The biggest secret has been revealed?!

[sb6]

The topic is "Biggest Secret Has Been Revealed" having to do with vibration mgmt. Something more than what the usual status quo presumably.

IMO, the secret has yet to be revealed because it really has to do with extreme forms of electrical mgmt by the use of extreme forms of vibration mgmt. When this is accomplished, far greater percentages of the music info read from a recording and processed through a playbck system, will remain audible at the speaker. Including volumes and volumes of the live performance's ambient info captured in even many inferior recordings such that our listening perspecitve is now somewhere / anywhere in the recording hall. IOW, we're hearing so much more of the live performance that perhaps every last room acoustic anomaly has been completely overshadowed and for all intensive purposes the room is gone. This implies we no longer need to concern ourselves with room acoustic treatments nor do we need to consider "the room" as the most important component anymore.

In summary, extreme forms of electrical mgmt and extreme forms of vibration mgmt will DRASTICALLY lower a playback system's noise floor so much greater percentages of the music info becomes audible above the much lowered noise floor. The playback system's noise floor mostly or entirely consists of electrical energy.

On the other hand and what you and atmosphere are alluding to is another noise floor of sorts. This noise floor (NF) is focused between a given speaker and given room and is acoustic in nature. Move a speaker 1/2-inch here or there and bass notes become audible or inaudible. When a speaker is acoustically dialed in to a given room, we hear a tighter, deeper, more pronounced, more well-defined bass we didn't even know existed or was possible.

The combination of successfully addressing both of these electrical and acoustical noise floors should negate the need for any room acoustic treatments whatsoever and the thought that the room is the most important component are completely gone. Because when successfully accomplished every last room acoustic anomaly has been so completely overshadowed with more music info now audible from the recording that our ears have been transported to somewhere / anywhere at the recording hall. Even if that perspective is somewhere near the restrooms at the recording hall.

This fun little in-room video below is not my best example but if you crank it up a bit I think you'll notice that your listening perspective is somewhere at the live concert and at somewhat live concert volume levels. The in-room volume level peaks were around 104-105db.

Anyway, the topic is "The Biggest Secret Revealed?" and the complete disregard for room acoustic anomalies is just one of the many resulting benefits. IMO. And FWIW, 65% of my entire system's retail costs are dedicated solely to extreme forms of electrical and mechanical energy mgmt and I do nothing specifically to address my slightly smaller listening room's (formerly a kitchen) acoustic anomalies.

I'm sorry but I can't fully agree. Irrespective of the lowering of the noise floor, sounds waves are sound waves and large sound waves (low freq), especially of higher amplitude in all of our relatively small rooms need to be managed not only for even bass response but for intelligible bass due to excess reverberations. A non - existent noise floor won't stop 10', 20' 30' waves from reverberating and blurring the music. Now, that's not to say that a lower noise floor is not a good thing, but it can't bend the laws of physics and acoustics.

 

[Stehno]

I have no time to a complete answer now but, WOW!
I´m not alone in this matter too!

:Bow::Bow::Bow:

I´ll be back!

Thanks, Spock. Ummmm, maybe I've been with you in spirit all this time?

 

[Stehno]

I'm sorry but I can't fully agree. Irrespective of the lowering of the noise floor, sounds waves are sound waves and large sound waves (low freq), especially of higher amplitude in all of our relatively small rooms need to be managed not only for even bass response but for intelligible bass due to excess reverberations. A non - existent noise floor won't stop 10', 20' 30' waves from reverberating and blurring the music. Now, that's not to say that a lower noise floor is not a good thing, but it can't bend the laws of physics and acoustics.

That's fine. But I've yet to see any acoustic treatment "specialist" or enthusiast provide any audible evidence that acoustic treatments do anything more than make a not-so-tolerable music presentation a bit more tolerable. IMO, this makes sense because acoustic treatements can do nothing to actually improve a playback system's performance. It's impossible. To me, that implies that the room and/or acoustic treatments can only deal with the effects of a playback system's shortcomings (the cause). IME, addressing the effects always consumes far more resources and results in far fewer if any benefits than when addressing the cause. And in this case, acoustic treatments and custom rooms seems to be no exception to that rule and only further substantiate my lmited experiences of dealing with effects vs dealing with causes.

But please remember that we're actually dealing with two completely separate noise floors here. One is the playback system's much raised noise floor induced entirely? by electrical energy and the other is the speaker / room noise floor induced entirely by acoustics. The only overlap between the two noise floors that I can see is that a playback system's noise floor can influence the acoustic noise floor by allowing more music info to be audible. But the acoustic noise floor should have zero overlap into the playback system's electronics-induced noise floor. For the most part, each has its own areas of responsibility within the playback vineyard but when combining the sonic benefits of both, our playback presentations finally arrive at more of a complete package.

They might call it laws of physics and acoustics but guess what? So do I. Only I have the sonic evidence to support my claims and they do not. Morevoer, they've never attempted to do what I do, nor have they even tried as they continue adhering to decades old folkore and use inferior methodologies some of which actually violate laws of physics or nature. I do not think I do. IMO, of course.

 

[Spock]

So, here i am opcorn:

First of all

Great vídeo, great sound. Like you said, we can “see” the presence of musicians in the room. :thumbsup:

… but from the sound of one of your vimeo videos on drums it sounds like you're really onto something in that other thread.

I don't know if you were talking about this song (note that this video was made today)

Drums.mp4 on Vimeo

What can I say? The air movement in the room and the impact on the body and chest are amazing. I can take the volume as far as I want, but I'm afraid that a driver come loose from the speaker and be fired towards right at my face. But this is not the interesting thing. Naturally, this music has always produced bass in the room. But until a little while ago, everything was shaking, namely a few bottles that I have on top of the furniture. Currently the bass is even more powerful but, because it is more controlled, the bottles no longer sing. Why? :dunno:

… this makes sense because acoustic treatements can do nothing to actually improve a playback system's performance. It's impossible. To me, that implies that the room and/or acoustic treatments can only deal with the effects of a playback system's shortcomings (the cause). IME, addressing the effects always consumes far more resources and results in far fewer if any benefits than when addressing the cause.
…a playback system's noise floor can influence the acoustic noise floor by allowing more music info to be audible. But the acoustic noise floor should have zero overlap into the playback system's electronics-induced noise floor.

Ok, may i ask you to listen one vídeo more?

D Krall.mp4 on Vimeo

Can you hear the closing and opening of the microphone as Diana Krall sings or pauses? I think it´s possible to you to hear, listening with headphones, attentively. Here it is absolutely evident. When the microphone is closed, the noise floor (analog recording) is almost silence. When she enters again, or rather a fraction of a second before, the opening of the microphone is clear by increasing the background ssshhhhhh. But what does it matter? Everything! The micro detail increases the feeling of realism and presence in the room. As you say and well, the background silence in musical reproduction is of the utmost importance. When this revealing silence is obtained, everything is more correct. It improves the detail, improves the contrast between instruments, making the tone more correct, increasing the sensation of realism.


As for the acoustic treatment, in my opinion, the main thing is to eliminate the echo. And it can be done with ordinary furniture. I leave a challenge to anyone who has complaints from his room; do you have any instrument at home? A guitar? A cello? How does this instrument sound in this room, since the audio system is apparently hampered by the acoustics?

 

[Stehno]

So, here i am opcorn:

First of all



Great vídeo, great sound. Like you said, we can “see” the presence of musicians in the room. :thumbsup:



I don't know if you were talking about this song (note that this video was made today)



What can I say? The air movement in the room and the impact on the body and chest are amazing. I can take the volume as far as I want, but I'm afraid that a driver come loose from the speaker and be fired towards right at my face. But this is not the interesting thing. Naturally, this music has always produced bass in the room. But until a little while ago, everything was shaking, namely a few bottles that I have on top of the furniture. Currently the bass is even more powerful but, because it is more controlled, the bottles no longer sing. Why? :dunno:



Ok, may i ask you to listen one vídeo more?



Can you hear the closing and opening of the microphone as Diana Krall sings or pauses? I think it´s possible to you to hear, listening with headphones, attentively. Here it is absolutely evident. When the microphone is closed, the noise floor (analog recording) is almost silence. When she enters again, or rather a fraction of a second before, the opening of the microphone is clear by increasing the background ssshhhhhh. But what does it matter? Everything! The micro detail increases the feeling of realism and presence in the room. As you say and well, the background silence in musical reproduction is of the utmost importance. When this revealing silence is obtained, everything is more correct. It improves the detail, improves the contrast between instruments, making the tone more correct, increasing the sensation of realism.


As for the acoustic treatment, in my opinion, the main thing is to eliminate the echo. And it can be done with ordinary furniture. I leave a challenge to anyone who has complaints from his room; do you have any instrument at home? A guitar? A cello? How does this instrument sound in this room, since the audio system is apparently hampered by the acoustics?

Thanks for your comments. You've got good sound going all around. You've obviously been busy.

Just a little clarification. I never said anything about the presence of musicians in my listening room. That's the last thing I'd hope to ever hear. My hope is that my listening perspective has been transformed out of the room and somewhere / anywhere into the recording hall. That's actually quite important if a playback presentation is to have any means of believability. Much the same with background silence. I never mentioned it, sorry. If I've performed due diligence, then there should never be 1ms of black background as hopefully the entire presentation is loaded with volumes of the recording hall's ambient info captured at the recording so there's always something audible going on.

My headphones are not of the best quality so I'm unable to hear fine detail like microphones switching. I just advanced from Apple's wired earbuds about a week ago.

Diana's voice sounds wonderful. You also had fabulous recording on your other page talking about service panels and fuses.

Sure select furnishing are always good or certain treatments you don't want the furnishings. Hope I wasn't misleading as I think any reasonable room should/must have at a minmum some type of carpeting/rug and pad and some select furishings.

I still have to read your other page talking about electrical things in more detail. Like I said, you've really got something going on there.

This recording is always a fun piece for bass and guitar. Well, if you crank it.

 

[atmasphere]

Agreed. I think it primarily started with Steve McCormack in the early 90's with his "tip-toe" brass points. But hopefully nobody would argue that designs, materials, methods, executions, and efforts are not all identical or that such things don't matter.

It did not start with the Mod Squad. Again, my Scully lathe, built in the late 1940s or early 1950s employed adjustable 'tip toes' on the feet of the table for the lathe. It also used an anti-vibration platform for the lathe as well.

 

[BlueFox]

It did not start with the Mod Squad. Again, my Scully lathe, built in the late 1940s or early 1950s employed adjustable 'tip toes' on the feet of the table for the lathe. It also used an anti-vibration platform for the lathe as well.

What does that have to do with audio sound reproduction?

 

[bzr]

What does that have to do with audio sound reproduction?

it's an on-going learning curve that applies across code as in application. bit like mep...

 

[atmasphere]

What does that have to do with audio sound reproduction?

Vibration control. It reduces distortion. Isn't that what this thread is about?

 

[W9TR]

I'm curious how exactly does one successfully isolate an object from vibrations. Remove them from the room? How might that be possible since the room is overwhelmed with vibrations i.e. sound?

Are you not talking about accomplishing the impossible? The world and everything in it consists of vibrations.

The only way to eliminate the effects of airborne vibrations is to remove all your equipment from your listening room and place it in an adjacent room with good acoustic isolation. Except for the speakers, of course. With modern remotes this is easy to do.

The remaining structure borne vibrations can then be addressed with combinations of mass and isolation.

Acoustic isolation of 40 dB is practical, and structural isolation techniques like ‘room within a room’ and isolation feet on the loudspeakers can reduce structure borne vibration to a minimum.

This is far more effective than tube dampers, vibration funneling mechanical diodes like still points, isolation racks, etc.

 

[TheOctopus]

Have there been any articles out there that point to any electronic devices such as found in audio being sensitive or changing their specs due to vibration, thus altering the audio signal? I have never found anything other than small signal tubes being microphonic. I have never seen any measures implemented other than mechanical failure due to vibration where appropriate except for audio. Any links would be appreciated. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Spock]

...Much the same with background silence. I never mentioned it, sorry. If I've performed due diligence, then there should never be 1ms of black background as hopefully the entire presentation is loaded with volumes of the recording hall's ambient info captured at the recording so there's always something audible going on.

You´re right. I think i didn´t express myself well.
What i mean is, once we remove the garbage induced in the áudio signal, we will be able to listen all the little things that are always happening as you said. The example of the open / close microphone of Diana Krall allow us to hear "two layers of silence”. That´s what i mean about black noise floor.

 

[Stehno]

Have there been any articles out there that point to any electronic devices such as found in audio being sensitive or changing their specs due to vibration, thus altering the audio signal? I have never found anything other than small signal tubes being microphonic. I have never seen any measures implemented other than mechanical failure due to vibration where appropriate except for audio. Any links would be appreciated. Inquiring minds want to know.

I don't know as I've not come across any writings either. Even so, I'm quite certain nobody employs the extreme version of a rare vibration methodology that I do and in my case it makes components multiple times more musical. For example. I employ 3 little Jena Labs The Two line conditioners for my source and my 2 monoblock amps. The Jena Labs units are fabulous performers right out of the box and after burn-in. However, when I apply my unique and extreme form of vibration mgmt to them, over time they seem to perform 3 or even 4 times their original out of the box performance levels. Though I've no clue how one might measure that.

As for measurements themselves, I put little stock in them. I'm sure they do wonders at the test bench for checking indiviual parts but from a holistic listening perspective, they've yet to design a measuring instrument for quality of sound.

 

[W9TR]

A conductor moving in a magnetic field will create a voltage proportional to the length of the conductor, the strength of the magnetic field, and the velocity the conductor is moving through the magnetic field.

emf=l*h*v

This is Faraday’s Law.
l=length of the conductor in meters
h=field strength in Tesla’s
v=velocity of the conductor in meters/sec.

The earth’s magnetic field is about 0.00005 Tesla.
A 1m cable vibrating with a velocity of 1 m/s would create. 50 uV signal which is actually well above the noise floor of a good system.

I need to do the calculus on just what kind of displacement that is at 1 kHz but it isn’t very much.

Sorry to geek out on you but I am a believer in the basic laws of physics.

 

[TheOctopus]

I don't know as I've not come across any writings either. Even so, I'm quite certain nobody employs the extreme version of a rare vibration methodology that I do and in my case it makes components multiple times more musical. For example. I employ 3 little Jena Labs The Two line conditioners for my source and my 2 monoblock amps. The Jena Labs units are fabulous performers right out of the box and after burn-in. However, when I apply my unique and extreme form of vibration mgmt to them, over time they seem to perform 3 or even 4 times their original out of the box performance levels. Though I've no clue how one might measure that.

As for measurements themselves, I put little stock in them. I'm sure they do wonders at the test bench for checking indiviual parts but from a holistic listening perspective, they've yet to design a measuring instrument for quality of sound.

Sure, I get it, it is all part of the hobby. Have fun with it

 

[BlueFox]

A 1m cable vibrating with a velocity of 1 m/s

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but isn’t a vibration of 1 meter per second a huge, huge vibration?

 

[TheOctopus]

A conductor moving in a magnetic field will create a voltage proportional to the length of the conductor, the strength of the magnetic field, and the velocity the conductor is moving through the magnetic field.

emf=l*h*v

This is Faraday’s Law.
l=length of the conductor in meters
h=field strength in Tesla’s
v=velocity of the conductor in meters/sec.

The earth’s magnetic field is about 0.00005 Tesla.
A 1m cable vibrating with a velocity of 1 m/s would create. 50 uV signal which is actually well above the noise floor of a good system.

I need to do the calculus on just what kind of displacement that is at 1 kHz but it isn’t very much.

Sorry to geek out on you but I am a believer in the basic laws of physics.

At one meter per second Tom, that is not a speaker cable, that is the Anaconda the local zoo has been missing for a few weeks...

 

[Spock]

Octopus,
Do you know why UFOs don't exist? Because the laws of physics say it is impossible for them to do what they do. Therefore, they cannot exist. :weird:


Do you remember this game?
It only works with the wire well stretched, right?
Do the same with your speaker cables (well stretched) and then tell me about the differences.

 

[W9TR]

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but isn’t a vibration of 1 meter per second a huge, huge vibration?

A very good question! No bad questions really. The first thing you imagine is a wire moving back and forth a meter! I know I did.

But remember that this is a velocity, not an amplitude. The amplitude needed to achieve this velocity will depend on the frequency of the induced vibration. I’m thinking it is quite small at say, 1 kHz, but I need to work the math problem. I’ll do it later this week when I have some more time.

On a more anecdotal note, if you’ve ever done live recording you’ve experienced microphonics in Mic cables.

 

[TheOctopus]

Octopus,
Do you know why UFOs don't exist? Because the laws of physics say it is impossible for them to do what they do. Therefore, they cannot exist. :weird:


Do you remember this game?
It only works with the wire well stretched, right?
Do the same with your speaker cables (well stretched) and then tell me about the differences.

Sorry but both of the examples are simply wrong. Aviation in general should have been against the laws of physics because “heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible”, said Lord Kelvin, a few years before the Wright Brothers took flight.

Just because UFO are exhibiting maneuvers that are beyond our own technology, they are not necessarily breaking any laws of physics.

You'd be surprised what the Navy holds patents on. It will blow your mind first time you look at them.. Navy "UFO Patent" Documents Talk Of "Spacetime Modification Weapon," Detail Experimental Testing

As to the two cups and a string, that is "mechanical" vibration that has nothing to do with electrical signal propagation in a speaker cable. It is similar to any stringed instrument making a sound when the strings are plucked, bowed, struck, etc... In the case of the two cups, your voice sets the cups and the string that has tension into voice modulated oscillations that can be heard on the other end.