Alan B wrote:What cables would you use?

These Rip-off Merchants?

Mains cables at £200 a go, speaker cables at £1,100 per metre.

There was a well known blind test, oh, many years ago, where audiophiles couldn't tell the difference between 'custom' speaker cables and a 13 Amp mains cable used to connect to the speakers...

I know I've mentioned this company before, but for the uninitiated:

http://www.machinadynamica.com/index.html

I notice they have a new product since I last looked at their website:

OUR NEW PRODUCT Morphic Message Labels, comes in a sheet of 60 CLEAR Easy -Peel adhesive-backed lables with messages in red ink, each label 2/3" by 1 3/4". Morphic Message Labels go on ANY and ALL BAR CODES on the jewel box of all CDs, DVDs, Blu Ray discs, as well as any and all Bar Codes on LPs and books - i.e., all media. Labels should also go on any and all COMPACT DISC DIGITAL AUDIO logos that appear on jewel boxes and on CDs themselves. Labels should also go on ALL BAR CODES anywhere in the house! - on food packages, cosmetics, cleaning supplies, kitchen appliances, etc. Many different messages to choose from, one message per sheet. Morphic Message Labels are based on Peter Belt's Red X Pen and Gold Message Foil. Permission was kindly granted for this Morphic Message Label project by Peter and May Belt of PWB Electronics. $30 per sheet of 80 labels. if you order three sheets of labels each sheet will contain a different morphic message. Instructions included.

"I got the sheets of labels and stuck about 280 labels all over the house, on bar codes mostly but also on other things like logos and brand names. Immediately without any doubt the sound quality was spectacular, especially in terms of AIR and realism. On percussive things such as maracas I could hear the inner nuances in great detail, in it's own space and with plenty of AIR. And MUCH lower distortion. Totally. Send more sheets of labels and hurry! Have you thought of the IMPLICATIONS of this?". - Brian Wilbur, 18 May 2015

"O.K., they work. More detail and more air. - customer, June 7, 2015

WTactualF?

Ah OK, didn't realize what a piss-take it was. Brill.

Alan B wrote:What cables would you use?

These Rip-off Merchants?

Mains cables at £200 a go, speaker cables at £1,100 per metre.

There was a well known blind test, oh, many years ago, where audiophiles couldn't tell the difference between 'custom' speaker cables and a 13 Amp mains cable used to connect to the speakers...

There are some, I think, $20K mains cables out there, the absurdity of this is mind-boggling, all you have to do is ask them about the rest of the miles of power lines that feed the wall outlet, what's so special about that outlet, and they're stuck.

Macdoc wrote:I long ago gave up trying to move air accurately around a variety of room shapes and simply went to where the engineers are ...with accurate pro cans on my head.

A system sealed to your ear canal eliminates all the hoop jumping that speakers entail and requires little power so a $99 tube headphone amp sounds glorious. I put together an OPPO DVD player, $99 tube headphone amp and my Pro Sennheisers for a glorious sound experience.

As to cabling for speakers - 12 gauge is fine and what we used to sell against the rip-off crowd.

You'll get the most detail, finest, highest fidelity sound that way, except for the one important aspect that for me is more important than shear accuracy, and that's the dynamic impact of the bass, it can't be done through headphones, hearing is more than what goes in your ear. It's a bit like food without sight or smell, it loses a substantial impact of the sensation.

How about where you are listening? Has everyone built a sound studio?

Shrunk wrote:I know I've mentioned this company before, but for the uninitiated:

http://www.machinadynamica.com/index.html

...DIAMOND HARDNESS GLASS MICROSPHERES...

How do they work that one out?

laklak wrote:Ah OK, didn't realize what a piss-take it was. Brill.

I remain unclear as to whether it is a piss take. Their products have been reviewed in mainstream audio publications, and have even won awards. Which, of course, doesn't mean it's not a piss take, regardless. But, if so, they've kept the joke going long enough that, if they know it's snake oil they're sellling, it's moved beyond being a joke to being an outright scam. One thing that makes me think they might be for real is the graphics of their website. If they were trying to scam people, I'd expect them to go for a more typically high-end image.

Shrunk wrote:

laklak wrote:Ah OK, didn't realize what a piss-take it was. Brill.

I remain unclear as to whether it is a piss take. Their products have been reviewed in mainstream audio publications, and have even won awards. Which, of course, doesn't mean it's not a piss take, regardless. But, if so, they've kept the joke going long enough that, if they know it's snake oil they're sellling, it's moved beyond being a joke to being an outright scam. One thing that makes me think they might be for real is the graphics of their website. If they were trying to scam people, I'd expect them to go for a more typically high-end image.

We've had this discussion before, about 6 years ago, I think this is the company I called, to talk about their $25 switch outlet covers, which I see are now $30. The high end audio market is so full of shit, it is almost impossible to tell if it's parody. Like the rightwingers come to think of it.

So folks, step right up and see possibly the champions of BS audio gear. From Nordost, from the web sight of a dealer, AudioVision in San Francisco, the Nordost Odin & Odin2 Supreme Reference Cables, price breakdown:

Odin2 Speaker Cable
2M - $37,999.00/pr
3M - $45,999.00/pr
4M - $53,999.00

Odin2 Interconnects
1M - $22,499.00/pr
2M - $27,499.00/pr
3M - $32,499.00/pr

Odin2 Power Cable
1.25M - $16,999.00 ea.
2.5M - $21,999.00 ea.

Odin2 Digital Cable
1.25 Meter $10,999.00


Odin2 Tonearm Cable
1.25 Meter $11,999.00

Scot Dutchy wrote:How about where you are listening? Has everyone built a sound studio?

I tried but it turned out kinda flimsy.

You'll get the most detail, finest, highest fidelity sound that way, except for the one important aspect that for me is more important than shear accuracy, and that's the dynamic impact of the bass, it can't be done through headphones, hearing is more than what goes in your ear. It's a bit like food without sight or smell, it loses a substantial impact of the sensation.

I actually used to plug a sub in and Pioneer had a cool chair that provided subsonics for that purpose. Yeah having an 1812 cannon flap your shirt is cool but impractical and let's face it....the music is created with the guys with cans on their head in charge.

A sound studio bears no relation to listening at home as it's premix.

One of the hardest aspects of sound is the square wave for initial detail of transients and that is hard to effectively "mix in" with the ability to move air. I'll take the headphone trade off.....I like my transients.
One reason I always like LS35a's as studio monitors despite the lack of bottom end - I prefer accuracy in what we actually can hear as opposed to feel.

Getting the transients on something like a tabla is very difficult so you know it's fingers on a skin.
The best recreated sound I ever heard was on a meetup in Quebec of a bunch of high end reps and manufacturers....Oracle, Classé, we had a handbuilt Supex cartidge we supplied and some Dutch electrostatic speakers ( very large panels ) that we were considering importing. Forgotten what arm on the Oracle.

We all sat mesmerized listening to Oregon ....you could place every acoustic instrument in the sound field and the transients were astonishing.

Pat my rep looked at me and said we would be chasing that sound for the rest of our lives....

Scot Dutchy wrote:How about where you are listening? Has everyone built a sound studio?

This one time, I hooked up a DAC to my PC and ran audio cables to a pair of powered monitor speakers. The room was carpeted, but I didn't set any traps. Does that count?

Scot Dutchy wrote:How about where you are listening? Has everyone built a sound studio?

Well, again many years ago when I were a lad, some Amateur Radio friends of mine decided to set up a recording studio. Not having a lot of cash they lined the walls and ceiling with Papier Mâché egg boxes. The effect was quite startling.

Macdoc wrote:

You'll get the most detail, finest, highest fidelity sound that way, except for the one important aspect that for me is more important than shear accuracy, and that's the dynamic impact of the bass, it can't be done through headphones, hearing is more than what goes in your ear. It's a bit like food without sight or smell, it loses a substantial impact of the sensation.

I actually used to plug a sub in and Pioneer had a cool chair that provided subsonics for that purpose. Yeah having an 1812 cannon flap your shirt is cool but impractical and let's face it....the music is created with the guys with cans on their head in charge.

A sound studio bears no relation to listening at home as it's premix.

One of the hardest aspects of sound is the square wave for initial detail of transients and that is hard to effectively "mix in" with the ability to move air. I'll take the headphone trade off.....I like my transients.
One reason I always like LS35a's as studio monitors despite the lack of bottom end - I prefer accuracy in what we actually can hear as opposed to feel.

Getting the transients on something like a tabla is very difficult so you know it's fingers on a skin.
The best recreated sound I ever heard was on a meetup in Quebec of a bunch of high end reps and manufacturers....Oracle, Classé, we had a handbuilt Supex cartidge we supplied and some Dutch electrostatic speakers ( very large panels ) that we were considering importing. Forgotten what arm on the Oracle.

We all sat mesmerized listening to Oregon ....you could place every acoustic instrument in the sound field and the transients were astonishing.

Pat my rep looked at me and said we would be chasing that sound for the rest of our lives....

What you are saying goes against the physics/maths involved. To accurately produce an impulse, you need very high bandwidth, including low frequencies. Electrostatics are generally highly accurate, partly because they're mostly a one-driver system, but most of the ones I'm aware of still use a woofer, they can't reproduce low freqs because they can't move much air. They're fine in headphones because of the acoustics of the air in confined spaces. It really is a matter of preference, not 'accuracy'. It isn't accurate reproduction if you don't feel the sound like you would from the source. I prefer to get that high-dynamic, impactful 'sound', it is more important to what I like, in music as well as soundtracks. Even with headphones that have plenty of very deep bass, it isn't produced in a way that you can feel other than from the skull, the body gets no signal. Our brains are great at supplying missing sound to a degree, but when you get the actual high-volume low frequencies, you know. If ya ain't scaring the cats, you're missing something.

These electrostatics were 7' tall and 4' wide. Believe me they had accurate, wide spectrum sound but again we weren't playing or interested in rock. A tabla works in part in the 70-200 Hz range.

There a different forms of "accuracy" and catering to subsonics is not one of interest to me nor most sound engineers with the possible exception of theatre sound systems. Rooms will alter any such attempt in a small space. I'd much prefer the leading edge sounds be accurate ..

you said it yourself

. They're fine in headphones because of the acoustics of the air in confined spaces

Room acoustics are neither confined nor open....they are a muddle of harmonics and reverberations. It's the reason concert halls have their own sound that designers attempt to control.

Binaural recordings at least get that recording to your ears - music and hall.
https://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=cur ... escription

There are very few insruments or the 1812 cannon ( hardly a musical instrument ) producing "large impactful sounds" under 50 hertz. A big organ can, a concert piano can but not with power....a tuba just gets there at its lowest.
http://www.zytrax.com/tech/audio/audio.html
Movie sound tracks with explosions etc are completely different genre for sound and nicely suited for iMax et al.

This is an important concept .....your hearing sensitivity is not linear ...

Humans are not uniformly sensitive to sound across the frequency spectrum. The most sensitivity is from approximately 300 Hz to 5 KHz with a particularly sensitive spot round 2 - 4 KHz (this phenomena is described by the Fletcher-Munson curves). This means that for many instruments we can be more sensitive to the effects of the 2nd, 3rd or higher harmonics (and equivalent overtones) not the fundamental.
A doubling in sound power/energy results in a 3 dB(SPL) increase, 10 times power sound power/energy results in 10 dB(SPL) increase but humans preceive 10 dB(SPL) as only double the loudness.

I prefer my accuracy in the region we are most sensitive to.

You keep getting hung up on what registers in your ears, that simply isn't all there is to 'hearing'. i've made it quite plain I'm talking at least as much about cinema as I am music. And, it's not like there isn't a great deal of loud, low frequencies in a symphony concert, e.g., plucking the strings of the cellos, basses, etc, I don't know the names of all those instruments, and the bigger timpani/kettle drums probably require considerable dynamic abilities in the low frequencies.

7x4 ft is a big electrostatic, but what is the excursion of the diaphragm? It's not going to get all that deep, at least with much volume. Perusing wiki, the -3dB for an electrostatic is about where a quarter wavelength equals the smaller dimension of a panel, for 4 ft that means roughly 50 Hz. That is OK, bui hardly good sub territory, it still needs a sub.


The non-linearity of our ears responses to sound pressure levels is irrelevant, it's the same for instruments as speakers. Fletcher-Munson is more about how we perceive sound when it's of low volume, the curves straighten out a lot when the sound gets louder. It's the reasoning behind the loudness compensation setting or button as they used to always have on good receivers. I first heard about this back about my senior year in high school 40 years ago, though they had to revise the curves when it was found to be much less of an effect at high frequencies than low.

Listening with headphones is rather similar to going outside on a bright and warm sunny day and only seeing the brightness of everything, you're missing a huge part of the sensation if you don't feel the heat all over your body. I don't dispute anything you say about headphones, except the implication that they aren't a significant compromise, that there isn't a substantial loss in the perception of many sound sources.

Sure - whatever.. you think you can make the transition through the recording process and compression and analogue digital interface twice and get the original infrasonic in a small room...

I've got some monocrystal copper for you 1/2 price. Your body is just another filter....just like a room is....and there is very little in music that activates that filter beyond a couple of instruments. I'd rather hear the metal in the horns.

Most metal I've heard eschews horns.

How is the rest relevant? The digital stuff is not a drawback, the compression is, but all of these would be the same for the headphones, unless you're restricting this to specialty recordings of some kind. Even the binaural recordings are digital I would assume, and compression is a problem that hopefully is a symptom of growing pains in the audio business in digital/streaming realm. Compression certainly isn't a problem with many many movies, the movies/TV are generally increasing the audio quality overall, and have been for some time.

I'll get far closer to the original infrasonics with a big sub than you could get with the best headphones possible. You keep telling me shit I already know and agree with, you just can't admit that headphones have their own deficiencies. If you're talking about accuracy, how many symphonies have you gone to where the soundstage follows your head movements? You even admitted to deficiencies earlier when you mentioned using subs while listening to headphones. It isn't true that sound engineers always use headphones, maybe while mixing, but they often use monitors of some kind when they are recording.

The biggest misunderstanding evidenced here is saying the body is 'just a filter', what does that even mean? It appears to imply you think the sensation of sound you get from the infrasonics is somehow arises as the sound energy is coupled through the body to the ear, or more specifically the sensory apparatus in the ear, and this is clearly false. Perhaps a good example of this is the old movie Earthquake, where they installed vibration-inducing transducers in the seats, giving moviegoers the thrilling feeling of the earth actually shaking. It also makes the 'sounds', in a sense, louder. You can buy such transducersnow, the overall effect does something to our perceptions, and it ain't something coupled to the ear, it's felt through the body and integrated into what we 'hear'. Perception is profoundly complex, the brain integrates all kinds of info and then 'presents', or causes the sensations. Yes, this could be thought of as some kind of filter, but this isn't what you are implying.

crank wrote:We've had this discussion before, about 6 years ago, I think this is the company I called, to talk about their $25 switch outlet covers, which I see are now $30. The high end audio market is so full of shit, it is almost impossible to tell if it's parody. Like the rightwingers come to think of it.

Yes. And while Machina Dynamica is generally treated as a joke in the audio press, when it gets any attention at all, Nordost is generally discussed in serious and reverent tones. I suppose that's the difference between charging $30 for your snake oil, and $60,000.

And the same question remains: Does Nordost really believe the pricing for their cables is justified? Or are they laughing all the way to the bank?