Memory distortion?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
> than usual.

That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier. Wrong newsgroup.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Martin Andér" wrote...
> http://www.lavardin.com/lavardin-techE.html
>
> Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
> than usual.

"solid-state amplifiers use silicon components which keeps the trace of
electrons flux that have gone through . New electron flux will be
affected by the fact that other electrons preceded them. "

Yeah, it is that kind of "memory distortion" that keeps us from using
silicon to make microprocessors that can go faster than about 4~5 GHz.
It is a devestating effect at audio frequencies like 20 KHz.

Never realized before that even the lunatics are returning from summer
vacation. :-)

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
> I think that a lot of the problem is that the audiophiles
> that audio production people joke about are relatively
> uninvolved with audio production. Recording live sound
> whether in a venue or a studio involves making a fair number
> of pragmatic choices and observing the consequences of those
> choices.
>
> The classic golden ear audiophile has been taught to be
> almost exclusively a consumer as opposed to being a producer
> or manager. They often seem to have excess reverence for
> recording and production, and really don't have any
> experience with doing it for themselves.


So what then are we to make of folks like Ray Kimber, who is an active
audio production engineer, out in concert venues recording live music
regularly...when he's not designing & selling $3000/foot speaker cables?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Zigakly wrote:
>>Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
>>than usual.
> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier. Wrong newsgroup.

"More excited that usual" as in "the biggest thing to hit the market
since $2500 power cables". Obviously, the joke didn't get through. But
this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?

/martin.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Martin Andér" <nospam@slowland.com> wrote in message
news:431303f0$1@griseus.its.uu.se
> Zigakly wrote:
>>> Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world
>>> are more excited than usual.
>> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier.
>> Wrong newsgroup.
>
> "More excited that usual" as in "the biggest thing to hit
> the market since $2500 power cables".

Very telling comparison.

> Obviously, the joke didn't get through.

Is the Lavardin web page a joke?

It is a study in double-talk by non-native speakers of
English with fractured syntax to match.

> But this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?

One would hope that audio production would be a avocation
that attracts people who love audio - in a word,
audiophiles. ;-)

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_And=E9r?= <nospam@slowland.com> wrote:
>Zigakly wrote:
>>>Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
>>>than usual.
>> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier. Wrong newsgroup.
>
>"More excited that usual" as in "the biggest thing to hit the market
>since $2500 power cables". Obviously, the joke didn't get through. But
>this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?

Well, clearly in a gross way the whole concept of memory effect is a
valid one. If you overdrive an amplifier and blow a fuse in it, you
have changed the state of the amplifier and the future operation of
the amplifier is clearly dependant on the signal that went through in
the past.

I can imagine that there could be other things that a signal could do
which might change the amplifier state in ways less severe than blowing
a fuse. Admittedly all of them would come under the category of abuse
in my opinion. But I could see how they might be encountered.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Buster Mudd" <mr_furious@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1125340421.023366.10080@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> I think that a lot of the problem is that the audiophiles
>> that audio production people joke about are relatively
>> uninvolved with audio production. Recording live sound
>> whether in a venue or a studio involves making a fair
>> number of pragmatic choices and observing the
>> consequences of those choices.
>>
>> The classic golden ear audiophile has been taught to be
>> almost exclusively a consumer as opposed to being a
>> producer or manager. They often seem to have excess
>> reverence for recording and production, and really don't
>> have any experience with doing it for themselves.

> So what then are we to make of folks like Ray Kimber, who
> is an active audio production engineer, out in concert
> venues recording live music regularly...when he's not
> designing & selling $3000/foot speaker cables?

He's a salesman of $3,000 a foot cables. The recordings seem
to be window dressing. Ditto for Mapleshade. Some of the
ones I've heard were pretty nice window dressing, but a lot
of really good sounding recordings have been done with far
less snake oil.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_And=E9r?= <nospam@slowland.com> wrote:
> >Zigakly wrote:
> >>>Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
> >>>than usual.
> >> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier. Wrong newsgroup.
> >
> >"More excited that usual" as in "the biggest thing to hit the market
> >since $2500 power cables". Obviously, the joke didn't get through. But
> >this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?
>
> Well, clearly in a gross way the whole concept of memory effect is a
> valid one. If you overdrive an amplifier and blow a fuse in it, you
> have changed the state of the amplifier and the future operation of
> the amplifier is clearly dependant on the signal that went through in
> the past.
>
> I can imagine that there could be other things that a signal could do
> which might change the amplifier state in ways less severe than blowing
> a fuse. Admittedly all of them would come under the category of abuse
> in my opinion. But I could see how they might be encountered.

And funnily enough - it's the boutique products that are most likely to be so
damaged.

Graham

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Zigakly wrote:

>>Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
>>than usual.
>
>
> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier.

AAAHHH-HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! I love it!  


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0535-0, 08/29/2005
Tested on: 8/29/2005 8:53:45 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 8/29/05 9:02 AM, in article puadnbqGB73Pmo7eRVn-jA@comcast.com, "Arny
Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:

>> But this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?
>
> One would hope that audio production would be a avocation
> that attracts people who love audio - in a word,
> audiophiles. ;-)

Indeed!
I have fun with audiophilic pholks...
I are one!

What REALLY irks me about these Levardin posers is that they've COMPLETELY
DENIED and glossed over (and thus lied) about the issue of valve amplifier
memory effect and, failing to design one that correct constantly for the
pattern and memory effect of "how many and which and from-where" electrons
have been blown off the plate since the first time the tube was fired up,
have abdicated any claim on hi-end audio design.
In short this sort of forced-electron-migration ionic memory degradation is
ELEMENTAL to real audiophilic valve amplifier design. I have these answers
(have for years) but only an elite few have chosen to have me custom-build
the kind of self-monitoring and correcting plate-redepositing halogen based
hi-temperature heater systems that are required to solve this. As has been
said, "Expensive but worth it".

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 8/29/05 9:27 AM, in article 3nggqoF1dqhqU1@individual.net, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

>
> "Martin Andér"

>
> ** The appropriate term is " audiophool " - not audiophile.
>
> Allegedly first coined by pommy engineer John Woodgate to describe that
> particular sort of anti-science narcissist addicted to audio snake oil.

THANK YOU!!!
Adding to the thesaurus.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 8/29/05 2:33 PM, in article
1125340421.023366.10080@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Buster Mudd"
<mr_furious@mail.com> wrote:

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>> I think that a lot of the problem is that the audiophiles
>> that audio production people joke about are relatively
>> uninvolved with audio production. Recording live sound
>> whether in a venue or a studio involves making a fair number
>> of pragmatic choices and observing the consequences of those
>> choices.
>>
>> The classic golden ear audiophile has been taught to be
>> almost exclusively a consumer as opposed to being a producer
>> or manager. They often seem to have excess reverence for
>> recording and production, and really don't have any
>> experience with doing it for themselves.
>
>
> So what then are we to make of folks like Ray Kimber, who is an active
> audio production engineer, out in concert venues recording live music
> regularly...when he's not designing & selling $3000/foot speaker cables?

That he understands both real engineering AND has the moral scruples of P T
Barnum?

It's not TOO far removed from Dr Bose (Whose products I do NOT reject out of
hand.. Several I find indispensable in certain situations)


>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Richard Crowley" wrote:

> Never realized before that even the lunatics are returning from summer
> vacation. :-)

They never go ON vacation. <g>

--
"Coloured and animated, the concerts and spectacles are as many
invitations to discover the universes of musicians and artists
who tint with happiness our reality."
To reach me reverse: moc(dot)xobop(at)ggestran

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 15:19:14 +0100, Pooh Bear
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

---------------8<--------------------
>
>And funnily enough - it's the boutique products that are most likely to be so
>damaged.
>
>Graham

-- Beware of that ilk. A friend of mine called me recently to contact
the manufacturers od $ 12.000 monoblocks because a customer brought
him both of the amplifiers (each looking as a microwave oven and
weighting accordingly), they were schorched. Apparently, the man
connected the amplifiers to a Dutch electrostat loudspeaker pair ie.
to their transformers, as I have understood. Ouch.

I found a website, showing pretty big works and I tried twice to
contact them to their e-mail adresses, shortly describing the problem
and asking for a diagram because some component markings were
unreadable. Of course, I stated both the type and serial numbers. No
reply whatsoever.

And these pretty powerful amps weren't protected by any means. Oh yes,
it would disturb the sound :>

Edi Zubobvic, Crikvenica, Croatia

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Edi Zubovic" <edi.zubovic[rem this]@ri.t-com.hr> wrote in
message news:hi48h1dom3k48mvlv2c8dgt8tq12kvcceq@4ax.com
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 15:19:14 +0100, Pooh Bear
> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> ---------------8<--------------------
>>
>> And funnily enough - it's the boutique products that are
>> most likely to be so damaged.
>>
>> Graham
>
> -- Beware of that ilk. A friend of mine called me
> recently to contact the manufacturers od $ 12.000
> monoblocks because a customer brought him both of the
> amplifiers (each looking as a microwave oven and
> weighting accordingly), they were schorched. Apparently,
> the man connected the amplifiers to a Dutch electrostat
> loudspeaker pair ie. to their transformers, as I have
> understood. Ouch.
>
> I found a website, showing pretty big works and I tried
> twice to contact them to their e-mail adresses, shortly
> describing the problem and asking for a diagram because
> some component markings were unreadable. Of course, I
> stated both the type and serial numbers. No reply
> whatsoever.
>
> And these pretty powerful amps weren't protected by any
> means. Oh yes, it would disturb the sound :>

My take is that people who spend like $12K on power amps are
probably into audio primarily for bragging rights. So,
paying $12K is a rite of passage, and having them blow up
shortly after installation is just an excuse to run right
out and spend $12K again, and also to have a good whine
about how quickly the last $12K amps turned into pumpkins.

It's the old Mercedes-of-the-month gambit.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Edi Zubovic wrote:
> they were schorched. Apparently, the man
> connected the amplifiers to a Dutch electrostat loudspeaker pair ie.
> to their transformers, as I have understood. Ouch.

Must have been Audiostatic then.
http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html

I've heard a demo of their speakers several years ago.
A jazz trio was recorded with a pair of B&K microphones to an early
prototype Marantz CD recorder and then played back over the audiostatics
for a direct comparison in the same room.

Amazing stuff.

They didn't fry any of their amplifiers there though.

Sander

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sander wrote:
> Edi Zubovic wrote:
>
>> they were schorched. Apparently, the man
>> connected the amplifiers to a Dutch electrostat loudspeaker pair ie.
>> to their transformers, as I have understood. Ouch.
>
>
> Must have been Audiostatic then.
> http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html

Very interesting. Any idea what they cost?

One thing slightly disconcerting:

Your DCM5 electrostatic loudspeakers are so narrow, can
they really produce bass?

Yes, these models easily produce 30 Hz with no
substantial roll off. Obviously because of the limited
membrane excursion they won't produce ear shattering
levels at that frequency.

If they are flat then they won't produce ear shattering
levels on any material without externally rolling off that
bass. Not that I want my ears shattered, but there is a
hidden implication there.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Martin Andér <nospam@slowland.com> wrote:

> http://www.lavardin.com/lavardin-techE.html
>
> Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
> than usual.

At first I thought it was going to be an article about how the
listener's memory distorts audio, such that things heard previously
sound better (or worse, depending on the price tag) than things heard
presently. That kind of memory distortion is well worth studying. It
could explain why all the best concerts I've ever heard were so many
years ago.

As it turns out, I think they're talking about capacitance. And
claiming to have discovered it.

ulysses

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 29 Aug 2005 09:51:09 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_And=E9r?= <nospam@slowland.com> wrote:
>>Zigakly wrote:
>>>>Right now, thousands of audiophiles around the world are more excited
>>>>than usual.
>>> That's like saying thousands of popcorns are fluffier. Wrong newsgroup.
>>
>>"More excited that usual" as in "the biggest thing to hit the market
>>since $2500 power cables". Obviously, the joke didn't get through. But
>>this IS the make-fun-of-audiophiles newsgroup, rigth?
>
>Well, clearly in a gross way the whole concept of memory effect is a
>valid one. If you overdrive an amplifier and blow a fuse in it, you
>have changed the state of the amplifier and the future operation of
>the amplifier is clearly dependant on the signal that went through in
>the past.
>
>I can imagine that there could be other things that a signal could do
>which might change the amplifier state in ways less severe than blowing
>a fuse. Admittedly all of them would come under the category of abuse
>in my opinion. But I could see how they might be encountered.

At first I thought this might be a reference to thermal trails, but
I ended up going to the website and reading it:

"Tube technology allows electrons to travel through a vacuum which
causes no storage or memory effect, but solid-state amplifiers use
silicon components which keeps the trace of electrons flux that have
gone through . New electron flux will be affected by the fact that
other electrons preceded them."

Of course, this is totally wrong. Firstly, it should say "charge
carrier flux" instead of "electron flux" which would cover P as
well as N material.
Secondly, ... well, it's too fluxing late to mess with this
anymore...


>--scott

-----
http://www.mindspring.com/~benbradley

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 06:21:54 GMT, Ben Bradley
<ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote:

---------------------------------8<------------------------------
>"Tube technology allows electrons to travel through a vacuum which
>causes no storage or memory effect, but solid-state amplifiers use
>silicon components which keeps the trace of electrons flux that have
>gone through . New electron flux will be affected by the fact that
>other electrons preceded them."
>
> Of course, this is totally wrong. Firstly, it should say "charge
>carrier flux" instead of "electron flux" which would cover P as
>well as N material.
> Secondly, ... well, it's too fluxing late to mess with this
>anymore...

Yes, now and then I've came across such a misinterpretation, mostly
describing the sheer quality of some cables built of very exotic
insulators (aka termoshrink sleeves) and having copper leads of 0,
many zeros 1 purity so that the electrons, running trough at a speed
of light or thereabouts would not cling hitting some impurities...

and we ought to buy it to have peace in mind ofcourse.


Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia
>>--scott
>
>-----
>http://www.mindspring.com/~benbradley

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 12:57:45 +0200, Sander <Big_Scary_Man@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Edi Zubovic wrote:
>> they were schorched. Apparently, the man
>> connected the amplifiers to a Dutch electrostat loudspeaker pair ie.
>> to their transformers, as I have understood. Ouch.
>
>Must have been Audiostatic then.
>http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html
>
>I've heard a demo of their speakers several years ago.
>A jazz trio was recorded with a pair of B&K microphones to an early
>prototype Marantz CD recorder and then played back over the audiostatics
>for a direct comparison in the same room.
>
>Amazing stuff.
>
>They didn't fry any of their amplifiers there though.
>
>Sander

Don't exactly know if there were Audiostatic. These look good, wish I
could hear them to judge.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:

> Very interesting. Any idea what they cost?
>
> One thing slightly disconcerting:
>
> If they are flat then they won't produce ear shattering levels on any
> material without externally rolling off that bass. Not that I want my
> ears shattered, but there is a hidden implication there.

It was years ago I heard them. Was a slightly different model and they
had 2 panels setup on each side where one panel worked full range and
another panel right next to it acted as a "subwoofer".

My impression was they could handle plenty of level and produce plenty
off bass under those circumstances but I don't know how they would
handle the lowest organ pipes. It's a bit difficult remembering all the
detail after a few years but at the time I was impressed by them.

I don't know exactly what they cost but a quick google search turned up
a price of almost 5000 Euro for a pair (incl. 19% BTW = dutch VAT)


Sander

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>>Sander
>
>Don't exactly know if there were Audiostatic. These look good, wish I
>could hear them to judge.
>
>Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

--- Just called the friend -- yes it was an Audiostatic DCI pair. He
says they sound very good.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia