I stumbled across a device called 'The Interface' at www.q-audio.com
It makes some interesting claims:
"Designed specifically for high-performance, high-resolution home audio and/or home theater systems, the InterFace addresses the inherent weak link common to virtually all single-ended (RCA) interfaces; the tying together of the power and signal reference grounds of each component via the interconnect's ground lead/shield.
The InterFace very effectively addresses this problem by eliminating the common ground path between single-ended components so that each component references only its own local ground. The result? Each component is allowed to operate at its optimum, allowing you to hear what your system is truly capable of."
I don't really understand that some device like this could really help, especially at the listed price of $US575.
I tried a Google search but can find no information or reviews to back up its claims.
Seems to be associated with a Steve Eddy who I see posting often in this forum? Beyond giving some useful DIY advice, he seems to have penchant for dissing other products like Bybees that he has no personal experience with.
Not sure what makes his product any different? In fact maybe they are competitors, since each seems to make claims to improve the quality of a line-level signal passing through it? At least I can find considerable reviews / posts backing the Bybee claims.
Has anyone had experience good or bad with this product?
It makes some interesting claims:
"Designed specifically for high-performance, high-resolution home audio and/or home theater systems, the InterFace addresses the inherent weak link common to virtually all single-ended (RCA) interfaces; the tying together of the power and signal reference grounds of each component via the interconnect's ground lead/shield.
The InterFace very effectively addresses this problem by eliminating the common ground path between single-ended components so that each component references only its own local ground. The result? Each component is allowed to operate at its optimum, allowing you to hear what your system is truly capable of."
I don't really understand that some device like this could really help, especially at the listed price of $US575.
I tried a Google search but can find no information or reviews to back up its claims.
Seems to be associated with a Steve Eddy who I see posting often in this forum? Beyond giving some useful DIY advice, he seems to have penchant for dissing other products like Bybees that he has no personal experience with.
Not sure what makes his product any different? In fact maybe they are competitors, since each seems to make claims to improve the quality of a line-level signal passing through it? At least I can find considerable reviews / posts backing the Bybee claims.
Has anyone had experience good or bad with this product?
I haven't used Steve's product, but I have used the guts of it, the Jensen balanced input transformers. They work as advertised. And unlike the Bybee stuff, they're based on sound science and engineering and produce a measurable (and in the case of my system, audible) difference.
And, no, I haven't tried every perpetual motion machine or healing crystal out there. But they're sold on the basis of LOTS of testimonial evidence; there's no shortage of gullible people out there. Credophilia lives and multiplies.
And, no, I haven't tried every perpetual motion machine or healing crystal out there. But they're sold on the basis of LOTS of testimonial evidence; there's no shortage of gullible people out there. Credophilia lives and multiplies.
Sales science..
Of course like all good salesmen, the figures he quotes are the best his can do vs the worst others are likely to do, so the results will vary from installation to installation.
This does not detract from the fact that there will be a real improvement.
The same, or better improvement could be gotten by employing real balanced interconnects (properly done), rather than Steve's pseudo's. His solution is however, elegant.
Of course like all good salesmen, the figures he quotes are the best his can do vs the worst others are likely to do, so the results will vary from installation to installation.
This does not detract from the fact that there will be a real improvement.
The same, or better improvement could be gotten by employing real balanced interconnects (properly done), rather than Steve's pseudo's. His solution is however, elegant.
shuang said:
(emphasise mine)
No need to try, shuang. How dare its inventor even think about using Bolivian rosewood in high-end audio? After reading the chip amp forum for 10 seconds, any half-serious audiophile will realize that only egyptian maplewood can reproduce sound to the true satisfaction of all audiophiles within twenty million milky way years.
Millwood,
You dissappoint me
That you can find nothing better to critisize than the case material. I could find no reference to the wood making any difference other than the appearance.
Where's the slightly abrasive and rational wit that we have come to know and love? If the engineering has shortcomings, why not attack that
Ah, I know the problem: Steve should have used MillWood
You dissappoint me
That you can find nothing better to critisize than the case material. I could find no reference to the wood making any difference other than the appearance.Where's the slightly abrasive and rational wit that we have come to know and love? If the engineering has shortcomings, why not attack that
Ah, I know the problem: Steve should have used MillWood
shuang said:
What I "diss" are BS technical claims. You don't need personal experience with something to address BS technical claims. And so far, there's not a shred of technical evidence backing up any of Bybee's technical claims.
So what? I can find reviews/posts backing up Peter Belt's claims that placing photographs of yourself in your freezer will make your system sound better.
The efficacy of line level isolation transformers has been proved technically for nearly a century now. It's not as if these things are anything new. But again, there's not a shred of technical evidence supporting any of Bybee's claims.
I don't consider Bybee any sort of competitor and have never advised anyone against trying them for themselves nor have I ever impugned anyone for using them. If using Bybee's products results in someone getting more enjoyment from their system, I say great!
I just think it hurts this industry as a whole when manufacturers market their products using BS technical claims. And just because I might address the BS technical claims made by a manufacturer doesn't mean I think the product itself is worthless.
In the past I've addressed the BS technical claims made by Eichmann concerning his Bullet Plugs and I still think the claims are BS. But I actually like the Bullet Plugs as a product and in fact I'll be using them for a new product I'm working on.
se
Re: Re: Re: Sales science..
Ah, thanks.
I don't recall claiming that the InterFace balances anything. I've only said that it can provide better common-mode rejection than typical electronically balanced interfaces even when fed from an unbalanced source. Which it can. And not because it balances anything, but because the common-mode rejection of a transformer isn't affected to the same degree by source impedance imbalances as typical balanced inputs are.
se
dhaen said:I was referring to the effect that your transformer balancing has on unbalanced cables. My mind inserted the term Pseudo-balanced. Technically accurate or not, the system is neither balanced or unbalanced.
Ah, thanks.
I don't recall claiming that the InterFace balances anything. I've only said that it can provide better common-mode rejection than typical electronically balanced interfaces even when fed from an unbalanced source. Which it can. And not because it balances anything, but because the common-mode rejection of a transformer isn't affected to the same degree by source impedance imbalances as typical balanced inputs are.
se
Letting It All Hang Out............
The transformers are effectively decoupled from external vibration by E*A*R Specialty Composites' C-1002 Isodamp gaskets under each transformer, with the circuit board upon which they are mounted decoupled from the enclosure using E*A*R Isoloss VL sandwich mount standoffs and low-resonant nylon fasteners. Further decoupling is provided by four E*A*R Isoloss VL feet on the enclosure itself.
Connection is made via WBT's finest 0208 Topline female RCA sockets with Kimber AGSS pure silver wire used for the minimal internal wiring. The output damping network (bypassable for connecting to inputs of exactly 10k Ohms) comprises a single Caddock type MK precision film resistor and WIMA type FKP polypropylene film capacitor per channel, neither of which are in series with the signal path.
So Steve, why would such vibration isolation be any kind of advantage ?.
Why are "WBT's finest 0208 Topline female RCA sockets" advantageous ?.
"Kimber AGSS pure silver wire used for the minimal internal wiring."
So why Kimber wire specifically, and if the internal wiring is so minimal why would any wire/cable make any difference ?.
"The output damping network (bypassable for connecting to inputs of exactly 10k Ohms) comprises a single Caddock type MK precision film resistor and WIMA type FKP polypropylene film capacitor per channel, neither of which are in series with the signal path."
Why Caddock and WIMA, and why is not being in series with the signal path by definition any kind of advantage.
So Steve, can you properly back these kinds of claims or are you publically prostituting yourself ?.
Eric /- Perfectly Wary Of Shamans.
The transformers are effectively decoupled from external vibration by E*A*R Specialty Composites' C-1002 Isodamp gaskets under each transformer, with the circuit board upon which they are mounted decoupled from the enclosure using E*A*R Isoloss VL sandwich mount standoffs and low-resonant nylon fasteners. Further decoupling is provided by four E*A*R Isoloss VL feet on the enclosure itself.
Connection is made via WBT's finest 0208 Topline female RCA sockets with Kimber AGSS pure silver wire used for the minimal internal wiring. The output damping network (bypassable for connecting to inputs of exactly 10k Ohms) comprises a single Caddock type MK precision film resistor and WIMA type FKP polypropylene film capacitor per channel, neither of which are in series with the signal path.
So Steve, why would such vibration isolation be any kind of advantage ?.
Why are "WBT's finest 0208 Topline female RCA sockets" advantageous ?.
"Kimber AGSS pure silver wire used for the minimal internal wiring."
So why Kimber wire specifically, and if the internal wiring is so minimal why would any wire/cable make any difference ?.
"The output damping network (bypassable for connecting to inputs of exactly 10k Ohms) comprises a single Caddock type MK precision film resistor and WIMA type FKP polypropylene film capacitor per channel, neither of which are in series with the signal path."
Why Caddock and WIMA, and why is not being in series with the signal path by definition any kind of advantage.
So Steve, can you properly back these kinds of claims or are you publically prostituting yourself ?.
Eric /- Perfectly Wary Of Shamans.
Common mode rejection
Well the balanced interfaces I've been used to working with over the past few years do have good CMR. They use either transformer or dedicated chips (with laser trimmed resistors). These maintain good CMR. All of this good stuff is available off the shelf, and is affordable.
Of course there's worse out there.....isn't there always....
Well the balanced interfaces I've been used to working with over the past few years do have good CMR. They use either transformer or dedicated chips (with laser trimmed resistors). These maintain good CMR. All of this good stuff is available off the shelf, and is affordable.
Of course there's worse out there.....isn't there always....
Surely SE will find an appropriate and convincing answer in no less than 10000 words. For the rest of us it's obvious that all the above 'features' have no technical backing at all and as we also know that SE is not into subjective appraisals the only possible answer comes forward - the audiophools will likely buy a box made out of real wood and wired with expensive wire. Suckers!
Konnichiwa,
Well, transformers work like that. I like to use Transformers (for example as volume control) for the same reasons.
Hmmm, Direct Sales at nearly $600 - the Transformers inside cost $ 60 each retail from Jensen in sensible quantities.
Yes, that's him.
He makes and sells this Box.
Sayonara
shuang said:
Well, transformers work like that. I like to use Transformers (for example as volume control) for the same reasons.
shuang said:
Hmmm, Direct Sales at nearly $600 - the Transformers inside cost $ 60 each retail from Jensen in sensible quantities.
shuang said:
Yes, that's him.
He makes and sells this Box.
Sayonara
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.