Bybee Fraud Protection

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#863
Gentlemen,
For active speakers some diyers prefer low level signal running from source to speaker.
Provided length would be same for a given system, what would be preferable regarding effects of interference and noise ? Low level signals from source to speakers or amplified signals to speakers ?
Regards
 
#867
tomtt said:
past ur bed time?




can't do this yourself?

what happens when one passes a current through a conductor ?





so,

this is beyond your comprehension?
Click to expand...

I presume your are referring to the BQP, if so you are not saying anything I can fathom regarding the devices... other than as we ALL know they are a resistor, if you are claiming some magic happens to the wave surrounding the wire as it interacts with the tube surrounding the resistor then enlighten us please.... The problem with this silly esoteric audio stuff is no one ever comes out and sais it does this or that, they make up myths, surround it with mystery and when one theory is rebuffed move the goal posts to try another theory. Of course the "names" in audio promote and encourage these myths and beliefs in posts, in the audiophile press if they are revuers or in on line blogs.... and then there are the really open forums where any dissent is met with hostility and extreme arrogance from the "we can hear it so know its true because our ears are special" brigade... Does this help encourage younger people to strive for decent sound reproduction, no...
 
#868
Hiten said:
Gentlemen,
For active speakers some diyers prefer low level signal running from source to speaker.
Provided length would be same for a given system, what would be preferable regarding effects of interference and noise ? Low level signals from source to speakers or amplified signals to speakers ?
Regards
Click to expand...

Rule of thumb:

If you use single ended cabling - short interconnects and long speaker cable;

If you use balanced lines - long interconnects and short speaker cable.
 
#870
tomtt said:
basic electronics explain why these why this would make a difference.

very basic .
Click to expand...

Keep saying it like the teacher that thinks his students are beneath his "talents" and teaches nothing. The reversal of entropy involved in the a posteriori separation of signal from noise would be something that you should have come across or maybe you need some refresher courses.

Come on enlighten us, you said John is right, remember he claimed the wow and flutter, etc. were removed from LP play with no effect on the low frequency music content. So where does the demon sit, in the groove, in the cart, or in the BQP?
 
Last edited:
#873
tomtt said:
John is 100% correct.





there will not be any awards, for being a stop-stick on the road to knowledge .

(other than tagged as a human race traitor .... )




you project too much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection


```````````````````````````````````````````````

the lack of scientific understanding,

exhibited by the mass of posters in this

tread, is quite sad.
Click to expand...

I see:bored:
 
#874
marce said:
I presume your are referring to the BQP, if so you are not saying anything I can fathom regarding the devices... other than as we ALL know they are a resistor, if you are claiming some magic happens to the wave surrounding the wire as it interacts with the tube surrounding the resistor then enlighten us please....
Click to expand...
The only detail that I can find is as below...
Technical Details

As a very basic intro it should be stated that signal conduction in all electronic circuits is based on the movement of electrons through the crystal lattice of conductor materials. While the signal does indeed propagate at the speed of light, individual electron motion is extremely slow and ponderous. Ultimately, the noise floor of any electronic circuit is due to the quantum nature of the electron and its interaction with the crystal lattice through which it moves. Several types of quantum noise have been identified. Thermal and shot noise were discovered by Schottky in 1918. Random thermal motion of the charge carriers produces a small fluctuating noise potential, whose power is uniform over frequency - so called white noise. Thermal noise places an ultimate limit upon signal to noise performance in real circuits, which cannot be improved upon without cooling the circuit. Shot noise occurs in certain devices (e.g., vacuum tubes) due to random fluctuations in current and its spectrum is also white in character. In contrast, thermal noise is usually not an issue with solid-state devices. However, for many solid-state circuit elements (e.g., MOSFET), the noise floor is dominated by frequency dependent noise, often referred to as 1/f noise. Its spectral density increases as the inverse of frequency, just like pink noise. But unlike pink noise which is broadband, 1/f noise is typically confined to under 2 kHz.

The key point is that 1/f noise behaves like the musical spectrum. Its envelope mimics that of the musical signal. Recent research indicates that perceptually such noise blends in very well with the music. Once buried within the music, it is reasonable to speculate that 1/f noise defuses image outlines and adulterates harmonic textures. After all, the sonic benefits of the Purifier are exactly in these areas. Thermal noise, on the other hand, is audible but does not correlate with the music. To put it into perspective, let me use the analogy of vinyl ticks and pops. Yes, they are quite audible, but they are resolved as distinct from the music. And no, they don't bother me for the same reason that audience noises are part of the concert hall experience. I have been able to enjoy music at home through some pretty noisy tube-based systems, which means that conventional signal to noise ratio does not tell the whole story. The fact that 1/f noise dominates in many solid-state devices holds a vital clue that may explain, for example, some of the perceived sonic differences between tubes and transistors.

The basic premise of the Bybee's audio devices is that 1/f noise detracts from the listening experience: reduce 1/f noise and you improve the sound. The Purifier uses a combination of rare earth metal oxides in a ceramic form to absorb and dampen 1/f noise. The ceramic surrounds a low-value resistance (about 0.1 ohm). I asked Jack Bybee to provide me with a brief explanation of the physics and engineering taking place in the Quantum Purifier, without violating proprietary or classified secrets. The bottom line, as Bybee states, it is that "when developing the technology we did not fully understand why certain metal oxides absorb or damp specific frequencies and to the best of my knowledge we still do not." However, as is the case with audio cable and interconnect, a fully understood theoretical basis is not necessary to enjoy the benefits of the technology.
Click to expand...
"The key point is that 1/f noise behaves like the musical spectrum. Its envelope mimics that of the musical signal."

This is indeed a key point but I would state it differently.
More so that signal excites system VLF 1/f noise, which then 'rides' with and modulates the, in this case audio signal.
The resultant is a 'translucent' cloud of non musical junk that subtly obscures the original audio (or video) signal, reducing replay ultimate resolution and clarity.
This 'modulation' is somewhat like dielectric absorption hangover, causing a decaying noise on the back of instantaneous signal peaks.
So, Mr Bybees 'trick' is to damp this system VLF junk noise with a selection of metal oxides not usually used in electronic systems .

Mr Bybee states "certain metal oxides absorb or damp specific frequencies".
So that gives the questions...what frequencies and what is the Q of those frequencies/bands ?.
Is the kiln fused mixture that is incorporated on the surface of the BQP ceramic tube carefully chosen to provide frequency selective reduction/control of VLF noise ?.
I don't have the answer....perhaps somebody has analysis of the ceramic tube, and analysis of the elements present in the ceramic tube surface coating ?
The problem with this silly esoteric audio stuff is no one ever comes out and says it does this or that, they make up myths, surround it with mystery and when one theory is rebuffed move the goal posts to try another theory. Of course the "names" in audio promote and encourage these myths and beliefs in posts, in the audiophile press if they are revuers or in on line blogs.... and then there are the really open forums where any dissent is met with hostility and extreme arrogance from the "we can hear it so know its true because our ears are special" brigade...
Click to expand...
Not "our ears are special" more to the point is that some have heard/experienced and are relating such experience.
Listening skills are learned skills and borne of experience.
The explanations/blurb of some products is another matter, and likely borne of lack of deep understanding of the actual mechanisms involved.

Does this help encourage younger people to strive for decent sound reproduction, no...
Click to expand...
The regular and repeated dissension by those who have no first hand experience of course muddy the waters, and cause some to believe that all that can be achieved in audio reproduction has been achieved already, thus stifling further development.
Circuit techniques in this modern age have evolved to astonishingly good, so much so that devices and circuit topologies are arguably close enough to perfection for the purpose intended given the limitations of human hearing.

The final step is to correctly align audio equipment with physics realities and biological hearing systems in order to achieve fully realistic and non damaging/fatiguing sound reproduction/reinforcement.
The above statement may seem odd, and is deliberately cryptic....I don't expect any here to fully understand......more later.

Dan.
 
#875
So written by someone who is rather dim on electromagnetism. As well as word usage. 😀

John claimed that the effects were in the gigahertz range. This guy claims ULF. Really, all of the hucksters need to get together to get their story straight, it looks unseemly when the lies are so scattered. Focus is a virtue for optimizing scams.
 
#876
Max Headroom said:
The only detail that I can find is as below...

"The key point is that 1/f noise behaves like the musical spectrum. Its envelope mimics that of the musical signal."

This is indeed a key point but I would state it differently.
More so that signal excites system VLF 1/f noise, which then 'rides' with and modulates the, in this case audio signal.
The resultant is a 'translucent' cloud of non musical junk that subtly obscures the original audio (or video) signal, reducing replay ultimate resolution and clarity.
This 'modulation' is somewhat like dielectric absorption hangover, causing a decaying noise on the back of instantaneous signal peaks.
So, Mr Bybees 'trick' is to damp this system VLF junk noise with a selection of metal oxides not usually used in electronic systems .

Mr Bybee states "certain metal oxides absorb or damp specific frequencies".
So that gives the questions...what frequencies and what is the Q of those frequencies/bands ?.
Is the kiln fused mixture that is incorporated on the surface of the BQP ceramic tube carefully chosen to provide frequency selective reduction/control of VLF noise ?.
I don't have the answer....perhaps somebody has analysis of the ceramic tube, and analysis of the elements present in the ceramic tube surface coating ?

Not "our ears are special" more to the point is that some have heard/experienced and are relating such experience.
Listening skills are learned skills and borne of experience.
The explanations/blurb of some products is another matter, and likely borne of lack of deep understanding of the actual mechanisms involved.


The regular and repeated dissension by those who have no first hand experience of course muddy the waters, and cause some to believe that all that can be achieved in audio reproduction has been achieved already, thus stifling further development.
Circuit techniques in this modern age have evolved to astonishingly good, so much so that devices and circuit topologies are arguably close enough to perfection for the purpose intended given the limitations of human hearing.

The final step is to correctly align audio equipment with physics realities and biological hearing systems in order to achieve fully realistic and non damaging/fatiguing sound reproduction/reinforcement.
The above statement may seem odd, and is deliberately cryptic....I don't expect any here to fully understand......more later.

Dan.
Click to expand...

You honestly cant believe this tripe.....
 
#877
As to classified, if it was classified it would not be on sale to the public.....
Special metal oxides not normally used etc. if this was true he would have a Nobel prize as well as many other benefits, the whole story from secret classified to smoothing the electron flow (which you don't mention, again the goal posts move) is pure BS.....
How does the BQP differentiate between noise and signal, that is the crux of the matter...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom