PS Audio Noise Harvester

[ExtremeSkeptic]

ERS Paper = Hairy transients

The two major problems with headsets are, that bass is very much influenced by how they are placed over the ear or in the ear depending on the design (which has nothing to do with paper) and they also give stereo channels an exaggerated separation.

Paul

For over a year (after I got my vibration isolation rack) I have got too much bass and have spent my time tweaking to reduce the bass. After I modified my Nordost Valhalla cables thinner the problem was solved but everything was bright because the cables weren't good at rejecting EMI anymore. After I wrapped them in ERS Paper the brightness had turned into hairy transients that never existed with the fat Valhallas. It sounds hairier than ever before! People without ERS Paper don't know what they are missing!

 

[Paulhoff]

After I modified my Nordost Valhalla cables thinner the problem was solved but everything was bright because the cables weren't good at rejecting EMI anymore.

Why the hell would thinner cables reduce bass and at the same time be worse with so-called EMI problems.....................

Paul



You have no idea of what your taking about.

 

[Dan O.]

What kind of fool would go through the bother of covering his system in ERS paper and then stick it down with ordinary cellophane tape? Has he no practical real world experience? Has he never pealed off a piece of tape in a dark room? He could have at least used antistatic tape though that would still interfere with the acoustic properties. The best approach would probably be direct ultrasonic bonding though I don't think ES could afford the equipment.

 

[ExtremeSkeptic]

Why the hell would thinner cables reduce bass and at the same time be worse with so-called EMI problems.....................

Paul



You have no idea of what your taking about.

Skeptics aren't interested in knowing the truth because they think they already do. They don't have enough brain power to realize they don't know everything, so they are living in placebo world because it's the easy way out.

Disconnecting conductors from a helical litz cable will separate the signal-carrying conductors further from each other and there will be less EMI rejection.

If the conductor is too thin it will melt, if it's too thick the dielectric will distort the signal and make the bass muddier, this gives the illusion of bigger bass. With a cleaner signal the resolution is higher and the bass is tighter.

A shielded cable makes the power supply work more efficiently which increases the resolution of the component which makes the background appear blacker because of greater clarity and low-level detail. Since the attack and decay is longer everything will sound fuller and heavier, there will be more bass information which makes it sound heavy and fast.

Muddy signal = boomy bass
Less EMI = true bass

To make the signal less muddy you need to burn in the cable to puncture the dielectric, with lower voltage you need longer burn-in. That's why the wiring in your house matters more than the high voltage power lines from the nuclear power plant. The lower the voltage is the better the cable needs to be, it's similar to 192kHz vs 44.1kHz.

 

[ExtremeSkeptic]

Skeptics have very poor memory so I need to post these pictures again. Better do some memory exercises (guess who is ranked #2 in world).

I'm using 1 conductor per signal with all my Valhalla cables, it revealed more low-level detail but it also made it brighter because of more EMI. Wrapping them in ERS Paper transformed the brightness into more information. Everything got heavier because of longer attack and decay.

 

[JamPal]

ES. You have got the bug bad mate. I run a HiFi Forum and even I have never witnessed such nonsense in my entire life.

Well apart from a certain forum member that swears by his Shakti Stones.

 

[Paulhoff]

Skeptics aren't interested in knowing the truth because they think they already do. They don't have enough brain power to realize they don't know everything, so they are living in placebo world because it's the easy way out.
Bogus
Disconnecting conductors from a helical litz cable will separate the signal-carrying conductors further from each other and there will be less EMI rejection.
Bogus
If the conductor is too thin it will melt, if it's too thick the dielectric will distort the signal and make thebass muddier, this gives the illusion of bigger bass. With a cleaner signal the resolution is higher and the bass is tighter.
Bogus
A shielded cable makes the power supply work more efficiently which increases the resolution of the component which makes the background appear blacker because of greater clarity and low-level detail. Since the attack and decay is longer everything will sound fuller and heavier, there will be more bass information which makes it sound heavy and fast.
Bogus
Muddy signal = boomy bass
Less EMI = true bass
Bogus
To make the signal less muddy you need to burn in the cable to puncture the dielectric, with lower voltage you need longer burn-in. That's why the wiring in your house matters more than the high voltage power lines from the nuclear power plant. The lower the voltage is the better the cable needs to be, it's similar to 192kHz vs 44.1kHz.
Bogus, dielectric means nothing at audio Frequencies

You have no idea what your taking about, please don't become a doctor...

Paul

 

[slyjoe]

To make the signal less muddy you need to burn in the cable to puncture the dielectric, with lower voltage you need longer burn-in. That's why the wiring in your house matters more than the high voltage power lines from the nuclear power plant. The lower the voltage is the better the cable needs to be, it's similar to 192kHz vs 44.1kHz.

Yea, like 50KV dielectric puncture would take longer than 250KV. Show how much dielectric puncture would occur at the voltages in your audio system.

Just saw Pauls' post - I agree completely. This is all bogus.

 

[ExtremeSkeptic]

You have no idea what your taking about, please don't become a doctor...

Paul

You don't know my history in psychology. It's not hard to figure out who are the people who don't know what they are talking about. Any sane person who has read this thread will agree.

 

[ExtremeSkeptic]

Yea, like 50KV dielectric puncture would take longer than 250KV. Show how much dielectric puncture would occur at the voltages in your audio system.

Just saw Pauls' post - I agree completely. This is all bogus.

If skeptics don't believe in shielding why would they believe in burn-in? I can hear the difference and so can others, it's proof enough.

For some reason the narrow-minded skeptics think a shield is only effective if it's grounded. But why don't the aircrafts have long cables that connects them to Earth? They are using Carbon Fiber shielding instead, same as ERS Paper uses. There are many passive shielding materials that even NASA uses, why not do the research? Because the skeptics think they already know it all, that's why. They are evil because they are stalling the progression in science. If someone has new ideas or even has proof, the skeptics will destroy it because they don't want to realize they didn't know everything.

 

[slyjoe]

You don't know my history in psychology. It's not hard to figure out who are the people who don't know what they are talking about. Any sane person who has read this thread will agree.

Generally, I would expect a psychologist to know more about wishful thinking, than, say, an Electrical Engineer. However, I would expect an engineer to know more about electrical theories than a psychologist. BTW - how many psychologists use the term "sane"?

 

[slyjoe]

If skeptics don't believe in shielding why would they believe in burn-in? I can hear the difference and so can others, it's proof enough.

For some reason the narrow-minded skeptics think a shield is only effective if it's grounded. But why don't the aircrafts have long cables that connects them to Earth? They are using Carbon Fiber shielding instead, same as ERS Paper uses. There are many passive shielding materials that even NASA uses, why not do the research? Because the skeptics think they already know it all, that's why. They are evil because they are stalling the progression in science. If someone has new ideas or even has proof, the skeptics will destroy it because they don't want to realize they didn't know everything.

We aren't saying we don't believe in shielding, or even dielectric puncture (do you even know what that is?). We are discussing your methods of shielding and other junk and whether or not you can hear a difference. You have not shown any proof.

 

[Paulhoff]

To make the signal less muddy you need to burn in the cable to puncture the dielectric, with lower voltage you need longer burn-in. That's why the wiring in your house matters more than the high voltage power lines from the nuclear power plant. The lower the voltage is the better the cable needs to be, it's similar to 192kHz vs 44.1kHz.

I just love we these guys talk about dielectric burn in and or brake in. Puncturing the dielectric would be called a short and serves no function. First it was the copper and or silver wire being broken in with these guys, now it is the dielectric. The dielectric only come into play at high frequencies in the MHz and higher, and it does not cause distortion, it only causes power lost.

Also what the hell does 44.1 kHz and 192 kHz, have to do with so-called burn in.

Paul

 

[slyjoe]

I'm getting dizzy....

 

[Paulhoff]

I can hear the difference and so can others, it's proof enough.

For some reason the narrow-minded skeptics think a shield is only effective if it's grounded. But why don't the aircrafts have long cables that connects them to Earth? They are using Carbon Fiber shielding instead, same as ERS Paper uses. There are many passive shielding materials that even NASA uses, why not do the research? Because the skeptics think they already know it all, that's why. They are evil because they are stalling the progression in science. If someone has new ideas or even has proof, the skeptics will destroy it because they don't want to realize they didn't know everything.

First you hear what you want to hear, any time I have double blinded my audio friend in testing he has always failed.

Satellites are not grounded, and we have no problem with that, daaaaaa.

Your equipment is already shielded, it is called metal.

And no, NASA does not use Carbon Fiber as a better shield then metal.

Paul

 

[ExtremeSkeptic]

ES. You have got the bug bad mate. I run a HiFi Forum and even I have never witnessed such nonsense in my entire life.

Well apart from a certain forum member that swears by his Shakti Stones.

I eat bugs for breakfast. I'm only interested in truth no matter what it is.

Shakti Stones are less effective than Noise Disruptor. Putting the shield outside of the chassis doesn't give big enough improvements to be worth the price. Putting ERS Paper inside the chassis is the way to go, because the components themselves generate EMI which interfere with each other.

The ignorant skeptics think the improvements are very small, but they are only small if the audio system is full of problems, fixing 1 problem of 100 isn't going to make a big difference. But if you have already fixed 90 problems you start to get huge improvements.
With a single tweak the resolution can easily double. When I moved the transformers of my power conditioner out of the chassis and put them on top of Magix levitation feet I could hear 600 transients per second instead of 300. With a crappy system without any tweaks you can't even hear 30 because they are masked by the big block of brightness. With tweaks you get blackness between each transient which makes it sound hairy. Skeptics really don't know what they are missing, they are just laughing.

 

[jimlintott]

The problem with headphones is that they don't produce volume. I've listened for many hours to headphones and I have never had the feeling that I am sitting in a room with a musical instrument the way that good speakers can. Your whole body senses vibrations, particularly bass.

Headphones have their place but I don't consider them acceptable for quality listening. My car sounds better than any headphones I've ever heard. Alpine Type X speakers are worth the price.

Hey, would a noise harvester work in my car?

 

[Paulhoff]

I'm getting dizzy....

You are new to this? Maybe a virgin.......

I have hear this stuff as I say from my audio friend, I just wish he would read the real stuff and stop reading the woo-woo that is on the internet.

Paul

 

[slyjoe]

You are new to this? Maybe a virgin.......

I have hear this stuff as I say from my audio friend, I just wish he would read the real stuff and stop reading the woo-woo that is on the internet.

Paul

Yea, I just joined hoping to build up my argumenting chops, and hoped I could contribute something. However, I am starting to see the futility when it comes to some arguments. It is so woo I don't know where to start. Do we ever get people looking for real answers around here, or is it always the crazies (I'm not into psychology, so I can use that phrase).

 

[Paulhoff]

Putting ERS Paper inside the chassis is the way to go, because the components themselves generate EMI which interfere with each other.

What sound do a train make........

Woo-Wooooooooo

That is so ridiculous, my 440 MHz radio would never work if that woo-woo happened to audio equipment, let alone my friend's 1.2 Ghz radio.

Paul