| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
I just went through the Shakti homepage. I have never seen so much fraud concentrated in one place....we are talking 100% BS, please Frank, go have a look......im sure you will agree.
http://www.shakti-innovations.com/buy.htm
Magura:) |
While you were there did you notice this picture?
Hmm... who has more credibility you or Steve?? |
|
|
| Magura |
After this picture have been published....I believe a number of people would say that I am.
Magura:)
EDIT:
That is if Steve isnt giving it the thumbs up for its value as firewood....after all it is hardwood, and should be adequately dry.
EDIT 2:
BTW. didnt it occour to you that Steve could be paid for this????
You truly are naive!!!
Nobody does stuff like that for free, anybody whom ever have been launching a product knows that, and if youre willing to pay, allmost anybody will say anything about any product. |
|
|
| Magura |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
And btw, if you've never been through Alex Chiu's site (www.alexchiu.com), it's worth a few minutes. |
Actually Alex even offers 90 days guarantee of eternal life....thats more than any of the other voodoo stuff ive seen offers ;)
So thanks for the link SY, my life is now guaranteed to be eternal for the following 90 days :D
Magura:) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RHosch
Are you a solopsist?
|
Isn't everyone a little?
| quote: | Originally posted by RHosch
Then you admit that many of the changes that "amaze" you by improving your system may in fact be based on the placebo effect?
|
If so than I am not the only one feeling its effects.
| quote: | Originally posted by RHosch
I have news for you as well... electronic instruments are orders of magnitude more sensitive than our ears. That your ears are the "most sensitive measuring equipment known to man" is just a myth. A myth just like that we only use 10% of our brains, or a dozen other similar ones.
|
Why do you let instruments listen to your system? Try your ears for a change.
| quote: | Originally posted by RHosch
No, I don't know how they work because I have neither conducted nor reviewed a properly controlled test to determine that. I can surmise, however, based on the body of knowledge gathered thus far and applying the tenet of Occam's Razor, that the effect you perceive is due to psychological mechanisms, not physical ones. |
With all due respect to Occam sometimes hoof beats are zebras.
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
RHosch:
This thread have been mud slinging most of the time, Tom started out being rather rude sometime yesterday, PD went personal and so forth...its not just you whos getting personal attacks. PD pretty much called me a narrowminded moron yesterday for not swallowing this stuff raw.
Take this thread for what it is.
Magura:) |
I was rude?... you posted on a thread you had no business posting on.
You implied I was either stupid or a liar.
If your lap dog SY wasn't chief censor here you would see rude. |
|
|
| Magura |
Have any of you watched the movie called the 51st state??
It just popped up that there was a quite good paralel ;)
POS anyone???
Magura:) |
|
|
| Magura |
| quote: | Originally posted by tom1356
You implied I was either stupid or a liar.
If your lap dog SY wasn't chief censor here you would see rude. |
I implied that somebody had been making you believe in something that has no chance to be true.
And BTW. SY is a lap monkey....nooot
Magura:)
EDIT:
And BTW, rude isnt exactly implying intelligense. |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
EDIT 2:
BTW. didnt it occour to you that Steve could be paid for this????
You truly are naive!!!
Nobody does stuff like that for free, anybody whom ever have been launching a product knows that, and if youre willing to pay, allmost anybody will say anything about any product. |
You think everybody is as spineless and immoral as you are?
Do you think he just might have heard them as I did and likes them as I did?
Have you forgotten you have never heard them? |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | While you were there did you notice this picture? |
Where, o where, have I seen that pic before?
BTW, did someone finally take the guys' fingerprint or is he still waiting?
Just kidding folks,;) |
|
|
| Magura |
| quote: | Originally posted by tom1356
You think everybody is as spineless and immoral as you are?
Do you think he just might have heard them as I did and likes them as I did?
|
In an ideal world youd be right, unfortunately its buisness, and in this case the dirtier variety of it...marketing. Its got ZIP to do with moral or spine, but cold cash.
Ive been through this stuff a couple of times with different products....trust me, anybody you see in any sort of marketing is paid for it, and rather well that is. 10 grand is little in this matter.
Now lets try again, if somebody offered you 10 grand, or even 20 for that kind of matter.....would you not accept the offer?
I have seen examples of people writing reviews about ithems they had never even seen....thats how buisness works, and in particular marketing.
Magura:) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
Now lets try again, if somebody offered you 10 grand, or even 20 for that kind of matter.....would you not accept the offer?
I have seen examples of people writing reviews about ithems they had never even seen....thats how buisness works, and in particular marketing.
Magura:) |
You think someones reputation could be bought for so little?
You are the naive one. |
|
|
| Magura |
I have personally seen people be "bought" for even less on a few occasions, selling their reputation.
Anybody who cares about their reputation must have been paid rather well for something like what Steve have done here, I agree. The 10 grand figure was also just a low number...as I wrote " 10 grand is little in this matter", it could easily be a much bigger figure.
Magura:) |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | If your lap dog SY wasn't chief censor here you would see rude. |
Arf! Arf! |
|
|
| Magura |
According to my experience, people have to have very little interest in money to not be somewhat flexible when it comes to the actual truth, when a figure above 10 grand is mentioned.
Magura:) |
|
|
| SY |
| I note that the Q-Ray bracelet also has celebrity endorsers. |
|
|
| Magura |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
I note that the Q-Ray bracelet also has celebrity endorsers. |
Hmm...wonder if they also just begged to be part of the marketing, or they maybe have been paid a "little" ???
Magura:) |
|
|
| jam |
Will this thread ever end..........................:D
' |
|
|
| Magura |
| Hey Jam, join the madness :D |
|
|
| jam |
| I don't think so.................:D |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by jam
Will this thread ever end..........................:D
' |
For my part...it ends here. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
Tom started out being rather rude sometime yesterday, PD went personal and so forth...its not just you whos getting personal attacks. PD pretty much called me a narrowminded moron yesterday for not swallowing this stuff raw.
|
I am very much tempted to use till's expression:| quote: | Originally posted by till
for everyone what he deserves... |
...but I will not.
I would like to see where exactly I "pretty much called you a narrowminded moron". Please provide a quote.
OTOH, you and Mr Fitzpatrick, acted very childishly right from the beginning, without any respect for efforts of others. Your rude behaviour and lack of understanding for never ending quest for better sound is a shame to diyAudio, which I have to remind you once again, features in its logo the expression: "projects by the fanatics, for the fanatics".
Obviously, majority of people who spoke in this thread, don't qualify as fanatics, and I'd rather described them as armchair critics. I don't even know why you actually spoke here, as the person who opened this thread was specifically asking "If anyone built a pair of Shaktis?"
So if you don't have anything constructive to add, please keep away from this thread. This is a formal moderator's warning. :cop: I don't want to go as far as applying a formal Citation, but it seems like this might be the only way to let people speak freely on this board, without being afraid of naysayers, whose favourite passtime is critisizing the efforts of others. |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
OTOH, you and Mr Fitzpatrick, acted very childishly right from the beginning |
What did I do? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bill Fitzpatrick
What did I do? |
That's exactly how my 6 years old daughter would describe those devices:
| quote: | Originally posted by Bill Fitzpatrick
Those squiggly wood pieces are called "snakes."
The black metal rods in front of them are hollow and hold the oil. |
|
|
|
| Elso Kwak |
| quote: | Originally posted by till
for everyone what he deserves... |
| quote: |
They should last a lifetime under normal conditions and can be easily transferred to future cars or components you may own. |
Heh, I want a Shakti Stone on my grave.:clown: |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
That's exactly how my 6 years old daughter would describe those devices:
|
Well, good for her. She can recognize a scam when she sees one. |
|
|
| Magura |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
I am very much tempted to use till's expression:
...but I will not.
I would like to see where exactly I "pretty much called you a narrowminded moron". Please provide a quote.
OTOH, you and Mr Fitzpatrick, acted very childishly right from the beginning, without any respect for efforts of others. Your rude behaviour and lack of understanding for never ending quest for better sound is a shame to diyAudio, which I have to remind you once again, features in its logo the expression: "projects by the fanatics, for the fanatics".
Obviously, majority of people who spoke in this thread, don't qualify as fanatics, and I'd rather described them as armchair critics. I don't even know why you actually spoke here, as the person who opened this thread was specifically asking "If anyone built a pair of Shaktis?"
So if you don't have anything constructive to add, please keep away from this thread. This is a formal moderator's warning. :cop: I don't want to go as far as applying a formal Citation, but it seems like this might be the only way to let people speak freely on this board, without being afraid of naysayers, whose favourite passtime is critisizing the efforts of others. |
Well thanks for providing the quote in this post, so I dont have to go back and search for the first time you implied that im narrowminded and not too clever.
Your moderators hat obviously fell down over your eyes, since you cant see that youre not in a position in this thread to use it, your own behaveoure taken into account.
I personally find it very important to take the steam out of scams like this one as effectively as possible, and I sure wish others would do the same for me should I at some point come to believe in some sort of scam.
Such is as far as im concerned constructive for the forum as a whole, and for the people whom have been caught by the scam.
At this point there are plenty of warnings included in this thread,so its no longer an add for a scam.
Considering the turn this thread have taken, this is it from my side. It is obviously no longer a discussion, but just a place to vent frustrasions.
Magura:) |
|
|
| till |
| quote: | | At this point there are plenty of warnings included in this thread,so its no longer an add for a scam. |
I only hope the moderation of this thread (and others) does not turn into advertisment for voodoo & scam. There is a tendency.... |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | Originally posted by till
I only hope the moderation of this thread (and others) does not turn into advertisment for voodoo & scam. There is a tendency.... |
Worry not.
(no mod hat on here!!) People have the right to believe in the Tooth Fairy and pixie dust. They do NOT have the right to believe in these things and to expect that other adults won't laugh at them. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magura
Well thanks for providing the quote in this post, so I dont have to go back and search for the first time you implied that im narrowminded and not too clever.
|
I would still like to see where I implied that. Otherwise, I might very well imply that you are a liar. |
|
|
| analog_sa |
| quote: | | narrowminded and not too clever |
My, oh my. Maybe aurally challenged or cochleary disabled, but certainly not narrowminded. I personally respect people with disabilities even if they are in a stage of angry denial. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
People have the right to believe in the Tooth Fairy and pixie dust. They do NOT have the right to believe in these things and to expect that other adults won't laugh at them. |
However, this forum should also provide them the right to discuss any topic they wish, without being attacked by others and laughed at. At least this is my understanding and that's why we have so many different sections and that's why each thread has a title. The moderators should looked into, that this right is being enforced. |
|
|
| Variac |
| quote: | | However, this forum should also provide them the right to discuss any topic they wish, without being attacked by others and laughed at. At least this is my understanding and that's why we have so many different sections and that's why each thread has a title. The moderators should looked into, that this right is being enforced. |
Well, are the moderators in agreement that no dissention should be allowed, or is that your opinion backed up with your cop icon?
While all viewpoints shold be allowed, think of the diservice you would be doing newbies to audio or people new to this forum, if by banning opposing opinions, you allow them to get the impression that all these gizmos are accepted by all. By not allowing people to express their sceptisism, you are promoting the impression that all of us here agree with these "theories" and devices, which is flat out untrue. Many here are FANATICS about not being taken in by BS and trying to differentiate between BS and not so BS.
It is hard, which is what makes this sport so interesting!
While I don't condone the mudslingling here, EVERY thread which discusses unprovable issues (that means about all of 'em) MUST allow a disenting view, or it inaccuratly reflects the opinions of the DIY Audio group as a whole.
Then again, sometimes a thread just reaches it's limit, and it needs to be shut down.....;) like maybe this one.. |
|
|
| Elso Kwak |
Hi Tom,
I am sorry for the bad jokes. I have no experience with these Hallographs.
Anyone who wants to try The Shakti Products, the VPI Magic Brick, Samba Clip, Bybee Quantifiers or whatever may do so, of course!
I am always very sceptical and do only believe a tweak after I heard it on my own equipment at home.
Peter I really thought you made a joke with post # 25.
So I leave this thread and will no longer interfere.
A good friend of mine has the Shakti Stones and he swears these are an improvement. I don't hear any effect.... Also I dropped one stone, my fault.
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl...kti&r=&session=
:bawling: |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | the VPI Magic Brick |
Duh??? What's that doing here?
IOW, since when is EMI shielding something nobody can explain?
Cheers,;)
P.S. Not wanting to launch an avalanche of Shakti Stones landing in Kwakwater... |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | Now tell me, what impression this gives to newbies? |
That the operation of devices which have no actual experimental support and are claimed to operate outside of physics ought to be presumed fraudulent until such actual evidence is presented? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| It all depends how you define your "physics ought" |
|
|
| SY |
The same physics that lets your computer work, that drops payloads on Mars, and predicts forces and energies with fabulous precision.
Hey, I did try the hat-rack experiment! |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Hey, I did try the hat-rack experiment! |
Which only tells us that they didn't work for you and we shouldn't replace Shakti Hallographs with hatracks.
By your logic hatracks are fraudulent devices.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
That the operation of devices which have no actual experimental support and are claimed to operate outside of physics ought to be presumed fraudulent until such actual evidence is presented? |
This statement is patently fraudulent. I can site dozens of reviews, formal and informal, which atest to their validity. You can site zero reviews stating they don't work.
These reviews and mine are "experimental support" they work. You have produced no evidence that they don't work.
Please site the laws of physics these violate.
I have recieve a bunch of requests for plans for these so I am encouraged that some people are reasonable and intellegent.
Please email me if you would like to build them yourself and experiment. Of course you will have to give up membership in the "know it all" club. |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | By your logic hatracks are fraudulent devices. |
As acoustic modifiers, yes. As devices to hold your hats, they seem to work just fine. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
That the operation of devices which have no actual experimental support and are claimed to operate outside of physics ought to be presumed fraudulent until such actual evidence is presented? |
Does that mean that Tom shouldn't be presenting his observations here, on this forum, in the thread he opened for that purpose? |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | These reviews and mine are "experimental support" they work. |
An anecdote or a testimonial is not an experiment. There are anecdotes and testimonials aplenty for all sorts of quack medicines, psychics, and pyramid powers. Oh, yes, and putting your picture in the freezer. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | As acoustic modifiers, yes. |
Which may be why Shakti doesn't sell hatracks for this application...
All in all no big deal as even the homemade copies seem to work...
So much for fraud...and armchair critics.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
An anecdote or a testimonial is not an experiment. There are anecdotes and testimonials aplenty for all sorts of quack medicines, psychics, and pyramid powers. Oh, yes, and putting your picture in the freezer. |
I will never set foot on the moon. By your logic I will assume the moon is cheese. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
An anecdote or a testimonial is not an experiment. There are anecdotes and testimonials aplenty for all sorts of quack medicines, psychics, and pyramid powers. Oh, yes, and putting your picture in the freezer. |
Does this forum really requires an "actual experimental support" to present a personal opinion, based on personal observation? |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | Does that mean that Tom shouldn't be presenting his observations here, on this forum, in the thread he opened for that purpose? |
Of course not. Remember this line?
| quote: | | People have the right to believe in the Tooth Fairy and pixie dust. |
The most likely explanation of his "observation" is psychological. An unwillingness to face that possibility and pursue the appropriate experiment to see if that's true or not is... well, closed-minded. |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | Which may be why Shakti doesn't sell hatracks for this application... |
Maybe. Or maybe because they can't charge their usual markup to the gullible. |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | By your logic I will assume the moon is cheese. |
When did I say anything about cheese? Maybe over on the Food Lovers Discussion Group, but not here. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
The most likely explanation of his "observation" is psychological. An unwillingness to face that possibility and pursue the appropriate experiment to see if that's true or not is... well, closed-minded. |
I didn't notice that he ever denied that. It's the armchair critics who don't seem to notice that possibility.
Even my experiments with photographs in a freezer, although seem to work the way described, don't exclude the possibility that psychoacustic plays a big role here. But to me it doesn't really matter. If it works, it works, the final outcome is important, not the actaul mechanism that leads to it..
If only people could understand that;) |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Or maybe because they can't charge their usual markup to the gullible. |
Untill we know that for a fact we shouldn't accuse anyone as being fraudulent; what happened to the innocent untill proven guilty principle?
Besides, as said before, the argument is moot as anyone willing to experiment with it is free to do so at the expense of materials cost and time invested.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| SY |
| Peter, have you tried the stuff with the red pen and the four-ring binder? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
Peter, have you tried the stuff with the red pen and the four-ring binder? |
For that you have to wait another year;) |
|
|
| Illusus |
Please cut it out guys. This discussion seems to be leading to hurt feelings. Personally, I come to this forum to learn from what I see as a collective of intelligent people with views, experience and knowledge I do not yet posess. I'm not trying to be humble. I really am happy to have access to this learning tool and am blown away by the amount of knowledge you people freely share. I do not want to see these same people ending up disregarding someone's opinion or factual information in a later discussion on a different topic because of an argument that led astray into personal territory. As this thread goes on I read more and more personal attacks and clever wordsmithing aimed at discrediting the other side. In my opinion this shakti thing is becoming a huge trident in the a**. This thread has turned from a discusion on why or why not this may work to a "he said she said" type argument I commonly have with my wife that ultimately has nothing to do with the issue that started it.
I have yet to meet a person that has not taken this route of argument before and understand the human nature that is leading us astray from the original topic. I just don't want it to go too far.
I do sit on a definite side on this topic, but I will refrain from posting because I do not want to end up being misquoted, slandered, or pigeon-holed into a certain category. There may be others that feel this way and it's a little shame that their views will not be heard. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Illusus
I do sit on a definite side on this topic, but I will refrain from posting because I do not want to end up being misquoted, slandered, or pigeon-holed into a certain category. There may be others that feel this way and it's a little shame that their views will not be heard. |
And this is also an issue that shouldn't be overlooked.
Some people would like to present a view, but because of unfriendly atmosphere and hostile attitude from others they prefer to keep it to themselves.
I have no problem saying that putting photographs in a freezer works for me. I tried it few times (in and out of a freezer) and each time the results were very conclusive. I'm not afraid of laughs and jokes. I might joke about it myself on occasion;)
But will we progress, if nobody will share their observations, no matter how absurd they may seem initially? Probably not as much as if things were carried out different way. Nobody forces you to believe what's being said here. Nobody even ask you to listen. You can easily choose a topic that suits your interests. But if your only interest is to fight the "fraudulant" products, I think you should be in a different company. I personally don't want you to tell me what's wrong and what's right. Please let me decide myself.
I also think that the whole discussion developed in this particualr thread wasn't complete waste of time. I hope it helped some of us to understand better certain issues and maybe act differently next time. |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
Ladies, please! Will you retract your claws? Squabbling is fun but this thread did start out with a point.
No one seems to be following a logical course of action in trying to understand this device and the integrity of the company that manufactures it.
Let's start with the company and cut them a small initial break by not pre-emptively labeling them as "scammers." I point out first that their claims for the various items they produce, at least as far as I have investigated, lean to offering very minor improvements, their flowery rhetoric notwithstanding. I'll admit that it didn't dig to deeply into this. A 2 to 3 db reduction in the effects of EMI, etc. is not a great deal. Neither is a few horsepower for an engine capable of 300 horsepower. I cannot speak to the validity of these claims but there certainly seems to be adequate 2nd party testing and support.
Maybe Shakti & Co. are pickpockets but that isn't the real point.
ON TO THE DEVICE
Any item placed anywhere in a listening room will physically alter the sound field via one or more of these mechanisms - resonance, diffraction, reflection or absorption. Variables are the type(s) and degree of effect. Even a small item such as a coffee cup MUST have at least some physical effect; it is unavoidable. It follows, then, that the Shakti device does, as it must, have a physical effect and at least one argument against it can be put to rest. One cannot say it does nothing.
Since, it seems, that only one? person in this thread has heard the effects of the device and most thread participants are nay-sayers, it might be constructive to figure out what it is physically capable of doing.
WHAT DOES/CAN IT DO?
Based on the device's construction we can safely disregard resonance and absorption effects, at least in comparison to it's other attributes.
There is about 1 square foot of reflective area so it can be considered a reflector. However, a normal room has a reflective surface far greater than what the device provides and a few square feet wouldn't make much of a difference particularly since it is covering up the same amount of reflective area that it provides. It is unlikely that the device's reflective effect would have any significance unless one were to "aim" it so as to pick up a reflection from another surface and direct it to the listener. Even then, I would imagine the effects to be minimal.
There are numerous curved edges so it can be considered a diffractor/diffusor which has a partial extra dimension of effect (it's effect is not confined to the horizontal as some diffusors are). Also, It's effects would be mostly limited to the mid-range and high frequencies. Regardless of what else you might want to say about it, this device is a diffusor. Diffusors are your friend.
WHAT CAN'T IT DO?
It cannot effect the first reflections as their claim states. The first reflections, as I have mentioned previously, are normally from the side walls and floors, although this can vary with speaker placement. With the device behind and to the outside of the speakers, it cannot effect these first reflections even if they come from the rear wall partly because the recommended positioning is wrong and even if that were not the case, the first reflection from the rear can only occur at lower frequencies where the speaker is radiating omnidirectionally and the effectiveness of the device decreases with decreasing frequency. Their claim seems to be in error regarding this point and, as far as I can see, seems to be the only claim they make aside from an audible improvement.
IS WHAT IT DOES REALLY AUDIBLE?
I would say, without having the opportunity to listen to them, "barely+" and "it depends." Perhaps on a par with Polypropylene vs Mylar or Class A vs Class A/B - I don't know, you tell me. I haven't yet started to sweat the small stuff.
As to "increased focus", which is an effect that tom1356 observes . . . any increase in the diffuse field, even if the diffusors are not in optimum positions with regard to the listening position, will increase to some degree the clarity of the direct sounds because they will be more prominent. Perhaps this is what he means by "increased focus."
MY CONCLUSION
I consider the Shakti devise to be a diffusor which is less effective than a properly designed diffusor of the same size would be. The manufacturer's recommendations for the placement of your first pair are inapt. These devices have questionable artistic value and to my mind look like they were beaten with an ugly stick. They seem to be overpriced by a factor of about 2. I think the money would be better spent on a pair of RPG diffusors, or better yet, for DIY, construct your own.
This commentary is not to suggest that I have any clue as to what I'm talking about and I'm looking for an escape clause as I write these last words. |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | I'm not afraid of laughs and jokes. I might joke about it myself on occasion |
Healthy and deserving of respect.
| quote: | There is about 1 square foot of reflective area so it can be considered a reflector. However, a normal room has a reflective surface far greater than what the device provides and a few square feet wouldn't make much of a difference particularly since it is covering up the same amount of reflective area that it provides. It is unlikely that the device's reflective effect would have any significance unless one were to "aim" it so as to pick up a reflection from another surface and direct it to the listener. Even then, I would imagine the effects to be minimal.
There are numerous curved edges so it can be considered a diffractor/diffusor which has a partial extra dimension of effect (it's effect is not confined to the horizontal as some diffusors are). Also, It's effects would be mostly limited to the mid-range and high frequencies. Regardless of what else you might want to say about it, this device is a diffusor. Diffusors are your friend. |
This is exactly why I did the hat-rack experiment. A similar cross section and plenty of curved surfaces. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Perhaps on a par with Polypropylene vs Mylar or Class A vs Class A/B - I don't know, you tell me. |
I think the two types of filmcaps hardly compare sonically but I see your point.
From what I've read on their site I think you're absolutely correct; much better diffusors can be constructed for less money....especially if the Shaktis won't have any effect at all...:D
I also very much doubt the device can possibly have any effect on anything below, say, 1KHz. Not that it should as the ear is more sensitive upwards of that frequency.
Let's see what Tom has to say about this.
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Hi,
I think the two types of filmcaps hardly compare sonically but I see your point.
From what I've read on their site I think you're absolutely correct; much better diffusors can be constructed for less money....especially if the Shaktis won't have any effect at all...:D
I also very much doubt the device can possibly have any effect on anything below, say, 1KHz. Not that it should as the ear is more sensitive upwards of that frequency.
Let's see what Tom has to say about this.
Cheers, ;) |
I don't know what frequencies they effect but the result is a soundstage that reaches further in all directions (forward in front of the speakers is the most dramatic improvement).
Triangles, xylophones, chimes, and I are all the big winners here.
Dark side of the moon on SACD is even more of a sonic treat.
I am using beryillium ribbon tweeters good to above 50k. This may have some bearing on the overall sound. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
I wouldn't mind building them myself, just to try. Is there a material choice important here? I could use solid maple, but it will be harder to machine than lets say MDF.
BTW: I ordered silver S&B 102s;) |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
I wouldn't mind building them myself, just to try. Is there a material choice important here? I could use solid maple, but it will be harder to machine than lets say MDF.
BTW: I ordered silver S&B 102s;) |
I used the maple because I'm sure thats what the originals are mostly made of and it matches the system. I've heard of others using MDF with good results.
Welcome to an exclusive club. I love the silver TX-102's and I'm sure you will too. If you can avoid the +6 db tap it does sound better. Will you be using the Seiden switch?
Keep me posted on what you find when they arrive. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| I will stick with Elma, I think. Unless Seiden offers clear sonic advantage. So, it's better not to use +6db option and configure preamp for low gain? I also prefer low gain on my copper wire TVC. Are you using balanced inputs/outputs? |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
I will stick with Elma, I think. Unless Seiden offers clear sonic advantage. So, it's better not to use +6db option and configure preamp for low gain? I also prefer low gain on my copper wire TVC. Are you using balanced inputs/outputs? |
I'm very pleased with the Seiden but I never tried the Elma. I started using the +6 tap and switched after a few months. I'm very glad I did. I don't miss the volume and it is a more detailed sound. I do not have any balanced equipment at this time though the pre was built with this in mind for the future.. |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
Hey, off topic. Thread jacking. There's never a cop when you need one.
I now return you to the subject.
Much of the specular reflection present in a room would tend to obfuscate the portions of the soundfield that are responsible for the depth, width and height information. There are plenty of opportunities for the DIYer to play with diffusors and their positioning.
If I were to make a pair I would design them so the undulations rotated through a full 90 degrees so there would be vertical scattering as well as everthing in between.
I sure that MDF would work just as well as oak. But you could save your self a lot of trouble in coming close to the shape the Shatkis use buy buying the wood pieces that are used to support corrugated fiberglass roofing. They are already snakelike on one edge, about the same width and come in lengths up to 8'. Not as effective a properly made snake but available at your local home center for not much money, they remove any last hope of an excuse not to do some experimenting. |
|
|
| Illusus |
Now that this thread is back to it's intended state, I'd like to share my thoughts...although while I was watching this thread develop my thoughts were expressed by others.
Anything placed in a listening environment will have some effect on the sound. The special shape of these may make that effect a positive one, however, seeing how relatively small the surface area is I estimate the change to also be small. Browsing through my "master handbook of acoustics", by F.Alton Everest, I see many diffusor designs and explanations on how they work and how to design one. All designs are made to tame certain ranges of troubling frequencies, depending on application, usually resulting in complex surface contours and large surface areas. Placement within a room also largely determines the diffusor's effectiveness and design. The Shakti diffusors do seem to have a purposefull design, and I do not doubt that they perform the job they are intended for, although I think their effects are achieved under certain conditions, such as proper placement in an already well designed listening space. I am willing to bet that a pair of well designed, more conventional diffusors mounted in trouble areas within the listening room will warrant much more noticeable gains. In my untreated listening/living room these things would mostlikely be moot.
I will not build a pair yet, not because I am not a fanatic or afraid to experiment, but because I believe I can have much larger benefits from properly placed conventional diffusors, bass traps and absorption panels. I will one day build these, but only after I have treated all of the coarse problems in my listening space, only then will I be able to give them the proper evaluation they deserve.
On another point, I am a firm believer in the placebo effect. Humans can be easily swayed by suggestion. It has been shown repeatedly that the mind is easily tricked into believing things that logically do not make sense. One of my aquaintances is a professional magician (not the birthday party, fake flowers, or the big production kind, pure sleeveless hands on, coin and card guy), I know he does not actually bend the laws of physics but his tricks are so good he fools me and others, even under the closest supervision, into a gaping mouth stupor. Unfortunately the positive placebo effect that the Shakti's would have had on me has most likely been killed off. I have now developed a biased opinion and, if anything, the placebo effect would be negative in nature. A placebo prescribed by a doctor would not give any results if he informed a patient that what he is prescribing to him is a placebo. |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Illusus
Now that this thread is back to it's intended state...
|
Yeah, being back on track has really has taken all the fun out of this thread.| quote: | Originally posted by Illusus
Unfortunately the positive placebo effect that the Shakti's would have had on me has most likely been killed off.
|
Good!
Build them and you will see that they work as prescribed.
Anyone in the seacoast New Hampshire area want to hear them for yourself email me. |
|
|
| tom1356 |
Quote from Steve Hofman 03-04-2003:
"Yeah, I played with those at CES.
Those are NICE dainty room treatments. Much better than those big round cushion things that one has to prop up all over the place to get a decent accurate bass response! They look like art." |
|
|
| SY |
No criticism of Shaktis-as-art (not my style, I'm more of a Henry Moore kinda guy). There are cheaper and easier placebos, like the red pen and binder stuff of Belt's.
But when talking about any sort of actual physical function, one has to consider scaling. What are the wavelengths that are at issue? What's the size of the (un-backed up) reflective surfaces? The space between them? The total scattering cross-section? There's some fundamental physics that's just dead wrong. One might as well use a hat-rack. Have you actually tried that? |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
No criticism of Shaktis-as-art (not my style, I'm more of a Henry Moore kinda guy). There are cheaper and easier placebos, like the red pen and binder stuff of Belt's.
But when talking about any sort of actual physical function, one has to consider scaling. What are the wavelengths that are at issue? What's the size of the (un-backed up) reflective surfaces? The space between them? The total scattering cross-section? There's some fundamental physics that's just dead wrong. One might as well use a hat-rack. Have you actually tried that? |
Why don't you stop refering to them as placebos. There is no evidence for that. Again, cite the physics that are wrong or shut up about your pretend knowledge of physics.
You need to come to grips with the fact that you just may not know how they work.
Build them, test them, use them, and then disparage them if you need to. |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | | Again, cite the physics that are wrong |
I just did, in the post right above you. The issue is scale. The cross-section of an effective diffusor needs to be on the order of one-quarter the square of the wavelengths of interest. A three inch wide slat hanging in space at a distance from the sound source and the listener doesn't reflect much. Several slats with decorative curlicues on the order of an inch all spaced apart don't reflect much more, about the same as a hat-rack.
The guys peddling these gadgets offer no actual evidence of any significant effect, just the same testimonials as the Q-Ray people. I'll leave it to someone more patient than me to deconstruct the gibberish on their website that they are trying to pass off as technical. |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
I just did, in the post right above you. The issue is scale. The cross-section of an effective diffusor needs to be on the order of one-quarter the square of the wavelengths of interest. |
Who ever said they work by reflecting? Who said how they work?
Physics? I know physics, physics is a friend of mine, you are no physicist. |
|
|
| SY |
We're talking about sound waves here. The only way in which energy can be exchanged or modified is by relection or absorption*. If you want to ride that latter horse, it's a lamer mount than the former.
* Unless, of course, you're positing forces as-yet unknown, in which case I invoke my Fifth Law: When a fundamental change in our understanding of the Universe happens, it is unlikely to emerge from someone peddling hifi gadgets. |
|
|
| analog_sa |
| quote: | | you are no physicist |
Wrong Tom. SY is very much a physicist, trust me, i've known a few :)
The real issue with all tweaks that some of us seem to hear and others don't (won't?) is that they often affect our perception of sound through some very remote secondary/tertiary effect. If you can't quantify the effect in one way or another no self-respecting physicist will take you seriously.
A close relative of mine, follower of the same paradigm, flatly refuses to take part in any kind of auditions, even though he has keen interest in music. I don't think he would like to live in a world where perceptions mismatch theoretical expectations consistently. And i also have to agree - a lot of this stuff is madenning in the way it refuses to fit our simple models. |
|
|
| tom1356 |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
We're talking about sound waves here. The only way in which energy can be exchanged or modified is by relection or absorption*. If you want to ride that latter horse, it's a lamer mount than the former.
|
The only one who saddled up, was you. What about diffraction?
http://www.stormingmedia.us/59/5922/A592201.html |
|
|
| SY |
| Diffraction IS reflection, or at least is a vector sum of reflections. You still have the scaling issue. |
|
|
|
