Guys, I really don't know HOW these devices work, but work they do! However, the effect is subtle, only important when everything else has been addressed. Now, Jack Bybee uses all JC designed electronics, so he is in a position to create a meaningful effect. I also have JC designed electronics (no IC's) and I could probably benefit from these devices, but I don't have any, and personally the effect is mostly on the sound imagining in the room, which I would have far to go to make good enough to make these things useful to me at all. I don't have any of these devices, but I have seen some of the raw ingredients that look like a powder. The metal is just a catalyst I am pretty sure.
You say they work, but everything else you just wrote fairly screams "No, they don't!". The effect is only audible on a sufficiently "good" system (though you used to say the BQPs only worked in systems that were "bad" enough). The effect is subtle, some might not hear it (poor benighted souls!). The "active" ingredient is a mysterious powder, unseen by others. The metal foil is a "catalyst", though no chemical reaction has been suggested. I mean, really, if you read that stuff would you keep a straight face?
I am surprised that in such a litigious society, that people are free to advertise how they please. Whether truth is being told or not appears to be irrelevant.
Are there no laws in place to protect the consumer?
Are there no laws in place to protect the consumer?
No, the BBB is a private organization. A pretty useless one, IMO. It would have to be an actual DA or federal prosecutor, and they have a few things on their plates that they might consider more important than a guy peddling bogus hifi gadgets to a few foolish folks in a minuscule niche market.
No Bean, just a typo. Personally I don't invest much interest in 'imaging', you know, stereo spread or depth, but many of my colleagues do. I could live with mono, if necessary, but the thru-path must be clean! I am very sensitive to that.
This is just blind endorsement, maybe if some involved in high end audio had the courage to stand up to these silly devices that audio reproduction would benefit as a whole, instead of perpetrating myths and untruths for a few bucks.....
These devices work by belief, a belief promoted by certain audio publications and revues by certain individual's.
And a certain amount of snobbery, if you cant afford the gear you cant hear the subtle changes, creating a desire to buy buy buy!
As I have said before, if people want to sell things like this they really ought to avoid giving 'explanations' of how they 'work'. Why invite ridicule?
It's part of the marketing strategy. "O-ho, look at those stupid scientists who can't accept this remarkable technology! They're probably still trying to prove why bumblebees can't fly!" The smug superiority of ignorance is a powerful motivator. All it takes is a total lack of ethics in its promotors.
That got me thinking as to where the bumblebee myth comes from... found this and thought it rather interesting...
Bumblebee argument - RationalWiki
so it is basically a pseudoscience myth, I'm glad otherwise I would have to doubt my view of reality having seen a bee fly and then be told by scientist that it actually cant fly...
There has been a perfect example of the anti-science and engineers rant earlier today and an other example where some base information is briefly scanned and used as proof because it fits someone view....
I must say that there is more chance of bumblebees flying than Bybees actually working.
Bumblebee argument - RationalWiki
so it is basically a pseudoscience myth, I'm glad otherwise I would have to doubt my view of reality having seen a bee fly and then be told by scientist that it actually cant fly...
There has been a perfect example of the anti-science and engineers rant earlier today and an other example where some base information is briefly scanned and used as proof because it fits someone view....
I must say that there is more chance of bumblebees flying than Bybees actually working.
Attachments
Yeah, I used it as an example of a thoroughly and widely debunked story that is nonetheless still commonly used by unethical hucksters and their dupes.
A side note: despite its name, RationalWiki is anything but. It has spotty reliability in general.
A side note: despite its name, RationalWiki is anything but. It has spotty reliability in general.
having looked at the site further I am inclined to agree.... Though I have found a section 9opposite of evolution) that will raise my blood pressure and stress me out when I read it, but cant resist...
The bumblebee is a good example of science bashing, I hear it regularly yet we are aware that bees fly...
What is impossible is trying to photograph them in flight and get a good result...
🙂
The bumblebee is a good example of science bashing, I hear it regularly yet we are aware that bees fly...
What is impossible is trying to photograph them in flight and get a good result...
🙂
The bumblebee myth does have a useful purpose: it alerts us to the fact that someone is talking nonsense and they haven't bothered to check their facts/sources before offering the benefit of their opinion on a subject they know nothing about. Other similar warning flags include:
'wife in the kitchen'
'need a good system/ears to hear this'
'conventional science/engineering'
'wife in the kitchen'
'need a good system/ears to hear this'
'conventional science/engineering'
How is it possible to sit pecking away at the physical keyboard of a laptop or the virtual one on a tablet or smartphone and be skeptical of science and engineering? Although we have not (and will not) crossed the threshold of superluminal "warp" travel we have otherwise in the last 40+ years eclipsed the 23rd century communications technology envisioned in the original Star Trek series "Communicator". These devices clearly demonstrate everyday the incredible sophistication and deep physical comprehension that lies behind modern electronics technology and systems engineering. As a guy who has experienced the journey from the late vacuum tube era (1950s) to now, in some ways it seems we have moved much farther and faster than should have been possible!
Last edited:
Who's being sceptical of science? not us....
it was another thread, where I was impressed by the level of ranting regarding science.... But it did illustrate your point.
My own view is some factions of audio what to get their feet back on the ground and stop promoting such rubbish as the Bybee devices, the sooner these people start telling the truth and help dispel these silly ideas and components the better it will be for audio.....
it was another thread, where I was impressed by the level of ranting regarding science.... But it did illustrate your point.
My own view is some factions of audio what to get their feet back on the ground and stop promoting such rubbish as the Bybee devices, the sooner these people start telling the truth and help dispel these silly ideas and components the better it will be for audio.....
- Status
- Not open for further replies.