how many times has the question been asked - have you put your ears where your mouth is?
in other words, sometimes one just needs to STFU and listen, then try to figure out - what was that?
BTW, how often do you order anything online, take home from a bricks and mortar store, or a freekin Big Mac without paying first?
not that I condone the consumption of Big Macs
in other words, sometimes one just needs to STFU and listen, then try to figure out - what was that?
BTW, how often do you order anything online, take home from a bricks and mortar store, or a freekin Big Mac without paying first?
not that I condone the consumption of Big Macs
I dont know who you are posting to but I can answer this for you:
With Bricks and Mortar I know what I am buying I know what they are used for and I know what the result will be. Pretty much no risk there.
Ditto Big Macs...not really a big risk..apart from health issues as you say yep lol.
ENAble - Makes no sense not even the seller can tell me how it does what is claimed it does?may? do and could be very risky some drivers cost a fortune...but they want my money up front and no guarantees?
WM
Oh sorry Chris you sell this stuff?
STFU and buy it and apply it ?
or STFU listen to it applied to a cone that has no relation to what I have at home? Then buy it in the hope that the dubious effect will be repeated?
or STFU listen and figure out that yes the particular driver was improved by doping?
(but mine may not be)
Hmmm your business credo is weird.
WM
That is the approach i take... and one of the reasons i have that set of demo speakers. Takes me less than 15 sec and 1 switch to tell you which are which. Took me an entire afternoon when i was 1st exposed -- i was very skeptical when i 1st ran across the idea, but it resonated with something one of my gurus -- a speaker & driver builder -- had said to me. So i sent Bud a set of drivers. Chris went down and picked them up. When he returned, despite him trying to be nonchalant, i could tell he was almost giddy with excitement, wanting me to sit down and hear the difference. But i had a cold and couldn't hear a thing. Later that week...
The rest is history.
dave
There is much in hifi that has yet to have a solid scientific explanation, and little that has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
For instance why amplifiers sound different (i show my bias by the way i phrase that)
dave
Actually I didn't say open your wallet, but your ears - it's very easy to decry something for whatever reason that you haven't heard.
The exhortation was to listen with an open mind, which of course to paraphrase HiViGuy as humans, it virtually impossible, but at least with the mindset that - does one of these (whatever) portray aspects of the performance in a more musical / coherent manner? Even if ( or perhaps even better if) in a system with which you're not familiar, those differences will either be apparent or not. For me they have been, every time - I'd be happy for a clinical / behavioral psychologist to enjoy themselves explaining the placebo effect - meanwhile, I'll just enjoy the music.
FWIW, long before encountering EnABL, and after over 30yrs of riding the hi-fi carousel, and enjoying each lap less, I made stepped off and after a brief period of vertigo made a sharp left turn and confined myself to the "kiddie's pool" of small full-range drivers and lower powered, mostly tube amplification. So admittedly, the range of drivers on which I've compared the EnABL process is less than hundreds, and there will certainly be some excellent speakers I'll never hear or be able to afford on which it might not effect the improvement I've heard for myself.
Unfortunately, thanks to the internet and dearth of bricks and mortar stores (at least in my area) in which it possible to audition any but mainstream commercial, or in the case of the few remaining high end shops, esoteric or legacy name brands and associated accessories such as $500 power cords and multi K$ speaker wire/interconnects, there's more leg work / shoe leather to be invested in availing oneself of the opportunity to hear anything different.
Yes, I'm associated with "the purveyor" , and build and listen to a range of speakers and amps, but I don't "sell the stuff" directly, and can certainly understand folks not wanting to take that leap of faith. Clearly there's no concise, compartmentalized science on "how it works", and I certainly don't have the technical acumen of those folks arguing against it. As much as I think I understand about it, there may be more going on than simply change in the material's properties by doping or localized mass loading.
However, after over 4 years of high level noise on the subject, with acrimony bordering on libel, I do take umbrage to being told that I'm not experiencing something real.
not doubt I've run the risk of censure for chumming the water, but have yet to be contacted
The exhortation was to listen with an open mind, which of course to paraphrase HiViGuy as humans, it virtually impossible, but at least with the mindset that - does one of these (whatever) portray aspects of the performance in a more musical / coherent manner? Even if ( or perhaps even better if) in a system with which you're not familiar, those differences will either be apparent or not. For me they have been, every time - I'd be happy for a clinical / behavioral psychologist to enjoy themselves explaining the placebo effect - meanwhile, I'll just enjoy the music.
FWIW, long before encountering EnABL, and after over 30yrs of riding the hi-fi carousel, and enjoying each lap less, I made stepped off and after a brief period of vertigo made a sharp left turn and confined myself to the "kiddie's pool" of small full-range drivers and lower powered, mostly tube amplification. So admittedly, the range of drivers on which I've compared the EnABL process is less than hundreds, and there will certainly be some excellent speakers I'll never hear or be able to afford on which it might not effect the improvement I've heard for myself.
Unfortunately, thanks to the internet and dearth of bricks and mortar stores (at least in my area) in which it possible to audition any but mainstream commercial, or in the case of the few remaining high end shops, esoteric or legacy name brands and associated accessories such as $500 power cords and multi K$ speaker wire/interconnects, there's more leg work / shoe leather to be invested in availing oneself of the opportunity to hear anything different.
Yes, I'm associated with "the purveyor" , and build and listen to a range of speakers and amps, but I don't "sell the stuff" directly, and can certainly understand folks not wanting to take that leap of faith. Clearly there's no concise, compartmentalized science on "how it works", and I certainly don't have the technical acumen of those folks arguing against it. As much as I think I understand about it, there may be more going on than simply change in the material's properties by doping or localized mass loading.
However, after over 4 years of high level noise on the subject, with acrimony bordering on libel, I do take umbrage to being told that I'm not experiencing something real.
not doubt I've run the risk of censure for chumming the water, but have yet to be contacted
Last edited:
Not much income. It is more a passion than a vocation. Even with a number of other "jobs" i still fall into the impoverished class. Fortunately that only applies to monetary wealth.
dave
No he can't be when he is directly involved with a threads content. WindingMan I am going to respectfully ask you to step back a bit. You made your point numerous times, now either say something new or move on.
To the others involved in this thread, the same message to you. I do not like to see these turn into ******* matches and will begin deleting posts.
They are more interesting looking to many, but from 3+ m away and with your eyes closed they aren't very visible
dave
WindingMan I am going to respectfully ask you to step back a bit. You made your point numerous times, now either say something new or move on.
To the others involved in this thread, the same message to you. I do not like to see these turn into ******* matches and will begin deleting posts.
Thanks Cal will do!
WM
You can say the same about most things hifi.
You won't get any drivers from me unless we feel they are better after than before. And who said there were no guarantees? I just said that no-one has asked for their money back, or to send their drivers back (altho i have had one person trade one set of unused drivers against another).
dave
I didn't find that C37 offered any benefits beyond what puzzle coat does (and in some cases not as effective), on some cones it does have an eerie way of going onto the cone (i.e. Visaton B200)
dave
WindingMan I am going to respectfully ask you to step back a bit. You made your point numerous times, now either say something new or move on.
To the others involved in this thread, the same message to you. I do not like to see these turn into ******* matches and will begin deleting posts.
ditto
chrisby
Every speaker I have listened too that "sounds bad" has had a solid scientific explanation that can be been proven beyond reasonable doubt as to why it sounds bad. They always measure bad in some demonstrable way, whether in frequency response, phase, distortion, thermal compression, polar response, the worst offenders combining liberal doses of all.
Amplifiers are easily proven to sound different, as they either do or do not present artifacts not present in the original signal.
There are as many "whys" as to why they sound different as there are designs, though good, well executed designs tend to "sound the same" in their linear operating range.
Speakers are far more ambiguous as far as "proof" of what "sounds better", but there are many scientific metrics that can be employed as to why two speakers that are the same other than some dots would sound different.
If I were selling dots, I'd want to measure the difference so I could determine the most effective dot pattern and spacing for the desired sonic outcome.
Of course, as one who sells said dots, I can understand your reluctance to quantify something you have not shown to be measurable.
Art
Art, et al:
I know Bud and Dave well enough if they had incontrovertible scientific proof of what's going on / why / how this stuff works, it'd have long since been published.
edit: since the patent has long since expired and the process was gifted to the DIY community by Bud, with as I can assure you no financial windfall, he certainly has nothing to gain by withholding a proprietary secret and is no doubt as weary of the fight as any of us
As to the method used to determine the appropriate number and locations of ring patterns, I believe that has been described in one of the now many threads in which the subject has been discussed.
I know Bud and Dave well enough if they had incontrovertible scientific proof of what's going on / why / how this stuff works, it'd have long since been published.
edit: since the patent has long since expired and the process was gifted to the DIY community by Bud, with as I can assure you no financial windfall, he certainly has nothing to gain by withholding a proprietary secret and is no doubt as weary of the fight as any of us
As to the method used to determine the appropriate number and locations of ring patterns, I believe that has been described in one of the now many threads in which the subject has been discussed.
Last edited:
I would appreciate some comments upon this blink comparison of a wavelet analysis. Only from engineers please and from a point of view of which driver might be best employed in a speaker system, to be used as a reference for comparison, in audible double blind tests with other drivers. I would appreciate your comments upon why you choose a particular unit. To activate the blink just roll your mouse off of the page.
Enable Tests
Other data presentation formats can be provided at request.
Enable Tests
Other data presentation formats can be provided at request.
Bud,
The comparison says:
mouse over to invoke stock change (2 different drivers, 1 stock, 1 treated)
The two different drivers presented in your Enable tests look different in delay vs frequency. I would expect two different drivers to look different.
I’m not understanding your request:
“which driver might be best employed in a speaker system, to be used as a reference for comparison, in audible double blind tests with other drivers.”
My preferred reference for comparison would be two closely matched broken in drivers of the same type (matched prior to modification, after break in) in identical enclosures, one modified , one stock.
I would also want to compare the modified driver before and after modification traces to compare the modification vs driver differences.
Do you have any comparisons of a broken in stock driver and the same driver after treatment?
As far as data presentation formats, I find overlayed amplitude response and phase response to be convenient for comparisons.
Art Welter
Attachments
Dave, can you take the time to make a blink comparison of A & B and one of C & D for Art? This will provide him with a better idea of how two untreated and two treated drivers compare to each other.
But there are no scientific proofs of measures that will tell you a speaker sounds good.
dave
I'm not sure which, is which, but I'd take the one on the right in Art's side by side image. They seem to have some trade offs, but the worst offender is that junk around 1.5 to 4khz and 1.5ms and then again around 4ms. I'm on my phone now so hopefully I'm looking at it right. My choice has more junk but it's tighter and more spread out in frequency so likely less audible. The 1.5 to 4khz range on the one I wouldn't pick is more likely to stick out. Critical frequency and further in time. Otherwise my pick might be worse.
I too don't totally understand the question. I think you're asking which one would I think I'd pick in a blind test? It would be the one on the right.
I too don't totally understand the question. I think you're asking which one would I think I'd pick in a blind test? It would be the one on the right.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.