Most of the rationalizations expressed here about why some people who have tried the Bybees like them, are just bogus.
Dan, as far was WHY Bybees work is pretty much as much a mystery to me as it is to you. It is true that about 20 years ago, I got fascinated in the effect and tried to find out though reading advanced physics texts what was really going on, and I learned a lot about strange physical effects, but not specifically how the Bybee might work. Of course there are at least 3 different approaches that Bybee has taken so far, and this leads to more confusion. First was the standard Bybee with the added resistor, like we are talking about, then came the 'Slipstream Bybee' where no conventional resistor would be found, even if you opened it up. This was tried by SY, but he did not dissect it to find out more.
Finally, now Bybee has introduced indirect effect devices that do not have to be directly attached to the circuitry, but effect the circuitry in some way. This is what I have been working with lately. It really transformed my OPPO 105 to a better player, and I have seen it used elsewhere, including one of my Vendetta Research preamps. It is supposed to work by changing the resonant frequency of the nitrogen molecule in the air around the circuitry, according to Jack.
Just yesterday, I attended a SF Audiophile Society event and found one of Bybee's latest devices sitting next to an OPPO 105. I asked about it and our hostess said that Bybee had left it, but it didn't seem to do much. However, to work, the device has to be placed INSIDE the OPPO 105, not sitting around next to it. If I then had the time, I would have installed it for her. I spoke to Jack Bybee later about it and he said that she would not let him install it, apparently afraid of damaging the 105, I presume. Oh well, maybe next time I visit I will place it where it can do the most good.
Dan, as far was WHY Bybees work is pretty much as much a mystery to me as it is to you. It is true that about 20 years ago, I got fascinated in the effect and tried to find out though reading advanced physics texts what was really going on, and I learned a lot about strange physical effects, but not specifically how the Bybee might work. Of course there are at least 3 different approaches that Bybee has taken so far, and this leads to more confusion. First was the standard Bybee with the added resistor, like we are talking about, then came the 'Slipstream Bybee' where no conventional resistor would be found, even if you opened it up. This was tried by SY, but he did not dissect it to find out more.
Finally, now Bybee has introduced indirect effect devices that do not have to be directly attached to the circuitry, but effect the circuitry in some way. This is what I have been working with lately. It really transformed my OPPO 105 to a better player, and I have seen it used elsewhere, including one of my Vendetta Research preamps. It is supposed to work by changing the resonant frequency of the nitrogen molecule in the air around the circuitry, according to Jack.
Just yesterday, I attended a SF Audiophile Society event and found one of Bybee's latest devices sitting next to an OPPO 105. I asked about it and our hostess said that Bybee had left it, but it didn't seem to do much. However, to work, the device has to be placed INSIDE the OPPO 105, not sitting around next to it. If I then had the time, I would have installed it for her. I spoke to Jack Bybee later about it and he said that she would not let him install it, apparently afraid of damaging the 105, I presume. Oh well, maybe next time I visit I will place it where it can do the most good.
I have similar experience with my mixture in that it is a proximity effect of sorts.
Placed around cables works, placed within equipment works, placed on chips and osc crystals works, used as a coating/paint works, placing on connector shroud/neutral works...etc, etc....
Dan.
Placed around cables works, placed within equipment works, placed on chips and osc crystals works, used as a coating/paint works, placing on connector shroud/neutral works...etc, etc....
Dan.
Last edited:
The only way to change audio signal is linear or nonlinear distortion of signal. It is so simple... We are able to meaure those effects orders of magnitudes bellow audibility treshold. Nothing such till now was prooved (simply because it is impossible..), "feelings" are not proofs . Here are no magic nor uknown effects.
The whole debate is shining example of snake oil marketing (read scam..) and I am very dissapointed that Mr. Curl is so engaged and advocating this.
The whole debate is shining example of snake oil marketing (read scam..) and I am very dissapointed that Mr. Curl is so engaged and advocating this.
Last edited:
When measuring down into noise there are noise behaviours that are averaged by typical T&M equipment and therefore not revealed.
No rec/pb gear is perfectly linear, and these noise behaviours cause secondary effects that are subtly audible ...once learned and identified they become obvious.
This is what BQP and my filters address.....the noise caused subtle modulations.
BQP causes a wideband 'dithering' that reduces the objectionable artifacts, but with slight signature.
My filter does same but different..... no signature except better clarity and instantaneous dynamics of audio playback/reinforcement.
In my experience different dithering shapes applied when down converting cause distinctly different audible artifacts.
Think about how 'house sound' is caused....Yamaha, Sony etc use different pcb substrates for starters.
Dan.
No rec/pb gear is perfectly linear, and these noise behaviours cause secondary effects that are subtly audible ...once learned and identified they become obvious.
This is what BQP and my filters address.....the noise caused subtle modulations.
BQP causes a wideband 'dithering' that reduces the objectionable artifacts, but with slight signature.
My filter does same but different..... no signature except better clarity and instantaneous dynamics of audio playback/reinforcement.
In my experience different dithering shapes applied when down converting cause distinctly different audible artifacts.
Think about how 'house sound' is caused....Yamaha, Sony etc use different pcb substrates for starters.
Dan.
The nitrogen clsim is curious.
That said, past experience with my filters has caused cracking on walls, and in rounds of trialling on a live PA system earlier this year there was ultra low f (seismic) stuff happening in the flooring and felt through the feet....iow some seious coupling into the venue structure.
Dan.
That said, past experience with my filters has caused cracking on walls, and in rounds of trialling on a live PA system earlier this year there was ultra low f (seismic) stuff happening in the flooring and felt through the feet....iow some seious coupling into the venue structure.
Dan.
And BQP should remove those rec/pb gear imperfections (nonlinearities)?? By what miracle?
Just opposite, thanks to averging we can disclose technical gear imperfections also in levels , that are normally buried in noise (or masked by noise, so inaudible) and try to make things better. It is better not to rely on mystery, but on critical thinking.
Last edited:
The resonant frequency of nitrogen like everything else depends on the strength of the magnetic field.
At 1 gauss the resonant frequency is 306 hz
earths magnetic field is typically between .25 and .65 gauss
Amen
I would tend to believe other factors would make a larger impact on sound.
Things such as temperature & humidity; At least those can be measured and reproduced.
They also sell Crystals
"Space evaporation strikes boost the space energy and enhance the sound reproduction and their listening experience."
.
Last edited:
It sounds as though you believe only large(r) effects matter. I'm sure they matter more, but that doesn't mean the small things don't. I have no idea about nitrogen resonance, but that is not my point.
It has been fun reading what you guys can prove is 'impossible'.
I just found a parallel criticism deluge regarding another QM device (a test instrument) from the 1950's. Let me give you the quote:
"Now to a surprising number of people, this idea seemed not only heretical but patently absurd and they told us so in person, by letter, in publications, and by actually doing experiments which claimed to show that we were wrong. At the most basic level they asked how, if photons are emitted at random in a thermal source, can they appear in pairs at two detectors. At a more sophisticated level the enraged physicist would brandish some sacred text, usually by Heitler, and point out that ... our analysis was invalidated by the uncertainty relation...."
R. Hanbury Brown, THE INTENSITY INTERFEROMETER (Taylor and Francis, New York, 1974 p. 7.
Does this sound like some of you? '-)
I just found a parallel criticism deluge regarding another QM device (a test instrument) from the 1950's. Let me give you the quote:
"Now to a surprising number of people, this idea seemed not only heretical but patently absurd and they told us so in person, by letter, in publications, and by actually doing experiments which claimed to show that we were wrong. At the most basic level they asked how, if photons are emitted at random in a thermal source, can they appear in pairs at two detectors. At a more sophisticated level the enraged physicist would brandish some sacred text, usually by Heitler, and point out that ... our analysis was invalidated by the uncertainty relation...."
R. Hanbury Brown, THE INTENSITY INTERFEROMETER (Taylor and Francis, New York, 1974 p. 7.
Does this sound like some of you? '-)
Give it a rest, the last few pages have just been hilarious, you and Max make a great double team...
Haven't even seen any real measurements yet that actually back any of the pseudo science up. Never mind the damage this stuff does to the image of the hobby...
But its a chuckle, we must have had every cutting edge physics phenomena now associated with the Bybee's.
Haven't even seen any real measurements yet that actually back any of the pseudo science up. Never mind the damage this stuff does to the image of the hobby...
But its a chuckle, we must have had every cutting edge physics phenomena now associated with the Bybee's.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.