We have a whole forum on "the method of tuning" that we invite folks to visit if they wish to explore. Also two threads here that I recommend.
as well on TuneLand which I will be building on
If it's not vibrating you would hear nothing at all. I personally have never seen or heard of an isolated audio system. I've only seen HEA marketing using the term isolation as a sales tool.
Repeatedly the simple question is asked, if you kill the vibration than what are you listening to? Audio is vibration and has been described as nothing but vibratory on any scientific level ever taught unless HEA has created it's own science.
Maybe it's time we set up our in-room listening labs and reference this.
Ladies and gentlemen lets take a look at the testing in-room systems you would like to use for your testing. I've done thousands of systems in the past but lets use our current in-room systems to talk about and explore tuning or lack of, anew.
How about we start at this very basic beginning of any audio discussion, what's your system?
thanks, looking forward to a constructive conversation with you folks
here's some brief history on my systems that bring you up to date
and a look at Jim Bookhard's article of his visit to an early Tunable Room.
LOL, HEA is a trip. This is why it has gotten itself in so much trouble. No matter how many people post the definition of the Fundamental Interactions "the standard for interaction and a requirement for studying physics" HEA folks keep making their own rules and defend them to the audio forum death. A fascinating trait in this hobby.
If I may, some of you are far more interested in the arguing then the actual doing. All on-lookers have to do is read your posting, pretty simple (and they do). That said, have fun, but if you are talking about actually doing (practical application, science's proof) you need to step into that arena sooner or later. In other words when you say "it isn't happening" yet millions of people tune every day in their respective fields of interest and professions (anything we use that passes energy) throwing out pet names (strawman or slogan whatever) just roles off sounding inexperienced to those of us who practice the discipline of tuning the variables.
The funny part to these audio forums is instead of these guys actually doing they keep loading up with the same words to see if who is speaking more or louder than anyone else will work. The only thing that works is actually doing and studying.
If any of you can prove science is incorrect I say go for it and get in line for your award. However why come to the table if you're not prepared to dine. So here's what I say, I'm willing to once again do a real time lab testing these things and giving the listening proof. Are you?
Come on guys lets get past the talking and down to the actual doing.
"As for the electrical signal itself, it’s not (repeat not) vibrating, but it is oscillating or alternating."
Actually both oscillating and alternating are "Vibratory" according to our physics books. But using your Vibratory language if you killed the oscillating or alternating the sound would stop correct?
So Geoff, it appears you keep going on both sides of this fence "is audio vibratory or not". There are like 3 or 4 threads you are on right now saying "kill vibrations", then someone comes up (me included) saying "audio is vibration if you kill it you won't hear anything". We are referring to all forms of audio along the audio pathway.
I'm sorry my friend but how can you be on both sides of this fence and still make your points? If audio is not vibratory why would you need to isolate it? If it is vibratory and you kill it, it will not produce audio.
When one goes up and reads these threads it's like watching someone playing on both sides of the tennis court. I'm definitely siding with glupson, audionuttoo, Tj and others on this one. Audio is vibration and if you kill it (anywhere in the audio chain) you're killing the sound itself.
I’m going to make some adjustments on the system, not because the music sounds bad, but to show how easy and effective Tuning Blocks and other wood pieces are when used.
People have already mentioned several types of wood and so this is in addition to their uses. I usually don’t like doing the better or worst thing, that’s up to the listener. What I’m here to do is show the variables of Vibratory tuning. Before I jumped in I knew others would come up to give their experiences, or quote others, shoot in the dark or share their own listening experiences that were successful using wood.
I look at the entire house or building as part of the mechanical system. The 4 fundamental Interactions tell us that everything affects (interacts) with everything else. That’s a pretty simple beginning guideline "there is no real isolation on a moving, magnetically charged planet". The audio debates on this sort of thing are amusing but if you back away from the surface for very long and then return you will find yourself in a different location. We live in motion from the day we are born till the day we fold up our listening ears and move on.
One of the reasons why wood is so good for music is the way trees have been growing on our planet. A tree is the biggest live fiber that grows from beneath the Earths surface to the suns energy in a full range vibratory fashion. Trees grow in cycles as they reach out for the suns energy. They are natures watch like all natural materials. If you slice through a tree you will see natures cycles just like if you carve away the side of a mountain. It doesn’t take much to see that we are all living in time and all connected to, and a part of, energy.
hope you don’t mind me doing this in several parts, works better for me
When I got into designing audio products I focused more on metals, shapes, springs and other methods and materials, and the longer I was exploring the more I ran into issues that I ended up calling "energy blockage". I found that there are three main parts to energy movement, flow, resistance and interaction. I also discovered that energy interacts with mechanical conduits that pass energy in a way that is interactive with gravity, weak force, strong force and electromagnetism. All this is easy to look up or you can come to TuneLand where we looked it up for you and we’ve written about forever.
When we look at a component or wire or any audio part it’s easy to think with our eyes and not think about the forces that make the system work. If we were to put on our "field & wave" glasses we would see a lot more going on than what our eyes are seeing alone. That space between us and those components and parts are full of interactive forces. If we looked inside those components we would see the same thing, and if we looked at a micro level we would still see the same thing, tons of interacting energy.
What do these forces affect in audio? Everything about audio falls right in the crosshairs of the 4 interactions. And these 4 interactions are in in-ter-change with the audio signal non-stop. You can change the interaction, you can convert it to another form but you can't get rid of it. Space inside of our atmosphere must stay in full mode. You're not going to create a black hole with no interaction when it comes to the AC of an audio system. When you make a change to the interaction you are also making a change to the sound. The sound (audio) is part of the interaction. There is no separation between audio and the forces, they are one and the same. If you take the forces out of audio there would be no sound.
When you get to the place in your hobby that you start to realize the audio signal’s interacting with every thing around it a new hobby begins from that point on. Most people I see going down this new path usually go the dampening route for a while because the changes are so obvious. After a while though they start finding that they can’t play as many recordings as they once did. The system will sound very detailed and musical on some recordings but far less forgiving on others. First thing we want to do is blame recordings but in time we’ll do something that gets us thinking more. Usually we’ll get to a place where we realized we have been cutting out parts of the recorded signal by squeezing the life out of the mechanical pathway. When the reality hits we start to understand that the audio signal and the physics of everything around and through it are actually a part of it. That’s when it’s time to take a look at the sound of wood and what it can do musically to the system. Rubber squeezes, metal sends but wood has a balance to it that is fuller range. The wrong fuller range can be disaster and the sound can get pitchy sounding on you quickly. Super hard woods are going to sound more like cones but can be tricky. Using a combo of cones springs and wood can be pretty cool once you figure out how to avoid field distortion. The possibilities of voicing your audio signal is endless but it doesn’t happen over night and more than likely you are going to get stuck a few times till you figure out how to tune the three parts to your system in harmony (electrical mechanical and acoustical). For this reason I usually start with a wood type that is fuller range and work on voicing the sound of that wood.
Western Red Cedar
are all medium to lower tone woods and a safe starting place. Once you get the basics down then you can move more toward fine tuning. If you’re not going to go the full wood route yet or have a different material rack you might want to start with springs and play with wood slivers for the top of the spring and bottom. This will give you some tonal adjustability. You can also do the same thing with cones, a sliver of wood on top and one on the bottom.
Hi Tj, great to see you!
"Now since you are a man of science and seems to be an amazing physicist would you care to comment on what is happening to my setup and tuning ?"
In all fairness to Geoff that would be a stretch I would think. When Tj and I do listening sessions we both have In-Room audio systems to do this with. Our rooms and systems are giant musical instruments that we sit inside and make whatever adjustments we wish. Not just acoustical, but speakers, electronics and the whole thing. As Geoff shares he no longer has a stereo to do any testing with as far as an in-room system goes. I don’t think Geoff has done any in-room testing for over some 15 or more years I believe. If I’m correct Geoff uses a Sony Walkman Cassette Playing with ear buds.
I’m not saying this as a joke, but just that a portable cassette player to use as a referencing tool with a Tunable Room on the other end might be a little of a mismatch, especially in the feeling department but hey lets give it a try if you guys want.
I'm certainly into referencing from my end.
So OP, I’m ready to do some listening. Yesterday I put on "Toys in the attic" by Aerosmith. This is a regular off the shelf CD and I’m playing it on my favorite CDP, which happens to be a very low mass player that Magnavox produced for several years. The system is totally mine with no brand names to mention except for mine, folks can check this out on the TuneLand Forum. I have my headphone setup cued up as well to do a few comparisons but this is mainly an in-room reference.
Most of my Tuning references are done with in-room systems because when listening I want to feel the music while I listen to it.
I use CDs for 3 reasons, one I love the sound of them, two a CDP is easy to tune and 3 the repeat button. For more serious referencing I might listen to the same recording for days leaving the player on repeat.
Ever sit there one day and listen and everything sounds great and the next day you listen and everything sounds horrible? Well besides you changing everything else also changed. Go from a sun shiny day to a rainy one and back and you will get a good dose of audio interaction with the forces. Do the same from night listening to day listening, or seasonal listening or one of thousands of interactions and you will experience the system sounding different.
Want to know how much of the recording you’re actually hearing? The easy way is to go from the live room of a recording studio and listen and then go home and listen to see if the recording is the same size. If you do this most of the time you will be shocked at how much smaller the soundstage is from your home system as compared to your live experience, with the exception of close miking. In most cases you are maybe hearing 1/10 of the actual recorded info on a typical stereo setup (at any price). Ever sit there and am amazed to hear this incredibly huge soundstage that goes past any boundary in your room? You’ve probably just got a lot closer to the real size of the recording. How did that happen? The audio signal was more in-tune with the energy surrounding the info. Take that same recording around to your different friends systems and guess what. The stage might be as big on them but more than likely that same recording will be different sizes on each system. You can do this back and forth from system to system and you will find that some of the big stages on your system will be smaller on theirs and some of the big stages on theirs will be smaller on yours.
Hi Jburidan, well said!
Almost have my chores done for the day so I want to get started on the referencing.
My reference is not the system but the recording itself. First rough listen to "toys" I knew a couple of moves I would make right away. Took me all of 60 seconds to move my chair out a little from the SAM wall behind me and move the speakers forward about 3". Soon as I did this the "digital" sound was gone. I say digital sound because that's what many call the brittle sound when they play CDs. Fact is CDs don't sound brittle at all, it's the system playing the CD that creates this sound. CDs are an extremely accurate source and can require slightly different chair and speaker placement that can be needed as much as per recording. Most of the time not but when that certain cluster on the top end is heard it usually means the relationship between the speaker and back wall placement are off some. This is a cue for folks wanting to see how their setup is doing. As soon as the highs are tamed you will notice that your stage grew. Mid to higher sounds that were playing in the speakers now miss the physical speaker placement. The disappearing act may not be completely over but we are on our way.
be back in a little
Back to Aerosmith.
After getting done some running around I've made it back to my place and am ready to see where I might want to go with the sound of Toys in the attic. The speaker and chair move have settled in and I can hear the stability of this soundstage. To give an idea of the general size the stage is about 8 to 9 feet tall and extends all the way down to the floor. This is great cause there is some great cymbal work on this recording and the end of percussive action has a nice round expansion. The stage is about 20 feet wide and front to back is about 18 feet (14 feet in front of me and 4 feet behind me).
I've decided I wanted that 70's tube sound so I've moved the LTR Tuning Blocks almost to the edges of the CDP with the grain of the wood running front to back. This is a common setting for me when I'm doing Deutsche Grammophon type classical listening. The similarities between some classic rock system settings and many of the classical pieces from DG, Phillips and London can be uncanny at times and one cool thing about a Tunable system in general is almost no recording sound bad, you just have to get used to certain adjustments if you want to really get that stage where you want it.
running in for a listen
Well, I was planning on doing a couple of tuning moves, but I really like this presentation and I’m going to take it in instead of changing it. Maybe when I put on the next recording if there is something I want to change I can describe what I did from this recording to that but for now I think I’m just going to groove on this more.
As far as spikes go I like brass, zinc and some mild steel. I’m not crazy about the sound of too much hard material in the system, to easy to get frequency clusters and stage holes with harder materials. I’m cautious about the sound of Maple. Maple is the Aluminum of the wood world. Sometimes I will use Maple or Aluminum for Tuning bars but that’s only with certain woods or sizes of side boards on speakers, rare for me though.
With cones, Brass blends are my fav. Not always 360 but 360 is a great standard to start with. Doing Copper/Zinc alloy blending can get pretty expensive. 360 is so great because you can play with speeds (turn) and different shapes easy. I should give this tip as well if folks are using the brass cones (mine or others). If you’re using Brass cones and you’re finding the highs still a little too forward or brittle, take 220 grit sand paper and gently sand the end of the cone tip just barely and it will smooth out the transfer. You can do this same trick on your other cone types as well, just be careful to only do this on the tip or top surface. If you do this with the main part of the cone you can screw things up. And always sand in the direction of the turn and in circles, don’t do side to side sanding on metals. Since I have moved to the desert I find myself blending less metals and curing more wood. LTR has been a major hit for me and I can voice the wood to different grades, and that goes a long way in helping folks get those missing tones they’ve been hunting for.
There’s lots to look into when using any material and shapes and the only way to come up with a formula is to jump in and do it. Folks who just throw out material names without giving a formula of use are not very accurate. But if you talk to someone who has takin the time to play around they can help you.
I don't want to talk directly about Mapleshade, but the first question I have is, did you keep your stock feet on your table and what is the table?
Nothing wrong with the Target cutting board. I'm sure there are a lot of Ikea and Target audiophiles out there getting great sound. It's not a matter of buying HEA, it's a matter of what works.
Jhills mentioned Walnut. Now this is an interesting species if you are someone who is going to go the felt, rubber (type) and cork route. You can get some interesting tones out of Black or Chocolate Walnut mixed with the softer (more absorbent) materials. When I did my ranking a few years ago Walnut came in right after the softer woods and I ranked it higher musically than Maple (for electronics). So that's cool Jim brought this up.
good ears :)
My evolution of wood curing and voicing has been a fascinating journey. Even when I read back through the threads it's pretty amazing. The answer to your question is a long one because for me it has meant owning my own kilns and huge collections of wood. A big factor in the learning curves are, where you live.
No matter how much wood I have collected or the different types, and from where, the key is learning how to cure.
Lets start with the where it comes from. I have my pet areas to choose wood from and also get samples of this years harvest (been collecting wood seriously since 1987). I have wood sent directly to me and I also make my regular rounds of my lumberyards. The advantage to having lumberyards here is they are natural kilns. I can go in on any given day and start testing wood for possible purchase. The yards here have gotten to know me and have been very gracious about letting me come in a do my first testing. In fact during the start of my curing season each year some of the workers who know me will let me know what they have that I might want to check out.
There are 3 types of yards I visit here, common, exotic and exotic blocks. On TuneLand I have pictures of all three and with us choosing the wood and the process I go through in the curing and voicing. For me it's not only a weekly hobby of mine but also a thrill ride that once you get hooked is as cool as any other hobby. Today for example I spent half a day over in my curing house, flipping and getting ready some wood for Platforms, Subs and Blocks.
On the topic of Maple vs Walnut, yes I gave a very general answer and if someone ran out and bought a piece of either they would more than likely have their own created sound based on the way they treated that particular piece of wood. If you would like me to give you how I get different species ready for my listening tests I can do it, but yes every piece of wood has it's own story.
I like Michael, I think he’s witty and easy to watch, even though I didn’t watch this entire video. My writing room is kind of like his listening room "stuff all over the place". However even my writing room seems to be a little more organized then Michael’s listening room.
I see what you are saying about the LPs and CDs and immediately made my own listening judgement call as soon as Michael walked into his listening area. On a professional level it would be a disqualifier for me to take his critiquing of components and music seriously. I would classify Michael’s room more of a music collectors room than a listeners room. That’s not a slam on Michael, just a different part of the hobby than I am a part of. I will make this comment though, If I sat down and listened to both his system and your system (with exception of the body effect) I would bet that I would choose your system over Michael’s.
I know that I am on you Geoff about using your ear buds as a reference for in room listening and I hope you can understand why, it’s not in-room listening and I’m never trying to do anything but talk about real time, on going, in-room listening. However if you are making a comparison between your in-room listening and Michael’s I can totally understand why you would make some comments you make, you don’t have to be listening to see the potential problems Michael is living in the middle of.
Any comments Michael would make about soundstaging would score a zero among the level of listeners I deal with. At the same time there are many Stereophile type hobbyist who are collector/listeners and not stoundstage enthusiast just as there are many other off shoots of this hobby and industry. It’s truly a to each their own type of experience.
thanks for your post, it sheds a lot of light on Michael’s preferences and mostly for me that Michael is an entertaining and gifted magazine writer more than a soundstage expert.
Oh, I should also add, as a purist listener, CD cases and LPs should be no where near the listening room. That's just fact and if anyone has taken the time to remove them out of the area they will tell you the tremendous benefits to not having them around.
"Anyone who calls listening to music a "hobby" is engaging in a quite different endeavor than am I. Focusing on soundstaging is like watching a film for 3-D effects."
Honestly I wasn’t aware of this so much before bdp24 but yes I now see clearly that we (you and I) belong to two different camps of the hobby, industry, happening, lifestyle or whatever it is that you or anyone wishes to call it.
I am most definitely a SoundStager and believe this is the heart and soul of playback. I also believe obtaining the real space of a recording is the proper way to hear it in it’s fullest regardless of any particular parts and pieces someone may want to extract from the recording. That said, from now on I will try to make note of this as much as I can when acknowledging you.
As I have said to you directly before I hope we can get to a place where you don’t feel upset that I refer the event by different names. I think you know by now I have done nothing else but music my entire life and would say I have embraced every inch of it. I’m happy for your excitement and passion for your type of listening and lifestyle, but please keep in mind that it has been my quest to live and study the whole with all of it’s variables and disciplines.
Just as I respect that Geoff is a "direct to ear" listener I respect you as a non-soundstage listener as I would respect Michael as a collector type of listener. Each has their own sensibilities and passions and are obviously driven by healthy egos. For myself I enjoy all the variables and explore every part is if it is part of a big universe without judgement of right or wrong but more choice to go wherever we wish. Personal taste is a beautiful thing but there also needs to be those who can take this all the way in any direction, stopping along the way to take in preferences but having the ability to move on to the next exit when it is desired.
"At the same time, many people, if not most of those, who watch basketball do not have basketball courts at home."
Absolutely positively correct!
However there are more people who explore the "whole" of playback than you would think. Keep in mind that most who tune have no need or desire to be part of an audiophile forum. My clients over the years learn the art and technology of tuning and then move beyond the stereophiles of the world. If you read the members threads on TuneLand you will see that they get to a certain place in their abilities and move on to the rest of their listening years with the knowledge that they can do anything they wish. Some do stick around to help others get started but the vast majority send me Christmas emails and good greetings usually with the title "I'm still tuning and love it".
Once you learn how to tune this becomes a different type of adventurous lifestyle for you. Most of the guys and gals who tune keep in touch with me through PMs to let me know they want to try something I have developed or share with me, and sometimes the forum, things that they have been doing that works within their own world. These folks have stepped way past the sales world of Stereophile and HEA tradeshows and have developed their own version of the Tune that they have fine tuned just for them. It's like a family of the worlds most explorative listening members. Folks who have traveled so far beyond plug & play you wouldn't even recognize they were from the same hobby as the ones still looking at component collectables.
Yep, two different worlds! I prefer the in-room system obviously, and the in-room listening experience. Audiogon looks to me like a mostly in-room system forum, at least most of the threads I see you on, which is why I question some of your input as being up to date or relevant. It’s ok, I just think the reminder to folks needs to be often that you are not basing your comments about in-room system listening as actually something you practice yourself.
For example with the OP
"What kind of wood have you found to be best?"
It doesn’t appear to me that you use any wood with your Walkman so for the guy using an in-room system with many different materials how does your Walkman fit in.
I also disagree by a long shot with your Quick Summary - More music, better sound. It might be better than Michael Fremer’s clutter but not a well tuned in-room setup, not even close to the full body listening experience. But I say this having all of the above to base that on.
Just I little update. As with some of the topics here that I get involved in I start receiving emails wanting to know more. One of those emails was from a member here who has been reading the TuneLand archives, especially the Jim Bookhard reviews and articles. After my talk with him we've started reposting Jim's work. I'll give a link to this area on TuneLand after a few of the articles get republished.
Audio & sound are cool because they fall right in the range of physical being, meaning the cycles are low enough as to move and stimulate physical materials. All the physical parts in your audio system are vibratory. As soon as these parts are energized they are not only passing signal but they are passing that signal along with their own vibratory DNA. For example take 2 capacitors of the same spec from 2 different companies or designs and they will sound different from each other. Anything that has mass in your audio chain has it's own vibratory signature added to the sonic mix. Doesn't matter how great or small it is acting just like our planet "giving out and taking on info". Your audio signal will not be separated from nature because it is here on Earth and subject to Earth's physical laws of interaction.
Now a little lab work, nothing too difficult.
What I have done is take a simple audio receiver Sherwood rx4105 and put it in my system. After a week of constant play it’s time to see how it responds to both rubber and wood.
The stock feet have been removed and the receiver was place on the rubber. The first thing that was heard is that the sound has darkened and some of the notes have become more clear but other notes have seem to have disappeared, dropping into the background of the stage. There are lots of other things to listen for but that’s a quick start. Now using harder wood "Ebony" there’s a noticeable jump in high frequencies and a lack of bottom end even though the mid bottom is tight. Compared to the rubber product the ebony is fatiguing after a short time grading on my ears. Back to the rubber, I can clearly hear the notes that are missing as compared to the ebony but the rolled off type sound is less fatiguing, at least at first. The more I listen to the rubber the more I’m discovering a lack of true dynamics and made aware of that rubbery sound that starts to haunt every recording played. Both materials have without a doubt entered into the DNA of the audio signal. Trying springs, cones and other shapes and materials I can hear the materiel itself mixing in (interacting, mingling) with the audio signal. Even putting the original feet back on I can clearly hear that anything under the receiver becomes part of the receivers sound.
Comparing notes from as far back as the mid 80’s I see my notes are exactly the same, conclusions that no matter what goes underneath, on top of, on the sides of, or even touching there is absolutely a mingle taking place between signal and materials. Same is true with moving the same system from one room to the next or shipping the system to a different environment to another. The audio signal is part of the interactive fundamentals.
I have done this same testing hundreds of times, maybe thousands, and have never been able to conclude that the audio signal fits outside of the scope of the forces interactions. Everything literally affects everything else. The "audio signal" is tunable.
Hi Glupson & Perkri
You weren’t overlooked, I just wanted to see how far off track and topic things would get here before doing much more posting.
You are both on target here "unwanted" vibrations. As Glupson said "audio is vibration" and according to the Fundamental Interactions he is correct, there is no such thing as non-motion here on Earth. You can’t logically say "kill all vibrations" on a moving planet and it make sense. The Earth doesn’t stop spinning just because someone on an audio forum says so. That’s a little on the crazy side of things.
So here you have the audio signal, which is part language and part energy in motion. You have a legitimate change called volume. Volume is when you add energy to the signal. The energy itself is Vibratory. You can call it "put into motion" or "force" or several other names but Vibration covers the audio realm pretty well. Volume is an amplification of the vibration (audio signal) and when used all the Fundamental Interactions of physics also amplify and or interact. This is where the balancing act between interactions starts to play out in audio. When you increase Electrical, Mechanical and Acoustic energy the values of the new setting have to balance themselves out again. This is where you get either "true gain" or "distortion". True gain is an increase in the function of fundamental frequency and harmonics in balance (harmonic structure) that make up notes or band of notes. Distortion is when the fundamental frequency and support harmonics are out of balance. It can be too little vibratory structure or too much, either one is distortion. The fundamental interactions are what I call a "fair exchange" of energy.
Whenever something in Earth’s energy realm goes out of balance the 4 Fundamental Interactions (forces) go into action to put the fundamentals and supportive harmonics back into tune. The shape of being in-tune is a sphere. Reason being is a sphere can give off and take on energy exchanges with a natural vibratory interaction. It’s like a 3d oscillation or pulse. Without interacting force the Earth along with every planet or star would crack apart and loose it’s pattern. Just like when something is out-of-tune it means the supportive energy is out of balance with the fundamental cycle. The cycle out of balance is then called "distorted" or incomplete in motion.
readers feel free to visit TuneLand
The audiophile forum that gives detailed info on this topic including pictures, diagrams and many active in-room systems with threads. You'll find TuneLand to have a ton less confusion for those of you who would like to read without the spins (we are troll free). We give a list of different types of wood and the long history of mechanical transfer.
thank you for your emails!
In the last hour I have put slivers of wood, up to 1/4" thick on the tops and bottoms of the springs. Much more girth and impact to the notes. Drums and cymbals are taking on more 3d shapes and the tone of the mid highs are rolling across the cymbals then come to the end of the cymbal and rolls into the air.
So to recap the springs on their own didn't do it with the other materials in the components. Then springs with the added tone from the slivers moves things a lot closer to real instruments sounds.
A couple more hours and I will go LTR Tuning Blocks, but the springs and wood is very listenable. I can move the position of each spring to get a different tonal transfer.
Pretty fun couple of days going back through these procedures again. Makes it fun to have a stereo to play with and hear the interaction of the entire space.
I added a thin slice of rubber on the bottom of the slivers under the spring and the sound went instantly dark and rubbery. Tried it on top, same thing. Not something I am hunting for so the rubber again sits on the sidelines. I also briefly put back in one of the players I added Geoff's NDM to and it was disaster. I can best describe this as a stage filled with black holes. I quickly put back in the non-treated CDP and in about 3 to 4 minutes the stage came back nice and full. I think the NDM can sit off to the side for a while as well, not really sure I'm going to go back that direction for a couple of reasons, meaning a couple other types of material that I like better on the tray. However the experiment with the NDM was not a complete wash. That's for another topic perhaps but after some further experimenting is done.
Ok, some more listening and I'll be back.
Yep, pretty simple stuff isn’t it, and this has been universally known and demonstrated for ever since we were all little kids taking our first science class in grade school. Why people attempt to create things in HEA that can’t be is very strange. Those of us who actually test (live with) these things don’t really care what words are used as long as they portray the event, and putting something underneath an audio component is clearly a transfer (interaction) of energy not isolating.
BTW today I’m listening to springs under my components. These are isolating nothing, clearly mechanical interaction going on here. Springs are probably one of the greatest examples of being gravity responsive not anti-gravitational. Springs don't push against gravity, they act as a transfer cushion for the pull of gravity.
Why would there be any hit and miss LoL, tuning is tuning. Hit & Miss is called Plug & Play or random setups. The Method of Tuning is the most comprehensive system synergy method ever done in audio and music.
"always tinkering" LoL another funny. Tuning is the direct opposite from unknowns.
You need to get a stereo Geoff.
I think I'm a little tough on the industry because of the numbers of people who have come to me to start tuning, and then they end up feeling ripped off by HEA because HEA was not being straight up about how audio works and instead kept selling up till that music lover became trapped in a "fixed sound" world.
Do you have any idea how many folks have come to me and replaced their 100,000.00 plus system with a tunable 8,000-14,000 one? A $14,000.00 system completely blowing away the big buck systems and to boot one that you can make sound almost anyway you want.
people can use whatever words work for them but this is the world I live in daily
"wood is too random and has unavoidable colorations"
But I also think it’s a starting place for those experimenting. A lot of my clients start off DIYing their wood pieces which I think is cool. Then when they get the real thing and comment on why does the authentic MGA wood sound so much better. The products I do sound better because it is born with a purpose, it’s not random but specifically chosen and voiced. My curing shop resembles an instrument builders space.
I shipped 65 8’ long pieces last week to one client and when the shipper was loading he picked up a piece and went "d***". Then I played the piece of wood for him and he freaked out.
But again everyone needs to start somewhere and many times the first DIY approaches get the wheels turning so I try to encourage playing around with different tones. Ultimately though getting the real thing is much easier to tune with. Plus buying the real thing is a lot less expensive than the learning curve of voicing.
Now that we have developed the tools of tuning it’s pretty easy to do. The more difficult thing was the timing aspect. In the 70’s and 80’s most products, by design or mistake, were made of materials and applications that were more organic to the audio signal. When the 90’s got here designs changed dramatically and the products were more locked into their sound and became harder to mate to other components. Right then things should have stopped and the problem looked at. Instead HEA created it’s own little world of plug & play, not taking into account chassis, PC boards and a bunch of problems they were giving birth to not knowing what the end results would end up doing to the industry.
HEA created a very impractical monster and then built a marketing scam around it. Once the reviewers put this to motion the progress stopped. Now that HEA has been in decline it’s time once again to push Tuning in a more practical sense.
But tuning itself? Tuning itself is an easy discipline to learn and follow. I would say this though. It’s much easier for a person to use tuning right off the bat than it is for the person who has been HEA-ishly trained. To quote Jim Bookhard "you can’t tune a rock".
let me give an example
Remember when power cords started to be plugged into receptacles on the back of components? This was done so HEA could market power cords. Fact is a direct connection without using the extra plug sounds much better. Banana plugs, same issue. HEA built a plug & play world that made sound generally worse but it fit into a marketing play that worked beautifully. Problem now is things have been made so messed up for so long the general HEA public thinks these impractical moves are common place, even more high end, when in reality they were some huge steps backward.
I only give the feedback I get from people who have lived through the experience. I don’t add to or take away from what is. I don’t have the time or desire to head down paths that burn up my time as you can probably gather.
not sure I used the words "big conspiracy" did I, if so sorry that would have been a bit stretched
Here's my recommendation, start hanging out where people are actually doing the things being talked about here. If you always stay in talk mode years pass by and you never get to the sound or the variables.
Watching someone experience vibratory tuning you get to see the hobby change for them in front of your eyes. There's no debate, no argument and the proof is right in front of them to explore as much as they wish.
If you read some of Johnathan Skull's writing (I think it was he) he used cardboard boxes partly filled with newspaper for trapping his corners. Cardboard and newspaper (not so much slick print) can be fun to play with.
If you ever run across me talking about making pressure boxes, the originals were cardboard. Tons of uses for compressed paper, or even loose crumpled. Sometimes however cardboard and paper can be a curse in a system, especially if you live in higher humidity.
Btw thanks for your questions and being patient with me many times. Sometimes when I'm up here I barely have enough time to squeeze out a few words before needing to run, and I appreciate it very much when the questions are clear and stated in a way that makes it easy to answer and also with good intent. So much easier to answer things with good vibes attached to them instead of the bad vibes that for people like me are the wrong experiences. I literally spend all my time inside of the tuning vibe solving sound situations for people or having my mind in the right place while writing articles or evaluating. Getting out of tune is a drag and sometimes when I see people here on head trips or have bad intent it's simply a waste of time and productive life. thank you Glupson
"@michaelgreenaudio- So Mike, you and your followers are ’walking the walk’ when it comes to electron vibration within a wire?? Please tell me how you’ve all managed to ’tune’ the electrons and are preventing them from vibrating. You know, since Geoff and I are only in talk mode about it. And since your hanging out with the people who are actually doing the things being talked about here. We're discussing a theoretical supposition
I've tuned 3 systems today and about to work on my 4th. I think some of you are discussing theoretical supposition, but not me, I'm doing.