith

« Some "Science" is often only a fucking habit»-Groucho Marx

«Is it not only  a recipe?» -Chico Marx

By the way a simple experiment i made numerous time sometimes forgetting to put some part of my S.G. grid ON:

I disconnected few minutes ago 9 of my 12 S.G. : results: collapse of the " envelopment listener sphere" potential diameter to a very smaller or less powerful one... It is the way how the sound can be sitting in our face litterally and powerfully...It is not related to volume deafening listening by the way even if some minimal volume is required...

I decide to put them ON again... Results : Regaining immediately the listener envelopment sphere normal diameter and power...

You can conclude to "placebo", but it will be an easy erroneous conclusion, because placebo work for small borderline audible change, not for the perceptive collapse of the listener envelopment potential sphere, if you experience one to begins with and if you know what this concept acoustically means anyway to begins with....

It is not soundstage which is about the way sound go out of the space between speakers and the way each instruments is posit in 3 dimensions in perceived space...Envelopment listener  potential sphere diameter or power, is not the same experience nor the same concept...Imagine a voice coming immediately from your left ears but the speakers are in front of you? Or the same voice coming from the back of your head? And the speakers are in front of you....This is listener envelopment sphere,,, I gain it way better with my Helmholtz mechanical equalizer completed but i gain it mostly from my S.G. connected grid.... The two devices were necessary for my experience...

Most audio system are not enough rightfully set in the acoustical dimension of their room anyway to give to someone even one audible envelopment listener potential sphere experience.... Most people work hard to gain only a decent imaging and a decent soundstage and envelopment listener sphere come ONLY after imaging and sounstage are there already...It is with natural timbre perception very difficult to recreate but easy if we know how to deal with acoustic.... And in a small room it takes more than just balancing passive reflecting,absorbing and diffusing surface...It takes an activation and controls of the pressure zones which i did with my mechanical Helmholtz equalizer and in a less powerful way with my Ionizers...

 By the way this envelopment listerner potential sphere is also  linked to the original way the recording engineer put his microphones  and the type chosen  around or near the performers....Your are projected in the original performing space in an acoutically  translated way by your own room acoustical settings... It is a way more lively experience... 

Most people here dont even know what this envelopment listener potential  sphere is in a 2 speakers system experience....

Then for them calling my experience "placebo" reflect only the poor environment where they listen to....Or their lazy prejudices against a cheap experiment...Or their lack of acoustical experience in a small room...

Am i forgetting another reason?

Yes, there are some people who believe in science and physics and not voodoo.  There are people who are not gullible or naive and can realize when they are being conned.  Some people don't fall for the logical fallacy of "the appeal to authority", especially when the authority on science you are appealing to is Groucho Marx.

Results : Regaining immediately the listener envelopment sphere normal diameter and power... 

Interesting.  I thought the SR devices do not affect the sound or the listening environment, they only relax the listener so the music becomes more enjoyable.  Are you that easily affected that a change in mood can be turned on-off like a switch with immediate results?