Just for reference here is the lync Jack Bybee's Quantum Purifier website
Bybee Technologies | Our Technology
The claims are quite remarkable.
Bybee Technologies | Our Technology
The claims are quite remarkable.
Would you mind to display some numbers, for us to see how "lowered skin affects" would improve transfer of high audio frequencies.
Not to answer each and every post individually, let me make myself a bit clearer if I can. AS I said, whther I understand how soething works has nothing to do with how it does or does not actually work. Over th year, like most of us here, I've benn treated by a slew of wonderful new and "new" ciruits and systems, all of which claimed to improve the sound. From cables, and you know THOSE stories and ads, to new pastes to new internal circuits, you name it. And truth be told, the vast majority of such claims never cut the cake in my book, they went either unnoticed and only like 1 in a hundred actually could be heard, not necessarily as a clear improvement.
All this has caused me to write my own sales texts with two points to make: 1) my filter can only HELP your electronics sound a bit better, but ultimately it will always boil down to the electronics, I just free them from has, but I cannot improve them, and 2) the end effects of any filter, including mine, can never be foreseen prisely, they can range from next to nothing to unbelievable, and to find out which, there's only one way - try them out in your system, see how it goes, and if you feel they don't justify their price, pack them up and ship them back to me at my cost. I am pleased to note that in 13 years, only one was returned., which is around 0.5% of the total made. I like to believe that low percentage is all the sales blurb I really need. I have NEVER claimed anything that couldn't be proved by measurement and always called my device exactly what it is, a power line FILTER. Period. It creates noting by itself, it doesn't have anything to do with the signal except that it removes what may have been a problem without them, and allows the circuits inside a device to work free of some known problems and do the best they can.
Some deivices react favorably, some don't, which is why I insist as best I can that you try before buying. You have the opportunity, so use it.
The deplorable sales gimmicks used by far too many. like suggesting or outright claiming that they have just discovered hot water is up to them and their conciousness and self respect. I like to sleep peacefully and keep my self respect knowing I did whatever I could to fairly present my product by making no false or even doubtful claims. Others obviously feel differently about that, but that's their business.
That I must be doing something right has been confirmed by tests in some magazins, such as the French NOuvel Revue de Son, a Danish mag (unfortunately in Danish, which I do not speak) which compared my product with thelikes of Nordost and found that mine was as good as the Nordost in every way, only it was about 1/3 of their price) and so forth.
Which is why so much "reverse engineering" here has so little impact on me. If anyone here feels they can do better, by all means, go for it. Just for the fun of it, use standard Wima caps in one sample and X-25 caps in another, then come back and tell me it's all the same thing. Like hell it is.
Then step back and think - what are standards for? It's a sad truth that there are quite a few manufacturers out there who do not observe safety standards. I have seen a few cheap Chinese power line filters which use standard caps rated at 250VDC, which is indeed too low in those initial surge situations. Read standards, the British standard being an excellent example; it'll take you like 10 minutes to realize that standards are written to define the lowest allowable level, to force those who prefer profit to safety to use what is a minimum of safety. They are meant to prevent the inevitable jackass here and there from doing something dangerous. Be it the maker, or an end user. As I said before, in 13 years not one filter has ever failed, except the one with me, and I strongly suspect it's one of the 0.68 uF caps which is to blame. And I know for a fact that the initial switch on moment is not too bad in terms of current because the filter is protected by a fast blow 10A fuse, and it never blew even if it's located on the inpit side of the filter. These fuses are mandated by law, and even if they weren't I'd still use them, just in case. I was informed by one customer from Singapore that a fuse kept blowing, but the problem was traced to a faulty power amplifier with a rather substantial transformer, and once that was repaired, no further problems were encountered.
Lastly, regarding its actual effects on audio. Why don't you try and see, rather than do so much guesswork? If your internal power supplies are good, it won't have too much to do, but you can still compare input vs. output and know that the output is actually cleaner no matter what. It's that simple.
All this has caused me to write my own sales texts with two points to make: 1) my filter can only HELP your electronics sound a bit better, but ultimately it will always boil down to the electronics, I just free them from has, but I cannot improve them, and 2) the end effects of any filter, including mine, can never be foreseen prisely, they can range from next to nothing to unbelievable, and to find out which, there's only one way - try them out in your system, see how it goes, and if you feel they don't justify their price, pack them up and ship them back to me at my cost. I am pleased to note that in 13 years, only one was returned., which is around 0.5% of the total made. I like to believe that low percentage is all the sales blurb I really need. I have NEVER claimed anything that couldn't be proved by measurement and always called my device exactly what it is, a power line FILTER. Period. It creates noting by itself, it doesn't have anything to do with the signal except that it removes what may have been a problem without them, and allows the circuits inside a device to work free of some known problems and do the best they can.
Some deivices react favorably, some don't, which is why I insist as best I can that you try before buying. You have the opportunity, so use it.
The deplorable sales gimmicks used by far too many. like suggesting or outright claiming that they have just discovered hot water is up to them and their conciousness and self respect. I like to sleep peacefully and keep my self respect knowing I did whatever I could to fairly present my product by making no false or even doubtful claims. Others obviously feel differently about that, but that's their business.
That I must be doing something right has been confirmed by tests in some magazins, such as the French NOuvel Revue de Son, a Danish mag (unfortunately in Danish, which I do not speak) which compared my product with thelikes of Nordost and found that mine was as good as the Nordost in every way, only it was about 1/3 of their price) and so forth.
Which is why so much "reverse engineering" here has so little impact on me. If anyone here feels they can do better, by all means, go for it. Just for the fun of it, use standard Wima caps in one sample and X-25 caps in another, then come back and tell me it's all the same thing. Like hell it is.
Then step back and think - what are standards for? It's a sad truth that there are quite a few manufacturers out there who do not observe safety standards. I have seen a few cheap Chinese power line filters which use standard caps rated at 250VDC, which is indeed too low in those initial surge situations. Read standards, the British standard being an excellent example; it'll take you like 10 minutes to realize that standards are written to define the lowest allowable level, to force those who prefer profit to safety to use what is a minimum of safety. They are meant to prevent the inevitable jackass here and there from doing something dangerous. Be it the maker, or an end user. As I said before, in 13 years not one filter has ever failed, except the one with me, and I strongly suspect it's one of the 0.68 uF caps which is to blame. And I know for a fact that the initial switch on moment is not too bad in terms of current because the filter is protected by a fast blow 10A fuse, and it never blew even if it's located on the inpit side of the filter. These fuses are mandated by law, and even if they weren't I'd still use them, just in case. I was informed by one customer from Singapore that a fuse kept blowing, but the problem was traced to a faulty power amplifier with a rather substantial transformer, and once that was repaired, no further problems were encountered.
Lastly, regarding its actual effects on audio. Why don't you try and see, rather than do so much guesswork? If your internal power supplies are good, it won't have too much to do, but you can still compare input vs. output and know that the output is actually cleaner no matter what. It's that simple.
No Pavel, Richard has spoken his piece, and if you disbelieve, YOU prove him wrong. Let everyone do their own legwork, rather than just typing "I do not believe that!". The burden of proof should be with the doubting Toms, and some here are doubting Toms by default (I am tempted to say "by vocation").
On Bybees - has anyone tried to look at before and after effects? Comapred input with output? If it does something, there should be an identifiable difference.
If anyone sues anyone, the one suing will be expected to show good cause, and "I don't believe it!" won't impress the judge.
We can discuss their sales strategies and policies, but that would be much more to the point if one could see the before and after 'scope shots.
If anyone sues anyone, the one suing will be expected to show good cause, and "I don't believe it!" won't impress the judge.
We can discuss their sales strategies and policies, but that would be much more to the point if one could see the before and after 'scope shots.
No, I would never knowingly sell anything to a naysayer, the trouble is not worth the gain.
What makes you think anyone cares whether you believe in something you have never tried? Are you inviting sales offers?
So true, Abraxalito. I think a healthy dose of skepticism is a good thing, but doubting by default is wrong, I think. To be fair, the rather wild and outlandish sales blurb does encourage one to doubt, but in things audio, I truly believe only in what I can or cannot hear.
But it's not the doubt that bothers me, it's the switching of roles. X says this is so, and Y does not draw upon personal experience and previously done tests, but doubts by default and demands that he be convinced, shifting the legwork to X. As if X gives a damn whether Y is convinced or not. In legal practice, if I call X a snake oil peddler, I have to prove why this is so, using recognized tests and effects, you do not say to X now prove what you say. He can show a list of say 100 satisfied customers and he's done.
Last edited:
Yes, I have. There isn't. It's a fraud. But it's useful for John to whip out now and then when he thinks he's not getting enough attention.
Exactly the opposite. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
And yes, some are doubters demanding proof when extraordinary claims are made, and do that as a vocation. We call it "science," and that's the difference between scientists and charlatans.
Within the realms of pure 'belief' systems, anything goes.
Add a bit of rationality (everyday life, engineering, science) and the burden of proof is with the one making the claim.
“In civil law cases, the plaintiff is normally charged with the burden of proof.”
“In criminal law cases, the burden of proof is placed on the prosecution, who must demonstrate that the defendant is guilty before a jury may convict him or her. The prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.”
In US there is also a procedural step called ‘discovery’:
“A category of procedural devices employed by a party to a civil or criminal action, prior to trial, to require the adverse party to disclose information that is essential for the preparation of the requesting party's case and that the other party alone knows or possesses.”
As it seems, you have not followed the BB issue from the beginning
By the way, where is Eddy? (I hope you are doing well SE)
Dejan
At least one of the participants has gone some good way toward this direction. He has published his findings.
Make a search, his name is not Tom (*).
There are not all ‘armchair nay sayers’ here.
George
(*) He answered already
Last edited:
Just because it didn't work for you is no proofa it oesn't work at all. There could be several reasons for that:
1, You live near your local transformer and have few between you, hence naturally less much in the power line, but remember, not everyone has your luck;
2. Your audio devices have unudsually good PSUs, but if so, do remember not everyone has that kind of PSUs,
3. Your audio system is not as revealing as you believe it to be, while others may do better, etc.
I take your statement that it does nothing FOR YOU, and nobody else will know that better than you yourself. That's all right and fair enough. But based on your audio system, you cannot know whether it does nothing for someone else with a mch different system.
SY doubting as such is far removed from science, and demanding proof is also no science. What happens if you measure a device and find that there is no measurable difference between input and output, yet the sound changes with in comparison without? How do you prove that? Or all those cases when unit A measures better than unit B, yet unit B sounds better? Or have you never come across such a case?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.