A minor rant


Prologue: this is a minor rant. It will not be tediously long, and it will not attack anyone. Proceed only if interested in reading a short diatribe on reviews about tweaks.

Almost all serious members of our hobby have tried various tweaks over the years – some successful, some not. Infact, tweaks are so much a part of our hobby that dedicated audio enthusiasts are often referred to as “tweaks”. I’ve tried a lot of tweaks myself over the years, and most proved of dubious value, but most were also fairly cheap. Many of us indulge in tweaks in the hope they will get us closer to audio nirvana. I think, however, that the variety and price of tweaks has reached the stage (like interconnects) that, as Monty Python might say, they are “silly” (envision John Cleese doing his bit as the Minister of Silly Walks…).

During lunch today, I strolled down to the Tower Records in the University District (a block or so from the Univ of Washington campus) to browse for a few CD’s, and wound up buying the current issues of “Listener” mag and “Audio Musings” mag. The copy of “Listener” contains a subscription ad with a picture of a coiled pile of feces sitting next to a can of Shinola wax, with the caption: "Read ‘Listener’, and learn the difference”. Did this ad inadvertently contain an editorial statement about the very tweaks that were the subject of their review article?

There are two tweak products reviewed in the mags: the Rollerblock Symposiums (which sell for $300 for a set of 3 steel balls, with their blocks – and for only $75 more, with tungsten carbide balls) (I once knew an Army drill sergeant with a pair of those, but that’s another story…), and the Aurios “Media Isolation Bearings” (MIB’s), which sell for the same price.

“Audio Musings” has an equipment review of the Aurios bearings, which the reviewer tested under a Parasound 1500 power amp (also the subject of a full review). To determine how effective the isolation bearings are, the reviewer placed not one set, nor two sets, not even three sets under the amp. He eventually placed 5 SETS OF BEARINGS (3 bearings per set) under the amp. That’s $1500 worth of isolation bearings under a $995 power amp!! Here’s a quote from the Audio Musings review:

“I switched amps to the Parasound 1500. After getting used to its sound, I placed three Aurios under it. With just the three Aurios MIB’s, there was a slight but noticeable improvement. With each addition, the level of improvement was noticeable. Then I put 6, 9, 12, and then 15 MIB’s under the amp. With each addition the level of improvement was noticeable. Boy, was I surprised. This raised the level of performance to quite a degree…”

Let’s set aside the issue of whether the reviewer suffered from “audio delusions” working as a possible factor here. Does anyone in their right mind actually spend 50% more than the cost of the amp (or other component) on isolation tweaks? What kind of improvement would be realized by getting a $2500 amp with regular feet, vs. a $1000 amp with $1500 feet? At what point does improvement from adding more MIB’s reach a plateau? Could an actual human being hear the difference between 15 MIB’s vs. 30? Or 45, etc. If these isolation bearings offer such "noticeable improvements", why has no component manufacturer seen fit to make them standard on their products at a fraction of the $300 cost (for one set)? (Would you buy a $20,000 car with $30,000 tires?)

This kind of asinine reviewing is what contributes to “normal” people seeing audiophiles as strange at best, and maybe clowns or dupes at worst. This review really aggravated me, and I appreciate having a place to vent to my fellow ‘philes. Thank you – I now return control of your computer to you.
sdcampbell
There is one MAJOR point that you folks are missing. The more "tweaks" ( cones, bearings, pods, etc...) that someone puts under a component, the more it is coupled to the surface supporting it. As such, instead of having the surface area of one set of 3 bearings "isolating" it, the amp now has FIFTEEN bearings "coupling" it. That means that there is a 500% increase in contact / transfer area as compared to one set. I bet if he would have put that amp right on the supporting structure, it would have sounded REALLY great... Sean
>
Duh. Additionally, it seems that isolation would be more practical beneath something other than a solid state amplifier. Like a piece of tube equipment (to negate microphonics)... Or CD transport. I wonder if the bearings placed under the speaker wires would help? Now THAT could get expensive, depending on the run of cabling.

For the amount of cash that some of us kick down for our passion, it seems that building an anechoic chamber, with a hole in the middle for our head would be just as practical as any other "tweak". Pour a concrete slab to place the components on, and isolate the "headroom" with about 6" of concrete and 3' of earth.
I think Tireguy has the right idea--$20k for a car with $30k wheels sounds like a steal! Of course I would immediately turn around and sell those tires to Tireguy for $20k, effectively making my purchase price for the car nil. ;-)

I understand SD's point, but consider a slightly different angle. If the reviewer simply intended to judge the effectiveness of the tweak, I don't see any problem with taking it to the nth degree (insane as it is) to see if it still offers benefits. Car reviewers put cars through maneuvers that would land most of us in traffic court in an attempt to see how the car handles at extremes. But if the reviewer were suggesting consumers should do the same as a permanent option instead of, as SD pointed out, investing that money in a better amp, then I would seriously question his judgment.
I think you guys are missing the point. Since 15 bearings show improvement over 3, then one would think that 30 would be even better. 60...well, audio nirvana. The trick is that 60 bearings simply won't fit under this puny amp, so next month's review will be for the Aurios ABE - Amp Base Extender - allowing you to place up to 120 bearings under any sized amp. Suitably priced for the budget minded at $399 for anodized aluminum, or $599 for polished aluminum which provides optimal contact with the MIB's and is much shinier.

Frankly, I just don't see what you folks are so worked up over...

Ken
Hifiho, do you have a schematic for the anechoic chamber? I'd like to build one. My question is if I stick just my head in it, won't my head be too low for the optimal listening height? Perhaps we can design a special listening suit we can wear into the chamber. Just a thought.