Funniest snake oil theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
patent examiners pretty much don't care what you say in patent text - all they care are the claims, prior art patent refs

many foolish, "obviously wrong" descriptions, background text assertions by current scientific and engineering understanding fly right by them - they have a very narrow definition of their job re "patent-ability"
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the patents mentioned are nothing more than marketing BS. When I saw that John Bedini was able to secure a patent for his "clarifier," claiming that spinning a CD in a fixed magnetic field not only resulted in data compression, but also rearranged the data on the disc, I knew that the patent system was little more than a joke (Bedini was also able to secure a patent on what is effectively a perpetual motion machine).

se
 
I find that silver sounds 'brighter', perhaps too 'bright' to be comfortable, unless it is broken in. This is for you newcomers who still use their ears for listening.
Why is this so John, any explanation...
Secondly, apart from listening and holding a hat, spectacles etc on your head what else do you use your ears for ? (those that can wiggle there ears do not need to answer).
And thirdly what else would you use to listen, apart from bone conduction?
Ah your eyes:)
 
We made a set of 7 Blowtorches with the highest quality copper hookup wire that I could find, then compared the result with a CTC blowtorch with silver hookup wire. Both sounded OK, but different. Silver being more forward and revealing, copper being more forgiving.
You see, this is how I learn how to make audio equipment that is not forgotten with the next thing new from the competition. I trust my ears, and those of my associates.
For 2 decades I gave up on silver wire as being too bright, but finally Bear came out with the 'perfect' silver hookup cable, and nothing has beaten it yet. I just wish I could buy some more.
 
We made a set of 7 Blowtorches with the highest quality copper hookup wire that I could find, then compared the result with a CTC blowtorch with silver hookup wire. Both sounded OK, but different. Silver being more forward and revealing, copper being more forgiving.
You see, this is how I learn how to make audio equipment that is not forgotten with the next thing new from the competition. I trust my ears, and those of my associates.
For 2 decades I gave up on silver wire as being too bright, but finally Bear came out with the 'perfect' silver hookup cable, and nothing has beaten it yet. I just wish I could buy some more.

Some may try to ridicule you on this but I agree with you and having spent years trawling through a great many posts on a number of forums it seems that hundreds if not thousands of other people also agree.

Whatever the reason, if it works for you, why not make use of it.

Silante

Davy
 
Silver being more forward and revealing, copper being more forgiving.
I've gone through this experience, over and over again, in many areas of fine-tuning - unrelated to silver vs. other wiring ...

My interpretation of such is that there is distortion in both the silver, and copper 'messages' - but the silver is the more 'correct' solution at this particular point in time. The copper being 'forgiving', equals distortion of masking, hiding detail which needs to be heard for the content of the recording to be fully appreciated -- and if it remains 'masked' then there is no chance of the recording coming fully to life. Whereas, the silver is allowing more of the recording to be audible, but, is either also revealing further underlying distortion which needs to be resolved; or, the implementation of the silver wiring is introducing some distortion artifacts as a by-product of how it's used or integrated into the device.

In simple terms: IME, 'dulling' is a backward step; 'sharpening', 'brightness', is forward motion which needs further refinement, work done to fully resolve the potential in the system.
 
i find out that normal cheap antenna coax cable with made in china ebay rca plugs on the end sounds better than normal "audio grade" expensive cables ( 2x 1meter of cable costs more than my dac so i find that expensive ). i belive that is becouse of smaller capacitance due to fat insulation inside coax
 
Frank, the problem with copper and silver is that they are still metals. As Pano has demonstrated, even a very bad liquid such as a bucket of mud can be indistinguishable from the best metal interconnects. Therefore, I think more research should be going into non metalic conductors for interconnects. VandenHull introduced carbon, but that is still a solid.
 
My interpretation of such is that there is distortion in both the silver, and copper 'messages' - but the silver is the more 'correct' solution at this particular point in time. The copper being 'forgiving', equals distortion of masking, hiding detail which needs to be heard for the content of the recording to be fully appreciated -- and if it remains 'masked' then there is no chance of the recording coming fully to life. Whereas, the silver is allowing more of the recording to be audible, but, is either also revealing further underlying distortion which needs to be resolved; or, the implementation of the silver wiring is introducing some distortion artifacts as a by-product of how it's used or integrated into the device.
I then danced naked round a pentagram I drew around my system, chanting "silver is shiny, silver brightens my sound" after sacrificing a tin of beans to Apollo, there was a puff of smoke, and I finally managed to exorcise the Maxwell Demons from my system.
Even my wife, who is not a audiophile, noticed the change straight away when she came in from the kitchen, saying "What the .... are you doing dancing round the living room naked covered in baked beans!"
:D
 
Last edited:
Frank, do you believe in spirit forces and other woo?

If so, that's OK, but what you have tried to describe above has about as much to do with audio engineering as ektoplasm.

But then, perhaps you are just having a laugh.
Not in the slightest. Various adjectives are thrown around with gay (can I say that, :) ?) abandon in audio - and they all have to do with attempting to describe the subjective impression of audible distortion. Rather than attempting to 'capture' that behaviour on a scope or other measuring device, I use my ears to pick 'what's going on' - very fast, and precise enough to get the job done.

In the same way, someone can fine-tune the responsiveness of a car engine - the 'engineer' will hook up a vast array of monitoring gear while he adjusts, the 'pragmatist' adjusts by varying some parameter, then hops in and drives to get a "seat of the pants" feel of whether an improvement has occurred -- which is the 'correct' way ...?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.