PDA

View Full Version : Ultimate Audio


phecksel
02-16-2005, 11:51 AM
check out all their products


http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina27.htm

Had me laughing my a$$ off all day :)

Mag_Red
02-16-2005, 12:01 PM
And I bet he sells of ton of these. :purplaugh

Leroy
02-16-2005, 12:05 PM
Too funny phecksel! I think the unobscure point is there is a sucker born every day.

I am sure no one here has bought one of these!

jake
02-16-2005, 12:41 PM
I like the claim that their products improve "musicality".....*** is musicality? Is that where you put a Britney Spears or other similar mas produced/shrink wraped pop star albumn in and it becomes something actually resembling music?

AirJunky
02-16-2005, 04:13 PM
Here is an email thread I just had with the guy.........

quantum mechanics, upon which this device apparently operates (my opinion) is not very well understood, even among quantum mechanics experts. Richard Feynman - professor of theoretical physics at Cal Tech for many years (and who was on the Challenger accident investigation panel) once said nobody really understood quantum mechanics and if someone said he did understand it he was probably wrong. Rational explanation is a sticky wicket as you know, since a rational explanation can be incorrect and the irrational explanation can actually be the correct one.

Geoff


From: Bill
Organization:
Reply-To: bill@
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:48:35 -0800
To: geoff kait <geoff>
Subject: Re: Intelligent Chip


Thanks Geoff,
Yes, I read the website. This is why I'm skeptical. Even if it's developed by accident, there still has to be a rational explanation. And to infer that the disc could be manipulated in this way is inaccurate.... period.
--
Bill

geoff wrote:

Bill, Hello, I actually have not offered an opinion as to how the chip works; if you read my web site at www.machinadynamica.com
I've been careful not to offer a theory at this point in time. On the other hand, the manufacturer has offered a theory, one which may or may not be correct IMHO, in addition, the way it is written in what appears to be bad Chinese to English translation. The devcie does appear to be "new technology" however
IMO and does work as advertized. Keep in mind the person whose brainchild this is discovered this by accident, so to speak, i.e., he didnt one day decide to design it, so his "theory of operation" might easily just be his guess why the thing works, doesnt mean it absolutely is the explanation.

That the chip works just sitting on top of the player (for less than 2 seconds) is what makes this little thing so fascinating and mysterious.

Geoff



From: Bill
Organization:
Reply-To: bill
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:22:07 -0800
To: geoff
Subject: Intelligent Chip

Call me a skeptic, but how could this possibly work? It sounds like your inferring that the disc is being changed or written to somehow. But how could this happen wiht the chip just sitting on top?
Please explain......
Thanks.
--
Bill

SkySkiSpokane
02-16-2005, 05:57 PM
AJ, always looking for a technical discussion!! :D
I think that you should buy some and market them on airjunky.com. hehe!!

Tom023
02-16-2005, 06:12 PM
These things really do work, but it's important to put it on TOP of your CD player. I accidently put my CD player on top of the chip and it started sounding like crap.

JimN
02-16-2005, 06:42 PM
What a complete load of crap! Not as if the disc was encoded magnetically.

Similar to an Audio Magazine I saw not long after CD players were first available, there was an ad for what amounted to a green magic marker. The idea was to run the marker around the edge of the discs and when the red light from the laser scattered, it would hit the green edge and be absorbed. This supposedly tighten up the bass and caused the sound to be more "coherent". Total BS. Once the light hits the optic and goes into the D/A converter, a very slightly delayed signal means nothing. Even if it did, the error correction would make the difference go away unless the duration surpassed the EC circuit's capacity.

I stopped reading all of the audio magazines immediately. If they couldn't keep from taking ad money for a product that couldn't possibly affect the sound, I wasn't going to read their rag.

Coherent, musical, transparent and aggresive midrange are a few of the terms used by audiophiles. Also known in the consumer audio retail industry as Tweeks, audiopiles, propeller heads, audiofilets, etc. The high end audio mags are stuffed with terms like these. How else can someone describe an experience to someone else, who hears it differently? No two sets of ears are the same and each person experiences any sensory input in their own way.

AJ- so he basically was saying "I didn't make 'em, I just sell 'em"?

AirJunky
02-16-2005, 06:46 PM
Thats what I got out of it...... that & he didn't have a clue what he was talking about. If you don't know what your talking about, baffle them with bullsh1t!

phecksel
02-17-2005, 11:49 AM
Did you look at the rest of his products?

Friend of mine and I are going to set up a company on EBay to refill the chips.

And we're going to improve the magic pebbles sonic absorbtion

And we're going to "tune" the antivibration pads for specific geographical locations.

Wish I had the cojones to actually do this :)

What led me to this was doing some research on speaker wire. People will spend $100's per FOOT for wire. What I did discover was plain old CAT5 makes outstanding speaker wire. I took three CAT5 cables, removed them from the PVC sheathing, braided them together, separated solids and stripped, soldered the ends, and ended up with improved high frequency. Cost for me, ZERO, extra cable laying around. Took about two hours per cable, but that was done watching the tube.

JimN
02-17-2005, 12:06 PM
According to everything out there on wire, high frequencies travel on the outer surface of the strands(skin effect). The more strands, the better the highs will be. You have 12 positive and 12 negative strands. Can you get an audio analyser to measure the frequency response?

I'll never buy the really high dollar wire, but after talking with a friend who has the equipment to test cabling(TEF, or Time-Energy-Frequency analysis), 16 ga is fine for most applications. Once the run is long enough, go with heavier cable. If it's really long, move the amps closer to the speakers and fees them with a low impedance signal. However, consumer grade equipment is almost never low Z.

What kind of wire were the speakers connected with before the experiment?

phecksel
02-18-2005, 11:38 AM
According to everything out there on wire, high frequencies travel on the outer surface of the strands(skin effect). The more strands, the better the highs will be. You have 12 positive and 12 negative strands. Can you get an audio analyser to measure the frequency response?

I'll never buy the really high dollar wire, but after talking with a friend who has the equipment to test cabling(TEF, or Time-Energy-Frequency analysis), 16 ga is fine for most applications. Once the run is long enough, go with heavier cable. If it's really long, move the amps closer to the speakers and fees them with a low impedance signal. However, consumer grade equipment is almost never low Z.

What kind of wire were the speakers connected with before the experiment?

30 year old 16 guage zip cord.

Audioholics actually did objective testing and braided (their version) CAT5 did extremely well. They braided the cable sheathing and all. Here's where I first learned about braided cat 5

http://www.venhaus1.com/diycatfivecables.html

Apparently the design of CAT5 cable minimizes the potential for cross talk, which is supposed to affect the high frequencies.

There is no way I would ever take the time to do that, but braiding three cables worked out well, increased the wire size, was CHEAP, and it looks kewl.

JimN
02-18-2005, 12:26 PM
By comparison, almost any newer wire should have sounded better. The copper in old wire was a lot less pure. I hope these "objective" tests were double blind. That would be the only way to do it without any kind of bias and the only way I would even start to believe anything about the tests. I'm not saying the cat 5 can't sound better because the way something sounds is subjective. Just like a tube amp sounding better than solid state, even though the specs look bad on paper.

By objective, you mean with test equipment, right?

Cat 5(e) rejects common mode interference because the wire pairs are twisted. Any twisted pair wire will reduce this, it doesn't need to be Cat 5(e). I remember that Kimber Cable had some problems with amps blowing up because of the added characteristics caused by their braided cables. Not bashing, just heard from people who sold it and the problems went away when the wire was replaced.

phecksel
02-21-2005, 12:48 PM
objective meant test equipment. The did not do any audio tests, DB or otherwise. Apparently CAT5 will increase capacitance and some amplifiers might have problems.