Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

mediaphage posted:

I am always reminded of the coat hanger post: http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?s=97d4a3c39d247bf955a57b3953326a34&p=15412&postcount=28

anyone who uses a pair of coathangers is retarded thats a great way to have metal touching metal and trip your amp (or if your amp doesnt trip it just totally destroys it).

# ¿ Jul 8, 2009 06:39

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:02

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

stizu posted:

That's funny, I just assume that they are all fat. I never thought about why I think that though.

I have noticed that many of these guys with tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment do not use any sort of table or bench to put their equipment on, they just put it on the carpet. Are they concerned that the table might resonate?

im not sure what you mean, anyone with thousands of dollars in cables is going to put that poo poo on magix/rack of silence which also cost a cool 1-2 grand

# ¿ Jul 13, 2009 01:13

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

stizu posted:

That must be it, the last example that I saw of this was of a listening room that was in its own guest house looking building.

I suppose that it has something to do with my age and such, but I just cannot fathom sitting down with the sole purpose of listening to music. Although I do find myself doing way too much of the, "I wonder what this song sounds like through these speakers?" bullshit. Even so, I don't think that I will carry it much further than upgrading/trading amps and speakers.

sometimes it can be fun to just sit down and purely listen to a song or two but they have to be very very good songs. what most audiophiles listen to would probably put me to sleep

# ¿ Jul 13, 2009 07:18

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

mr. nazi posted:

It was.

http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coat-hangers-sound-as-good-monster-cables

Ive ranted about this before. I hate how popular this story was. Its some random rear end guy on audioholics telling a story about a test he conducted. What a great source... if he had reported that the monster cables sounded great everyone would have discredited it, but because hes saying they couldnt tell the difference between monster cable and a coat hanger its quoted everywhere. Those monster cables are also the cheapest of their "speaker cables" in terms of terminated with banana plugs + techflex. If someone bought the monster cable 1000 speaker cables i wouldnt hate on them, they just wanted something that looked okay and had banana plugs and didnt want to do it themselves. Im not saying that higher end monster cables are in any way worth it, but of all the monster cables to be demonized they choose arguably the best bargains out there?

A much much better story is when mike lavigne ( http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vaslt&1036349020&read&3&4& ) had his transport opus $70,000 speaker cables replaced with $200 monster cables and couldnt tell the difference. This test was held by a friend of his on AVS forum. Mike lavigne confirmed the story. Maybe ill find a link to it later

# ¿ Jul 26, 2009 00:12

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

Mister Kingdom posted:

If you are willing to pay $100 for a pair of cables, excuse me, audio interconnects, that do the same job as a much cheaper alternative (not necessarily coat hangers, but actual run-of-the-mill cables), then you should be prepared to be ridiculed. Who's going to see them anyway?

They arent interconnects, consumerist doesnt know what theyre talking about. Monster cable 1000 come in flavors of speaker cables, interconnectors, hdmi, probably component cables too, they were comparing speaker cables not interconnects.

# ¿ Jul 26, 2009 06:11

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

stizu posted:

Someone asked him about that, I don't think that he answered. I am pretty curious about that too.

After further reading, he said that the price might have been more like 50k. I don't know if anyone has read this far, but his source is a laptop that runs through a usb dac then through a t-amp. To top it off, he apparently only/mainly listens to trance music! Someone figured that his dac and amp are worth a whopping 300 bux together! So even figuring in an expesive-ish laptop, his power cable ~~is worth~~ cost him at least ten times the total of the rest of his gear. Oh yeah, and he covers it all in expensive wrapping paper. He also claims that changing sources, amps, and other important pieces of equipment only make the sound different, not better. Yet he feels that the best way to improve a system is to buy things like "Magix levitation feet"

I think that we have reached peak audiophillia.

this is his profile, http://www.head-fi.org/forums/members/patrick82/ I think that all or most of his previously owned stuff was sold to pay for this cord.

patrick probably has mental issues. the funny thing is if you didnt see any videos or pictures, the way he talks about audio cables is no different than everyone else on head-fi.

# ¿ Aug 1, 2009 06:42

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

metaxus posted:

As an employee of the Hi-Fi world, I'll gladly make and send three audiophile-related prizes to the winners as determined by King Hotpants.

It's my day off tomorrow, but when I'm back in the following day I'll make them and take some pics of the awesome prizes on offer.

You just might score some special Australian bags of magic pebbles!

are we going to get to know what the prizes are? i can think of several tweaks but i dont think anyone at head-fi will fall for them unless i put a shitload of effort into it and take pics of me actually doing it...

# ¿ Aug 5, 2009 09:39

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

Gromit posted:

Well, what do you mean by "effect on audio quality"? I can turn my hifi up pretty drat loud in my untreated house, and it all sounds fine to me. True, I spent $7k on the audio components, but that's a far cry from $30k.
"Sounds worlds better", to me, would be like going from AM radio to CD. Not making my subwoofer produce 2dB less inaudible resonance on my antique bottle collection.

Some people think room treatments can do more for sound than simply upgrading speakers (i dont really but some do). However i do subscribe to the belief that room treatments are the biggest change in sound right after a better loud speaker. I think amps just need to be "adequate", and dont really change the sound, cd players and dac do almost nothing, especially for the high prices. So basically if you want to get more out of your speakers dont look at upgrading the gear, you should look at sound treatments, as they will get you closer to how the speaker is actually supposed to sound.

# ¿ Sep 2, 2009 07:42

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html

loving brilliant

# ¿ Nov 24, 2009 22:27

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

I love how the site ENCOURAGES blind testing

"Can you give an example of how to test the effectiveness of this device?

Of course. Here is but one test: the assistant holds a Blackbody up behind the tweeter of the audiophile�s left speaker. The audiophile then chooses which speaker draws his interest more. (He will report that the left speaker has cleaner highs and draws his attention more than the right speaker, which sounds uninteresting in comparison.) Then, the assistant moves to the right speaker, pretending that he is still holding the Blackbody, but in reality he has left it behind the tweeter of the other speaker, where it was before. The audiophile is asked once again to choose which speaker sounds more interesting, more believable. (He is still drawn to the sound of the left speaker, even though he believes that the Blackbody is now behind the right speaker.)"

Of course this IS what will happen right up until they got to "he is still drawn to the sound of the left speaker". I love how they said HE IS STILL as if its a certainty in the same vein as releasing an apple from your hand means gravity will pull it to the ground.

# ¿ Nov 25, 2009 03:56

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

blugu64 posted:

Thats only because he's got a bum right ear.

(The man is still drawn to the left speaker because the right speaker is not hooked up. proof of $1000 product working)

# ¿ Nov 25, 2009 04:11

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

Houston Rockets posted:

The $10,000 Denon AKDL1 (an ethernet cable) has some decent reviews.

http://www.amazon.com/Denon-AKDL1-Dedicated-Link-Cable/dp/B000I1X6PM

It was $500 actually

# ¿ Dec 24, 2010 22:21

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

88h88 posted:

The easiest way to think about sub placement is when you stand in front of a completely still pond and chuck a stone in. The ripples produced all come from the same spot and are nice and smooth.

Wait for the pond to become still again and chuck in two stones this time, you'll notice that unless you're unbelievably lucky the ripples will gently caress with each other in a destructive manner.

This is the simplest way to explain what happens with more than one sub source, obviously rooms factor into this but y'know...

I have no idea what you are saying

are you saying having two subs in opposite corners of a room is a bad thing because the sound waves will be destructive and cancel each other out?

If so youre very very wrong.

15hz = 15 foot long wave, it already cancels itself out when you have one sub. Look up "room modes"

Having one sub is loving awful and causes all sorts of room modes

# ¿ Jul 7, 2012 23:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:02

coolskillrex remix: Jan 1, 2007; gorsh

ohgodwhat posted:

Since he's so very very wrong, could you explain how adding subs reduces destructive interference? And also how you calculated 15 Hz = 15 foot long wave?

I was wrong, theyre much longer (thats bad)

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-wavelength.htm

"Destructive interference" would be stuff like comb filtering from point sources.

Low freq dont really have ANY directivity. The length of a soundwave from ONE subwoofer already crashes into itself multiple times creating destructive nulls/peaks. Placing multiple subwoofers is both constructive AND destructive, it flattens out the peaks and fills the nulls. You dont want to be sitting in a standing wave that results in a bass suckout at 50hz for example, the way to get rid of that is to get more subs. You dont want to be EQing a high Q trough with a +10db boost.

The concept that you would be worse off with multiple subs because it would somehow be destructive to your frequency response is false. What you hear at your listening position is a summation of frequencies bouncing all over your room (and it also happens in 3 dimensions which is why people like Geddes recommend having one elevated subwoofer)

edit: I didnt realize this but i guess 88h88 was sort of just adding onto what neurophonic said with a metaphor. Im not sure what neurophonic means when he says

"Actually, a single bass source is the simplest way to get good bass unless you're absolutely sure there's going to be stereo or more panning done with the really low stuff. Adding distance between boxes will create peaks and nulls that can be unpleasant."

What he posted were charts of overall bass levels between 44hz and 88hz, which has nothing to do with frequency response. Ideally in your room you want a flat frequency response and you want it to be flat over most of the listening positions. EQing your room for one sub simply doesnt work. Ive tried it. You can EQ it flat for one side of your couch and sit 2 feet to the left and your EQ is totally useless and youve probably just put all sorts of stress on your amp using boost. It sucks to know that you have a sweet spot on the couch, and if you have anyone over if they arent sitting in the sweet spot theyre sitting in a null and they dont hear bass from an explosion because its 38hz and theres a huge suckout in their seat.

coolskillrex remix fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jul 8, 2012

# ¿ Jul 8, 2012 02:41

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Inspect Your Gadgets > Ridicule Audiophiles - Find the cat shit's resonant frequency