Post by hooperthom February 17, 2013 (1111 of 1518)
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
Great! I have some AtmosFear for you that at $1000 per pack will make all hypersonic sonics tighten the sub-sonic bass into a so-hot-it-burns listening experience; it is similarly hard to detect on delivery thanks to the environmentally friendly wrapping - I have managed to create something that makes graphene look thick! Take care when you open your mail box, it could fall out and integrate into the environment without you realising it had arrived - if you feel a brush on your foot, I'm afraid it'll be time to break out another grand. You can't measure AtmosFear but I guarantee it will remove clouds of damaging oxidation from the path of loud speaker to ears. All donations/payments to http://theflatearthsociety.org/
I recommend it all who buy tweaks of every variety & I have discovered a truly marvellous proof of AtmosFear, which this forum is too narrow-minded to contain.
All I was saying is that I don't need facts and figures on paper. This mat does wonders, my ears can hear the difference and that is all I need. Isn't that what's most important? trying to make your sound system sounding the best you can to your ears.
|
|
|
Post by Nagraboy February 17, 2013 (1112 of 1518)
|
|
hooperthom said:
Totally uncalled for. This mat does wonders my ear can hear the difference and that is all I need.
The ear doesn't hear on it's own, it needs the brain too. That's where all the problems of bias, expectation etc start. For example, I'm thinking of buying an expensive separate master clock for my digital front-end which several highly educated audio engineering boffins have told me cannot affect sound quality - it's impossible they say. Yet to me it clearly benefited my system when I demoed it and test measurements show improved performance (below the hearing threshold, they insist).
According to these people all decent audio electronics are transparent to the signal so not only are you deluded with your enthusiasm for a disc mat, but so are all the rest of us here with our SACD players, DSD recordings, high-end amplifiers etc. That's why I always find it slightly amusing when people (like Polly) sarcastically deride tweakers yet own 'high-end' electronics. Isn't it all just fighting over religion - who has the best imaginary friend?! Well, I'm told by some that it is.
In spite of these musings, I too support the SACD format, am enthusiastic about DSD recordings and own high-end equipment of which I'm very proud to own and enjoy daily. I don't use any tweaks or fancy cables because I'm satisfied with good quality professional examples like Sommer and Mogami. I just don't want to spend money on those things. Maybe I'm equally deluded?
It's a circular argument going on in audio forums all over the Internet.
But if it feels better to you with the mat and you don't mind paying, then go for it. The audio industry needs all the customers it can get. In fact, I was told by a very well known audio magazine editor that if no one bought exotic cables and tweaks the whole high-end audio industry would collapse - no exaggeration.
So in the overall scheme of things I have to applaud your commitment to our flagging industry!
|
|
|
|
|
|
DSD said:
Thanks - I forgot about returns. If you can find the packaging of course...
|
|
|
Post by rammiepie February 17, 2013 (1114 of 1518)
|
|
Nagraboy said:
The ear doesn't hear on it's own, it needs the brain too. That's where all the problems of bias, expectation etc start. For example, I'm thinking of buying an expensive separate master clock for my digital front-end which several highly educated audio engineering boffins have told me cannot affect sound quality - it's impossible they say. Yet to me it clearly benefited my system when I demoed it and test measurements show improved performance (below the hearing threshold, they insist).
But if it feels better to you with the mat and you don't mind paying, then go for it. The audio industry needs all the customers it can get. In fact, I was told by a very well known audio magazine editor that if no one bought exotic cables and tweaks the whole high-end audio industry would collapse - no exaggeration.
So in the overall scheme of things I have to applaud your commitment to our flagging industry!
Good musings, Nagraboy and right on the money. If you took the engineering "boffin's" advice, you wouldn't have the privilege of making a major improvement to your already stellar system.
Hooperthon speaks the absolute truth. If he listened to all the skeptics on this site (and other sites) he wouldn't have taken the "risk" of demoeing this fantastic tweak.
And the truth about cables.........if anyone knew what I have in my main system...............cable~wise (garden hoses, literally)............eech!
Was playing a multitude of DTS discs tonight (the 16 bit 44.1 variety with 7:1 compression) and with the damper they sound almost (and that is NOT an exaggeration) as good as bona fide mch SACDs. The care that went into their manufacture at the time was extremely high and to extract every nuance from those 1's and 0's, my tweaks have elevated their sound to a brilliantly high level.
So, folks, don't be embarrased if you discover something that might improve everyone's system....and by everyone, I refer to those who are a bit adventuresome and try things out for themselves......with that 30 day return guarantee in place.
Meanwhile Nagraboy......disappointed that you abandoned your multichannel quest but totally understand. You have 200 SACDs in your collection and there are in total 10,000 out there so you have a ways to go.
|
|
|
Post by AmonRa February 17, 2013 (1115 of 1518)
|
|
Nagraboy: if no one bought exotic cables and tweaks...
Which proves that the whole High-End industry is unnecessary. Better results would be achieved by getting better speakers and correcting the listening room acoustics with real acoustically sound means and methods (not wavy wood ripoff coat hangars, Rammipie...).
But audiophool and his money has already been parted.
|
|
|
Post by Acavus February 17, 2013 (1116 of 1518)
|
|
rammiepie said:
Peter, I had a similar problem just last night with the SA112S but it was quickly rectified as it's important that the mat and disc are perfectly aligned. I placed the bumpers in the recess area of the tray (which my other transports do NOT have) and I also move both damper and disc slightly backward...toward the back of the tray.
Thanks for the advice Ralph. I have tried everything I could think of, including careful mat and disc alignment. I am not sure exactly what you mean by 'in the recess area of the tray' - I avoided putting the bumpers such that they overlapped the recess in case they fouled the spinning disc.
I continue to use a Statmat, which also improves the sound by reducing static on the disc. Interestingly, in the Marantz SA11s2, the mechanism seems to clamp the disc and the Statmat at the centre and at the outer margin, as evidenced by the clamp marks on both the inner and outer circumferences of the thin plastic Statmat after use. Does anyone know whether this is indeed how the SA11s2/SA7s1 drive mechanism works?
I don't understand the tweak-deniers. I have found that mats and cables, both power and interconnect, can dramatically change the sound of a decent-quality system. I would of course like explanations as to how it works, but if my ears tell me it is an improvement, that will do for now.
|
|
|
Post by hooperthom February 17, 2013 (1117 of 1518)
|
|
rammiepie said:
Hooperthon speaks the absolute truth. If he listened to all the skeptics on this site (and other sites) he wouldn't have taken the "risk" of demoeing this fantastic tweak.
I'm glad i took the risk. 30 days to try it out, can't loose.
Best way I can describe what the Marigo mat does is: music is more focused and your able to hear every note more clearly, too my ears anyways.
The less error correction from the player with the mat means more real sound from the disc.
|
|
|
Post by Nagraboy February 17, 2013 (1118 of 1518)
|
|
rammiepie said:
Good musings, Nagraboy and right on the money. If you took the engineering "boffin's" advice, you wouldn't have the privilege of making a major improvement to your already stellar system.
Meanwhile Nagraboy......disappointed that you abandoned your multichannel quest but totally understand. You have 200 SACDs in your collection and there are in total 10,000 out there so you have a ways to go.
If I took their advice I'd be listening to purely Redbook CD quality files via a cheap streamer, into bog standard amps and the same speakers I have now. The thought of it makes me want to puke!
Yes I've abandoned the multichannel project, but since upgrading to larger Harbeths I'm most happy in my new larger room. As for the nearly 10,000 SACDs I'm yet to purchase, I even find it a headache to accumulate and listen to all the Channel and Praga discs I'm interested in (which is a great many!). I could buy masses of discs every month but I want to spend time getting to know each disc nowadays before rushing onto the next.
|
|
|
Post by benvandyk February 17, 2013 (1119 of 1518)
|
|
Nagraboy said:
The ear doesn't hear on it's own, it needs the brain too. That's where all the problems of bias, expectation etc start
yes but the brain can forget what disc has a mat on it in changers. but they wont work in them. the smaller ones do.I played all the discs in my changer last nite. its a 6 disc dvd audio sacd changer. not knowing if there were any black holes on any of the discs. I opened it up this morning and found 2. those 2 discs did not sound any better than the others. they were only $1 each. I made a lot of them my self. this is sort of a blind test. it would be nice if a mat would stay put in a changer but they wont. I made some that got stuck in it.
I do like the material in rammies mat but I think the main purpose of them is vibration control. I use goop on discs too but like Ive said before I dont know how it use to sound same as my black holes so for me its just something to do.I dont spend much on disc tweaks so its fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I tried a blind test on a completely non technical person. It was without introduction, (they did not know of the existence of the mat) so there was no expectation. I simply asked them to listen to the same track twice and tell me a) if there was any difference and b) if there was, to describe the difference (after a difference was noted). They said the two sounded quite different. The mat version was described as sounding ' more like a live performance .. as if the singer was in the room'. This was a RBCD of Katie Melua.
I still don't fully understand why this thing works but there is no doubt that it does. Some of my RBCDs sound much more like SACDs, but strangely I still feel the same discomfort with protracted listening. The reduced dynamic range is still apparent. SACDs are 'improved' too and even my few Membrans have lost that glare and screetchy string tone.
|
|
