stokessd said:
You could well be right Sheldon. However, as long as the established objective measurements fail to give the complete picture of the subjective sound, we must keep open minds.
Norman Koren (and others) Norman Koren's pages make a strong case for controlling the breakthrough of RF radiations into the hi-fi chain. Who's to say that there aren't 'quantum' effects as well - whatever they are!
Have you actually listened to these Bybee devices? Has anyone?
Personally, I believe (as I would guess you do) that the development of loudspeaker driver and cabinet technology is a far more fruitful field for the improvement of sound but still ...
Steve
Most of the regulars here would realise that I am having a good natured dig at people who champion unconventional methods of allegedly improving the sound from your hifi. But the thing that was too much to ignore was the one about putting a photo of yourself and your hifi in the freezer to improve the sound you hear from it.kelticwizard said:
I might sometimes ridicule the methods but never the people who use them. I like to ask them hard questions though. 
I just wish some people would quit being abrasively dogmatic about some components and techniques and simply state that they enjoy their music and equipment better after they did this or that, rather than assert that their golden ears can hear something that lesser mortals can't. Do you really have to justify enjoyment?
I asked about these in the past, and nobody actually had heard any, but there sure was a whole lot of crap peddled about how they could not possibly work.
From my experiece and experiments I fully believe that they do work as described, however I also reckon that their sonic effect is not a completely good one, based on my knowledge of their ingredients.
I am currently finalising something vaguely similar that has met with universal acclaim so far in listening trials in various live, recording and playback applications.
This does not rely on belief systems or voodoo, and is clearly heard and appreciated by all who have heard it.
That said, I also consider the P Belt stuff about putting photographs in the freezer as the biggest load of moonshine that I have ever heard of - is this guy tripping permanently, or is he just having a good laugh ?.
Eric.
http://www.modwright.com/products/bybee.php
"I installed them directly to the drivers, one at the woofer and one at the tweeter"
"The price for the Bybee filters is $80 each"
"there are NO RETURNS of Bybee filters"
I think I'm going to wait awhile before spending $320 trying them.
"I installed them directly to the drivers, one at the woofer and one at the tweeter"
"The price for the Bybee filters is $80 each"
"there are NO RETURNS of Bybee filters"
I think I'm going to wait awhile before spending $320 trying them.
Hi Pete,Peter Daniel said:
So I assume you tried putting your photographs in a freezer, because if not, you are not different from people dismissing Bybee devices (without trying them)
So are you saying that if someone comes around to my my house to listen to my stereo with pictures of myself in my freezer, that they are going to hear a difference - I think (suppose) not.
However, college recording assignments handed in have been noted to sound better and questions asked about how come these recordings are different to other student's recordings.
I have you there.
Eric.
I just wanted to point out how everything is relative in our believe system.
For people talking about New Age Audio Rot, possibility of shelf influencing sonics or cables making a difference in sound, or to the ones already accepting those two, the concept of Baybee devices is as absurd as to you the idea of frozen photographs improving your listening experience.
Which doesn't mean I support the photographs claim. But just for the hell of it, I might try it one day Why not?
For people talking about New Age Audio Rot, possibility of shelf influencing sonics or cables making a difference in sound, or to the ones already accepting those two, the concept of Baybee devices is as absurd as to you the idea of frozen photographs improving your listening experience.
Which doesn't mean I support the photographs claim. But just for the hell of it, I might try it one day
Why not?
I gave up on it
Its tilting at windmills. Psycho-acustics is more like it. In the end, it is your ears, and what you like it what really counts.
I have seen the magicians. They create neural networks and study on what we hear. They then play thier results to Average Joe, and its just fine, even at bit rates that would scare you (try 32k... stunning results).
Play them to a group of engineers of the audio type (recording, broadcast, etc) and we hear the defects. Our ears have been trained. Perhaps so much that it makes the music harder to appreciate.
Its tilting at windmills. Psycho-acustics is more like it. In the end, it is your ears, and what you like it what really counts.
I have seen the magicians. They create neural networks and study on what we hear. They then play thier results to Average Joe, and its just fine, even at bit rates that would scare you (try 32k... stunning results).
Play them to a group of engineers of the audio type (recording, broadcast, etc) and we hear the defects. Our ears have been trained. Perhaps so much that it makes the music harder to appreciate.
Pete, Your System Sounds Like There Is A Photo In Your Freezer !.
As far as I can tell, the P. Belt frozen photo claim relies on the listener knowing that there is a photo in the freezer, and logically this relegates this claim sustantially (fully imo) to the realm of psychology, and is entirely relient on such a belief system.
Eric.
Shelves, cables and BBQP causing sonics changes have a real physical basis, whether the listener knows of their presence or not.Peter Daniel said:I just wanted to point out how everything is relative in our believe system.
For people talking about New Age Audio Rot, possibility of shelf influencing sonics or cables making a difference in sound, or to the ones already accepting those two, the concept of Baybee devices is as absurd as to you the idea of frozen photographs improving your listening experience.
Which doesn't mean I support the photographs claim. But just for the hell of it, I might try it one day
As far as I can tell, the P. Belt frozen photo claim relies on the listener knowing that there is a photo in the freezer, and logically this relegates this claim sustantially (fully imo) to the realm of psychology, and is entirely relient on such a belief system.
Eric.
Re: Pete, Your System Sounds Like There Is A Photo In Your Freezer !.
I'm not convinced that we should be talking of "relegation" to the realm of psychology. If something sounds better it sounds better, psychology or not.
One's enjoyment of music can vary with one's mood, even without changing one's system. I'm a strong advocate of certain "mind-body" methods - for example The Feldenkrais Method. Practice of this method (which re-educates movement through gentle movements made with awareness) can be more effective in improving the subjective sound of your system than an upgrade.
Just thought I'd throw that one in.
Steve
mrfeedback said:
I'm not convinced that we should be talking of "relegation" to the realm of psychology. If something sounds better it sounds better, psychology or not.
One's enjoyment of music can vary with one's mood, even without changing one's system. I'm a strong advocate of certain "mind-body" methods - for example The Feldenkrais Method. Practice of this method (which re-educates movement through gentle movements made with awareness) can be more effective in improving the subjective sound of your system than an upgrade.
Just thought I'd throw that one in.
Steve
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.