[[email protected]]

Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

[[email protected]]

On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

[jwvm]

On Jul 18, 8:42*pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. *Has anyone tried this? *The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. *What other disk treatments are
available? *What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would *believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Its snake oil. "Magic" treatments like this cannot have a significant
impact on sound given the binary nature of digital data on good media.
CDs have error correction that should result in perfect reproduction
in media that is not overly dirty or damaged. Even with uncorrectable
errors, data hiding is usually effective in preventing obvious sound
degradation. If this fails, the results are painfully obvious with
very choppy playback or no sound at all. It is usually possible to
clean or repair CDs that cause these sorts of problems, but there is
no need to use such overpriced gimmicks.

[Sonnova]

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:42:10 -0700, wrote
(in article ):

Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!


Its been pretty much established that the only thins that can affect CD sound
from the disc is a system that introduces lots of jitter or a system that
drops so many bits that the error-correction is always in interpolation. Then
of course there's physical damage to the disc itself, but that's another
discussion. So unless this liquid can address either jitter or bit errors,
it's impossible for it to do anything. And even if it did address on or the
other (or both) of these conditions (unlikely), I suspect that it's audible
result would diminish as one used better and better CD players. I say this
because excessive jitter and high bit error rates are usually associated with
cheap players.

At one time, I was convinced that that silly green pen improved CD sound but
a D-B test proved conclusively that it did NOTHING.

I suspect that Mr, Harley has been, once again, tripped-up by his own
methodology and prejudices.

[Peter Wieck]

On Jul 19, 10:06*am, wrote:

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

Amen.

Note additionally that Barry has a sense of humor that is both dry and
irreverent.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message


Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the
Ultrabit Disk Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The
price is outrageous for a two ounce bottle of stuff ($65)
plus $8.00 shipping.

Hmm, is this an ad for it?

http://www.tweekgeek.com/_e/Digital_..._treatment.htm

Is this the Enjoythemusic.com review of it?

http://www.thehornshoppe.com/ultrabit_platinumPDF.pdf

Is this the manufacturer's white paper justifying it?

http://www.thehornshoppe.com/SOMEREFLECTIONSADZ.doc

It can't cost the guy more than a
buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available?

Supposedly, the developer of Ultrabit also developed Finyl for Vinyl LPs.
and Finyl the Digital Solution.

What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70
for a small bottle of disk teatment, I at least would
believe I heard some improvement!!!!

As you know, that's how snake oil works. People have to justify their
investment, so they perceive an irrelevant benefit.

[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

[[email protected]]

On Jul 20, 2:50 pm, Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

The original was posted back in 1990: that may have
been before the reorganization of the rec.audio hierarchy,
and many news archive servers may not have it. Check out
any of them that have archived plain ol' rec.audio or, before
that. net.audio.

I have the original posting around somewhere. along with
Jim Johnston's April Fool's joke about using a green pen
on the edge of CD's, posted around the same time.

[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
On Jul 20, 2:50 pm, Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

The original was posted back in 1990: that may have
been before the reorganization of the rec.audio hierarchy,
and many news archive servers may not have it. Check out
any of them that have archived plain ol' rec.audio or, before
that. net.audio.

I have the original posting around somewhere. along with
Jim Johnston's April Fool's joke about using a green pen
on the edge of CD's, posted around the same time.

I'd love to see both of those. GOogle's archive just isn't
up to snuff.

--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

[---MIKE---]

Back in the 80s there was a publication (CD Review?) but out by Wayne
Green. He advertised a green pen called "Balonium" for about $3.

---MIKE---
In the White Mountains of New Hampshire
(44° 15' N - Elevation 1580')

[Codifus]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm never going back. Now
when I see a speaker with only one pair of speaker terminals, I tend to
look down on it. Before I tried biwiring, I didn't really care. This
notion some believe that bi-wiring was invented to sell more speaker
cable is total bull. The perfect analogy is how many people also believe
that the US carmakers were in cahoots with the oil companies to produce
big giant gas guzzling SUVs. Well, here we are. Oil is at $140/barrel
and all US carmakers are on life support while all the oil companies are
enjoying the biggest profits of any company ever. Staggering could
better describe their profit margin.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

I do not subscribe to Monster Cables belief in speaker wire. While I
would believe that speaker wire makes a difference, the difference is
incredibly small. Monster Cable is a perfect example of
way-over-engineering. I'll just buy any run of the mill 12 gauge speaker
cable and appreciate that difference.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?

CD

[Norman M. Schwartz]

---MIKE--- wrote:
Back in the 80s there was a publication (CD Review?) but out by Wayne
Green. He advertised a green pen called "Balonium" for about $3.


Some of the history can be read he
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/49381-6-green-tweak

[Steven Sullivan]

Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.

It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.

Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?

No comment.

--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

[Steven Sullivan]

Norman M. Schwartz wrote:
---MIKE--- wrote:
Back in the 80s there was a publication (CD Review?) but out by Wayne
Green. He advertised a green pen called "Balonium" for about $3.


Some of the history can be read he
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/49381-6-green-tweak

LOL. The 'Anonymous' author of that first post, is me. I started that
thread.





--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

[Sonnova]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:58:28 -0700, Steven Sullivan wrote
(in article ):

Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!

Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.

Note especially that it was published on April 1st.

So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.

It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

Also known as "THE green pen". In a double blind test using multiple copies
of a number of CDs where one was treated and one wasn't, the consensus was
that there was no discernible difference between "treated" and non-treated
copies of the same CD.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.

Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

Amen.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?

No comment.

[Codifus]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.
So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.

It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.

Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?

No comment.

For all the other things I mentioned, it is quite difficult for me to
prove that they do indeed make a difference. The difference is there but
is quite subtle.

Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magentic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

CD

[Sonnova]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:27:01 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.
So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.

It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.

Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?

No comment.

For all the other things I mentioned, it is quite difficult for me to
prove that they do indeed make a difference. The difference is there but
is quite subtle.

Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magentic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

CD

Does this make sense to anyone? The whole idea of magnetically shielded
speakers is that their magnetic fields don't affect the electron beam in the
CRT, not the other way around. IOW, the shielded speakers protect the TV.
There's nothing in the TV that would affect the speakers. Also, I cannot
believe for a moment that one could get the speaker magnets close enough to a
large electric motor to actually affect the field in the voice-coil gap in
any way. If I'm missing something, please let me know.

[jwvm]

On Jul 23, 9:27*pm, Codifus wrote:
snip


Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Given the very strong magnets that are found in loudspeakers, it is
hard to understand why speakers would be affected by external magnetic
fields from these types of sources.


Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magnetic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.


Sounds like the manufacturer of these speakers needs to find a better
source for the permanent magnets that they use.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

Not really. This implies that speaker magnets can be restored by
generating "magic" AC fields via the voice coil, a very remarkable
discovery if true. Normally, AC fields are used to demagnetize
materials that have become magnetized such as tape recorder heads.

[Arny Krueger]

"Codifus" wrote in message


Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to
prove that it works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like
your CRT based TV and I guess any high powered electric
motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When I say expose, I mean
to place those speakers very near these magnetically
strong devices while they are on of course.

Of course?

Of course not!

Both speakers and electric motors do have very strong magnetic fields inside
of them, but their external fields are necessarily relatively small compared
to the intense magnetic fields inside. A large external magnetic field would
represent a gross loss of efficiency.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magnetic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

This paragraph is truly amazing. In my 14 plus years on Usenet and 47 plus
years as an audiophile, I've never seen so many different things naively
conflated into one big hairball of myth.

If you do anything to significantly diminish the internal magnetic field of
a loudspeaker driver, there is a very strong effect, the speaker driver
looses efficiency.

One of the last things to go would be the imaging.

The most common means by which a speaker's internal magnetic field is
weakened is probably heating of the magnet assembly by heat lost by the
driver during extended operation at high levels and high powers. Repeated
application of large, short pulses can reduce the strength of the permanent
magnets in a loudspeaker.

The first thing to go during sustained use would probably be any ferrofluid,
and the second thing to go would be the magnetic field strength. Loss of
either will cause the speaker to play more softly with a given amount of
power being applied to it. This is well-known to be a cumulative,
irreversible effect.

If a speaker's permanent magnets (which are obviously not totally permanent
but can be harmed by abuse) lose some of their strength, the usual fix is to
remove the voice coil and recharge the magnet assembly with a special
machine that will be described a little bit more below. That's what works!

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

Now we have a pure anti-scientific myth being propounded. While AC current
can demagnetize a permanent magnet, there is no means for using AC current
to re-magnetize it. An AC current strong enough to demagnetize a speaker
magnet would probably first burn out the voice coil. An AC current strong
enough to demagnetize a speaker magnet constitutes abuse of the speaker.

The myth being propounded here is that if abuse harms a loudspeaker, further
abuse of the identical same kind will repair it. Unprecedented!

BTW, speaker magnet assemblies are *not* magnetized by putting current
through the voice coil. The magnetic assembly is "charged" by a special
machine that uses large, relatively long electrical pulses. The magnetism is
applied by a special jig that engages the pole pieces. The voice coil is
installed once the magnetic assembly is charged.

[Arny Krueger]

"Codifus" wrote in message


I Goggled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;

http://Stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/

They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism
and were surprised to find that it did make a difference.

Two words: sighted evaluations.

They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to
why the difference was probably there.

Actually, the cited article starts out with a statement of acute reviewer
bias:

"The promise of "perfect sound forever," successfully foisted on an
unwitting public by the Compact Disc's promoters, at first seemed to put an
end to the audiophile's inexorable need to tweak a playback system's front
end at the point of information retrieval. First, the binary nature (ones
and zeros) of digital audio would apparently preclude variations in playback
sound quality due to imperfections in the recording medium. "

It is a well-known and generally-agreed upon fact that the binary nature
(ones and zeros) of digital audio *does* preclude variations in playback
sound quality due to imperfections in the playback of the media, in
well-engineered playback equipment. By 1990 when the article was written. CD
players that reliably performed at or near the theoretical limits of the CD
format were widely available for less than $150.

Key words: "foisted on".

dictionary.reference.com/search?q=foist&r=66

Foist

1. to force upon or impose fraudulently or unjustifiably (usually fol. by on
or upon): to foist inferior merchandise on a customer.

So the reviewer starts out his supposedly unbiased review by saying that
well-known scientific facts are actually frauds.

There does seem to be a fraud at hand, but its not the well-known scientific
facts. ;-)

I am very much inclined to believe it.

I'm very much inclined to disbelieve authors who make controversial claims
like this without some pretty solid evidence to back them up. The rest of
the article is full of assertions and evidence of a nature that is
well-known to be totally unreliable.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm never
going back. Now when I see a speaker with only one pair
of speaker terminals, I tend to look down on it.

The absolutely minimal difference that bi-wiring provides has been proven
both mathematically and by clearly demonstrated means of a variety of both
electronic tests and listening tests. The test that tells the story to me
best involves measuring the voltage across the speaker terminals for the
same loudspeaker system, wired normally, and bi-wired. There are
differences, but they are vanishingly small.

Before I tried biwiring, I didn't really care. This notion some
believe that bi-wiring was invented to sell more speaker
cable is total bull.

Actually, there is quite a bit of scientific evidence to support the
conclusion that bi-wiring mainly provides a financial benefit to the people
who sell it. However, the benefit is not restricted to just selling more
cable. Mislead consumers will also choose speakers with added terminals that
cost next to nothing to add, over speakers that are well-engineered and lack
superfluous hardware.

The perfect analogy is how many
people also believe that the US carmakers were in cahoots
with the oil companies to produce big giant gas guzzling
SUVs.

I live in the Detroit area, worked as an automotive engineer, and still have
a ton of inside connections. The analogy between the two theories presented
above is indeed perfect because both theories are bogus. The car companies
needed no conspiracy with the oil companies to induce them to produce SUVs.
They just wanted to sell vehicles. SUVs fit through a number of legal
loopholes and allowed the car companies to sell mechanically crude truck
chassis that the Asian producers were not producing, for a premium over far
more sophisticated car chassis. As consumers started demanding SUVs that
handled well and weren't so prone to flip over, and as the Asian producers
entered the market, the US car companies were forced to produce increasingly
more mechanically sophisticated and therefore more expensive chassis. But
they were still following their vision and mission, which is to sell more
vehicles.

Well, here we are. Oil is at $140/barrel and all US
carmakers are on life support while all the oil companies
are enjoying the biggest profits of any company ever.
Staggering could better describe their profit margin.

Way OT, but what we are seeing now is probably a short-term blip. The supply
of oil is over the short term relatively inflexible. Over a period of say 5
years, the oil supply can be upgraded significantly if natural forces are
allowed to work themselves out. Demand for energy increased sharply as
formerly-technologically impoverished Asian countries shed many of the
inefficiencies of their outdated political systems. The beauty of
energy-inefficient products like SUVs is that it is relatively easy to
return to the use of far more energy-efficient transportation of a number
of different kinds including the far more fuel-efficient passenger cars that
are still in mass production, and have also been undergoing technological
development.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say
its effect is bogus.

In fact, products like this can't work. The thesis of the Harley Stereophile
article above is that these media treatments reduce jitter. In 1990, there
was a lot of hysteria over jitter, and frankly some of it was warranted
because the high end market had embarked on an adventure involving the
gratuitous use of external DACs, and like the early SUVs, many early
external DACs were pretty crude and not well-engineered. Ironically, the
people who stuck with CD players with internal DACs continued to enjoy the
good jitter performance of even the first-generation CD players.

A CD player *must* contend with relatively massive amounts of jitter to work
at all acceptably. Minor eccentricities of CDs being played are a fact of
life. Due to the miniscule dimensions of the pits on the CD surface, the CD
player must do some pretty impressive things in order to produce any music
at all. One of the things the CD player must do is constantly and rapidly
adjust the location of the laser pickup so that it tracks the spiral of tiny
pits which is also wobbling back and forth. The CD player must have an
internal buffer and precision clock to even out the inconsistencies in the
timing of data received from the laser pickup in order to work at all.

I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference.

Two words: sighted evaluation.

The simple fact that so many people will so enthusiastically report events
that physically can't possibly happen is more criticism of sighted
evaluations than 1,000 ABX enthusiasts could possibly flood a newsgroup
with.

[Sonnova]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 06:06:05 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Codifus" wrote in message


Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to
prove that it works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like
your CRT based TV and I guess any high powered electric
motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When I say expose, I mean
to place those speakers very near these magnetically
strong devices while they are on of course.

Of course?

Of course not!

Both speakers and electric motors do have very strong magnetic fields inside
of them, but their external fields are necessarily relatively small compared
to the intense magnetic fields inside. A large external magnetic field would
represent a gross loss of efficiency.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magnetic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

This paragraph is truly amazing. In my 14 plus years on Usenet and 47 plus
years as an audiophile, I've never seen so many different things naively
conflated into one big hairball of myth.

If you do anything to significantly diminish the internal magnetic field of
a loudspeaker driver, there is a very strong effect, the speaker driver
looses efficiency.

One of the last things to go would be the imaging.

The most common means by which a speaker's internal magnetic field is
weakened is probably heating of the magnet assembly by heat lost by the
driver during extended operation at high levels and high powers. Repeated
application of large, short pulses can reduce the strength of the permanent
magnets in a loudspeaker.

The first thing to go during sustained use would probably be any ferrofluid,
and the second thing to go would be the magnetic field strength. Loss of
either will cause the speaker to play more softly with a given amount of
power being applied to it. This is well-known to be a cumulative,
irreversible effect.

If a speaker's permanent magnets (which are obviously not totally permanent
but can be harmed by abuse) lose some of their strength, the usual fix is to
remove the voice coil and recharge the magnet assembly with a special
machine that will be described a little bit more below. That's what works!

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

Now we have a pure anti-scientific myth being propounded. While AC current
can demagnetize a permanent magnet, there is no means for using AC current
to re-magnetize it. An AC current strong enough to demagnetize a speaker
magnet would probably first burn out the voice coil. An AC current strong
enough to demagnetize a speaker magnet constitutes abuse of the speaker.

The myth being propounded here is that if abuse harms a loudspeaker, further
abuse of the identical same kind will repair it. Unprecedented!

BTW, speaker magnet assemblies are *not* magnetized by putting current
through the voice coil. The magnetic assembly is "charged" by a special
machine that uses large, relatively long electrical pulses. The magnetism is
applied by a special jig that engages the pole pieces. The voice coil is
installed once the magnetic assembly is charged.

Speaker magnets are made of special alloys designed to be easily permeable
(or magnitized). It is very difficult to demagnetize them. Higher-end
speakers often use the types of super-magnets often demonstrated on TV how-to
shows as being able to lift many times their own weight and two of them stuck
together are almost impossible to separate. It would take some electromagnet
to demagnetize those!

But none of this has anything to do with the OP's preposterous assertion that
"demagnetizing" a CD (which has NO ferrous materials in it) will, in any way,
affect the CD's sound. Ð I've also heard this ridiculous assertion made for
vinyl phonograph records. There seems to be no end to the gullibility of the
rabid audiophile.

[Sonnova]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:25:09 -0700, jwvm wrote
(in article ):

On Jul 23, 9:27*pm, Codifus wrote:
snip


Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Given the very strong magnets that are found in loudspeakers, it is
hard to understand why speakers would be affected by external magnetic
fields from these types of sources.


Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magnetic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.


Sounds like the manufacturer of these speakers needs to find a better
source for the permanent magnets that they use.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

Not really. This implies that speaker magnets can be restored by
generating "magic" AC fields via the voice coil, a very remarkable
discovery if true. Normally, AC fields are used to demagnetize
materials that have become magnetized such as tape recorder heads.


Tain't necessarily so (apologies to G. Gershwin). You can easily permanently
magnetize a screwdriver by taking a Weller-type soldering gun and replacing
the tip with about 10 turns of heavy copper wire. Insert the screwdriver
shaft into the loop made by the 10 turns and squeeze the trigger on the
Weller. Now move the 'driver back and forth with the field on and then
let-off on the trigger and remove the screwdriver. You will find it now
nicely magnetized. To de-magnetize same, turn gun on, insert screwdriver
shaft, and slowly remove the screwdriver with the gun turned ON. Pull the
screwdriver as far away from the coil as you can get it (both arm's length)
and then turn the screwdriver (or the soldering gun) 90 degrees and with the
two as far apart as practicable, turn off the soldering gun. You should now
have a demagnetized screwdriver. This second method is also good for
demagnetizing tape heads. Make the loops in the coil large enough to fit over
the head in question, turn on the gun, place the coil over the tape head, and
slowly withdraw. When the gun is at least six ft, from the head, turn it 90
degrees and release the soldering gun's trigger. This will erase the tape
head's residual magnetization. Make a big coil, place it against a CRT screen
on a TV and do the same procedure and you can demagnetize a color television
screen and restore its purity.

[[email protected]]

On Jul 24, 6:47 pm, Sonnova wrote:

Speaker magnets are made of special alloys designed to
be easily permeable (or magnitized). It is very difficult to
demagnetize them.

Uh, no.

You have a lot of pseudo-magnet terms which are used
contradictory to one another and inappropriately, the
result is a desciption of how speaker magnets do NOT
work.

First, speaker pangent consists of basically TWO kinds
of materials: the first is so called "soft" parts which
consist primarily of low-carbon steels. They have
the magnetic properties of high permeability, high
saturation magnetization moderate coercivity and low
remanance. They are very good at directing and
concentrating magnetic force lines, but themselves
caonctribute almost nothing to the stored magnetic field.

The second rtype of material is called "hard". They are
characterized by high-coercivity, high-remanance, moderate
permeability and moderate saturation magnetization. They,
because of their high remanance and coercivity, are very
good at storing a magnetic "charge" or magnetizationm'
but it's very hard to change the magnetization.

In most speaker these days, the "hard" magnetic material
is often a ceramic-based ferrite consisting os barium or
strontium ferrite. One can also find materials allows such
the aluminum-nickel-cobalt or AlNiCo, as well as so-called
rare-earth magnet material such as samarium cobalt or
neodymium born.

All of these material are characterized by high remamance:
they can store a large degree of magentization and high
coercivity: the magnetization is devilishly hard to change
and requires the impression of a magnetizing field well
in excess of the desired end point magnetization.

It is just as difficult to DEmagnetize them as it is to
magnetize them, though under certain environmental
conditions, some hard meterials in sub-optimum
designs can lose energy through mechanical or
thermal shock.

Higher-end speakers often use the types of super-
magnets often demonstrated on TV how-to
shows as being able to lift many times their own
weight

Actually, a cheap old ferrite magnet in a reasonably well
designed soft iron yoke could easily lift 100 times its own
weight.

two of them stuck together are almost
impossible to separate. It would take some
electromagnet to demagnetize those!

Actually, no it's not. Simply raise its temperature
to the Curie point and poof! no more magnetization.
You can do that in a kitchen oven.

Yes, the assertions about how the CD can fix the speaker
is pretty out there, but let's not use complete technobabble
to "prove" it the case.

[Arny Krueger]

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:25:09 -0700, jwvm wrote
(in article ):

Not really. This implies that speaker magnets can be
restored by generating "magic" AC fields via the voice
coil, a very remarkable discovery if true. Normally, AC
fields are used to demagnetize materials that have
become magnetized such as tape recorder heads.

Tain't necessarily so (apologies to G. Gershwin). You can
easily permanently magnetize a screwdriver by taking a
Weller-type soldering gun and replacing the tip with
about 10 turns of heavy copper wire. Insert the
screwdriver shaft into the loop made by the 10 turns and
squeeze the trigger on the Weller. Now move the 'driver
back and forth with the field on and then let-off on the
trigger and remove the screwdriver. You will find it now
nicely magnetized.

You're taking advantage of a cheat. When you pulse the soldering gun, you
are creating a transient that is no doubt causing the magnetization effect.
You are BTW taking advantage of a nonlinear effect related to the operation
of the trigger switch.

That is vastly different than playing sounds off of a CD though a stereo.

To de-magnetize same, turn gun on,
insert screwdriver shaft, and slowly remove the
screwdriver with the gun turned ON. Pull the screwdriver
as far away from the coil as you can get it (both arm's
length) and then turn the screwdriver (or the soldering
gun) 90 degrees and with the two as far apart as
practicable, turn off the soldering gun. You should now
have a demagnetized screwdriver.

That would be more similar to anything you might achieve by playing a CD
through a stereo, except that the Weller iron operates with far higher
currents than a speaker voice coil.

[Codifus]

Sonnova wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:27:01 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.
So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;
http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/
They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.
They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.
It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.
Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.
It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?
No comment.

For all the other things I mentioned, it is quite difficult for me to
prove that they do indeed make a difference. The difference is there but
is quite subtle.

Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magentic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

CD

Does this make sense to anyone? The whole idea of magnetically shielded
speakers is that their magnetic fields don't affect the electron beam in the
CRT, not the other way around. IOW, the shielded speakers protect the TV.
There's nothing in the TV that would affect the speakers. Also, I cannot
believe for a moment that one could get the speaker magnets close enough to a
large electric motor to actually affect the field in the voice-coil gap in
any way. If I'm missing something, please let me know.
By the way, I specified initially in the experiment that NON
magnetically shielded speakers should be used, speakers that are NOT
magnetically shielded. Any old pair of speakers manufactured before,
say, the 1990s should fit the bill.

Also, it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker. Any pair of
speakers whose imaging (that mono test mentioned before will verify) has
gone down the tubes should benefit from The Densen CD.


I find it quite curious that most everyone who has replied has dismissed
my experiment by rattling off theories that would make a great thesis,
but not one person actually willing to try and prove me wrong on this
very very easy experiment.

Interesting.

CD

[Codifus]

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.


How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

CD

[[email protected]]

On Jul 25, 8:19 am, Codifus wrote:
By the way, I specified initially in the experiment that NON
magnetically shielded speakers should be used, speakers
that are NOT magnetically shielded. Any old pair of speakers
manufactured before, say, the 1990s should fit the bill.

Do you know, in fact, what the difference is, how and WHY?

Also, it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker.

Hold it a second, you're contradicting yourself.

First you said:

"NON magnetically shielded speakers should
be used"

Then you say:

"it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker."

Which is it?

Any pair of speakers whose imaging (that mono
test mentioned before will verify) has gone down
the tubes should benefit from The Densen CD.

Whuy?

I find it quite curious that most everyone who has
replied has dismissed my experiment by rattling
off theories

Sir, having, in fact, been professionally involved in
the design and measurement of loudspeakers for
over 30 years, let me assure you that I don't "rattle
off theories."

And, precisely what do you think a "theory" is? Are
you suggesting that Newton's theory of gravity is
just some old piece of guesswork he rattled off
while staying in the countryside. Is quantum theory
just one of a bunch of guesses?


that would make a great thesis,

No, it actually makes for great engineering and
superb predictability and verification of actual
physical manifestations and phenomenon.

but not one person actually willing to try and prove
me wrong on this very very easy experiment.

Because, perhaps, some of us HAVE done just this type
of experiment and found the results VERY different.

Because, perhaps, your own data is self contradictory.

Because, perhaps, both you and the manufacturer are
make quite extraordinary claims, and the burden lies
on those making such extraordinary claims to prove
the phenomenon exists as claimed, not on the rest
of the world to prove that it doesn't.

Becasue,. perhaps, some of us (like, well, ME for
example), have a very large base of both knowledge
and experience in the very specific domain you're
talking about to know what they're talking about.

Because, perhaps, we've seen this type of claim
time and time again and when each of them has been
subject to any sort of actual verification, they have,
ALL of them, come up wanting.

Interesting.

Actually, not.

[Sonnova]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:14:55 -0700, wrote
(in article ):

On Jul 24, 6:47 pm, Sonnova wrote:

Speaker magnets are made of special alloys designed to
be easily permeable (or magnitized). It is very difficult to
demagnetize them.

Uh, no.

You have a lot of pseudo-magnet terms which are used
contradictory to one another and inappropriately, the
result is a desciption of how speaker magnets do NOT
work.

First, speaker pangent consists of basically TWO kinds
of materials: the first is so called "soft" parts which
consist primarily of low-carbon steels. They have
the magnetic properties of high permeability, high
saturation magnetization moderate coercivity and low
remanance. They are very good at directing and
concentrating magnetic force lines, but themselves
caonctribute almost nothing to the stored magnetic field.

The second rtype of material is called "hard". They are
characterized by high-coercivity, high-remanance, moderate
permeability and moderate saturation magnetization. They,
because of their high remanance and coercivity, are very
good at storing a magnetic "charge" or magnetizationm'
but it's very hard to change the magnetization.

In most speaker these days, the "hard" magnetic material
is often a ceramic-based ferrite consisting os barium or
strontium ferrite. One can also find materials allows such
the aluminum-nickel-cobalt or AlNiCo, as well as so-called
rare-earth magnet material such as samarium cobalt or
neodymium born.

All of these material are characterized by high remamance:
they can store a large degree of magentization and high
coercivity: the magnetization is devilishly hard to change
and requires the impression of a magnetizing field well
in excess of the desired end point magnetization.

It is just as difficult to DEmagnetize them as it is to
magnetize them, though under certain environmental
conditions, some hard meterials in sub-optimum
designs can lose energy through mechanical or
thermal shock.

Higher-end speakers often use the types of super-
magnets often demonstrated on TV how-to
shows as being able to lift many times their own
weight

Actually, a cheap old ferrite magnet in a reasonably well
designed soft iron yoke could easily lift 100 times its own
weight.

two of them stuck together are almost
impossible to separate. It would take some
electromagnet to demagnetize those!

Actually, no it's not. Simply raise its temperature
to the Curie point and poof! no more magnetization.
You can do that in a kitchen oven.

Yes, the assertions about how the CD can fix the speaker
is pretty out there, but let's not use complete technobabble
to "prove" it the case.

Sorry for misspeaking. My point was only that the permanent magnets used in
decent speakers aren't easily demagnetized, nor are they easily affected by
stray magnetic fields from such things as vacuum cleaner motors or other home
appliances. The OP's premise about affecting imaging with stray fields from
such motors (or TVs) is nonsense. It's simply NOT gonna happen.

[[email protected]]

On Jul 24, 9:06 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
If a speaker's permanent magnets (which are
obviously not totally permanent but can be harmed
by abuse) lose some of their strength, the usual fix
is to remove the voice coil and recharge the magnet
assembly with a special machine that will be described
a little bit more below. That's what works!
...
BTW, speaker magnet assemblies are *not* magnetized
by putting current through the voice coil. The magnetic
assembly is "charged" by a special machine that uses
large, relatively long electrical pulses. The magnetism is
applied by a special jig that engages the pole pieces.
The voice coil is installed once the magnetic assembly
is charged.

Actually, this is not the case. For a varuety of reasons,
the magnetization is almost always the very LAST step
in the manufacturing of a driver, performed AFTER the
driver components, including the voice coil and dust caps
have been assembled.

Magnetizers are typically huge affairs that are capable
of immersing the entire assmebled driver in the magnetizing
field, and, over a very short period of time, immerse the
entire magnet assembly in a sufficiently strong field to
overcome the magnets coercive force. There's no need
to "engage the pole piece" at all. Doing it that way actually
substantially reduces the field density that can be imparted
on the magnetic field itself. The role of the pole pieces is
to concentrate the magnetic field of the lower permeability
hard magnet material, which has a much larger cross-
sectional area. The pole piece run at or near saturation
when the magnet itself is fully charge, but to charge the
magnet requires a much stronger field than you can impart
through the pole pieces.

For example, the saturation of the gap might be 12000
gauss, but the magnet itself might be running at a mere
1000 gauss when full charge, and the fact that the total
area of the magnet is 12=15 times that of the gap allows
the softw iron near the gap to concentrate that field. But
you can't stiff any more than 12000 gauss through the gap,
resulting in only 1000 gauss through the magnetic, far
too little to magnetize it.

Instead, you immerse the ENTIRE structure in, say, a
10000 gauss field momentarilly. Yeah, the gap saturates,
but you still have the 10000 gauss field permeating
the hard magnet parts and they are appropriately magnetized.

Taking that one step further, it becomes clearer why
it's not plausible to demagnitize a speaker through the voice
coil. Assuming the voice coil will thermally withstand the
current necessary,while you might be able to generate any
arbitrarily high field in the gap, the pole piece (especially
the outer diameter of the gap) STILL only will reach its
saturation magnetization (12000 Gauss or so for soft iron).
That amount of flux density in that small a gap translates
to a much smaller flux density when distributed over the
much larger cross sectional area of the magnet, and
you're nowhere near the kinds of flux density needed
to change the magnetization.

Take a practical example: an 8" woofer with a 1.5"
voice coil in a magnet assembly whose front plate
is a typical 0.318" thick, using a ceramic magnet
ring with an ID of 2" and an OD of 5". The cross-
sectional area of the front plate at the gap (the
narrowest point of the circuit and thus the limiting
point) has an area of about 9.5 cm^2. The magnet
itself has a cross sectional area of some 110 cm^2.

Assuming NO losses, with the gap at saturation at
12000 gauss, the magnet itself is seeing a flux
density of 12000 * 9.5/110 or about 1036 gauss,
nowhere near enough to reverse its magnetization.

All this goes directly to the showing the technical
assertions implicit in the other posters claims of the
CD are unsupportable on any physical grounds.

[[email protected]]

On Jul 25, 8:19 am, Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect
the 1st time but not any other time? All those times I
played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

No, it's not.

You made a series of rather extraordinary claims. Claims
which have some serious contraidctions to the known
macro and microscopic properties of conductors and
magnetic materials determined under conditions of
FAR greater sensitivity than you'll EVER encounter in
audio.

It's only a "rather quick and hasty dismissal" if you're
under the assumption that all technical opinions are
created equal. SOrry to vreak your illusion, but they are
not.

The notion that some schmoe who has a website has
come up with something that is contrary to what solid
state physicists have understood in great detail for
many many decades seriously stretches credibility
beyond Netownian limits.

To date, can you guess how many of these rather
extraordinary clims of discovery in the high-end audio
world have, in fact, lead to revisions of our knowledge
of conduction physics, magnetica, audio and such?

Well, the answer is, exactly ZERO.

If the writing on that web site is indicative of that person's
knowledge of physics, he is beyond clueless. The only
other choice is that he's a fraud.

The claims made by these sorts of people are of sufficiently
earth-shattering impact in their implications that, among
other things, they are of Nobel-prize stature. And how many
audio manufacturers do YOU know of having had lunch
recently with the King of Sweden.

NO, it's NOT up to us to do anything BUT dismiss
extraordinary claims. It';s up to those MAKING the claim
to substantiate them with something other than "it
worked for me." If it worked for you, fine, be happy with
and let it go at that. But as soon as you put the claim
out in the public space, the burden is YOURS to support
it.

You want proof that it works? Try the following experiment:

Find two pairs of the same speakers that both suffer, to
equal degrees, the problem you claim. Allow someone
to take ONE pair: you don't know which, and apply or NOT
apply the Densen CD treatment to it, completely out of
your site.

Afterwards, your job is very simple: all you nkow is that
one of the two pairs MAY have had the treatment applied.
BY LISTENING ALONE, tell us which one it is.

Do that reliably in a number of cases, and then, maybe,
it gets interesting. Otherwise, yawn.

But if it works for you, why do you even care what other
people think, and thus why even bother engaging in the
discussion, unles you DO want to face a skeptical
audience?

[Arny Krueger]

"Codifus" wrote in message

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say
its effect is bogus. I've tried it and definitely
noticed a difference. The effect was most apparent only
the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change.
Perhaps I haven't given my electronics enough time to
get magnetically out of alignment. It's preventive
maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.

Or more generally, criteria biasing.

http://www.lee.edu/library/uc_tutorial/mod7c.asp

How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect
the 1st time but not any other time?

We didn't mention cumulative or initial effects, we said sighted effects.
Your answer relates to cumulative or initial effects.

All those times I
played the Densen CD my sight was good and the Densen CD
looked the same

But you were fully aware of the details of what you were listening to.

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

If a person has any illusions about their own lack of bias, some practical
experience with bias-controlled listening tests will fix most people up
quite quickly. As the article I cited above says:

"It is important to keep in mind that there is bias everywhere."

[Sonnova]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:42 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Sonnova wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:27:01 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 18, 8:42 pm, wrote:
Robert Hartley, Absolute Sound, gave rave reviews to the Ultrabit Disk
Treatment. Has anyone tried this? The price is outrageous for a two
ounce bottle of stuff ($65) plus $8.00 shipping. It can't cost the guy
more than a buck to produce it. What other disk treatments are
available? What I am thinking is that if I paid over $70 for a small
bottle of disk teatment, I at least would believe I heard some
improvement!!!!
Do a web search for "Barry Ornitz" and "CD Optical Impedance
Matching Fluid" to find the origin of this substance.
Note especially that it was published on April 1st.
So far no luck finding these together on google groups or google web.

Anyone got a link?

I googled "CD Optical Impedance Matching Fluid"
and found this Stereophile article;
http://stereophile.com/reference/590jitter/
They tried a product called CD spotlight by Audio Prism and were
surprised to find that it did make a difference.
They then backed it up with a technical explanation as to why the
difference was probably there. I am very much inclined to believe it.
It's CD *Stoplight*, and Harley's 'technical explanation' for the
supposedly audible effect, is nonsense.

I also believe in bi-wiring. I've tried it and I'm
never going back.
Another 'tweak' with essentialy no basis for audible difference.

I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.
It's more likely sighted bias.

So, what does that make me, and Audiophool or an Audiophile?
No comment.

For all the other things I mentioned, it is quite difficult for me to
prove that they do indeed make a difference. The difference is there but
is quite subtle.

Now, for the Densen Demagic CD, it is very very easy to prove that it
works. This is how you do it:

Requirements? A pair on NON magnetically shield speakers.
Expose those speakers to a strong magnetic field like your CRT based TV
and I guess any high powered electric motor, like a vacuum cleaner. When
I say expose, I mean to place those speakers very near these
magnetically strong devices while they are on of course.

Now, place the speakers right next to each other and playback any source
in mono.

With the speakers right next to each other, when you listen to that mono
source you should get a strong sense of the image being midway between
the speakers.

Because the speakers have been exposed to a strong magentic field, they
probably don't have a strong image, if any at all. The sound is all
there but you can't localize it with your eyes closed. It seems to be
everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

Next step: playback the densen demagic CD at the loudest volume you can
tolerate. You probably want to leave the room while its playing for its
duration of 3 minutes.

Now, do the mono test again. You should now have a very strong image of
the sound coming from midway between the speakers.

And there you have it.

CD

Does this make sense to anyone? The whole idea of magnetically shielded
speakers is that their magnetic fields don't affect the electron beam in
the
CRT, not the other way around. IOW, the shielded speakers protect the TV.
There's nothing in the TV that would affect the speakers. Also, I cannot
believe for a moment that one could get the speaker magnets close enough to
a
large electric motor to actually affect the field in the voice-coil gap in
any way. If I'm missing something, please let me know.
By the way, I specified initially in the experiment that NON
magnetically shielded speakers should be used, speakers that are NOT
magnetically shielded. Any old pair of speakers manufactured before,
say, the 1990s should fit the bill.

Also, it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker. Any pair of
speakers whose imaging (that mono test mentioned before will verify) has
gone down the tubes should benefit from The Densen CD.


I find it quite curious that most everyone who has replied has dismissed
my experiment by rattling off theories that would make a great thesis,
but not one person actually willing to try and prove me wrong on this
very very easy experiment.

Interesting.

CD


It's not necessary. You can't supply a strong enough magnetic field using any
home appliance to in any way affect the magnetic field in a speaker -
especially so if the speaker in question is in its enclosure. Back in
reel-to-reel tape days, I kept a pro-quality 1/2" tape (bought it an
electronics flea market) degausser on top of one of my monitor speakers and
used to degauss 10.5" reels of audio tape with it regularly for years. Even
that strong of a magnetic field didn't change the performance of that speaker
one iota. Taking people to task for not trying your challenge is like a
flat-earther complaining that people don't take his assertions seriously and
won't try his experiments which show conclusively that the world is flat. You
see, it isn't.

[Sonnova]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:30 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 04:25:09 -0700, jwvm wrote
(in article ):

Not really. This implies that speaker magnets can be
restored by generating "magic" AC fields via the voice
coil, a very remarkable discovery if true. Normally, AC
fields are used to demagnetize materials that have
become magnetized such as tape recorder heads.

Tain't necessarily so (apologies to G. Gershwin). You can
easily permanently magnetize a screwdriver by taking a
Weller-type soldering gun and replacing the tip with
about 10 turns of heavy copper wire. Insert the
screwdriver shaft into the loop made by the 10 turns and
squeeze the trigger on the Weller. Now move the 'driver
back and forth with the field on and then let-off on the
trigger and remove the screwdriver. You will find it now
nicely magnetized.

You're taking advantage of a cheat. When you pulse the soldering gun, you
are creating a transient that is no doubt causing the magnetization effect.
You are BTW taking advantage of a nonlinear effect related to the operation
of the trigger switch.

That is vastly different than playing sounds off of a CD though a stereo.

Actually, they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. There is
nothing magnetic in a stamped, mass produced CD that would have the slightest
affect on it. I was merely showing that one can magnetize and demagnetize
ferric objects using an AC signal , CDs aren't ferrous (except maybe
recordable ones which, if I understand correctly, do use a magnetic field to
effect the burning).

To de-magnetize same, turn gun on,
insert screwdriver shaft, and slowly remove the
screwdriver with the gun turned ON. Pull the screwdriver
as far away from the coil as you can get it (both arm's
length) and then turn the screwdriver (or the soldering
gun) 90 degrees and with the two as far apart as
practicable, turn off the soldering gun. You should now
have a demagnetized screwdriver.

That would be more similar to anything you might achieve by playing a CD
through a stereo, except that the Weller iron operates with far higher
currents than a speaker voice coil.

They have nothing in common.

[Sonnova]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:54 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.


How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

CD


Please explain the theory on how a commercially stamped CD (which has no
magnetic properties) can be affected by demagnetizing? Most likely, you hear
a difference because you WANT TO, having spent the money on the device.
subsequent listenings do not elicit the same response as the first because
you have already heard the difference that you wanted to hear the first time
and that your expectations are that once treated, the disc shouldn't change.
Therefore it doesn't.

[Codifus]

wrote:
On Jul 25, 8:19 am, Codifus wrote:
By the way, I specified initially in the experiment that NON
magnetically shielded speakers should be used, speakers
that are NOT magnetically shielded. Any old pair of speakers
manufactured before, say, the 1990s should fit the bill.

Do you know, in fact, what the difference is, how and WHY?

No, I do not. I am just saying that I did hear a difference. Also, like
I said earlier, I only noticed the difference once. Never really noticed
it after that. This was probably due to the fact that I used it on
speakers that were severely out of magnetic alignment. It is what made
me buy the CD in the first place.

Let me be clear: the effect of the Densen Demagic CD will be most
apparent on a pair of speakers with extremely poor imaging. So poor that
when these said speakers are placed right next to each other, connected
in phase, and playing a monophonic audio source, the listener will not
be able to resolve a solid image midway between the speakers. PLay that
Demagic CD as loud as you can without distorting, and all will be good
again.

Now, because I have felt the effect on a most extreme case leads me to
believe that it is always working, just that I do not notice its effect
as whatever it has restored was more subtle.


Also, it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker.

Hold it a second, you're contradicting yourself.
No, I'm not.

First you said:

"NON magnetically shielded speakers should
be used"

Then you say:

"it doesn't have to only be that type of speaker."

Which is it?

Both. I was expanding on the types of speakers that can be used. First,
I mentioned the non magnetically shielded ones. Why? Because they are
the easiest to throw out of whack simply by placing them near a TV etc.
And, the effect of Demagic will be most obvious.

Then, I expanded on the types of speakers that can be used. Basically,
ANY pair of speakers can be used that fails that mono test I mentioned
earlier. The effect of Demagice may not be as obvious with these but it
still works.

Any pair of speakers whose imaging (that mono
test mentioned before will verify) has gone down
the tubes should benefit from The Densen CD.

Whuy?

I'm no expert, but Densen themselves have an explanation. All I can say
is that I heard it, most definitely.


I find it quite curious that most everyone who has
replied has dismissed my experiment by rattling
off theories

Sir, having, in fact, been professionally involved in
the design and measurement of loudspeakers for
over 30 years, let me assure you that I don't "rattle
off theories."

And, precisely what do you think a "theory" is? Are
you suggesting that Newton's theory of gravity is
just some old piece of guesswork he rattled off
while staying in the countryside. Is quantum theory
just one of a bunch of guesses?


that would make a great thesis,

No, it actually makes for great engineering and
superb predictability and verification of actual
physical manifestations and phenomenon.

but not one person actually willing to try and prove
me wrong on this very very easy experiment.

Because, perhaps, some of us HAVE done just this type
of experiment and found the results VERY different.
OK. Care to share? Please understand that I do know that normally the
Densen demagic CD's effect is incredibly hard to notice. My test makes
it's effect clear as day. You REALLY ought to try it.


Because, perhaps, your own data is self contradictory.


Because, perhaps, both you and the manufacturer are
make quite extraordinary claims, and the burden lies
on those making such extraordinary claims to prove
the phenomenon exists as claimed, not on the rest
of the world to prove that it doesn't.

Becasue,. perhaps, some of us (like, well, ME for
example), have a very large base of both knowledge
and experience in the very specific domain you're
talking about to know what they're talking about.

You are no doubt a very smart individual. I have seen your posts and
learned a great deal from you. You have also shot me down in flames on
an occaision or 2. But I keep coming back because I am always willing to
learn.

This is where I stop stroking your ego

Do you in fact think you know everything? Also, could you be wrong in
some things you've studied? Just because you don't hear something or
know of no law of physics to support a claim, does not make it untrue.
It just means that it hasn't been verified.

The world was once flat. Now it's round.

The titanic was unsinkable.

Light travels in a straight line.

As man has developed more sensitive and capable measuring instruments,
things that were once un-true became true.


Because, perhaps, we've seen this type of claim
time and time again and when each of them has been
subject to any sort of actual verification, they have,
ALL of them, come up wanting.

Interesting.

Actually, not.

Yeah, still interesting.

There's another thread discussing whether we need science in audio
reviews and and now I see very clearly that the answer is most
definitely yes. There's 2 groups. The scientists, such as yourself, Arny
Kruger, and Steve Sullivan, who seem to go by the mantra that if they
can't hear it, and it hasn't been proven, then it doesn't exist. Period.
The other group would be the reviewers such as tnt-audio, stereophile,
etc. These 2 groups have a yin/yang relationship and it keeps both sides
on their toes.

CD

[Steven Sullivan]

Codifus wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.

It's more likely sighted bias.


How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

No, because it is always something that must be ruled out in these sorts of
anecdotes, if they are to even begin approaching the status of 'observation of
a real phenomonen'



--
-S
A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence. -- David Hume, "On Miracles"
(1748)

[Codifus]

Sonnova wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:54 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.
It's more likely sighted bias.

How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

CD


Please explain the theory on how a commercially stamped CD (which has no
magnetic properties) can be affected by demagnetizing? Most likely, you hear
a difference because you WANT TO, having spent the money on the device.
subsequent listenings do not elicit the same response as the first because
you have already heard the difference that you wanted to hear the first time
and that your expectations are that once treated, the disc shouldn't change.
Therefore it doesn't.
OK. Basic law of physics: every electrical field has an associated
magnetic field and vice versa. One does not exist without the other.
This is the exact principle behind transformers, speakers, you name it.
Electromagnetism.


If you push an electric current through a speaker, it moves. If you move
the speaker cone with your hand, guess what? An electrical current will
be generated that you can measure at the speaker terminals.

I'm more than willing to prove it to anyone. This test is so easy its
ridiculous.

I will not use my system or CD. I can already see that if anything of
mine were used in the test, the conclusion would be that I rigged it
somehow.

Here's the deal:

Any skeptical taker who has the respect of Dick Pierce, Arny Kruger,
Sonnova, or Steve Sullivan. I chose you 4 because you have always been
so adamant about your beliefs based on facts. Nothing wrong with that at
all. It is a completely logical way to think. I'm just trying to open
some minds. Now, that taker should have a pair of non-magnetically
shielded speakers. I suggest these type of speakers because they are
easily set out of whack by moving them around near a strong magnetic
field like a CRT based TV.
Speakers that fail the mono test can also be used, but things get murky
and subjective. Who says that the speakers are not phase coherent, you
me? Who to believe?
The user should buy the Densen CD for $40. Again, I won't use mine
because it must be rigged somehowI will then come and visit and we can
go through the test together.

Possible outcomes of the test:

You don't hear a change, I do. I'll give your $40 and we'll be done.

You and I both hear the change. Proof positive. Actually, If I'm right,
I want Mr. Kruger, Mr. Pierce, Sonnova and Steve Sullivan, to each send
me $15. I take paypal

Yes, I'm getting a little more back than I put in, but you guys give me
grief It's just to cover expenses.



CD

[Sonnova]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:10:10 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Sonnova wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:54 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.
It's more likely sighted bias.

How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

CD


Please explain the theory on how a commercially stamped CD (which has no
magnetic properties) can be affected by demagnetizing? Most likely, you
hear
a difference because you WANT TO, having spent the money on the device.
subsequent listenings do not elicit the same response as the first because
you have already heard the difference that you wanted to hear the first
time
and that your expectations are that once treated, the disc shouldn't
change.
Therefore it doesn't.
OK. Basic law of physics: every electrical field has an associated
magnetic field and vice versa. One does not exist without the other.
This is the exact principle behind transformers, speakers, you name it.
Electromagnetism.

But a CD doesn't have an "electrical field" associated with it. It's just a
piece of plastic with some aluminum sputtered onto it.


If you push an electric current through a speaker, it moves. If you move
the speaker cone with your hand, guess what? An electrical current will
be generated that you can measure at the speaker terminals.

I'm more than willing to prove it to anyone. This test is so easy its
ridiculous.

I will not use my system or CD. I can already see that if anything of
mine were used in the test, the conclusion would be that I rigged it
somehow.

nobody is arguing what you say about speakers, above. It's fundamental
electrical theory. Where I am skeptical, is what you say about about being
able to affect the magnetism of a permanent magnet speaker by its proximity
to household magnetic fields. My own experience and what little I know about
permanent magnets says that this is wrong. Secondly, I do not believe that
degaussing a CD will have any more effect on it than degaussing a vinyl
record would or could affect it * and for the same reason. There is no
magnetically permeable materials in either. You'd have a better chance
degaussing your brain, at least blood has iron in it!

Here's the deal:

Any skeptical taker who has the respect of Dick Pierce, Arny Kruger,
Sonnova, or Steve Sullivan. I chose you 4 because you have always been
so adamant about your beliefs based on facts. Nothing wrong with that at
all. It is a completely logical way to think. I'm just trying to open
some minds. Now, that taker should have a pair of non-magnetically
shielded speakers. I suggest these type of speakers because they are
easily set out of whack by moving them around near a strong magnetic
field like a CRT based TV.

first of all, as I said before, their are no strong magnetic fields
associated with a CRT TV. Yes there is a magnetic coil called a yoke around
the neck of the CRT, but it's field is concentrated to the area inside the
neck and is used to bend the electron beam shooting down the neck at the
video raster rate. More than a few inches from that coil yields no
discernible field. I suspect that you are confused because magnetically
shielded speakers are often associated with video. This is not because a
magnetic field from the CRT might interfere with the speaker, but rather
because the speaker's magnetic field can affect the CRT. Often when one puts
large speakers with heavy magnets next to a TV, one gets a rainbow of colors
not associated with the picture near the edges of the screen closest to the
speakers. By shielding the speakers' magnetic field, the chances that it can
affect the CRT's convergence and purity is reduced.

Speakers that fail the mono test can also be used, but things get murky
and subjective. Who says that the speakers are not phase coherent, you
me? Who to believe?

Speaker phase coherence (or time alignment), ala E.H. Long is something else.

[Codifus]

wrote:

You want proof that it works? Try the following experiment:

Find two pairs of the same speakers that both suffer, to
equal degrees, the problem you claim. Allow someone
to take ONE pair: you don't know which, and apply or NOT
apply the Densen CD treatment to it, completely out of
your site.

Afterwards, your job is very simple: all you nkow is that
one of the two pairs MAY have had the treatment applied.
BY LISTENING ALONE, tell us which one it is.

Do that reliably in a number of cases, and then, maybe,
it gets interesting. Otherwise, yawn.

But if it works for you, why do you even care what other
people think, and thus why even bother engaging in the
discussion, unles you DO want to face a skeptical
audience?

This is an even better setup. I am totally game.
Why do I care? I guess I like to share. I subscribe to
rec.audio,high-end to discuss hifi with others that tend to share the
same enthusiasm for audio.
Why do you post on rec.audio,high-end?

CD

[Codifus]

Sonnova wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:10:10 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Sonnova wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:19:54 -0700, Codifus wrote
(in article ):

Steven Sullivan wrote:
Codifus wrote:
I also have Densen's DeMagic CD. Again, many people say its effect is
bogus. I've tried it and definitely noticed a difference. The effect was
most apparent only the 1st time I used it, though. After that, I've used
it every couple of months and haven't noticed a change. Perhaps I
haven't given my electronics enough time to get magnetically out of
alignment. It's preventive maintenance, then.
It's more likely sighted bias.

How does sighted bias explain that I noticed the effect the 1st time but
not any other time? All those times I played the Densen CD my sight was
good and the Densen CD looked the same

That's a rather quick and hasty dismissal, don't ya think?

CD

Please explain the theory on how a commercially stamped CD (which has no
magnetic properties) can be affected by demagnetizing? Most likely, you
hear
a difference because you WANT TO, having spent the money on the device.
subsequent listenings do not elicit the same response as the first because
you have already heard the difference that you wanted to hear the first
time
and that your expectations are that once treated, the disc shouldn't
change.
Therefore it doesn't.
OK. Basic law of physics: every electrical field has an associated
magnetic field and vice versa. One does not exist without the other.
This is the exact principle behind transformers, speakers, you name it.
Electromagnetism.

But a CD doesn't have an "electrical field" associated with it. It's just a
piece of plastic with some aluminum sputtered onto it.

If you push an electric current through a speaker, it moves. If you move
the speaker cone with your hand, guess what? An electrical current will
be generated that you can measure at the speaker terminals.

I'm more than willing to prove it to anyone. This test is so easy its
ridiculous.

I will not use my system or CD. I can already see that if anything of
mine were used in the test, the conclusion would be that I rigged it
somehow.

nobody is arguing what you say about speakers, above. It's fundamental
electrical theory. Where I am skeptical, is what you say about about being
able to affect the magnetism of a permanent magnet speaker by its proximity
to household magnetic fields. My own experience and what little I know about
permanent magnets says that this is wrong. Secondly, I do not believe that
degaussing a CD will have any more effect on it than degaussing a vinyl
record would or could affect it * and for the same reason. There is no
magnetically permeable materials in either. You'd have a better chance
degaussing your brain, at least blood has iron in it!
Here's the deal:

Any skeptical taker who has the respect of Dick Pierce, Arny Kruger,
Sonnova, or Steve Sullivan. I chose you 4 because you have always been
so adamant about your beliefs based on facts. Nothing wrong with that at
all. It is a completely logical way to think. I'm just trying to open
some minds. Now, that taker should have a pair of non-magnetically
shielded speakers. I suggest these type of speakers because they are
easily set out of whack by moving them around near a strong magnetic
field like a CRT based TV.

first of all, as I said before, their are no strong magnetic fields
associated with a CRT TV. Yes there is a magnetic coil called a yoke around
the neck of the CRT, but it's field is concentrated to the area inside the
neck and is used to bend the electron beam shooting down the neck at the
video raster rate. More than a few inches from that coil yields no
discernible field. I suspect that you are confused because magnetically
shielded speakers are often associated with video. This is not because a
magnetic field from the CRT might interfere with the speaker, but rather
because the speaker's magnetic field can affect the CRT.
Yes, I completely understand. When you move speakers past the TV, this
red and blue appears across the screen. The effect of the speaker on the
TV is much more noticeable than any effect that may be on the speaker.
But there is an effect.

Often when one puts
large speakers with heavy magnets next to a TV, one gets a rainbow of colors
not associated with the picture near the edges of the screen closest to the
speakers. By shielding the speakers' magnetic field, the chances that it can
affect the CRT's convergence and purity is reduced.


Speakers that fail the mono test can also be used, but things get murky
and subjective. Who says that the speakers are not phase coherent, you
me? Who to believe?

Speaker phase coherence (or time alignment), ala E.H. Long is something else.

I think you're missing the point. The CD is not being degaussed. The CD
is playing a tone. That tone manifests itself as an electrical signal
that goes through your entire audio system. That electrical signal in
turn generates a magnetic field. The properties of that generated
magnetic field are such that it neutralizes any static magnetism that
may have developed in the system.

You know, just as Arny Kruger mentioned deguassing old real to reel
tapes with a degausser and slowly moving away, this demagic CD is doing
the exact same thing. Think of the the tone as analogous to the
degausser's magnetic field. Now, as you slowly move away from the tape
heads the Demagic tone slowly fades away.

That's all it is.

CD