I've seen a good half dozen cases of the opposite, so I'm not holding my breath. The times when incredible claims seem to hold up involve the claimant failing to communicate what exactly was done. Once that is clarified, the original claims are conveniently forgotten.
If careful comparison to the .5 Ohm resistors themselves is not provided the usefulness is limited. Bybee vs. nothing is insufficient data.
Your understanding is correct; they only compared the "Bybees" to wires with the same length.
But one figure on the last page named "Impedanz-Messung" is interesting, as they combined a broadband noise signal with a discrete 10 Mhz sinus and measured the output with and without "Bybee". The 10 Mhz remained at the same level while the noise floor was lowered by ~10dB over a broad frequency range.
It´s always scaring if details of a allegedly breathtaking technology are restrained.
Much more important would be to know for example about the nanoflowcell technology:
http://www.nanoflowcell.com
It has every ingredient needed for a perfect story; only sparse information, sometimes offering news combined with serious partners - see the alleged MOT approval from the TUEV SUED - or the story about a new cruising range record reportedly successfully done to convince korean manufactures, a mastermind with a somewhat dubious past and a promising technology (principially known to be working, but not at this energy density level needed) that could help to solve some problems.
Last edited:
Exactly! The question is not does it 'do' something - it might well be that inserting 'something' in a signal or power line 'does something'.
But the question is, does it something else than a 0.5 ohm R that can be had for € 0.50.
Jan
Jakob, it does read a bit remarkable. I'm half wondering if it's a rebranding of already established battery tech with a small twist. They're not claiming higher densities than li-ion, so at least has a smidgen of a chance.
Proof will be in the eating of the pudding, so to speak. Those potential partners will either validate the tech and adopt or find the company wanting. (Or the tech is good and the company self-destructive.)
Proof will be in the eating of the pudding, so to speak. Those potential partners will either validate the tech and adopt or find the company wanting. (Or the tech is good and the company self-destructive.)
Violating first principles has nothing to do with "making a difference". Destroying charge and creating it elsewhere, reversing entropy, energy out of nothing, etc. are not happening and no you have not shown it.
Some people are quite happy to pay for delusion. It makes them happy.
And the act of selling delusion is what most consumer marketing is all about - they even go to college to study how to do it. Completely bona fide.
😉
The THD + noise plot looked simply offset for clarity. It's not clear (I can't translate) what exactly the impedance measurement is, impedance vs frequency ? That resistor is not an RF component it's not clear what the impedance at 10's of MHz has to do with audio.
You're a smart guy I respect your inputs if you want to believe audio reproduction involves rewriting the physical sciences as we know them then there is not much I can do about it. But I would like to see some of this approached from the pure science level, you have to do better than JC's litany of "It's not possible" ... blah blah.
How about a nice journal headline, man in garage cooks up resistor coating that removes noise in violation of Shannon entropy. The Nobel committee takes notice.
Last edited:
I think we are in the realm that the drop in the noise floor above 10MHz could easily be caused with a bit of R and L in the right place. For example the spiffy Neutrik EMC series XLRs. These do something to noise and for around £10 for the plug and £3 for the panel mount seem to be rather good value for emc peace of mind.
Attachments
The details of the story are so suspicious that i´m nearly convinced that it must be a fraud (it is ongoing afaik since around 2009), but in that case it is imo nearly a reference example what to do if you want to ride a hoax and to get a lot of money from potentially interested parties.
1.) it is a variant of a principially working tech, only claiming having found a surprising solution to realize a much higher energy density
2.) eloquent guy as chief technology officer
3.) offering new and promising news in well calculated time spans
4.) working with reputable partners (at least in/on some subdivision)
see for example the street license given by two different german TUEV subdivision; you have to dig deeper to read that both had to sign NDAs which prohibited to talk about any detail of the drive mechanism or energy system
5.) a record range test, but driver was the CTO, a lawyer from a zurich was engaged as witness for the record, but no real third party was there
6.) press releases and test drives with journalists
there was only one german newspaper (die Welt) that their reporter could drive the Quantino alone (after first introduction by the CTO) for a couple of hours but somehow they failed to report the drive range they had achieved ??
NanoFlowCell Quantino: Die erste Fahrt im Salzwasser-Elektroauto - WELT
I can't speak for putting any of the stuff I have out their into an EMC chamber and getting actual measurements. However, on phono inputs, the simple expedient of a 1nF cap from the interconnect shield to the (metal) chassis right at the entry point seems to provide significant improvements wrt mobile phone buzzing. After the input selection relays, an L pad with fo ~ 750 kHz is used. I am also using RFB's on balanced output drivers per THAT's recommendation - no RF issues (some will wince but I've measured it with a QuantAssylum - there is zero distortion contribution). On XLR, the ground pin is connected directly to the chassis right at the input - Neutrik XLR receptacles are grounded via the panel mounting screws and also provide a PCB pin connection as well.
Mains borne noise is a bit more troublesome. You need to use a decent filter - not cheap - from Schaffner or Schurter. I've used X caps as a belt and braces but have no measurements on efficacy - will need to look into that.
BTW, you will notice that most commercial equipment the input L&R phono receptacles are located close to each other. This is one way of minimizing loop area (along with twin phono interconnects) and therefore LF noise susceptibility.
Noise. Fascinating stuff.
Mains borne noise is a bit more troublesome. You need to use a decent filter - not cheap - from Schaffner or Schurter. I've used X caps as a belt and braces but have no measurements on efficacy - will need to look into that.
BTW, you will notice that most commercial equipment the input L&R phono receptacles are located close to each other. This is one way of minimizing loop area (along with twin phono interconnects) and therefore LF noise susceptibility.
Noise. Fascinating stuff.
It seems that 75% (or More) of the Audio Weenie industry is all about that.
Fleecing the dim and impressionable.
Basic Human nature .. no news there, sadly.
I put out a few documents and pictures just to show that Bybees are more than just a 'resistor'. In fact, while the resistor used is special (for example, it has a 25W rating) it is not absolutely necessary for the operation of the Bybee device. It is the outside container that carries the Bybee 'magic'. Now how do I know this? Well, back about 22 years ago, I got to see what a 'naked' Bybee looked like then. It was different from anything that you have seen here so far. It looked like a ceramic 3AG fuse EXCEPT that it was extra long AND it could not be easily soldered to. So Jack, in the early days, used clip type fuse holders that he had to extend to fit the Bybee device and the he ADDED the resistor, which originally was whatever 0.3-0.5 ohm wirewound resistor that he could find available.
Later, he switched to a VERY EXPENSIVE resistor (Pacific) that worked better, and he decided to put the resistor INSIDE the Bybee device. This is most of the extra effort that he has to add to the Bybee Purifier that he adds personally. Extra concentration on the resistor (because that is the only easily measurable characteristic) is a waste of time, because it is just a necessary add-on to make the device work properly. Today, the 'resistor' is only 0.025 ohms due to apparent improvements in the active technology over the decades.
Later, he switched to a VERY EXPENSIVE resistor (Pacific) that worked better, and he decided to put the resistor INSIDE the Bybee device. This is most of the extra effort that he has to add to the Bybee Purifier that he adds personally. Extra concentration on the resistor (because that is the only easily measurable characteristic) is a waste of time, because it is just a necessary add-on to make the device work properly. Today, the 'resistor' is only 0.025 ohms due to apparent improvements in the active technology over the decades.
Jakob -- I clearly haven't put as much research effort into the company as you, but as you say, it does smell rather fishy. Much closer to my world is the case study of Theranos, where the universe was promised and a pebble delivered, if that. All hushed in secrecy. Not sure if that was deliberate misdirection as the billion(s?) invested are working their way through the legal system now.
So I may come across rather cynical, but I hope it's more an acknowledgment of humanities weaknesses rather than a general assumption of fraudulence. (Although that happens often enough)
So I may come across rather cynical, but I hope it's more an acknowledgment of humanities weaknesses rather than a general assumption of fraudulence. (Although that happens often enough)
No, the plot wasn´t (according to the author) offset, it was just the difference in a XLR cable connection from UPL output to UPL input, first without the "small Bybees" (upper trace) and then with two "small Bybees" - one for each "hot" wire - soldered in the wire (lower trace).
The other measurements showed for the "small Bs" (they evaluated Bybee Quantum Purifiers, small and large) an attenuation starting at around 3GHz.
The measurement on page 46 (page number from the magazine) was done with the "large B" and was done, as mentioned earlier, with combined output from a noise generator and the 10 MHz sinus generator.
According to the description the level at 10 MHz remained unaltered while the noise floor dropped by 10 dB.
I don´t believe so much that rewriting of physical sciences is needed but strongly belief that there is a distinction between a (maybe existent and maybe positive) audible difference and the accompanying marketing or white paper "sprech".
The article from the Studio Magazine is a first approach (although not detailed enough to my liking, but it was just reported within a magazine article) and the published results are imo not compatible with the assertion that those "Bybees" are just resistors.
Of course my short litany doesn´t fit to every discussion, but i´ve faced it partly or literally in completeness at quite a lot of discussions in audio forums with socalled "objectivists" ....
Several years ago I revealed schematic of my condenser microphone. It was called "Arrogant". But today the same people drool over similar topology they call "CFA" 😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.