man readin all these wonderful posts about how this laquer and all those other great products can alter sound for the better, i decided to join both my as
cheeks with a .33uF 400V Hovland Musicap. all i have to say is wow! the sound change is amasing. i can hear things that i havent heard before not only from my speakers, but also from everywhere else. maybe ill pierce my ears, and plug some more quality caps in there...
cheeks with a .33uF 400V Hovland Musicap. all i have to say is wow! the sound change is amasing. i can hear things that i havent heard before not only from my speakers, but also from everywhere else. maybe ill pierce my ears, and plug some more quality caps in there...
How Does It Work ? - Who Cares.
Perfumes are expensive, and the ingredients usually secret.
C37 and Tubolator are similarly expensive and secret.
I understand that we are all interested to know the ingredients, and how they work, but that is not really important.
What is important is that they work, and in both cases more than one person is saying that they do.
I won't be saying how my invention works either, but there is no doubt that it does, and that other peope find it musically and sonically very pleasing.
The result is the important part, and not the mode of operation.
Sy, I feel that you need to get your head around this concept, and while you are at it try opening your awareness and senses - you will then find a more interesting and fascinating world.
Eric.
Perfumes are expensive, and the ingredients usually secret.
C37 and Tubolator are similarly expensive and secret.
I understand that we are all interested to know the ingredients, and how they work, but that is not really important.
What is important is that they work, and in both cases more than one person is saying that they do.
I won't be saying how my invention works either, but there is no doubt that it does, and that other peope find it musically and sonically very pleasing.
The result is the important part, and not the mode of operation.
Sy, I feel that you need to get your head around this concept, and while you are at it try opening your awareness and senses - you will then find a more interesting and fascinating world.
Eric.
Amen EC8010,
If we ain't got the time to try out absolutely everything (infinite number of monkies style) then at some point we've got to put a foot down.
And SY - I *did* hear an improvement in dynamic range when I reversed the diodes in my power supply *and* I confirmed this by measuring - about 100 db more. So there.
If we ain't got the time to try out absolutely everything (infinite number of monkies style) then at some point we've got to put a foot down.
And SY - I *did* hear an improvement in dynamic range when I reversed the diodes in my power supply *and* I confirmed this by measuring - about 100 db more. So there.
Re: Calibrated mud
Hi (Morgan?),
1) C37 is NOT perfume
2) Measurements where presented before for C37, namely in Klang + Ton, a German DIY/High-End HiFi Magazine
3) The German Magzine Klang + Ton did a blind AB test on C37, using two identical Mid-Fi systems, lackquering the PCB's and reported audible differences
Measurements of a Fostex FE127 WITHOUT C37
Measurements of a Fostex FE127 WITH C37
Measurements taken from Klang + Ton 3/96
Hm. If either C37 or "Tubulator" do approximatly what they are claimed to do, is that not justification enough? And as far as I can tell C37 does what it is claimed to do and it makes measurable positive differences at least in Loudspeakers.
Well, you already show again an A PRIORI knowledge that the products discussed here are "snakeoil".
You make a judgement based on pure prejudice. I hope they never call you up on jury service... ;-)
And just as in the good old easter european "justice" system you assume the position "guilty of fraud untill proven innocent beyound any reasonable doubt".
Have you ever approached the purveyors of what you consider "snakeoil" and offered them a joint study of the measurable effects?
Did you possibly bother to Inform Dick Olsher of the mathematical mistake in his review?
And how is this relevant to the topic under discussion.
Sayonara
Hi (Morgan?),
EC8010 said:
1) C37 is NOT perfume
2) Measurements where presented before for C37, namely in Klang + Ton, a German DIY/High-End HiFi Magazine
3) The German Magzine Klang + Ton did a blind AB test on C37, using two identical Mid-Fi systems, lackquering the PCB's and reported audible differences
Measurements of a Fostex FE127 WITHOUT C37
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Measurements of a Fostex FE127 WITH C37
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Measurements taken from Klang + Ton 3/96
Hm. If either C37 or "Tubulator" do approximatly what they are claimed to do, is that not justification enough? And as far as I can tell C37 does what it is claimed to do and it makes measurable positive differences at least in Loudspeakers.
Well, you already show again an A PRIORI knowledge that the products discussed here are "snakeoil".
You make a judgement based on pure prejudice. I hope they never call you up on jury service... ;-)
And just as in the good old easter european "justice" system you assume the position "guilty of fraud untill proven innocent beyound any reasonable doubt".
Have you ever approached the purveyors of what you consider "snakeoil" and offered them a joint study of the measurable effects?
Did you possibly bother to Inform Dick Olsher of the mathematical mistake in his review?
And how is this relevant to the topic under discussion.
Sayonara
Re: Re: Calibrated mud
******Did you possibly bother to Inform Dick Olsher of the mathematical mistake in his review?
And how is this relevant to the topic under discussion.******
Sayonara [/B][/QUOTE]
Oh, come on KYW, this bloke doesn't want to *help* anyone, he just thinks its smart to sit on the sidelines and discredit others. When he grows up, we might just be able take him seriously!
And by the way, don't try to *confuse* him with any *facts* like the "relevance" of anything, because he is confused enough already!
He's the 'sniper' who amongst other silly comments about Edison in this thread says he thinks that to pass a UK driving test you really need to understand the working principles of an I.C.E. which, if he was right, it would have completely avoided the current crisis on our roads here, especially in London!
Also, (from his equally juvenile quip "do tell") he has clearly never heard of the Focal TdX series of Titanium speaker drivers which have been around for well over 5 years to my knowlege, and probably nearer to 10!
To set the record straight, Dick Olsher did not make *any* mistake in that review which was apparent to me. He did not specify *any* input or source impedance when making this comment.
Presumably he just had in mind a very high value here, which is no less sensible than the quite *impossible* "zero impedance source" which EC8010 *chose* to illustrate the conclusion in his latest attempt at discrediting someone's writings.
I expect someone will hurriedly tell me I am wrong again here, though, and that they have seen some source equipment which sports a zero output impedance!!!
You've just got to give some of these self-declared 'scientists' some leeway, you know.
Regards,
******Did you possibly bother to Inform Dick Olsher of the mathematical mistake in his review?
And how is this relevant to the topic under discussion.******
Sayonara [/B][/QUOTE]
Oh, come on KYW, this bloke doesn't want to *help* anyone, he just thinks its smart to sit on the sidelines and discredit others. When he grows up, we might just be able take him seriously!
And by the way, don't try to *confuse* him with any *facts* like the "relevance" of anything, because he is confused enough already!
He's the 'sniper' who amongst other silly comments about Edison in this thread says he thinks that to pass a UK driving test you really need to understand the working principles of an I.C.E. which, if he was right, it would have completely avoided the current crisis on our roads here, especially in London!
Also, (from his equally juvenile quip "do tell") he has clearly never heard of the Focal TdX series of Titanium speaker drivers which have been around for well over 5 years to my knowlege, and probably nearer to 10!
To set the record straight, Dick Olsher did not make *any* mistake in that review which was apparent to me. He did not specify *any* input or source impedance when making this comment.
Presumably he just had in mind a very high value here, which is no less sensible than the quite *impossible* "zero impedance source" which EC8010 *chose* to illustrate the conclusion in his latest attempt at discrediting someone's writings.
I expect someone will hurriedly tell me I am wrong again here, though, and that they have seen some source equipment which sports a zero output impedance!!!
You've just got to give some of these self-declared 'scientists' some leeway, you know.
Regards,
SY said:
I suspect that they did not and I agree that it would be interesting to see such a comparison. However, from my perspective:
a) I have heard a distinctive difference between cones with C37 and those without and preferred the sound of the lacquered units.
b) I have now seen that there is a measurable difference.
c) I have read the literature on C37 and believe that, whatever the theory used, extensive listening tests have been performed on C37 in this application (paper speaker cones) by the manufacturer.
d) I doubt that the $3-a-can speaker dope was designed, made or sold with any audible improvement in mind. That isn't its function.
So, at this stage, it's of no interest to me to read any opinions posted here by anyone who hasn't listened to the stuff. Such opinions are either based on prejudices or on an incomplete understanding of the theory (and if anyone has a COMPLETE understanding of the theory of what makes one system better than another - let him come forward).
I would however be interested in hearing the views of anyone who has experimented with, or listened to, the lacquer that we're discussing.
Steve Margolis
C37.
Hi.
Doing a local search here on the forum yielded a long list of references to C37.
Not all of them may contain usefull info but here's just an example:
C37
No doubt some damping fluids will suit some speakers better than others, still all of them aim to reduce cone resonances IMO hence will affect the perceived sound.
Cheers,
Hi.
Doing a local search here on the forum yielded a long list of references to C37.
Not all of them may contain usefull info but here's just an example:
C37
No doubt some damping fluids will suit some speakers better than others, still all of them aim to reduce cone resonances IMO hence will affect the perceived sound.
Cheers,
Frank, I hadn't seen that earlier thread. FWIW, the glass microspheres are made by several companies; the one I've sourced them from is PQ. They come in various sizes with a variety of silane coupling agents on their surface, depending on what polymer you're using as a vehicle.
Most speaker dopes use a lacquer compound. PVAs and similar are problematic because of their hygroscopic nature. One good alternative is low MW styrenic elastomers (like SEBS)- my source is Kraton, though I think there are Asian equivalents like Septon. In theory, you could load the appropriate microspheres into an elastomer paint and make a nice fiber-reinforced composite cone by soaking a paper cone in a low viscosity solution, then curing. But trying to make paper work properly is, IMO, not a good way to go for high-quality audio. Too much variability with humidity, too much variability in manufacture. We've got better materials these days.
SY/ delighted with his Audax HDAs
Most speaker dopes use a lacquer compound. PVAs and similar are problematic because of their hygroscopic nature. One good alternative is low MW styrenic elastomers (like SEBS)- my source is Kraton, though I think there are Asian equivalents like Septon. In theory, you could load the appropriate microspheres into an elastomer paint and make a nice fiber-reinforced composite cone by soaking a paper cone in a low viscosity solution, then curing. But trying to make paper work properly is, IMO, not a good way to go for high-quality audio. Too much variability with humidity, too much variability in manufacture. We've got better materials these days.
SY/ delighted with his Audax HDAs
C37
Hi,
Well,the difference is that C37 is claimed to be benificial wherever you care to put it on...tonearms,CDP transports etc.
IMO, it was best put in the "Everything Else" section...that is if you want it to be moved.
I'll leave it up to the threadstarter to decide if or not he wants one of the mods to do so.
Sy,
Audax he? I use them too.
Cheers,
Hi,
Well,the difference is that C37 is claimed to be benificial wherever you care to put it on...tonearms,CDP transports etc.
IMO, it was best put in the "Everything Else" section...that is if you want it to be moved.
I'll leave it up to the threadstarter to decide if or not he wants one of the mods to do so.
Sy,
Audax he? I use them too.
Cheers,
An EEEdioooot Speaks
Expensive and Secret?
The site gives you the ingredients for Pete's sake.
Tube-o-lator lacquer consists of:
carbon 76.4 %
oxygen 23.1 %
sulfur 0.20%
natrium 0.17 %
silicon 0.09 %
chlorine 0.03 %
That is 99.5% OXYGEN and CARBON.
A couple of rare and expensive commodities.
Just got off the phone with my broker! I've got a bundle in oxygen and carbon futures myself.
The above adds up to 99.9%
Maybe it's the .1% P.T. Barnum that is so expensive?
They charged 6k for what they admit was a garden variety circuit covered with this stuff. To folks credit no one would buy it and so they repackaged it and they are now trying to sell it by the bottle. That says a lot about the current state of audio if you ask me. Hype is at least as destructive of progress as having a closed mind.
As far as Kuei Yang Wang's comments. Hey, I try to keep an open mind. He forgot more about tube circuits than I know. I've done his Billie mods (for one neice) and i think I will take advantage his recent efforts on the Opera Joplin for another. I'm keepin an open mind!
Where did I put my Karo syrup?
Cheers
Craig Ryder
Expensive and Secret?
The site gives you the ingredients for Pete's sake.
Tube-o-lator lacquer consists of:
carbon 76.4 %
oxygen 23.1 %
sulfur 0.20%
natrium 0.17 %
silicon 0.09 %
chlorine 0.03 %
That is 99.5% OXYGEN and CARBON.
A couple of rare and expensive commodities.
Just got off the phone with my broker! I've got a bundle in oxygen and carbon futures myself.
The above adds up to 99.9%
Maybe it's the .1% P.T. Barnum that is so expensive?
They charged 6k for what they admit was a garden variety circuit covered with this stuff. To folks credit no one would buy it and so they repackaged it and they are now trying to sell it by the bottle. That says a lot about the current state of audio if you ask me. Hype is at least as destructive of progress as having a closed mind.
As far as Kuei Yang Wang's comments. Hey, I try to keep an open mind. He forgot more about tube circuits than I know. I've done his Billie mods (for one neice) and i think I will take advantage his recent efforts on the Opera Joplin for another. I'm keepin an open mind!
Where did I put my Karo syrup?
Cheers
Craig Ryder
Claptrap?
"To talk of an amplifier having a 'chocolaty midrange' . . . is simply poetic claptrap. I think it's delightful that people have vivid imaginations, but ultimately these terms are just not constructive, not useful." - Dr. Floyd Toole.
"With science marching on and all that, the sonics differences between brands of a given hifi component are often reduced to subtleties. Loudspeakers, however..." - Ken Kantor.
"The classic anthropologist's way of thinking about magic is in terms of our sense of inadequate control over our lives, which ought to mean that, as healthcare improves, our belief in the superstitious causes of ill health declines. But even in the most prosperous and secure societies, there is still a kind of existential insecurity, and no amount of popularised science is going to give you answers to those kinds of emotional needs. And that's where these other things attract people. There are psychological variables and there are personal variables, and some people are highly resistant to anything that smacks of irrationality. But, the fact is, lots of people rather enjoy reading their horoscopes." -
The Guardian.
316a said:
"To talk of an amplifier having a 'chocolaty midrange' . . . is simply poetic claptrap. I think it's delightful that people have vivid imaginations, but ultimately these terms are just not constructive, not useful." - Dr. Floyd Toole.
"With science marching on and all that, the sonics differences between brands of a given hifi component are often reduced to subtleties. Loudspeakers, however..." - Ken Kantor.
"The classic anthropologist's way of thinking about magic is in terms of our sense of inadequate control over our lives, which ought to mean that, as healthcare improves, our belief in the superstitious causes of ill health declines. But even in the most prosperous and secure societies, there is still a kind of existential insecurity, and no amount of popularised science is going to give you answers to those kinds of emotional needs. And that's where these other things attract people. There are psychological variables and there are personal variables, and some people are highly resistant to anything that smacks of irrationality. But, the fact is, lots of people rather enjoy reading their horoscopes." -
The Guardian.
"hi-fi fetishism."
I like that term , it sums up quite a bit (Floyd Toole) . C37 coated wooden volume knobs and fluids which claim to dampen distortion would fall into this category . These products must do something , however subtle but to justify the claims ...? Where's Andy Evans when you need him , any guys that think these products work as promised just because they've paid megabucks for them must need an 'audio psycologist' . I think we should end this thread here chaps , my email is getting clogged and this is rapidly turning into a bunfight / ******* contest , after all the initial posting was regarding the claims of this Tubeolator . I'm off to my workshop to align my druid-blessed crystals symetrically either side of the valve tester to get good matching.'Supercrystal' double matched gravity balanced 12AU7 anyone ? $200 each , both myself , my wife and next door's dog say they'll beat any valve going so it must be true . Blimey , I should really call in Uri Geller to bless the valves too , some are bound to fall for that one !
ps If C37 was cheaper (say $15 for 50ml) I'd try it but not that tubeolator stuff !
316a
I like that term , it sums up quite a bit (Floyd Toole) . C37 coated wooden volume knobs and fluids which claim to dampen distortion would fall into this category . These products must do something , however subtle but to justify the claims ...? Where's Andy Evans when you need him , any guys that think these products work as promised just because they've paid megabucks for them must need an 'audio psycologist' . I think we should end this thread here chaps , my email is getting clogged and this is rapidly turning into a bunfight / ******* contest , after all the initial posting was regarding the claims of this Tubeolator . I'm off to my workshop to align my druid-blessed crystals symetrically either side of the valve tester to get good matching.'Supercrystal' double matched gravity balanced 12AU7 anyone ? $200 each , both myself , my wife and next door's dog say they'll beat any valve going so it must be true . Blimey , I should really call in Uri Geller to bless the valves too , some are bound to fall for that one !
ps If C37 was cheaper (say $15 for 50ml) I'd try it but not that tubeolator stuff !
316a
I vote for a permanent thread, anchor at the top of the forum, entitled "******* Match". At the beginning of the thread would be a running tabulation of who pisses...er...contributes the most to the thread.
At the end of each year, prizes could be awarded based on number of posts:
First prize: 3 weeks in Philadephia.
Second prize: 2 weeks in Philadelphia, etc.,
At the end of each year, prizes could be awarded based on number of posts:
First prize: 3 weeks in Philadephia.
Second prize: 2 weeks in Philadelphia, etc.,
No Magic Involved
To Ryder, and others,
Yes, I can add up the figures as given by analysis too.
What is not given is the forms of these elements.
Carbon has various forms - powder, graphite, diamond, bound up in a polymer compound etc, and this is what makes the difference.
If I were to tell you the ingredients of my invention, you would have a rather greater understanding of what you have been listening to all this time, and you would probably not want to go back to an untreated system - I know I can't be bothered listening to untreated systems now, live systems or replay systems, and I am also hearing untreated microphones in recordings.
The home listeners, musos, and live and recording sound engineers who have heard this treatment are all saying the same thing about it, and these results are all entirely positive, even without any explanation of the mode of operation.
The point is that they all readily hear and prefer the sonics difference, and do not actually care a hoot about how or why it works.
I will in the near future perform some rigourous lab measurements, but for now that is not the least bit important - my ears are already telling me what it is doing, and my ears prefer the change.
It is very unfortunate for you naysayers, that you seem unable to grasp some elementary aspects of physics, and this is to your own detriment.
Eric / - hearing on a higher plane.
To Ryder, and others,
Yes, I can add up the figures as given by analysis too.
What is not given is the forms of these elements.
Carbon has various forms - powder, graphite, diamond, bound up in a polymer compound etc, and this is what makes the difference.
If I were to tell you the ingredients of my invention, you would have a rather greater understanding of what you have been listening to all this time, and you would probably not want to go back to an untreated system - I know I can't be bothered listening to untreated systems now, live systems or replay systems, and I am also hearing untreated microphones in recordings.
The home listeners, musos, and live and recording sound engineers who have heard this treatment are all saying the same thing about it, and these results are all entirely positive, even without any explanation of the mode of operation.
The point is that they all readily hear and prefer the sonics difference, and do not actually care a hoot about how or why it works.
I will in the near future perform some rigourous lab measurements, but for now that is not the least bit important - my ears are already telling me what it is doing, and my ears prefer the change.
It is very unfortunate for you naysayers, that you seem unable to grasp some elementary aspects of physics, and this is to your own detriment.
Eric / - hearing on a higher plane.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.