The problem is the folks here will also use diffmaker as well as their ears. An interesting spin on no peeking.
Last edited:
A diyAudio member from Serbia recently posted (and Google Advanced Search can find):
My phono stage regulators are Jung Super reg with high PSRR up to high frequencies. Perhaps there is a filtering of noise produced by transformer and diode bridge. I have tested both CRC snubber and single resistor snubber .... After prolonged listening I noticed some differences in reproduction. First, sound picture is slightly darker with both snubbers. I would say less attractive than before, with reduced body of the instruments and vocals. But it seems that some pleasant coloration is removed. Bass is drier, but firmer and the whole sound is more coherent. More neutral and less forward in midrange.
Many people would prefer unsnubbered power supply. It gives so called warmer sound which many like. My flatpack transformers with very high L are sensitive to ringing. My other phonostage with unsnubbered low L torodial trafo have dry, precise sound picture similar to snubbered flatpack trafo. But , it takes time for testing with various music styles. Quick conclusions are bad.
However the most vociferous "sound is greatly improved" people seem to be owners of vacuum tube / valve equipment. The Linear Audio article includes some quotes (and internet hyperlinks) of their enthusiastic opinions:Many people would prefer unsnubbered power supply. It gives so called warmer sound which many like. My flatpack transformers with very high L are sensitive to ringing. My other phonostage with unsnubbered low L torodial trafo have dry, precise sound picture similar to snubbered flatpack trafo. But , it takes time for testing with various music styles. Quick conclusions are bad.
“Music just sounds cleaner, with a darker background”[1]
“Quiet. Glorious quiet. This makes for a clarity and low level detail recovery that is quite amazing. Imaging has really taken leaps forward”[2]
“There does seem to be an enhanced dynamic-I'm guessing from a lowering of the noise floor. I think there may be a better handling of signal peaks. Sibilance is handled more naturally”[3].
On the other hand, I am confident that skilled engineers can build audio equipment whose sound quality and listening enjoyment does not change one microscopic iota when excellent diodes + optimized snubbbers are added / removed. {obvious example: put the PSU in its own chassis located 5 meters away from the main signal-handling chassis, and apply plentiful numbers of common mode chokes, RFI filters, and cascaded voltage regulators between incoming DC and analog signal PCBs}. Remember what you already know: Lots and lots of well-loved gear provides super high end listening enjoyment, with no snubbers whatsoever and with no fancy rectifiers. Open up a Krell or an Acoustic Research or a Conrad Johnson or a Mark Levinson or an Apt Holman or a Threshold, and hunt for the snubbers. You won't find any.“Quiet. Glorious quiet. This makes for a clarity and low level detail recovery that is quite amazing. Imaging has really taken leaps forward”[2]
“There does seem to be an enhanced dynamic-I'm guessing from a lowering of the noise floor. I think there may be a better handling of signal peaks. Sibilance is handled more naturally”[3].
Last edited:
Just use batteries for phono and move the problem upstream. Taking care at the lowest levels removes most of the problem. Random internet talk from uncontrolled sighted listening impressions has limited use.
I do hope Jan can find a way to keep the silent switcher in production. Seems a one stop angst free solution for low level signals.
That has pretty much been my experience as well for the past 70 years. So, I tend to believe the differences are real if a large number people are also describing in same way as I would.
THx-RNMarsh
I see what you are getting at, but you have to be careful with this line of thinking and how you apply it.
A quick search on the internet will find all kinds of forums full of people who are susceptible to the same logical fallacies. They congregate there and then find reinforcement of their incorrect beliefs in what is basically an echo chamber.
The kinds of comments and reviews you refer to are generally by those with little real technical knowledge and little real audio equipment experience.
IOW, audio items are flashy mysterious 'black boxes' and appearance/form/cost can readily influence the appraisal.
Old sea dogs don't care about any of the above and are only concerned with performance....'performance talks, BS walks'...
Dan.
No, but I have Bybee devices attached virtually all my electronics and loudspeakers. I use them in both Audio, video, AC and sometimes interconnect cables, in this case, cable video sound.
It's easy to do when you don't have to pay for them, or cover them at full pop. It could be written off as a business expense as well.
Normal mortals like the rest of us have to watch where we spend our $$. I've seen ads at retailers for some of the newer Bybee products. I'm sorry, but if that stuff is based in science, then there be dragons and witchcraft in the world matey!
I understand where you're coming from though John. If you push this stuff, you must then use it to complete the pitch. So if you didn't use them everywhere, I would have been shocked. What I'm waiting for is a lump of something that makes troubleshooting tough problems easier. Think he can swing something, or is that too close to a military product that is in current top secret use?
-Chris
Normal mortals like the rest of us have to watch where we spend our $$. I've seen ads at retailers for some of the newer Bybee products. I'm sorry, but if that stuff is based in science, then there be dragons and witchcraft in the world matey!
I understand where you're coming from though John. If you push this stuff, you must then use it to complete the pitch. So if you didn't use them everywhere, I would have been shocked. What I'm waiting for is a lump of something that makes troubleshooting tough problems easier. Think he can swing something, or is that too close to a military product that is in current top secret use?
-Chris
Of course John gets them for free. They must cost very little to produce since they don't actually do anything. A nice marketing technique to get them in the hands of a "respected guru" who will post testimonials for free, legitimizing a bogus product.
No, I don't always get them for free, but I have known Jack for about 22 years, and we have worked together on projects as well. Sometimes I got something based on a project that I worked on with him, other times he would give me a Christmas present of something, and even once in a while, a sample of something.
I really don't care whether anybody here ever can afford these devices. I certainly could not, and my more recent employers just refused to put them in my designs as well, due to cost.
However, with the BEST audio systems that I have been exposed to, Bybee devices have made a serious difference. These are audio systems between $50,000 and $500,000 let's say. These customers swear by them, and I agree with their opinion.
I am not interested in promoting these devices to anyone here, especially those who have limited means, as I do. However, I do find them interesting, and difference making. They cost relatively a
lot to produce, generally the heart of the units is made for the military, and the finishing of the units takes a lot of hand work. I would not try to make them, although one of my former technicians did it for a time, years ago for Jack Bybee, finishing off the inner parts with connectors, heatshrink tubing, etc.
The most important thing is: They are not fake. They are real devices that do something to the sound, usually improving it, but sometimes making it sound dull. I have experienced both. Still, it is not made of what most of you accuse it to be made of. That is the only defense that I can offer.
I really don't care whether anybody here ever can afford these devices. I certainly could not, and my more recent employers just refused to put them in my designs as well, due to cost.
However, with the BEST audio systems that I have been exposed to, Bybee devices have made a serious difference. These are audio systems between $50,000 and $500,000 let's say. These customers swear by them, and I agree with their opinion.
I am not interested in promoting these devices to anyone here, especially those who have limited means, as I do. However, I do find them interesting, and difference making. They cost relatively a
lot to produce, generally the heart of the units is made for the military, and the finishing of the units takes a lot of hand work. I would not try to make them, although one of my former technicians did it for a time, years ago for Jack Bybee, finishing off the inner parts with connectors, heatshrink tubing, etc.
The most important thing is: They are not fake. They are real devices that do something to the sound, usually improving it, but sometimes making it sound dull. I have experienced both. Still, it is not made of what most of you accuse it to be made of. That is the only defense that I can offer.
Hi John,
It's nice that you believe they work in systems with high enough resolution to show the effect. Being more cynical by nature, and reasonably well versed in the physics and chemistry of electronics, I feel that the Bybee products have an effect on the people and not the gear. Finding someone who is willing to part with larger amounts of cash for an expensive system also means that they are pre-qualified buyers for Bybee's products. Psychology is the scientific principle in action here, and sometimes the program also captures some of the masters. 🙂
I would put them in any of my systems. However, I am pretty certain they would not have any effect detectable by a human who wasn't subjected to the "dog and pony show". I would even expose a friend who can hear differences in power cords to this situation (without telling him of course!). I do this with every change to see if he clues in, and he usually does.
What would you suggest would be the product(s) most likely to make an audible difference? Have someone talk to the dealer in question to allow this test, and I'll give a completely honest report, right here, of the results. I'm bringing in a person who I believe to be the most susceptible to the advertising. Heck, I'll even have him pick the stuff up and install it. He is non-technical, but an avid equipment reviewer.
If you want, we could also have him try these products out on his own system (mostly tube equipment). He uses Counterpoint for the most part, and I have improved the performance of some of it. He owns some of the most expensive models they made and runs it all through PS Audio power supply units. A best chance of getting a glowing review is this offer I can make to you and Mr. J. Bybee. The items tested would be returned to the dealer without any attempt to "unwrap" them. Hands off completely.
I'm willing to do all the testing at no expense to anyone. However, I'm not about to actually purchase anything since that would bias me / us to give a favourable report. Humans are funny that way.
-Chris
It's nice that you believe they work in systems with high enough resolution to show the effect. Being more cynical by nature, and reasonably well versed in the physics and chemistry of electronics, I feel that the Bybee products have an effect on the people and not the gear. Finding someone who is willing to part with larger amounts of cash for an expensive system also means that they are pre-qualified buyers for Bybee's products. Psychology is the scientific principle in action here, and sometimes the program also captures some of the masters. 🙂
I would put them in any of my systems. However, I am pretty certain they would not have any effect detectable by a human who wasn't subjected to the "dog and pony show". I would even expose a friend who can hear differences in power cords to this situation (without telling him of course!). I do this with every change to see if he clues in, and he usually does.
What would you suggest would be the product(s) most likely to make an audible difference? Have someone talk to the dealer in question to allow this test, and I'll give a completely honest report, right here, of the results. I'm bringing in a person who I believe to be the most susceptible to the advertising. Heck, I'll even have him pick the stuff up and install it. He is non-technical, but an avid equipment reviewer.
If you want, we could also have him try these products out on his own system (mostly tube equipment). He uses Counterpoint for the most part, and I have improved the performance of some of it. He owns some of the most expensive models they made and runs it all through PS Audio power supply units. A best chance of getting a glowing review is this offer I can make to you and Mr. J. Bybee. The items tested would be returned to the dealer without any attempt to "unwrap" them. Hands off completely.
I'm willing to do all the testing at no expense to anyone. However, I'm not about to actually purchase anything since that would bias me / us to give a favourable report. Humans are funny that way.
-Chris
Thanks Anatech for your offer. We have done this before, and it did not work out. Personally, I don't have any of Jack's latest products, nor do I think that an average audiophile should put their hard earned money in this area when so many other improvements can be made. Class A preamps, tubes, jfets, all good things, that's where to invest.
I have a question for everybody that I can't completely understand:
I am watching the first F1 race in Melbourne, Australia and I am amazed how wide the tires are this season. What is the advantage? As I remember from an early physics course, the size of the tire patch should not make any difference with typical materials, such as wood, etc. Why do racing tires work differently?
I am watching the first F1 race in Melbourne, Australia and I am amazed how wide the tires are this season. What is the advantage? As I remember from an early physics course, the size of the tire patch should not make any difference with typical materials, such as wood, etc. Why do racing tires work differently?
It's pretty complicated when you dive into it John. It's for cornering and thermal reasons also. It involves the sidewall and construction of the rest of the tire, the suspension geometry, etc.
Also, a road is not uniform and with a soft compound you might be better covered over irregularities with a wider tire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_load_sensitivity
You can see it on street cars also though. A typical Honda Civic class car will come with 205 mm section width tires. A super high performance RWD vehicle will typically have wide tires, which are wider in the rear (staggered) to create a bias toward understeer so amateurs don't end up crashing into a tree backwards. For example, a new Porsche 911 GT3 RS is using 265 width in front and a massive 325 in the rear.
Also, a road is not uniform and with a soft compound you might be better covered over irregularities with a wider tire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tire_load_sensitivity
You can see it on street cars also though. A typical Honda Civic class car will come with 205 mm section width tires. A super high performance RWD vehicle will typically have wide tires, which are wider in the rear (staggered) to create a bias toward understeer so amateurs don't end up crashing into a tree backwards. For example, a new Porsche 911 GT3 RS is using 265 width in front and a massive 325 in the rear.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.