John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Easy now to do now in software. These were devices full of analog computing circuitry with latency, etc. not at all the same thing.

Something as simple as looking for impossible rate of change of input based on the current smoothed rms value and BW of the music, does amazingly well in fact as good as any for sale tool I have demoed.

Scott, the interesting thing is that the topology of the device you sketch here is identical to that of the Byebee. One wire in, one wire out.

So, at that level of abstraction there is no fundamental reason why a one wire in, one wire out device could not work, of course within certain parameters, and necessarily always accompanied by a degradation of the original signal.

However, intelligence and memory are required to add a fourth force to the RCL trinity , and I don't see a location for this in the Byebee. Or its proponents.
 
The one and only
Joined 2001
Paid Member
What a passive quantum purifier do are simply to reduce the effect of quantum fluctuations / oscillations and thus giving a resulting reduced noise level. The quantum noise can be "picked up" by cables and components in the audio chain. If quantum noise are reduced on a RIAA input then it will not be amplified through the whole system, but will be "picked up" thru out the chain.

I don't think that's it. Clearly, being a quantum device, it behaves much like
the delayed choice two slit experiment - You the observer make the decision
about what constitutes noise and the Bybee merely acts in anticipation of
your decision.

:cool:
 
However, intelligence and memory are required to add a fourth force to the RCL trinity , and I don't see a location for this in the Byebee. Or its proponents.

I know it's esoteric but decreasing the entropy of information is covered by the second law, it must use energy and have a net increase of entropy to the universe. Transmission of informatin in a lossy medium has an increase of entropy going backwards must have a penalty.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that's it. Clearly, being a quantum device, it behaves much like the delayed choice two slit experiment - You the observer make the decision
about what constitutes noise and the Bybee merely acts in anticipation of
your decision.

:cool:

Who knows - maybe you are right regarding the Bybee´s :D
I do not know if the Bybee´s should be called a quantum device or even if they work on a quantum level?

However using materials that are the least influenced by unwanted quantum effects, or using a "filter" that attenuates the unwanted quantum effects or actively controlling the quantum effects are very interesting as it is not only affecting audio performance.
 
diyAudio Member RIP
Joined 2005
BTW: Brent Butterworth just posted in FB and elsewhere that loudspeaker cables really do make a measurable difference, anticipating an outcry of dissent. My comment was that it has NEVER been about them not making a difference --- but that when they do, the differences can be accounted for by standard electromagnetic theory. Or not. Even the proponents of bizarre physics should at least understand, and carefully account for, the basic EM. After that, as the preacher says to Sheriff Bart in Blazing Saddles, you're on your own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.