You've already stated that it's inaudible. Why would anyone need to get there?
and your bottle of deoxit is no longer sold or available. They changed the supplier of the actual ingredient long ago, google can reveal much of that controversy. Caig seems to be really just a repackager of products, not a manufacturer. Please correct me if I am wrong.
The original deoxit was absolutely great stuff. The current crop is no where near as active as the original. Most of it still does the job, just not for the really tarnished jobs.
Having a coating of fine oil is the real key to most of the products out there, EML, Caig, Sabilant 22, etc. Helps keep oxygen from getting to the metal. (and other pollutants)
Cheers
Alan
Markw4, I believe the answers to most of the posts of your caller should be:
42.
Don't ask him to "listen" to anything related to "audio".
He is part of this troupe that circles chanting "Evidence, evidence" and never try by themselves.
Last edited:
The original Caig Labs product: Cramolin RED unfortunately isn't available anymore, and it is still the best lab or audio connector cleaner in my experience. Of course Caig Labs DeoxiTT is pretty good and is still available. I use both. Unfortunately, Cramolin BLUE, Stabilant 22, and many others are a microcrystaline grease, primarily, and have limited cleaning properties. They do preserve bare contacts, but I don't use them with gold contacts (which is most of my audio cables) because the film has been noted as a potential problem to best listening. All my personal boards, such has those in the CTC Blowtorch preamps go through a series of cleanings. First of all 99.9% Isopropyl alcohol, sometimes Cramolin Red, but only if necessary, and finally finished off with Freon TF. Yes, really clean boards as well as connectors is helpful for best sound quality.
Have you tried level matched double blind listening of DACs? Perhaps you shouldn't claim anything until you do, no?
If that's the case, he should take Markw4 seriously about DACs and jitter.
Patently false. Just I try to limit my trials to stuff that has a real chance of making an effect (speakers, room). Funny, that reads just like what you wrote above. And doubly ironic that you tease Scott for actually giving a couple snake oil claims an honest shake.
It's fun trying to maintain this air of dignity why throwing poop from the trees, eh?
Yes, Cramolin was great stuff, and many an old piece of radio gear was brought back to life with nothing more than thoughtful and careful application of Cramolin.
I'm not sure when Cramolin went away and DeOxit appeared ( late 80's, early 90's?) or why, but DeOxit is just not as good. If it was meant as a product improvement, it missed the target ...
Win W5JAG
I still have my little bottles of Cramolin (red and blue) and LAST. So keep saying I never try anything. I never tried Enid Lumley's wet towels draped on all your walls but I bet it would give Ed's double sticky foam tape a run for the money.
I will respectfully disagree. The engineers who want to see data are conservative and skeptical, but they are not enemies. I would like to see data too. Unfortunately, conducting quality research takes time and effort that I don't have. I barely hobble along making any progress at all with the main focus of what I am trying to do. If I were 20 or 30 years younger and wanted to present at AES, things might be different. Of course, back then I was doing work in medical research to help save lives, and a single parent at the same time. In life you have to pick and choose how to spend what time you have, and I didn't have any time for audio back then. What I could use now is someone who does want to do some work to present at AES. Happy to give them something to do.
Last edited:
A male single parent, hats off to you. Everything we do here is trivial compared to this, I can't imagine it's hard enough with both parents.
Well, strangely, I'm such an engineer. Only, not "conservative".
I had explained why and how.
i had not read the subject of your discussion in details. Just bored by this endless catchphrase "show me evidence" each time somebody refer to some listening experience that does not violate any law.
May-be i'm totally stupid, but i tend to juge audio with my ears (and brain+culture) and photography with my eyes (and brain + culture). My calculator do not understand nothing to music...
Because, if very bad numbers can tell you what to avoid, good numbers do not tell so much about reproduction quality (Character of the sounds). We know more about a lens, looking at photo samples than reading at its MFT curves.
Will we ever have the right to share listening impressions or experiences, on this forum, without being flamed each time by the same ten contributors ?
Which I doubt they have the same technical background and the same professional experience as some of those they constantly attack.
At the risk of repeating myself one of the outstanding attributes of the Auralic Vega is it's extremely low jitter specified as 82 femtoseconds, with phase noise at –168dBc/Hz resulting in single-tone sidebands below -140 dB...JC would be interested that Stereophile gave it an A+.
I just think it sounds good with good files...
Howie
I've seen unsubstantiated claims of hearing difference or improvement being challenged. Even if sharing their listening impressions or experiences are being challenged, why does it bother you? And if you are that bothered by it and want to try different forums which they don't challenge such posts, is someone forcing you to stay here?
What about those who post for their business interest, you know, so called shills. Do you think it's OK to challenge them so that the consumers reading those posts would see through the disguise?
Debating on forum is somehow translated as attack in your view.
Put another way, your PhD friend is saying, "I don't have to listen to them to know they're bad; the mathematics tells me all I need to know." But isn't that the precise method you condemn when it comes to the Bybee stuff? When the Bybee stuff is objected to purely on the basis of science, you insist that science be ignored (or at least put aside) and the stuff evaluated on the basis of what you can hear.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.