Synergistic Research Acoustic ART analogue room tr

Many inexperienced hear what they want to hear.

And for $4K ceramic cups you better hear somethng right?

Voodoo cups for voodoo ears.

Bill, it's called the "Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. It exists in all fields of human endeavor, because concious deception is a uniquely human trait, and the "Achilles Heel" of our species ;--((

Hip hip hooray to the person who claimed he knws abt analog in his website and the rest of us are idiot who can't hear things which only he is good enough to hear.
Voodoo mouth who has nothing good to post. I knw analog? Then why represent some inferior products. Irrrespectful reply to a irrespectable seller
by the way I bought it at less than 40% of what
the person who knws abt analog but don't knw how to post respectfully

Nsgarch, actually it is called pseudo science. It is better than rejecting science which many of our species do, but it also assumes that we know everything about nature and humans and need to heed no further observations.

It still perplexes me how anyone would say physics has told us that once the sound leaves the speakers it cannot be changed.

Oh, well, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

Tbg, I'm sorry. The "they" I was referring to was the little bowls themselves. What physics tells us is that for a rigid object, rigidly mounted, to reflect a sound wave in air, it must have its smallest dimension at least half that of the wavelength to be reflected.

Working the math backwards, if the largest of these devices is half the size of a CD case (3 inches), then it could reflect a 6 inch (.5 foot) long sound wave. Sound travels at ~1100 ft/sec in air at sea level. 1100ft/sec. divided by .5 foot = 2200 Hz (cycles per second) the lowest frequency which that object could reflect (or be excited by to make it resonate.)

A wave front leaving a loudspeaker quickly grows to over a hundred square feet just a couple of feet out from the speaker. If these devices are roughly 9 sq. in. in area (1/16 of a sq. foot) it would take approximately 1500 of them in front of EACH speaker to significantly reflect (or be excited by) any frequency above 2200 Hz -- and that's just for the largest of these little devices.

The key word here is "significantly"! Sure, everything affects everything else. Cryogenics, pyramids, etc. I'm totally down with the "butterfly effect"; however, it takes a LOT of Monarch butterflies beating their wings IN UNISON across Mexico to affect the weather in China ;--)

If the people at SR had provided some test results showing the amplitude and frequency at which a single one of these devices resonated when excited ONLY by the frequencies generated by an audio system in a typical room, then I would consider them to be "active". However I would also probably conclude that one or two of them wouldn't be enough to SIGNIFICANTLY affect the sonics of of an audio system. To wit -- from the SR website, it says very clearly:

Ted visited Buddhist Temples and observed how Tibetan Prayer Bowls altered temple acoustics. These singing bowls affected a sudden shift in acoustics whenever they were activated, and when additional bowls of varying tone were also activated, the acoustics continued to change. Ted reasoned that a system of resonating bowls could be developed to discreetly treat room acoustics without the need for large unsightly tuning devices

Have you seen the THOUSANDS of bowls in a typical Buddhist Temple? Sure, they resonate all right, but as in the above quote, they have to be "activated" -- and NOT BY THE CHANTING OF THE BUDDHIST MONKS! They have to struck with a mallet!! Perhaps someone struck Ted with a mallet and he thought it was the bowls that were resonating ;--)

I hope that clears up the basis of my skepticism.

Neil

.