It is my belief that beyond a certain price point no product will perform any better regardless of cost.
These so called high end items exist simply to empty the very deep pockets of the wealthy allowing them to feel superior in the knowledge that they are part of an exclusive
'club' where they can point out their new T/T , amp , cable's etc to vistor's and say
"See that? ... 500k" .
The majority don't care about the sound it's all about lifestyle and image , the same people not content with a 'standard' Lamborghini buy one encrusted with diamonds .
Envious? not me
These so called high end items exist simply to empty the very deep pockets of the wealthy allowing them to feel superior in the knowledge that they are part of an exclusive
'club' where they can point out their new T/T , amp , cable's etc to vistor's and say
"See that? ... 500k" .
The majority don't care about the sound it's all about lifestyle and image , the same people not content with a 'standard' Lamborghini buy one encrusted with diamonds .
Envious? not me
It is my belief that beyond a certain price point no product will perform any better regardless of cost.
These so called high end items exist simply to empty the very deep pockets of the wealthy allowing them to feel superior in the knowledge that they are part of an exclusive
'club' where they can point out their new T/T , amp , cable's etc to vistor's and say
"See that? ... 500k" .
The majority don't care about the sound it's all about lifestyle and image , the same people not content with a 'standard' Lamborghini buy one encrusted with diamonds .
Envious? not me
They are probably the kind of people with about 10 albums in their collection........mmmm.....I wonder what they are.......no I don't.
The Dual 1249 was, and still is, a great belt drive TT. It was issued in 1975 to celebrate the company's 75th anniversary and is basically a belt driven (instead of idler wheel) 1229 with all it's guts, but another tone arm. In good working condition, it indeed can successfully compete with other, more expensive and more hyped TTs. Spare parts are still available from the aftermarket, but maintainance may get challenging, due to it's delicate machanic construction. With some care and always having some close look at the service manual it is doable, though.
Being a not overly high-priced mass product of solid construction, it never gained this snake-oiled reputation.
The Dual company is extinct since many years. Comparable and somewhat improved TTs carrying the »Dual« label are manufactured by the Alfred Fehrenbacher Company, also located at St. Georgen, Germany. They easily can be identified by their numbering, starting with »CS«.
There's some other new »Dual« stuff around with another »DT« numbering system. This isn't Dual at all, not even comparable to the traditional Dual standards.
Best regards!
Hi Kay i stand corrected , as always lots of conflicting info on the net .
Just read a couple of articles on the history of Dual .
The company you mention built t/t 's using the original plans apparently but the brand name was also sold and used on inferior Far Eastern manufactured products .
The article i read about the three new models stated made by the original company so i assume what that really mean is the Fehrenbacher Group i guess
It would seem at one time there where three completely different ' Dual ' branded product ranges of varible quality operating at the same time .
On a side note , my first cd player at around £600 was beaten hands down by my 505 mk 11 for sound quality and stayed in my system for many years .
, as always lots of conflicting info on the net .Just read a couple of articles on the history of Dual .
The company you mention built t/t 's using the original plans apparently but the brand name was also sold and used on inferior Far Eastern manufactured products .
The article i read about the three new models stated made by the original company so i assume what that really mean is the Fehrenbacher Group i guess
It would seem at one time there where three completely different ' Dual ' branded product ranges of varible quality operating at the same time .
On a side note , my first cd player at around £600 was beaten hands down by my 505 mk 11 for sound quality and stayed in my system for many years .
Notwithstanding that this stuff is pretty durned funny, I can sort-of see the point of people that buy the snake oil stuff (the non-billionaire targeted stuff, that is). One approach to improve sound as experienced might be to learn the technology, which is for most WORK and if the only purpose is for enjoying music, then.... why?
The whole hifi thing is about self-deception anyway. Convince the brain to subconsciously think that sound from speakers is from live musicians performing in a space -- even though it certainly isn't. You can employ improved technology in that direction (if you know or can identify when it is actually improved in a perceptible way). Or you can employ your brain's suggestibility in these matters to make it all sound good to you, with snake-oil products (pretty important, though, not to see the ones you spring for as being in the "snake oil" category!).
Between knowledgeable use of technology or utilizing the suggestibility of the human brain (craving to be deceived in the first place) which is likely to be the most effective approach to improving the perceived sound experience? I'm pretty sure it would be the second one.
I've spent years in RF engineering and designing transmission line structures so couldn't ever buy into all the magic cable snakelubricant though. To utilize a brain's suggestibility to experience more convincing sound, you have to sort of not know that's what it is. But for audiophiles without technological experience or education on its own terms, suggestibility is maybe the more economical route in terms of time and money! (Of course, things get more scary when denial of science becomes a factor in more public life effecting things than just fooling your brain that it is in a room with a string quartet!).
The whole hifi thing is about self-deception anyway. Convince the brain to subconsciously think that sound from speakers is from live musicians performing in a space -- even though it certainly isn't. You can employ improved technology in that direction (if you know or can identify when it is actually improved in a perceptible way). Or you can employ your brain's suggestibility in these matters to make it all sound good to you, with snake-oil products (pretty important, though, not to see the ones you spring for as being in the "snake oil" category!).
Between knowledgeable use of technology or utilizing the suggestibility of the human brain (craving to be deceived in the first place) which is likely to be the most effective approach to improving the perceived sound experience? I'm pretty sure it would be the second one.
I've spent years in RF engineering and designing transmission line structures so couldn't ever buy into all the magic cable snakelubricant though. To utilize a brain's suggestibility to experience more convincing sound, you have to sort of not know that's what it is. But for audiophiles without technological experience or education on its own terms, suggestibility is maybe the more economical route in terms of time and money! (Of course, things get more scary when denial of science becomes a factor in more public life effecting things than just fooling your brain that it is in a room with a string quartet!).
From my own experience, I gotta go with your first scenario above.
I never got into the audio woo tweako stuff either, so I don't have personal experience with that; but I have read a lot of magazines & websites that have catered to that mindset down through the years. To me the common message I get from those guys is that they're never finished tweaking. It has similarities to addictive behavior - always chasing the next high with new cables or magic stickers or whatever. I believe this is caused by the ultimate ineffectiveness of all that stuff. With no actual sonic benefit, the "newness" of the latest magical tweak soon wears off, and the cycle repeats.
Even though I never owned a green-ink Sharpie, I have spent a lot of time tweaking my gear down through the years. I always thought I was using a more objective, scientific approach, but I was also trusting my ears quite a lot. And not to boast, but my ears seem to work pretty well; for example I have a good sense of pitch that allows me to identify magnitude frequency response errors fairly accurately without using test equipment. I tried different acoustic measurement techniques at times, but I could never find much of a correlation between what the microphone was telling me and what my ears were hearing. Now I've discovered that I probably just wasn't doing it right!
A few years ago I decided to take a step back and see if I could learn more about how this stuff really works. In the process of going from 5.1 passive to 5.2 full active, I learned how to make proper quasi-anechoic measurements, which allowed me to make minor but significant improvements to driver response in my speakers. I also learned a lot about how to measure subs in a room, and blend them properly with the rest of the system, among many other things.
This was a months-long process, but very interesting and fun for me. And the results have been not only far beyond anything I was expecting, but also lasting and tangible. I've had the current setup for 2 or 3 years now, and I still feel the experience of the music simply appearing in the room instead of emerging from speakers. I can listen to anything from Debussy to Led Zeppelin to War of the Worlds, and I seldom feel that old twinge to get up and tweak something!
I actually feel a bit of a nuisance posting here to DIYAudio these days, since I don't have any active projects to talk about. And I don't think for a moment that my setup is as good as it can be; I can hear a couple of minor things that I take a swing at one of these days when I get time. I'm also certain there are many others here with systems that take things to a whole other level even from where I'm at with my stuff. But I must admit, for all my love of tinkering, at the end of the day this collection of hardware is really just a means to an end; it's the music I'm really after. Besides, there's always something else to tweak on - like the car system!
Last edited:
Don't be ridiculous. Everyone knows the green pen has to use water based ink.
(I still have one! But I bought a cheap generic pen rather than pay silly money. Still a saddo though.
)
I was looking up some old PB products after your post ( something to do with green soaking up red laser light ) when i stumbled oh this .... a Belt treatment i'd not seen .... lost for words ....
beltpen
Last edited:
I've not heard of that charlatan. Clue in his web site "demon", click on it and it looks like someone has wasted him, ha! Looks like the sort of thing that probably lives on YouTube now. Leaves do that, soak up red light, actually all the colours except green, that's why they're green, see, I'm not that thick. I still want one of those pens though cuz I haven't tried it so I shouldn't knock it, cuz that would be a thick thing to do.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.