The Audiophoolery Thread.

[m0cemdave]

Originally Posted by Craig Sawyers

Surprisingly something that does improve the sound is to get rid of anything high Q and resonant, like crystal ornaments etc. You can find this by standing in the middle of the room and clapping, then listening for an extended piiinnng, or a cacophony of different frequency pings. I ousted them all to a cabinet in another room. Now that did improve the sound quality, but in this case for good physical reasons.

I can second this suggestion, having also discovered it many years ago when I designed and built a few listening rooms. Things like box section frames used as mixing console stands that needed strips of damping material gluing to them, and a metal coffee table that had to be banished to the lounge!
The better the room acoustics are, the more such things become apparent.

[G.Castle]

While I was finishing up some paperwork in the study yesterday evening, Guy, the local audiophool near neighbour called round to pick up some postal misdeliveries. As I worked I had been listening to a little background music, being played through my home built, (when I was at college) 'stereo' Mullard 3-3 clone and my ol' Wharfdale E50's. Not even in the realms of HiFi, but I like to listen to the music I tell people.

Enter Guy.

Listens for a while and shakes his head and announces, "-that sounds really harsh, you do need to upgrade some of this crap: And the acoustics in this room are awful." He started to advise what was wrong with my whole sad existence that could only be corrected by buying into 'high end audio'

"You're right!" I said "-and there's suddenly an annoying whine spoiling the near perfect soundstage! I must get on now, pull the door to on your way out Guy."

Should we feel sorry for them?

Nah!

[joebog1]

Love that one!!!!.

Joe

[Radio Wrangler]

Don't have any audiophile neighbours. I suspect I radiate an audiophile repulsion field, effective over at least a mile radius....

David

[Beobloke]

Originally Posted by G.Castle

While I was finishing up some paperwork in the study yesterday evening, Guy, the local audiophool near neighbour called round to pick up some postal misdeliveries. As I worked I had been listening to a little background music, being played through my home built, (when I was at college) 'stereo' Mullard 3-3 clone and my ol' Wharfdale E50's. Not even in the realms of HiFi, but I like to listen to the music I tell people.

Enter Guy.

Listens for a while and shakes his head and announces, "-that sounds really harsh, you do need to upgrade some of this crap: And the acoustics in this room are awful." He started to advise what was wrong with my whole sad existence that could only be corrected by buying into 'high end audio'

"You're right!" I said "-and there's suddenly an annoying whine spoiling the near perfect soundstage! I must get on now, pull the door to on your way out Guy."

Should we feel sorry for them?

Nah!

I’m not sure this behaviour can be blamed on being an audiophile. It sounds like it’s more to do with him being rude.

[Herald1360]

Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler

I wonder how 36 degrees was arrived at?

........

Pseudoscience-R-us

David

Angle of cut of a #10A scalpel blade, perhaps?

[Craig Sawyers]

Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler

I wonder how 36 degrees was arrived at?

Maybe what they need is a non-isotropic plastic to make CDs from, so that light travels only vertically and has significant loss horizontally. Hmmm, new presto wonder solution. Dip your CD in it, and then apply a strong mag field to orient the new non-isotropic property... special mag field machine sold separately at extortionate price. Drops only need to be distilled water plus a little alcohol and detergent. A spot of a suitably mysterious colourant might help sales.

Pseudoscience-R-us

David

Oh there are CD demagnetizer units. You can either pay a whole lot https://www.futureshop.co.uk/furutec...furutech-demag of not a great deal (eBay no 274815129893).

The latter says

"Why need disc demagnetizer?

1. After being used for a period of time, CD, VCD, and DVD discs will have electrostatic magnetism.

2. The reason why CD is magnetic:

A. There are magnetic metal components in the ink on the CD printing surface.
B. The aluminum alloy in the CD aluminized film also has a magnetic metal component.

3. When the CD player is working, the laser generating diode in the optical head will generate a high-level electric field and a high-strength magnetic field. This electric field and magnetic field act on the CD to make it magnetize. The magnetic CD interacts with the electric field and magnetic field of the optical head: The high-speed rotating CD with magnetic induces electromotive force in the wire of the optical head, which interferes with the normal current of the optical head, and also interferes with the emitted laser beam, which is equivalent to destroying the optical head The accuracy of reading signals, how can such sound quality be good? The magnetic CD is distorting your audio equipment.
Reminder: Degaussing is required if the CD is played more than 10 times"

So there you have it. Hard science

Craig

[Craig Sawyers]

Of course to do real science on the magnetic properties of a CD, you would use a vibrating sample magnetometer. This is a superbly sensitive machine that used to be made by Oxford Instruments. You could even measure the magnetic moment as a function of temperature.

And yes - you can measure the magnetic properties of polymers (they are very weakly diamagnetic). Since this is a material property and not an induced phenomenon, it is not at all clear that a demagnetizer will have any effect at all.

But you could do a measurement and contrast samples that have been "demagnetized", or not. You would have to cut a small enough sample to fit in the machine, but that is not a problem.

You could pay a student at a university department that has one of these a couple of hundred quid to do the measurement.

Or perhaps the purveyors of CD demagnetizers don't want a measurement. They much prefer pseudobabble and appeal to audio paranoia.

Craig

[Radio Wrangler]

A couple of hundred quid is relatively cheap in the audiophoolery world. There is much more money to be made from pseudobabble and fear. It is completely coincidental that the vendors of audiophoolery requisites have all opted this way.

David

[G.Castle]

Originally Posted by Beobloke

I’m not sure this behaviour can be blamed on being an audiophile. It sounds like it’s more to do with him being rude.

But he's not an audioPHILE! As I see it that's a reasonable interest, this Guy is normally a nice personable chap but when he mounts his hobbyhorse he becomes a crusading zealot for all the crackpot ideas that are pushed at him by his gurus and their shills, and everyone has to agree with him just for a quiet life.

If the new postie leaves his correspondence here again it will be left in his porch in the dead of night.

Originally Posted by Radio Wrangler

Don't have any audiophile neighbours. I suspect I radiate an audiophile repulsion field, effective over at least a mile radius....

I'll buy some of that cologne David.

[duncanlowe]

Originally Posted by jjl

Everyone knows that there is a difference in sound between a corrected sample of precisely the same value and arriving at precisely the same time as an uncorrected, unmolested sample straight from the disc. Don't they?
John

I remember well having this precise discussion with a phool back in the early nineties. I also remember that it was time to never talk to him about this stuff again. He was an Electrical Engineer, though more to do with low voltage switches and stuff like that, and until quite recently continued in that role, in the same company.

Does that make him an early audiophool? And how did such people get their misinformation back in those days, before the interwebthingy?

[Philips210]

The one thing that strikes me is audiophools must have perfect hearing ability, with a full audio frequency response, or so they think they do.

Something that puzzles me is, how can an elderly audiophool be in a position to accurately assess the purity of sounds with natural ageing and inherent drop in upper frequency response? Or are all audiophools of the younger generation?

Do all audiophools have an equal hearing capability, have they had frequency response tests to prove it? So many questions but can they provide answers?

Just a few of my rambling thoughts.

Regards,
Symon

[Radio Wrangler]

They all have perfect hearing, by definition. There is no limit to their ability discriminate. It is quite scurrilous to suggest that they will only pronounce upon the quality of some sound, once an accepted guru has published what they are supposed to say.

This latter can be tested by arranging them to hear something via some anonymous equipment, professional looking but no badges and unrecognisable styling, then watching how they duck and weave to avoid saying anything about it. Great fun!

David

[Nuvistor]

Something for your Christmas stocking
https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/...oso-turntable/

[joebog1]

Thats only Mono Frank, I would need two of them with the syncroniser to play stereo.

Joe

[Craig Sawyers]

I'm surprisingly relaxed about this sort of thing. It is no different in price to a top flight mechanical watch (and for that, you can easily exceed the price of that turntable).

Of course you can pay a whole lot less for either, but that is not the point of the luxury market.

Craig

[fetteler]

Spot on Craig, Spot on.

Steve.

[joebog1]

But Craig!!! arent digital seconds more fasterer than analogue ones ??.
I know for sure ( because I read it ) that digital electrons are WAY more fartster than my old vacuum generated ones.
Sheesh!!! everybody knows that.

Joe

[Radio Wrangler]

One of my pet tricks when lecturing is to leap around like a loony (I find this rather easy) and cup my hands together. I announce to the audience that I've caught an electron. Picking a victim in the audience I offer to show it to him so he can tell me whether it's an analogue one or a digital one.

The point being is that there are just voltages and currents, electrons and empty orbitals. The whole analogue versus digital thing lies entirely in the assignemt of meaning to those parameters. It's all man-made.

When you start trying to do digital things fast, then you run into analogue issues and transmission line theory, signal to noiose ratios and non-zero uncertainty.

David

[Beobloke]

Originally Posted by Nuvistor

Something for your Christmas stocking
https://www.theregister.com/2022/10/...oso-turntable/

I heard it at Munich this year - it’s very, very good!