The current prototype has half that many. Most small. The patent was merely illustrative. The minimum number required for a given room depends on the room itself. The design must be customized to the room it's going to be used in.
Sounds like a cool system. I'd love to hear it. As you might have guessed, I'm into that sort of thing.
The entire idea, especially the mathematical model occurred to me all at once one day like a bolt from the blue. It was completey unexpected. The novelty is in the way the problem is approached. That's one reason I don't publish it. Once it is seen by someone "skilled in the art", it becomes obvious. I once showed it to a mathematician. He called it "trivial." And he was right. I learned a lot. From this I learned that often the quality of the answer you get depends on the quality and nature of the question you ask. A paradigm includes not only how you solve a problem but how you frame it to begin with. That often limits the range of available solutions. That's what those who trained managers in large corporations at seminars in the 1990s were talking about when they discussed "thinking outside the box." If a question is asked in just the right way, a new answer may just fall out of the sky, one that you would not have thought of had you use the more conventional way of looking at it.
It took me two years to build the first prototype. It succeeded far beyond my expectations. It also evolved into something much more complicated than I'd expected too. Even in its current form, it is too complex for even advanced audiophiles let alone tyros to assemble and adjust. Adapting the technology to where it is user friendly meaning the user doesn't have to do anything except insert a recording and play it will require a lot of further development. It isn't clear it will even work in many rooms.
There are major differences betwen this sound system and other types. For one the room becomes an integral part of the sound system. And for another there is no sweet spot, any spot in most of the listening room is about as good a place to listen as any other.
The question that bugged me for the longest time was whether the results of the unique type of sound field this machine produces is actually better or merely different from what othe machines produce. The most interesting and revealing indications came from demonstrating it to people who had little or no interest in music or recordings. Then the question arose, if it is better, why is it better. I've been thinking about that question for nearly 35 years and have some theories about that too. The science of psychoacoustics is still rather primitive IMO, there remains much to be learned. (There is also a related science I call neuroacoustics for which evidence is documented anecdotally by among others Dr. Oliver Sachs in his book "Musicophilia." Sachs is a neurosurgeon at Columbia Presbyterian Hospital in NYC.)
There are many unusual and adjustable qualites to the sound fields this machine produces but I think the most surprising and immediately noticed one is a remarkable and convincing sense of space. The process seems to work equally well on all genres of music too. I currently have a patent attorney who wants me to apply for further patents on improved versions. I'm rather hesitant having experienced an infringement on the last one and there was nothing I could do about it. I've only got one suitable customer for it who would likely be interested in developing it and has the resources and appropriate technologies to turn it into a viable consumer product (it isn't Yamaha.) I'll probably give it one last try in the next year or two. The last time I tried it in the early 1980s there was no interest in it. If there remains no interest, it will remain a "one off" example of an idea that will die with me. Knowing that will have its own satisfactions.
I'd like to ask when the ship date is, but it sounds like quite possibly never . . .
Do you have a setup that you currently use and listen to ?
Being the playback enviroment is much more controlled, how well would your idea work with headphones/earphones ?
.
Never see the light of day on the market, that just might be its fate.
Yes I have a prototype which continues to slowly evolve. It uses existing off the shelf technology that has been adapted for this use. Cost is not a factor, this is not the most expensive thing to build anymore. In fact the entire current prototype probably cost under $3000. Much of the equipment was bought used.
This idea will not work with headphones. When I first read about binaural sound, I thought it was the greatest idea since sliced bread....until I got to the end of the article where the author said that it sounded like the music was coming from inside your head. But then I was only about 14 years old.
Understanding why this happens with binaural sound and why it can't be made to work as hoped for is a real step in understanding sound fields and how the human brain perceives sound. We know it has to do with the fact that the sound turns with your head. But why this matters is a key to unlocking the mysteries of this problem. There are other clues from understanding why certain ideas don't work that give more insight. There are a lot of things that can be learned from studying failed efforts. Inside many of them are germs of good ideas that never fully bore fruit. Some of them can even be rescued.
Never say never, 3 axis MEMS gyro + DSP => headphones was an interesting demo. It certainly was a change from the usual headphone listening.
I've heard the SVS Realizer which reproduces loudspeaker & room "sound" in headphones with personal HRTF and head angle tracking
SVS Technology
they have done a end run around the probelm of what is "correct" by just settling for replicating a real loudspeaker & room at one listening position
quite convincing "outside your head" sound on a short listen in the demo room with 5.1 source material - and you do need loudspeakers and room to do the "personalization" - but only for ~1/2 hr - some people have mastering studio "personal calibrations"
SVS Technology
they have done a end run around the probelm of what is "correct" by just settling for replicating a real loudspeaker & room at one listening position
quite convincing "outside your head" sound on a short listen in the demo room with 5.1 source material - and you do need loudspeakers and room to do the "personalization" - but only for ~1/2 hr - some people have mastering studio "personal calibrations"
Well, now I know why we haven't heard much from John here lately. He's busy over at Tweaker's Asylum hawking Bybee Purifiers.
Bybee Purifiers
The heart of the Bybee Purifier is a ceramic tube that is coated on the surface with: ' ... combinations of rare earth metals (zirconium, yttrium, neodymium, praseodymium, and lanthanum oxides) It is this combination of materials that creates a barrier which isolates and absorbs specific electrons.' (From an early brochure). This is the best explanation ever offered, even to me.
se
Bybee Purifiers
The heart of the Bybee Purifier is a ceramic tube that is coated on the surface with: ' ... combinations of rare earth metals (zirconium, yttrium, neodymium, praseodymium, and lanthanum oxides) It is this combination of materials that creates a barrier which isolates and absorbs specific electrons.' (From an early brochure). This is the best explanation ever offered, even to me.
se
Last edited:
Well, now I know why we haven't heard much from John here lately. He's busy over at Tweaker's Asylum hawking Bybee Purifiers.
Bybee Purifiers
The heart of the Bybee Purifier is a ceramic tube that is coated on the surface with: ' ... combinations of rare earth metals (zirconium, yttrium, neodymium, praseodymium, and lanthanum oxides) It is this combination of materials that creates a barrier which isolates and absorbs specific electrons.' (From an early brochure). This is the best explanation ever offered, even to me.
se
Snake oil purifiers. How ridiculous !!
I thought John said he knew Jack Bybee before the infamous devices were created. Could be wrong on that, but maybe not.
Jack Bybee's one great mistake? He didn't hook up with a great marketing guy like Bob Carver, or even Mark Levinson. The efforts that JC is making causes me to feel embarrassed for him. It's a traveling road show now.
-Chris
Jack Bybee's one great mistake? He didn't hook up with a great marketing guy like Bob Carver, or even Mark Levinson. The efforts that JC is making causes me to feel embarrassed for him. It's a traveling road show now.
-Chris
Yes I believe the idea was stolen from aliens by the military during the Roswell incident
The following picture is is a well known audiofool interrogating an alien
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
What are you laughing at? Inductive reasoning informs us that where there are large inductances they are likely being induced to induct.
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.