Do you demag or destat your CDs/DVDS?


Just curious about these CD tweaks. The Furutech destat machine is tempting at around $350--I like their products. What is the story behind Furutech's discontinuation of their RD2 disc demagnetizing station? I see it was taken up by Acoustic Revive as the RD3, a supposedly improved version. Did it not prove effective by Furutech's standards, or did they let it go in favor of their much more expensive demagnetizer for vinyl and CD? Just wondering if the RD3 does work to improve sound. There isn't much mention of it in the past few years.
128x128jafreeman

Showing 9 responses by jea48

,If your bike has aluminium frame, you can try to attract magnet there and see what happens. Try to attract CD with magnet and see what happens.
07-09-14: Czarivey
Is the aluminum frame 100% pure AL or maybe only 99% pure? What about that 1%?
And how about the ink used on the label side? Any ferrous materials there?

Furutech RD-1 CD Demagnetizer

The Furutech CD demagnetizer might at first seem to be at the outer fringes of the improbable. Demagnetizing tape heads makes sense for two reasons: tape heads are made from permeable material, and the tape reading process depends on sensing magnetism. But neither of these reasons applies to CDs. CDs seemingly do not contain any permeable material that could become magnetized (neither aluminum nor plastic is permeable), and furthermore the CD reading process does not involve reading a magnetic field. So when we conducted our A-B before vs. after comparisons, we were admittedly biased. We did not believe that we would hear any sonic differences, nor any sonic improvement worth writing about. But hearing is believing. The Furutech is another winner that does make a sonic difference, and it is one of that very rare breed where the difference is entirely for the better.
Like any demagnetizer, the Furutech is intended to be used repeatedly and regularly, perhaps every few plays of each CD. Operation is very simple and automatic. You simply press the button and wait 10 seconds for the light to go out, indicating that the Furutech has completed its cycle. It automatically performs the task of gradually decreasing its demagnetizing field strength during this cycle, so you don't even have to bother with the manual chore of gradually withdrawing your CD away from the magnetic field (as you must do with old fashioned tape demagnetizers).
The Furutech makes your CDs sound more like the new high resolution digital formats. Music's trebles become faster, more extended, airier, and more open. There's a blacker background between musical notes, with better intertransient silence. You can hear more of music's subtle inner details. The natural hall ambience and decay captured by the recording is revealed much better. And music sounds a little more natural, with a little less of the upper midrange glare that characterizes many CDs.
That's a mighty impressive list of sonic accomplishments for a treatment that shouldn't make any difference. So let's investigate.
If we look at the Furutech's sonic accomplishments just above, we might notice that they could all be explained by one factor. If the Furutech somehow reduced the level of contaminating noise, then all the above sonic benefits might follow. Noise contamination certainly fills in what should be a silent black background between musical notes. This degrades intertransient silence, and also veils or blocks music's subtler inner details, which are audible immediately after and between music's stronger transients only if there is a silent background between these stronger transients. Likewise, contaminating noise would obscure and degrade subtle information like hall ambience and decay, which again are audible after and between musical transients only if there is a silent background. Finally, contaminating noise also smears and effectively dulls musical information, acting as a temporally lingering shadow that defocuses music's sharper edges. This is especially destructive of fast treble information, because treble information is by definition more transitory, with sharper edges, so it is more harmed by smearing, lingering shadows, and defocusing than are music's lower frequencies, which have rounder edged waveform profiles, and which tend to be more repetitive.
If CD treatment with the Furutech were somehow reducing some contaminating noise, then we would expect to hear these aforementioned problems reduced - we would expect to hear exactly those sonic benefits which we in fact do hear.
Now, how on earth might the Furutech somehow reduce contaminating noise? What is there in a CD that might cause contaminating noise, and that might need demagnetizing? And how does a CD get re-magnetized by being played, such that it benefits from further demagnetizing after a few plays?
The Furutech people have two simple answers. Ink and impurities. The whole surface of a CD is covered with ink, to make up the printed label. These inks contain pigments, some of which are ferrous, hence permeable. The Furutech people also suggest that the aluminum in the reflective layer might well contain impurities, including iron.
Now, the CD rotates pretty fast (200 to 500 rpm), and any ferrous material will gradually become slightly magnetized over time if it is rapidly moving in a magnetic field (the earth's magnetic field will do, but there are doubtless other magnetic fields as well within a CD player). All right, so we have a CD with some slightly magnetized pieces of ink, spinning around inside your CD player. How does that cause contaminating noise in your music?
Let's assume that the brown pigment in brown ink is ferrous, and let's assume that some small lettering on the CD label is printed in brown ink. Let's assume that there are about 50 letters in the small lettering, which means that there are about 100 vertical ferrous bar magnets (for example, the letter H has two vertical bars), rotating around with the CD. These rotating bar magnets are putting an electromagnetic noise field into the space and air inside your CD player. If the CD is rotating at 8 Hz (480 rpm), and there are 100 discrete bar magnets going around at 8 Hz, then they are putting out noise with a fundamental at 800 Hz, together with all kinds of overtones spread upward throughout the rest of the musical spectrum (if we were to assume the bar magnets were purely rectangular and put out noise that looks like a square wave, there would be overtones at 2400 Hz, 4000 Hz, 5600 Hz, etc.).
You can see that this contaminating noise thrown into the air is rich in high frequency spectral content, so it would be most destructive of music's higher frequencies and of singular, non-repeating musical transients, if it were to somehow interfere with the music signal inside your CD player. And, if a CD treatment like the Furutech could reduce this high frequency contaminating noise, then we would expect to hear the sonic improvements being most dramatic for music's trebles and for its singular transients - which is exactly what we do hear.
Given that this noisy electromagnetic field is radiating into the space and air inside your CD player, how could it come to actually contaminate your music? After all, your music signal is safely traveling inside the conducting wires of the CD player's circuitry, isn't it? So who cares if there's spurious electromagnetic noise in the air outside these wires, right?
Well, it turns out that electromagnetic fields in the space and air just outside your CD player's wiring can also penetrate into that wiring, so if that field comprises contaminating noise, then that noise can add to or interfere with the signals in your CD player's wiring. The analog circuitry in your CD player is certainly vulnerable to signal degradation by interference from noise, but so also is all the digital circuitry in your CD player. Why? First, that so-called digital circuitry is actually analog circuitry, operating with precise thresholds and precise currents, whose level and/or precise timing can be contaminated, degraded, or made less determinate by noise. Second, it is now widely recognized that merely adding noise to a digital signal in your CD player can worsen jitter (by making thresholds more temporally indeterminate), which in turn worsens distortion of your music when that timing indeterminacy reaches your DAC chip. If the interfering noise has high frequency content, then this can cause high frequency jitter, which is especially destructive of music's higher frequencies, causing smearing kinds of distortion (from FM distortion sidebands spread over a wide and high frequency range).
Furthermore, it turns out that the desired signals running around in the wiring of your CD player are not really traveling inside the wires, but instead are actually traveling as electromagnetic fields in the space and air outside those wires - in the very same space and air also occupied by the noisy electromagnetic field from those spinning magnets on the CD. Since the desired CD player signals, representing your music, and the noise from the spinning CD magnets are both mixing it up in the same space and air, naturally there is cross contamination.
Similar considerations would apply to any ferrous impurities in the aluminum deposited on the CD as its reflective layer.
A simple 10 second demagnetization with the Furutech would erase all these tiny magnets, and thereby would eliminate this source of contaminating noise, providing just the kind of sonic benefits we in fact do hear. Then later, after a given demagnetized CD has rotated fast about 75,000 times, it stands to reason that the ferrous particles in the label and/or in the aluminum might have become magnetized once again, so it would be beneficial to treat that CD to another simple 10 second demagnetization by the Furutech. Incidentally, note that in just 3 plays of a long (74 minute) CD, it rotates fast about 75,000 times. Thus, remagnetization and sonic degradation could begin again sooner than you would suspect. Since it is a pain to keep track of how many times you have played each CD since its last demagnetization, it might be easier to simply demagnetize every CD before each critical listening session, and don't bother before casual listening sessions.
In sum, there is a plausible hypothesis explaining how the Furutech demagnetizer achieves its sonic benefits, and indeed just the kind of sonic benefits that we in fact hear (this predictability and corroboration lends additional credence to the hypothesis). Of course, the most important proof of the pudding is in the listening. The sonic improvements you'll gain from using the Furutech on your CD library clearly make it a winning CD treatment to invest in. (Continued on page 54)
http://www.iar-80.com/page53.html

Other articles for you to read.

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/furutech/rd1.html

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/furutech/rd2.html

http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/demagnetization.html


I did a little quick research and it appears that CD players use photon lasers. Photons have no charge and therefore would not be effected by a magnetic field.

Can someone explain what the mechanism is for magnetic ink to influence the playback of a CD in a negative way, or at all? I would guess the ink explaination came up as a response to people first becoming skeptical of the product as it was first advertised.
07-09-14: Mceljo

Mceljo,

Quote from link.

"Now, the CD rotates pretty fast (200 to 500 rpm), and any ferrous material will gradually become slightly magnetized over time if it is rapidly moving in a magnetic field (the earth's magnetic field will do, but there are doubtless other magnetic fields as well within a CD player). All right, so we have a CD with some slightly magnetized pieces of ink, spinning around inside your CD player. How does that cause contaminating noise in your music?
Let's assume that the brown pigment in brown ink is ferrous, and let's assume that some small lettering on the CD label is printed in brown ink. Let's assume that there are about 50 letters in the small lettering, which means that there are about 100 vertical ferrous bar magnets (for example, the letter H has two vertical bars), rotating around with the CD. These rotating bar magnets are putting an electromagnetic noise field into the space and air inside your CD player. If the CD is rotating at 8 Hz (480 rpm), and there are 100 discrete bar magnets going around at 8 Hz, then they are putting out noise with a fundamental at 800 Hz, together with all kinds of overtones spread upward throughout the rest of the musical spectrum (if we were to assume the bar magnets were purely rectangular and put out noise that looks like a square wave, there would be overtones at 2400 Hz, 4000 Hz, 5600 Hz, etc.).
You can see that this contaminating noise thrown into the air is rich in high frequency spectral content, so it would be most destructive of music's higher frequencies and of singular, non-repeating musical transients, if it were to somehow interfere with the music signal inside your CD player. And, if a CD treatment like the Furutech could reduce this high frequency contaminating noise, then we would expect to hear the sonic improvements being most dramatic for music's trebles and for its singular transients - which is exactly what we do hear.
Given that this noisy electromagnetic field is radiating into the space and air inside your CD player, how could it come to actually contaminate your music? After all, your music signal is safely traveling inside the conducting wires of the CD player's circuitry, isn't it? So who cares if there's spurious electromagnetic noise in the air outside these wires, right?
Well, it turns out that electromagnetic fields in the space and air just outside your CD player's wiring can also penetrate into that wiring, so if that field comprises contaminating noise, then that noise can add to or interfere with the signals in your CD player's wiring. The analog circuitry in your CD player is certainly vulnerable to signal degradation by interference from noise, but so also is all the digital circuitry in your CD player. Why? First, that so-called digital circuitry is actually analog circuitry, operating with precise thresholds and precise currents, whose level and/or precise timing can be contaminated, degraded, or made less determinate by noise. Second, it is now widely recognized that merely adding noise to a digital signal in your CD player can worsen jitter (by making thresholds more temporally indeterminate), which in turn worsens distortion of your music when that timing indeterminacy reaches your DAC chip. If the interfering noise has high frequency content, then this can cause high frequency jitter, which is especially destructive of music's higher frequencies, causing smearing kinds of distortion (from FM distortion sidebands spread over a wide and high frequency range).
Furthermore, it turns out that the desired signals running around in the wiring of your CD player are not really traveling inside the wires, but instead are actually traveling as electromagnetic fields in the space and air outside those wires - in the very same space and air also occupied by the noisy electromagnetic field from those spinning magnets on the CD. Since the desired CD player signals, representing your music, and the noise from the spinning CD magnets are both mixing it up in the same space and air, naturally there is cross contamination.
Similar considerations would apply to any ferrous impurities in the aluminum deposited on the CD as its reflective layer."
http://www.iar-80.com/page53.html
"Pseudo science at best misapplying concepts in such a way that it sounds good to the consumer."
07-10-14: Mceljo

Mceljo,

These guys have no dog in the fight.

IAR International Audio/Video Review

http://www.iar-80.com/

http://www.iar-80.com/page53.html
.
Sorry Jea, but there's no lab tested evidence at all.
No information is quantisized or leveraged.
Do you or any one here knows of published info with any magnitudes and/or quantities? Any info on flow of the lab test?
Any scientific evidence will help.
07-10-14: Czarivey

Czarivey,

I would think by now you would have tried to back up your claim that the Furutech RD-1, RD-2 and the Acoustic Revive RD-3 are nothing more than pie in the sky snake oil devices. But no, all you do is continue to trash the devices and there by trash the name of the companies that manufacture the devices. You Flat Earthers never fail to amaze me. The very least you could of done is find one, just one, audio magazine that said the devices were nothing more than snake oil. Hell you are too lazy to even do that.

Here is your precious test you so desire.
http://www.acoustic-revive.com/english/cd_dvd/rd-3_2.html
What Czarivey and Mceljo are asking for is scientific proof that the minute magnetic fields produced either by the spinning disc or the paint on the top of the disc have any audible effect.
07-10-14: Timrhu
scientific proof......

What scientific proof can be presented why ICs and speaker cables can sound different when connected to audio equipment?

How about,

Power cords?

Mains power duplex receptacles?

Dedicated circuits?

Lots of theory why..... scientific proof?

How about NOS vacuum tubes vrs current production tubes?
Scientific proof?

How about a little real life experience with an item before slamming a product as being snake oil. Or at least research the item for bad press and then post the info found.

As for Czarivey and Mceljo, I furnished Links providing info on the Furutech RD-1, RD-2 and the Acoustic Revive RD-3. I challenged Czarivey to find any bad review/s by any recognized audio review magazine, he supplied none. Google is your friend.
Mceljo response, reviewers are biased. LOL, he never did answer my question where he learned of Blue Jeans cables. It couldn't of been a review in a magazine.

Best regards,
Jim
Jafreeman,

Thanks for the acknowledgement. I was hoping you had not made up your mind from reading the posts of all the naysayers that had responded to your posted message.

My Bedini Clarifier is the older dual beam unit. I have heard the quad is a better one.

Not sure if you researched any of the archives here on a Agon on the subject at hand. Here a a thread I posted back in 2005 incase you have not already read it.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ymisc&1110747999&openmine&zzJea48
Jim
07-12-14: Jafreeman
I spoke at length with my high-end retailer, here in MN, who swears by the Bedini Quad Clarifier. He states he never uploads a disc to his solid state drive or plays a CD that is not first placed in his Bedini. I trust this guy....
07-12-14: Jafreeman



A point to consider, regarding the mention of ripping to an SSD (or other hard drive): If in fact demagnetizing a CD accomplishes anything, and if the explanation of how that might occur is as described in the long quote from IAR which Jim (Jea48) provided on 7-9-11, the resulting benefit would only occur during real-time playback in a CD player or transport. The effect described in that explanation has no applicability to playback of a computer file that has been ripped from a CD. And that is especially true if the rip is performed using software that assures bit perfect accuracy, as it should be.

The IAR explanation, btw, involving introduction of electrical noise into circuitry in the CD player or transport, is the most plausible explanation I can think of for how these things MIGHT make a difference. And if that explanation is correct, whether or not a benefit will be realized, and its degree, figures to be highly dependent on the happenstance of the design of the particular player or transport.

Regards,
-- Al
07-12-14: Almarg


Hi Al,

You said,
"A point to consider, regarding the mention of ripping to an SSD (or other hard drive): If in fact demagnetizing a CD accomplishes anything, and if the explanation of how that might occur is as described in the long quote from IAR which Jim (Jea48) provided on 7-9-11, the resulting benefit would only occur during real-time playback in a CD player or transport."

You may be correct about an SSD or hard drive I have not experimented there.....

I have as you know, in a thread a while back here on Agon where you responded to a post of mine, where I copied a Red Book CD on a stand alone CD recorder to a CD-R disc and then treated the same Red Book CD in the Bedini Clarifier and then copied the cleaned CD on another CD-R disc in the same recorder. Play back of the two reviled the two CD-R discs sounded different. Sounded different on several different CD players. Several.....

Do you remember the thread? Damn if I can find the thread.... Any ideas? I would like to post the thread here for the naysayers.

You said,
"The IAR explanation, btw, involving introduction of electrical noise into circuitry in the CD player or transport, is the most plausible explanation I can think of for how these things MIGHT make a difference. And if that explanation is correct, whether or not a benefit will be realized, and its degree, figures to be highly dependent on the happenstance of the design of the particular player or transport."

I have played treated Red book CDs back on several different CDP players. I think it has more to do with the listening devices used whether difference can be heard. I will say to date for those that have listened they could hear a difference between a treated CD and non-treated CD. Note I only said difference. Some listeners preferred the sound of the treated CD, other preferred the sound of the untreated CD.

Jim
Hi Jim,

Voila!
07-12-14: Almarg

Thanks Al, I greatly appreciate you finding the thread for me.
Jim
Hi Al,

If you get a chance would you copy a good sounding Red Book CD, like the ones you used in the thread below, onto a hard drive and compare the original source Red Book CD to the hard drive copy? I would bet the original source CD will sound better.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1354371062&openflup&15&4#15

Thanks,
Jim