Do we believe in Machina Dynamics?

Let's see: we've had the pebbles, the little clock, the turntable platform that includes only some old springs...and now the Contact Paper CD tweek. Do any of us believe in this? I know Geoff's an advertiser, and actually a very nice guy, but come on, fellow audiophiles...this is all the epitome of snake oil! No?
Every idea was tried, and has failed, numerous times. Despite being a nice guy, all he's selling is audio nonsense.
Post removed 
I do but they're expensive so I try a bowl full of marbles and put on my coffee table and boy the soundstage's bigger better instrument seperations ( the marbles must act like diffusors I guess ). Cheers.
Post removed 

He must be a summa cum laude graduate from the Phineas Taylor Barnum School of Business.
As far as the brilliant pebbles, weight loading components is pretty well excepted as a tweak that can sometimes have a positive effect. I haven't bought the pretty rocks or other expensive means to do this, but I suspect that some folks have used the pebbles to good effect. The other stuff I would not spend my money on, but what is and ain't snake oil in ALL applications is hard to be absolutely certain of. In example, to my ear and in my system, power cords are snake oil but others have found them to be capable of creating a positive effect.
>>Do we believe in Machina Dynamics?<<

Of course and the man behind the curtain as well.

Pebbles and covers and clocks. Oh my!!!!!
I have used actual, real snake oil to clean my innerconnects and tube pins and believe me, it works!
Post removed 
Hmm,i actually know a guy who lined the insides of all his caps and hats with aluminum foil.Every time i start probing him on Mach.Dyn. affiliation,he changes the subject and leaves immediately.
I recently bid on a Clever Little Clock, not so much because I wanted to try it but rather to see if a legitimate bid from someone not associated with the seller would win. My bid was too low as it went for $141.
Why? I'm skeptical that real people are bidding on this clock.
This topic has, of course, been beaten nearly to death... but i can't resist.

The question raised in this thread -- do we "believe" in machina dynamica -- is perfectly stated. For at its root, the Machina Dynamic question is, as the question suggests,
a question of "belief." As such, the Machina Dynamica debate is a near perfect analog to the basic questions of religious belief; it forces us to confront the most fundamental questions of the human condition: the irreconcilable division between reason and faith.

In one camp we have the secular audiophiles. They apply reason and a scientific method to the evaluation of Machina Dynamic products. The secularists demand measurable, repeatable, and explainable evidence that a tiny little clock can produce an audible difference. Because no such evidence exists -- and even Machina Dynamica makes no attempt to suggest it does -- these secularists reject little clocks and pretty rocks as no more than a scam.

In the other camp, we have the believers. They need no "proof" as to why a blue CD cover creates extended bass response; it is sufficient for them that they believe it does. And by having faith that these products work, they actually "do" for the believers. Of course, many believers try to convert the heathen secularists by cloaking their support for Machina Dynamica products with scientific sounding explanations -- "outlet cover materials have different vibrational properties" -- but these explanations are as hollow and transparent as Intelligent Design. Reading the posts of these crusaders, one strains to accept that they even believe their own BS.

So, the debate over Machina Dynamica rages on. It is no more likely that we will develop a consensus on whether little pebbles add a sense of upper range air, as it is that we will agree on whether Jesus was the son of God or a just a humble carpenter. We can't reach this consensus because some of us appeal to reason for the answer, while others merely "believe." The bottom line is that both sides are "right" according to their own terms.
Did this thread not come up to recently.

I wonder if there are people with personal agendas going here??

I don't think much more can be rehashed over again, and again, and again. I guess you get the point.
No, but what I really don't believe is that we need yet another thread (probably destined to be deleted anyway) on why we don't believe in this..
>>I wonder if there are people with personal agendas going here??<<

You would know best as leader of the kool aid drinkers.
Post removed 
Hi for those who think Machina dynamics stuffs are snake oils have u actually tried it before u come to that conclusion? Obviously there are people who believe that the products work otherwise the products wont be appearing at audiogon advertisements so regularly right? I thought powercord were consider snake oil before it got accepted by the audio community? I believe its is not right to belittle a commercial product which we have not tried. Behind the product is a guy trying to make a living. In a democratic society like USA, there is such thing as Buyer Beware. So apply it prudently. Happy listening
Post removed 
Post removed 
Audiofeil, LOL! I love these threads, they're the most amusing ones on Audiogon.
>>In a democratic society like USA, there is such thing as Buyer Beware.<<

Or "reader beware" in your case.
Well the good thing is that they come in "mikro", "mini", "large" and "extra large". I'm thinking a person would have to be a fool to start out with the "Extra Large".
Tvad 20 years ago, if some come out with shakti hallograph soundfield would it be claim as snake oil? What about if somebody tell you fuse can improve dynamics of yr sound system? what abt put some liquid on the Cd. Abracadabra and the sound improve. Paint some silver stuff on yr connectors or tube pins, suddenly better resolution and lower noise floor in yr system. Believable or unbelieveable or snake oil? Today we know that the above products work. I dont have the opportunity to try Machina Dynamics in Malaysia. Therefore is fair for me to refrain from claiming that it is snake oil. Knowing whether a product works or not, its all abt listening to it right? So happy listening
>>Well the good thing is that they come in "mikro", "mini", "large" and "extra large<<

Yes but are they available ribbed, lubricated, and in different colors?
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Not that I've tried it Audioblazer, but that Shakti Hallograph thingy strikes me as classic snake oil too -- something I say based solely on having seen it pictured and read the ad copy, which looks and sounds like unmitigated BS along the lines of Shun Mook "Spatial Control" disks and stands. Not that I doubt that anything which is a resonator and/or physically large enough will affect the soundfield to *some* degree when placed in the listening environment (the Shun Mook disks qualify as neither of those as far as I can tell), but that's also true of most all of one's listening room furnishings. What I doubt is that this particular object could always make the sound somehow "better" and be worth what's charged for it (however I don't doubt that paying a significant amount for these types of things could in some cases be key to their "effectiveness"). Then again, I haven't tried liquid on my CDs or silver paste on my connectors either...
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
Post removed 
I imagine there are many who find some MD tweaks work and many who would never try them, and even a few who try them and find no benefit. One thing is certain on the MD tweaks as well as the Acoustic Revive tweaks, we get little inclining about why the work. Lacking this many will not try them, others will. There is no concensus nor anyone really available to convert to one position or the other. In short the discussion is a waste of time.

Be certain to buy matching Timex clocks and matching orange price stickers so the study participants don't know which is Machina Dynamica product and which is not. Same with the jars of pebbles.

Same with the $30 "Tru-Tone" Duplex Covers that you could purchase at Home Depot for $5.97.

Same with the "Special Helical Springs" that you could order on the internet from a hardware supply house for under $10 (although, addmitedly, they might not be "special" -- at least in the way MD means it).
Their physics are no less sound than those behind most tweaks and cables and they have smarter guys coming up with product names.
Drew: With respect, their "physics" are widely regarded as a joke (or worse) and have been debunked all over the internet. Try a google search of any of Geoff Kait's "white papers" and you will see what i mean.
The critics' "physics" tends to be old and out-of-date and the "physics" of MD tends to be obscure.
Norm, let rephrase correctly.

The critics' "physics" tends to be real physics, the "physics" of MD tends to be zero factual basis and believed only by the ignorant and gullible.

The ignorant have little problem believing MD (lack of) physics as they have no understanding of real physics. To them, sound tweaks like audio cable and total snake oil like pebbles seem to have the same factual basis. They are the individuals that folks like GK can exploit. You, Jim and a few other folks demonstrate a high degree of lack of understanding. Even now, you probably do not have a good understanding as to why some power cables may improve sound.

Once understanding of the physics behind tweaks is achieved, it is very easy to discriminate between what will work and what is placebo. There is no black magic in audio ... there never was, there never will be and the sure isn't any now.

The fact that you think that some aspects of physics is in some way out of date demonstrates a total lack of understanding of what science is about.

+++ Their physics are no less sound than those behind most tweaks and cables and they have smarter guys coming up with product names. +++

LOL - a little clock or pebbles have the same factual basis for improving sound as a speaker cable? Okaaaay.
Pauly, I don't want to go through this once again with you. I was a physics major, among other majors, in the 1960s. Physics today is quite different than then. I read Scientific American and have several friends in the Physics department. In reality, I doubt very much that you have any understanding of physics or the limitations on our knowledge of natural phenomena.

If something that fails to be explained by our limited knowledge, it is a challenge to our theories and understanding. Rejection of an observation that is contrary to a theory is a challenge to the theory and not to be dismissed as an accident or to be swept under the carpet and ignored.

You, my dear sir, are a pseudo-scientist.


+++ I was a physics major, among other majors, in the 1960s +++

Good for you Norm, you have a bachelors degree. My secretary has an MBA.

+++ In reality, I doubt very much that you have any understanding of physics or the limitations on our knowledge of natural phenomena. +++

Yep, and Geoff K is so way ahead of me, I just don’t know what I am missing?

+++ Rejection of an observation +++

I have yet to reject the findings of observation even once in my life.

Two weeks I tested a SS, wooden and plastic outlet cover plates back to back. Observation = zero difference.

So far from being swept under the carpet, the so-called cover plate tweak is nothing other than crap.

+++ You, my dear sir, are a pseudo-scientist. +++

LOL, coming from somebody that spends $1K on holograms and supports Machina Dynamics, you must forgive me for not taking that comment seriously.

There’s an old saying Norm, a fool and his money is easily parted. Old Geoff parts you with your money with little trouble.

Paully, so once again I am right you haven't a clue about physical regularities or of the scientific methods. Please spare us your trite phrases and unscientifically based judgment without fact.