If you think this idea is ridiculous, and I would be the first to say it does seem ridiculous if the universe behaves as we would like to assume it does with simple, simplistic and expected results, then do not bother to try this.
If you are satisfied that you audio system is giving you the sound quality you desire then you are done. Lucky you!
Many of us have tried initially inexplicable tweaks that have improved the sound quality so we are more likely to give others a try. There are those who try something and report what they have heard and then there are those who never try anything and know everything - like the Bourbon Kings who knew nothing and forgot nothing - the gods of audio and its Lord Protectors. Where would we be without them? Probably much further along. There are those who cannot let go of the textbook. Imagine someone practicing law and only using what they learned in law school.
I do feel compassion for those who have to carry this massive weight on their shoulders. I suspect Dante predicted a special corner of Inferno for these folk.
I have no animus towards Geoff Kait and have long suspected he is having fun at our expense. I have never bought any of his toys but I did try putting the copper foil on my windows and heard absolutely no difference at all. That is my history with him. His ideas for isolating a turntable made good sense to me.
Perception covers lots of ground. A placebo works great until it no longer works but while it does work you might as well enjoy it.
Problem with ferrite is it eliminates more than the noise. The sad case with all shielding. But then we are living on Earth and that brings many compromises ...
C'est la guerre or something similar to that.
If you are satisfied that you audio system is giving you the sound quality you desire then you are done. Lucky you!
Many of us have tried initially inexplicable tweaks that have improved the sound quality so we are more likely to give others a try. There are those who try something and report what they have heard and then there are those who never try anything and know everything - like the Bourbon Kings who knew nothing and forgot nothing - the gods of audio and its Lord Protectors. Where would we be without them? Probably much further along. There are those who cannot let go of the textbook. Imagine someone practicing law and only using what they learned in law school.
I do feel compassion for those who have to carry this massive weight on their shoulders. I suspect Dante predicted a special corner of Inferno for these folk.
I have no animus towards Geoff Kait and have long suspected he is having fun at our expense. I have never bought any of his toys but I did try putting the copper foil on my windows and heard absolutely no difference at all. That is my history with him. His ideas for isolating a turntable made good sense to me.
Perception covers lots of ground. A placebo works great until it no longer works but while it does work you might as well enjoy it.
Problem with ferrite is it eliminates more than the noise. The sad case with all shielding. But then we are living on Earth and that brings many compromises ...
C'est la guerre or something similar to that.
We have the birth of a new category in the whirled of science: the respectable responsible scientist.
The scientist who believes and does not observe.
I think those folks are confined to the new and unusual vaccine business. Many fear science is becoming a religion. I know it has.
What next?
The scientist who believes and does not observe.
I think those folks are confined to the new and unusual vaccine business. Many fear science is becoming a religion. I know it has.
What next?
Here are some example discussions where people who think in the way you are advocating were probably wrong:
Schumann Resonance:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/why-the-objectivists-will-never-win.403848/post-7485144
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/why-the-objectivists-will-never-win.403848/post-7485255
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/why-the-objectivists-will-never-win.403848/post-7485269
Purple Felt Pen:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/why-the-objectivists-will-never-win.403848/post-7486089
Bybee:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154881
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7153981
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/funniest-snake-oil-theories.234829/post-7154011
Wire directivity:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/daves-attempt-at-a-null-test.403488/post-7460696
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/daves-attempt-at-a-null-test.403488/post-7461484
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/daves-attempt-at-a-null-test.403488/post-7460604
Last edited:
You don't know that for a fact. You really don't know if there is any difference whatsoever in the sound emanating from your speakers, because you haven't measured it any meaningful way.
Your ear, brain, memory mechanism is not capable of discerning these differences in sound quality that you claim.
Well, I'd rather say "to each one his philosophy or subjectivity", but for demonstrating if there is a reputedly significative improvement - over any measurement technique, OK ? - when it comes to tone, I try to use the instant A/B sound comparison, with all parameters as equal as possible to validate any change.
If by this mean, I heard no instant significant difference today morning, evening, and tomorrow, then it may be not worth to go further for me.
So yes, I agree @classicalfan, in the sense that sometimes, the ear is a good girl and a bad advisor ! That's why I try to bring some "objectivity" - if I can say so - by the instant A/B comparison. But unfortunately, it's not always doable in the ideal conditions...
T
And there are those who try to replace there lack of textbook knowledge by pure fantasy. This is ok for me.
But if the same people insist of telling the only truth about "science" things become ridiculous.
Did someone in this thread say they know the "only truth" about science? Or maybe that's a strawman?
I'm always amazed/amused/shocked at things like cable lifters and such. When there's not even a feeble attempt at a plausible explanation for the claimed effect, it's apparent they don't know as much as Ohm's Law or if they ever did, ignore it and don't know how to apply it.
I recall on another forum someone was doing speaker cable experiments, and said he was a scientist, so he knew how to do those things (apparently like a "black box" experiment). I asked him if he had measured the resistance, inductance and capacitance of the cables. He said no, he didn't know how to do those things, and it seemed he didn't think it was necessary. I kinda regret not pushing the conversation further, asking what kind of scientist he was. Presuming he actually was a scientist and said he was a chemist, I'd say, so I could learn about chemistry by mixing random chemicals together and recording the results? Could I do this and in a reasonable time make "significant findings" in chemistry? I wouldn't have to know anything about elements, or those pesky electron shells? Oh, and I learned as a child to look both ways before crossing a road, so I know all the safety precautions I need.
I've posted this link before, it may be slightly off topic, but it shows how people can be misled into believing things that aren't as verifiable as one might hope.
https://www.susanblackmore.uk/chapters/why-i-have-given-up/
“But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
― Carl Sagan, Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science
I recall on another forum someone was doing speaker cable experiments, and said he was a scientist, so he knew how to do those things (apparently like a "black box" experiment). I asked him if he had measured the resistance, inductance and capacitance of the cables. He said no, he didn't know how to do those things, and it seemed he didn't think it was necessary. I kinda regret not pushing the conversation further, asking what kind of scientist he was. Presuming he actually was a scientist and said he was a chemist, I'd say, so I could learn about chemistry by mixing random chemicals together and recording the results? Could I do this and in a reasonable time make "significant findings" in chemistry? I wouldn't have to know anything about elements, or those pesky electron shells? Oh, and I learned as a child to look both ways before crossing a road, so I know all the safety precautions I need.
I've posted this link before, it may be slightly off topic, but it shows how people can be misled into believing things that aren't as verifiable as one might hope.
https://www.susanblackmore.uk/chapters/why-i-have-given-up/
“But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
― Carl Sagan, Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science
So, when engineers design something that brings you much satisfaction, like a great amplifier with virtually no noise or distortion, you are very happy with their skills and knowledge that created that product.
But when those same engineers tell you that there is no way by placing magic salts or rocks on AC outlets in the wall you can possibly change or affect the sound in your system, you suddenly no longer believe in them.
Instead, you are willing to listen to people on the Internet with no engineering degree or skills whatsoever and believe their far-fetched fantasies about sound reproduction. Just because they claim to have heard a difference.
Sad, very sad.
Did anyone provide any data? No, then it’s superstition.
Do not put salt in your outlets, it’s a really, really bad idea and your insurance won’t cover it if your house burns down.
Electricity is not magical and doesn’t need bizarre chemical recipes to make it better. Put the crystals on your forehead.
Running the ground through a box of salt and semiconductors is illegal and dangerous. Check your building code.
I’m guessing you are hearing a ground lift. Your system is no longer dumping noise to earth/ground. You are hearing noise and calling it beautiful things.
The patent calls for a large metallic enclosure. Simply use 1” copper pipe. I guarantee it will sound better than a box of salt.
The biggest improvement in my system was installing a grounding grid for the house ground. It cleaned up the sound remarkably. If you live in a dry climate then you should go a step beyond the typical ground wire clamped to a water pipe. Put in a simple grounding grid of four 2-3 meter long copper ground rods in a square 3-4 meters apart. Stop messing with salt boxes and power conditioners until you have found a good ground connection.
Do not put salt in your outlets, it’s a really, really bad idea and your insurance won’t cover it if your house burns down.
Electricity is not magical and doesn’t need bizarre chemical recipes to make it better. Put the crystals on your forehead.
Running the ground through a box of salt and semiconductors is illegal and dangerous. Check your building code.
I’m guessing you are hearing a ground lift. Your system is no longer dumping noise to earth/ground. You are hearing noise and calling it beautiful things.
The patent calls for a large metallic enclosure. Simply use 1” copper pipe. I guarantee it will sound better than a box of salt.
The biggest improvement in my system was installing a grounding grid for the house ground. It cleaned up the sound remarkably. If you live in a dry climate then you should go a step beyond the typical ground wire clamped to a water pipe. Put in a simple grounding grid of four 2-3 meter long copper ground rods in a square 3-4 meters apart. Stop messing with salt boxes and power conditioners until you have found a good ground connection.
I do know that if you install two 8' ground rods they must be at least 16' apart or the second rod will not lower the resistance much over the first rod. Earlier in this thread there was a Bill Whitlock paper linked that said that earth ground has no real benefit to lower the noise. But I like low resistance earth grounds anyway.
If people hear improvement to their systems with salt or quartz or ground boxes and it makes them happy I am all for it. After all this is a hobby forum, enjoy your hobby!
If people hear improvement to their systems with salt or quartz or ground boxes and it makes them happy I am all for it. After all this is a hobby forum, enjoy your hobby!
False.
"The early history of solitons or solitary waves began in August 1834 when the Victorian Engineer John Scott Russell observed a solitary wave travelling along a Scottish canal."
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/57/3/016#:~:text=The early history of solitons or solitary waves began in,de Vries, working in Amsterdam.
Back in 1834 someone claimed to have seen a raised body of water traveling down a river. At the time this happened there was no known theoretical explanation for what was claimed to have been observed.
Question: Did that make the observation a superstition at the time it occurred? (I don't think so.)
@rickmcinnis : would you just post some pictures of how you use - or apply - the Salt Treatment to your Audio Installation ? Or point me where to look on the web ? I mean : just for my instruction and understanding of the process. Because after all, we are discussing back and farth without any picture support !
Thanks ! 🙂
T
Thanks ! 🙂
T
I think I should mention about Rochelle Salt weakness.
It exhibits two Curie points, one at +24°C, called the upper Curie temperature, and the other at −18°C, called the lower Curie temperature.
Below and above these transition temperatures it exhibits paraelectric phase.
+24°C is not much and it's already summer.
Rochelle salt has a rather poor mechanical strength and low disintegration temperature.
The crystal decomposes at a low temperature of about 55°C
It is also apt to absorb water.
It exhibits two Curie points, one at +24°C, called the upper Curie temperature, and the other at −18°C, called the lower Curie temperature.
Below and above these transition temperatures it exhibits paraelectric phase.
+24°C is not much and it's already summer.
Rochelle salt has a rather poor mechanical strength and low disintegration temperature.
The crystal decomposes at a low temperature of about 55°C
It is also apt to absorb water.
I just wonder who and how found the material (Rochelle salt?) that brings positive subjective benefit on audio perception? Did that person try the whole alphabet, starting with aluminium oxide, through borax, citric acide, diamond crystals, etc.? How did he select good from bad? A scientific method starts with a hypothesis, then experiments proving or denying it, and finally a conclusion backed by a theory. Or did he find this stuff by chance, like Fleming the inventor of panicillin through not properly washed petri dishes?
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof.
Go out and measure something. No more subjective observations or theories applied outside of their domain of application.
Convince a skeptic with hard quantitative repeatable measurements of something as it relates to stuffed outlets and switches and an audio effect.
Go out and measure something. No more subjective observations or theories applied outside of their domain of application.
Convince a skeptic with hard quantitative repeatable measurements of something as it relates to stuffed outlets and switches and an audio effect.
All this talk about AC power. All this audio equipment runs on DC power. I would think that step one would be to go measure the ripple and or noise on the DC power supply rails of any equipment that is believed to be susceptible to this "noise" and measure the actual noise on those DC power supply rails to see 1) how bad is it 2) does it change when the AC filters are installed. Of course this ignores the fact that most well designed audio circuits have very high power supply noise rejection as well, so it would make sense to measure the noise spectrum at the amplifier output and compare that before and after these AC power treatments were applied. Until you start measuring and writing the measurements down you have not quantified the problem or the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. So much of the content produced about audio is just "talk talk talk" with absolutely nothing to back it up. I would think people would be more curious to know exactly what they are accomplishing with this work and be able to quantify and document it so others could replicate, verify and enjoy the results. So much of the "talk talk talk" is just parroting the sales brochures that I can read for myself and adds absolutely no value.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.