The Audiophoolery Thread.

[ajgriff]

I particularly like Caelin's 'flooby dust'. By the way does his name remind anyone else of a substance used to settle an upset stomach?

Alan

[DonaldStott]

Originally Posted by Valvepower

Ah, an imbedded Hawkwind LP reference – Quark, Strangeness and Charm

The Space Ritual LP through a Quad II system always hit the spot for me

Good spot - I seem to remember some controversy as a piano makes an appearance on "Quark, Strangeness and Charm"!

[joebog1]

Craig,
You conned me!! I did look at that site ( https://www.digitaldeckcovers.com/request-for-estimate ) but my Garrard 401 is the one with a round platter, not the square one, or the even more rare triangular version. That company only had 14 bit versions ( two bits for the steering, OR in USA, two bits for the coffee) whereas mine is 360 bits ( one full circle)

Joe

[GrimJosef]

Originally Posted by joebog1

I will give you ONE million bass traps for free!! and it IS an upgrade

( sounds like one of those adds on TV for the " Miracle Vegie Slicer" )

Remove the $1000 dollar 4 uF PIO coupling capacitors and fit 50 pF ceramics instead!! I bet I trap MORE bass than those bass traps.

Well, Craig, you sort of invited that. But I agree ...

I guess it's not so much a question of how much bass there is, but how many times you want to hear it. In an ideal world you'd hear it once and once only. In a typical living room you'll hear it first from the speakers and then, irritatingly, again and again as it bounces off the walls, ceiling and floor. The aim of the bass traps of course is to get rid of all the repeats. Your 50pF ceramics (or half a metre of unterminated co-ax even ) would mean you never got to hear it at all !

Cheers,

GJ

[Craig Sawyers]

I had a look at his Xitron technology, which he says eliminates dielectric absorption. He shows oscilloscope traces to prove it. Except he patented it, and even gives the link.

Basically he connects a capacitor between core and screen at each end.

That shifts the effective characteristic impedance down so there is impedance matching at the receive end. So it goes from Z0 = 68 ohms into a 25 ohm load to Zo = 36 ohms into a 25 ohm load. Which produces better matching and hence much better pulse rise times.

Nowt at all to do with dielectric absorption.

[Craig Sawyers]

Originally Posted by joebog1

Craig,
You conned me!! I did look at that site ( https://www.digitaldeckcovers.com/request-for-estimate ) but my Garrard 401 is the one with a round platter, not the square one, or the even more rare triangular version. That company only had 14 bit versions ( two bits for the steering, OR in USA, two bits for the coffee) whereas mine is 360 bits ( one full circle)

Joe

You sir are pulling my plker

Craig

[Radio Wrangler]

That article also said he got rid of characteristic impedance.

Another universe, far, far away. At right angles to our reality.

(For our American readers, by reality, I don't mean what we brits call estate agents...)

David

[Craig Sawyers]

Let's hope he hasn't also got rid of the impedance of free space, or we will be right up the swanee

[bikerhifinut]

Heres one from out there..............

My missus and I both notice how generally thick the population seems to be nowadays, this based on nothing more solid than the ubiquitous "Quiz" shows on TV and my personal experience with school leavers entering the world of work.
By "thick" I do not infer a lack of innate intelligence, rather a total lack of basic education. In the base areas of language, simple maths, and basic science. So it's really no surprise that many folk are bamboozled by pseudo science as they have never really been taught the basic building blocks that all other technical knowledge is based on.
I did more at "O" level than some degree students seem to comprehend it seems.

Ok Thats a gross exaggeration but thats how it feels at times.

A.

[joebog1]

I have to agree Andy.
I think basic physics is now an elective subject rather than standard basic Science as it was called in my day. So it would seem most kids today avoid "science" altogether.

Joe

[G8HQP Dave]

Yes, I too believe that there is a causal relationship between poor science teaching in schools etc. and the popularity of audio quackery. Someone who had a clutch of O-levels 50 years ago was better educated than most modern 'graduates'.

[joebog1]

Originally Posted by ajgriff

I particularly like Caelin's 'flooby dust'. By the way does his name remind anyone else of a substance used to settle an upset stomach?

Alan

Most of you have never emailed me !!

My email name is floobydust1, it USED to be floobydust until some drongo worked out that security would be completely useless in Java without a number,
hence floobydust1.
I plagiarized it from the 1980 edition of National Semiconductor Audio and Radio Handbook. It explains the name :
Its an American word, and it means

" things wot dont fit nowhere else".

The moderators here will understand me perfectly

Joe

[GrimJosef]

Poor science teaching might play a role, but it's simply wrong to suggest that the appearance of dubious claims about hi-fi is recent. As has already been pointed out, several times, some would push it as far back as Flanders and Swann. But the argument was crystallised in detail and in writing in the second half of the 1970's, and not by school-leavers even then. The authors of those articles would have left school with (or without, I suppose) precisely the 50 year old O-levels you refer to. Hard to accept sometimes, but modern youth is not unusually stupid or unusually badly taught.

Cheers,

GJ (sixty-something, for the record)

[stevehertz]

Originally Posted by joebog1

Its an American word, and it means

" things wot dont fit nowhere else".

Joe

Surely that's the same as "Things that fit somewhere else" ?

[stevehertz]

Originally Posted by GrimJosef

Poor science teaching might play a role, but it's simply wrong to suggest that the appearance of dubious claims about hi-fi is recent. As has already been pointed out, several times, some would push it as far back as Flanders and Swann. But the argument was crystallised in detail and in writing in the second half of the 1970's, and not by school-leavers even then. The authors of those articles would have left school with (or without, I suppose) precisely the 50 year old O-levels you refer to. Hard to accept sometimes, but modern youth is not unusually stupid or unusually badly taught.

Cheers,

GJ (sixty-something, for the record)

It's a question of degree in my opinion. And as you say, it is hard to accept sometimes, as I have witnessed myself when talking to 'modern youths'. Sure, there are those who are scientific/mechanical/electrical/ electronics savvy, but most haven't got a clue or worse still, try to blag it or think they know all about something having read an 'how to blag about...' primer in a modern man's magazine. The difference is clear, years ago we made our fun using Meccano, making carties, building bikes from scrap parts, connecting a battery to a miniature light bulb, and then later, trying to make our cheap, first car into something half decent. It's just not like that anymore for most kids, theirs' is a world of software, not hardware. I'm sorry, I have to own up, in general (there are exceptions whom I cherish and applaud) I don't have a lot of time for 'the modern youth' and his lack of hands on experience and his sometimes 'blag it, know all' attitude. And I'm speaking from day to day experience, now.
I agree with your dates etc re audiophoolery.

[ms660]

Originally Posted by stevehertz

The difference is clear, years ago we made our fun using Meccano, making carties, building bikes from scrap parts, connecting a battery to a miniature light bulb, and then later, trying to make our cheap, first car into something half decent.

Some did, some didn't as I remember things.

Lawrence.

[stevehertz]

Originally Posted by ms660

Some did, some didn't as I remember things.

Lawrence.

Like I said Lawrence, it's a question of degree. But I'd say without fear of contraception that there were many more kids messing around building and fixing stuff than there are in more modern times. But, in fairness, they are much more computer, apps and software savvy than the likes of me who is terrified of the stuff. So swings and roundabouts I guess? Who needs to make a cartie when you have an X-Box to entertain you in the warm?

[GrimJosef]

Originally Posted by stevehertz

... The difference is clear, years ago we made our fun using Meccano, making carties, building bikes from scrap parts, connecting a battery to a miniature light bulb, and then later, trying to make our cheap, first car into something half decent ...

And while we were doing it our grandparents were cursing us for wasting our time on all this useless modern stuff when we didn't know the first thing about what was really important - how to take care of a horse, how to cobble boots, when there would be enough moonlight for safe night-time travel, how to load and shoot a blunderbuss (let alone the proper use of a sabre !) . There's a reason why grinding replacement valves into the cylinder head of your car is a thing of the past Steve .

Cheers,

GJ

[Station X]

Equipment should not have to be repaired or maintained during its designed lifetime. The need for that should be eliminated at the design and manufacturing stages.

I've reground two valves in the last fortnight, albeit in 50 and 80 year old engines, The latter having valve cages to improve maintainability.

We're straying from the subject of audiophoolery though.

[ajgriff]

Caelin's flooby dust is actually ferrosilicon, an alloy of iron and silicon produced in blast and arc furnaces. Apparently he accidentally discovered its magic properties when he left a bag of it near some power cables. Quite why he had a bag of the dust hanging around is not really explained. Anyway, he now uses it in some of his cables which he claims are inexpensive compared with some ie, $2000 rather than $35000.

Alan