9) Totem Beaks:

"Now let's talk about the Beaks.
Vincent Bruzzese says that the design of the Beaks was determined
with the help of a mainframe computer, and that every aspect of it (the
cutout on the underside and the fine grooves milled into the surface)
must be exactly the way they are. He adds that actual frequency
measurements have been run on speakers with and without Beaks, but he
has supplied neither the methodology nor the actual measurements. The
Beak is meant to be at once a resonator (the air space trapped under the
device) and--if we understand correctly--a diffraction device. It is
claimed that it improves the bottom end, and it also allows the tweeter
to go higher more linearly. How it does this is, for the moment,
anyone's guess"
http://www.audiotweaks.com/shows/fsi2002/10.htm

Dick Pierce wrote:
Bromo wrote:

People wonder why engineers and scientists don't 'rise up' to
counter the ludicrous belief systems of audiophilia. I suspect
it's because they're laughing too hard.

A professional wouldn't ridicule - just note the observation and
trace it to root cause.

So if someone says 1+1=2.1, do you note the observation and trace it to
the root cause?

Ah, but what we were talking about is not that kind of issue.


Excuse me, but it most assuredly is. People in the high-end
business are making claims that precisely contradict principles
of engineering and physics that have achieved the status of
"theorem" (not theory) through rigorous proof. They make claims
about tweaks that contradict a century or more of vast and carefully
performed research, and make such claims without a single shred
of evidence to support that claim.


If I tell you that after washing my amp in warm milk, the sound
is so much more liquid, do you note the observation and trace
it to the root cause? Or have you lost your ability to laugh?

The ridiculous example you give does not have a bearing on what
we were talking about.


Begging your pardon, but it is precisely this sort of ridiculous
claim that the entire topic bears upon. Consider the following
tweaks:

1. Application of gren pens to CDs

2. Water filled audio cables

3. The placement of small wooden pucks around the room to enhance
the sound

4. The strident claim by an editorial contributor to one of the
prominent high-end magazines of the dramatic effects of audible
"glare" from a water faucet in the other room.

5. Armor-all as an "optical impedance matching fluid" to enhance
the playback of CD's

6. CD demagnetizers

7. "micro-diodes" in cables

8. Blue "dithering LEDs" in expensive CD players

How many more of these "ridiculous examples" do you consider to
have "no bearing" on what we were talking about?

Get rid of ALL these "ridiculous examples" that "have no bearing,"
and all of a sudden, the high-end biz is transformed from a back-water
freak-tweal cottage industry governed by mysticism, quackery and
a few vocal, wide-eyed magazine wonks into a reality-based pursuit.

Wouldn't THAT be a tragedy, then?

+---------------------------------------+
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| (1) 781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| |
+---------------------------------------+