As I know that there are quite a large number of our customers who do not have access to the Internet, I have compiled another selection of 'postings' which have appeared on the P.W.B. Internet Discussion Group over the last few months.
I feel sure that this selection will be of interest as an addition to this P.W.B. Newsletter.
The P.W.B. Internet Discussion Group can be accessed via:-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB/
2nd August 2005 From P.W.B. Electronics UK
Subject: Belgian Articles
Dear All
During July there has been two interesting articles on P.W.B. Silver Rainbow Foil by Jacques Thys the editor of a Belgian audio web site http://www.audioforum.be/
What is particularly interesting about these articles are the excellent photographs of how to apply the Foil. Jacques has done an excellent photo job.
First Article - http://www.audioforum.be/article490.html&mode=nested
Second Article - http://www.audioforum.be/article498.html&mode=nested
These articles are written in Dutch. To get a translation copy the URL above to the http://babelfish.altavista.com/ Translate a Web page section and then pick which language you require.
Please will you go to the translation page and enter the URL and see if it easily translates for you in the various languages of the members of this chat group.
We have found that the translation into English is not straightforward, as some of the words do not translate completely correctly e.g. Peter Belt becomes Peter Ring.
Many thanks
May
3rd August 2005 from A. Martherus, The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Belgian Articles
Thanks to these excellent articles, I encouraged myself to expose the P.W.B. theory (again) on our Dutch hifi-forum. These are the first articles on the net in Dutch, you should know.
The responses were as expected: disbelief, ridicule, (s)laughter and the few who dared to try the goodies, only wanted to communicate to me undercover- through "personal messages".
So, no one with positive experiences replied in the forum, but, the few people who tried the Silver Rainbow and heared no differences, did report this, so, the common conclusion on this forum is "it cannot and doesn't work".
The only answer I can honestly give is that, if there are no immediate improvements, you need more treatments, or, you are insensitive to the effect. You can imagen if this answer was accepted or not.
So, also in the Netherlands, still a long way to go...
A. Martherus
P.S. Jaques Thys promised a third article about the Retro Foil and Green Cream.
4th August 2005 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re: Belgian articles.
Again, Arkie, many thanks for all your efforts.
I find that the responses you have been getting are the usual ones after someone has written that they have heard our devices improving their sound.
I have noticed that Jacques Thys, the chief editor of www.audioforum.be has been getting some similar responses after his two articles about our Rainbow Foil. I notice that at least two people have responded with the comment "Oh, it is the placebo effect at work".
Such people seem to rush in with comments such as the one mentioned or the comment "It must be autosuggestion" without thinking - as though no one else in the world has ever heard of the 'placebo effect', or 'autosuggestion' !! What these people do not realise is that what they are actually doing by dismissing other people's experiences with the simplistic comments 'it's a placebo effect' or 'it's autosuggestion' is denying such as Jacques Thys his intelligence. Denying Jacques (and other people's) intelligence to take such things as 'the placebo effect' or 'autosuggestion' into consideration when making the judgement that it could not be either of those, that they DID actually hear the improvements in the sound that they are claiming they have heard.
As I have said many times. As soon as people start ridiculing others, nothing moves any further forward because intelligent people know that it is pointless holding any further discussions with such people and therefore 'back off' and the ridiculers win.
But, it has even more serious repercussions than that. What has happened in the past is that the more the audio journalists and editors persisted in trying to move things a bit forward, the more the ridiculing took place and the advertisers (manufacturers, retailers etc) decided that they did not want to advertise in magazines where the journalists and editors were constantly being ridiculed so they migrated to magazines which did not 'rock the boat'. So, things reach the proverbial 'brick wall' each time. I feel that Jacques Thys could come up against the very same problem if he continues to write about our devices. This is one of the times I hope I am proved wrong.
May.
8th August 2005 From: Bernhard Knoop, Holland
Subject: Re: Feedback from May's talks.
I have a Sony DVD player and i live in the Netherlands.
I have NO problem with playing the disc of May's talks.
Bernhard Knoop
12 August 2005 From: Mats Lindberg, Sweden
Subject: Keep experimenting
Hello, all!
I just wanted to confirm what most of you know already: It pays off to experiment.
I have always been lazy when it comes to foils. Once I have applied them, I do not remove them again to compare the difference in sound, and I do not remove them to try them in a different place if I cannot hear an improvement. Instead I usually put some more foil in other places.
My level of treating is rather low; mostly Rainbow Foil and Electret Cream along with some of the "free techniques". I have also received some samples of more advanced products, which brings me to my point. I got a sample of the Real Foil when it was new, and following the instructions I started with treating a record and then a photo of myself ( I used the two photos in the freezer). The rest of the sample was used on equipment and windows in the listening room. This resulted in a slight improvement of sound.
Then, a few days back, I began to wonder if I ought to try treating a separate photo apart from the ones in the frezer. I had a new picture of myself taken, and went home with four copies. I took some Real Foil from things in the listening room and put on one of the new photographs, and i updated the photo of my older self in the freezer with another of the new photos. The new photo of course got the foils that had been on the older photo. This time the improvement of both Hi-Fi and TV was obvious.
So I thought, why not treat the photos of the rest of my family? I took some more Real Foil from things in the listening room and put them on their photos as well, and i believe this took the improvements one step further.
Now, I cannot say if the improvements are all because of moving the foil from equipment to photos, or if the newer photos also have helped (I renewed the photos of my daughters as well), but I got an improvement because I changed things around a bit.
So how about a little more experimenting?
Kind regards,
Mats Lindberg
12 August 2005 From: Gary Lee, USA
Subject: PWB and intolerance
Thanks to May for posting the links to the Netherlands audio website. Unfortunately, using Babelfish made the pages more babel than fish. But it was a lot better than trying to read Dutch, especially with my pathetic knowledge of only one language - English. At least I was able to get some idea of what was said. It did appear that a few people had responded with posts about positive results.
Though it remains ever-popular for critics of PWB to respond with the placebo argument, I still don't see that as valid criticism. Even if it were only in our heads or a placebo effect, sound perceived is sound heard. Therefore, the argument is false. To paraphrase Descartes: I hear, therefore I enjoy (or not). If I like Mozart more because I think I hear it better, my increased enjoyment is real in my experience. When will those small-minded audiophiles who offer such explanations ever understand that? And how is that any different from one audiophile hearing, for example, a Plinius amp and having an audio epiphany, while another audiophile hears the same amp and remains unimpressed?
6 months ago I was at an audio dealer's looking for new speakers. (Forgive me, May, but my old speakers were sagging under the weight of all the foils.) I heard 3 different high-end models and brands, none of which were cheap. I couldn't stand the sound from two of them and the third was decent but not worth the $6000 U.S. price tag (3333 pounds sterling?). However, another customer commented positively on two of the three speakers and bought the $6K speakers I rejected. Is that voodoo? Why aren't people decrying these well- known speaker makers as snake-oil merchants? After all, I feel there is more than a little of snake-oil salesmanship in high-end speakers. I have a friend who uses the same drivers used by elite speaker makers and he's always telling me how manufacturers use $200 worth of parts and sell the product for 15 to 30 times that price.
As usual, the astonishing intolerance in the audio world amazes me. At the Audio Asylum there have been several threads, one started by May, that heaped abuse on Geoff Kait, as well as Peter and May. The resilience of people who are willing to go against the audio establishment is noteworthy and I salute you. There will come a tipping point when things start the other way, and I admire your patience until then. It is more than I would have.
Gary
19th August 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: Music Web International Article
Hello Everyone.
Bill Kenny has written a very good article on his initial findings of some P.W.B. products.
If you are a member of any Audio or Hi-Fi discussion group, can you please post a message letting everyone know of this new article. It could be the start of a new discussion of P.W.B. in a more positive note.
The link to his article is below.
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Aug05/Read_this_facing_north.htm or it can be reached via the front page of the P.W.B. Webpage. http://www.belt.demon.co.uk
Kind regards
May
30th August 2005 From: Richard Graham, UK
Subject: The simple things.
Taking a short break from the scorching Indian Summer that has hit the UK, I decided to take a moment to treat some discs. Many of us are aware that treating a disc will help us 'hear' improved sound when it is played. Less of us keep in mind that it will help other discs have a better sound, even when it is not in the player.
So there I was, watching a throwaway film on TV (great picture though!), and adding black, violet, and blue inks to the discs and cases respectively. I felt quite alarmed at how much the sound improved, just adding these inks from the Chunky Pens, since the discs had been in the listening room (if only - it's a lounge!) For some time before.
In the end, the time taken was a little more than other simple treatments, but it was not to be ignored - far from it.
So for the next few days, when I have a moment, I will be mainly colouring.
Richard
30th August 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK
Subject: The latest P.W.B. Newsletter is now on line.
Dear All
The latest P.W.B. Newsletter is now on line at the link below:-
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/vol0601/vol0601.html
or via the front page of P.W.B. Electronics
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk
There is also a new Digest of the articles and comments from our customers
that have appeared on the P.W.B. Yahoo group web site.
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/newsletter/yahoo_digest/Digest_Summer_2005.htm
You will also find links to two new sets of product reviews at:-
MusicWeb International article by Bill Kenny - 19th August 2005
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Aug05/Read_this_facing_north.htm
and
Belgian Audio web page article - latest on the 21st August 2005
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/Belgian_Article.htm
this link is via our web pages to let you know how to read a translation.
Kind regards
May
30th August 2005 From: Richard Graham, UK
Subject: Bi-wire Madness
I understand that there are more than a few engineers/audiophiles who question the value of bi-wiring (not bi-amping) loudspeakers.
I hope I haven't posted this before, but a recent moving around of things necessitated not bi-wiring some speakers. Sadly, I had misplaced (thrown away, I suspect) the brass links between the two sets of terminals on the loudspeakers, and wondered what to do. Whilst thinking of putting some 'Smart Metalled' copper wire in their place, I thought what the heck, skipped the soldering, and used Smart Metal as a wire. I found it rather good. Very good in fact, and I would be very interested in hearing of anyone else who has found novel uses for this rarely spoken product.
Richard
3rd September 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe, UK
Subject: Re: Bi-wire Madness
Richard,
Can this tip be described as PWB lateral thinking? If so it was inspired!
I have solid copper links - which I made at work, in place of the original links since I purchased the speakers. This is a throw-back to the days when I believed heavy duty was the only answer concerning things HI-FI. Replacing those with Smart Metal is yet another revelation. It recalls the day I threw out my solid copper speaker leads and put in a PWB made set. It was difficult to conceive how those thin little efforts could produce such a full and transparent sound.
Kevin.
12 September 2005 From: A.Martherus, The Netherlands
Subject: www.TNT-audio.com
Hello everyone,
I tried to persuade the editor of TNT-audio, a free web magazine about hifi, to try some P.W.B. goodies.
This is an Italian guy.
Read about my findings...
A. Martherus
***************
-----original message(1)-----
[aug. 22, 2005]
To: the editor of the internet magazine www.tnt-audio.com
Dear editor,
I'm a long time reader of your excellent web-magazine. Through the years, it helped me a lot, making my existing hifi-system better. Yes, I'm a tweaker. With a lot of soldering work inside my amplifier (Marantz PM80-II), cd-player (Denon DCD1015) and Sony tuner, the sound became from 'good' to 'very good'. The tips on your do-it-your- self section certainly helped.
The system really became musical since I discovered Ennemosers C37 lacker. I own self made French speakers from Davis, the M4's. Before, they sounded a bit sharp, but very clear and with very good hifi properties. Now, they sound really involving.
Since a year or two however, I discovered a set of tweaks, mere filosofy, that brought my system into another higher league. These are the ones of Peter W. Belt. Since I never read about him on your site, I thought it is time to give him a bit more attention. Now my system is no longer "hifi"; every time I put up some music, all I can do is enjoy. Words like "wonderful", "musical" come to my mind.
Here you can read about a customer who used the cheapest tweaks from Peter Belt.
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Aug05/Read_this_facing_north.htm
Indeed, P.W.B. gives away a lot of free tweaks, that work, but work better in synergy with his cheapest tweaks.
So, I strongly advise you, to - try a "beginners pack" (E 75,-) - or, better, invite the man or interview him and let him show you the working of his products - if you don't want to spend any cash, just ask for a free sample of the Silver Rainbow Foil
Kind regards,
Arkie Martherus,
The Netherlands
-----original message(2)-----
[aug. 22, 2005]
Been there, done that. In my opinion, the Silver Rainbow Foil doesn't work.
Tested and re-tested, no way.
Lucio
-----original message(3)-----
[aug. 23, 2005]
Dear Lucio,
It is very possible that the Foil did not work for you. This happens to many others.
Maybe in your situation this Foil wasn't powerfull enough?
Wouldn't it just be fair to give the Belts another chance, say, like you -hypothetically- recieved a speaker from Wilson Audio that wouldn't sound super. You would have called the designer or importer and asked "hey, your speaker doesn't sound good. Would you please come and make it sound good?"
So, why don't you invite the Belts to send you Really powerfull devices they are selling, just to test them, and just to see if their promises hold? (Or let them come to demonstrate them.)
Another thing is, that it would be just fun to hear and publish an interview with someone in Audio with a totally different filosofy.
There are more of those guys, like Michael Green. Again totally different from the rest.
Just like you interviewed Dieter Ennemoser, according to some -like me- a genius, and according to others a loonatic. (forgive the word)
Thank you for your time.
Yours truly,
-----original message(4)-----
Wouldn't it just be fair to give the Belts another chance, say, ...
I tried the SIlver Rainbow foils as they are sold to anyone. They Didn't work. What else should I do? I've already wasted enough of my time.
Another thing is, that it would be just fun to hear and publish an interview with someone in Audio with a totally different filosofy.
This one is easier, but I'm pretty sure Belt and his son (if I remember well) weren't very happy with my findings... so an interview might be useless or...harmful ;-)
Lucio
*************
13th September 2005 From: Bob Benn, USA.
Subject: Re: www.TNT-audio.com
Hello from Nashville, Tennessee;
Its been my experience that with the Belt products, the listener must have either a neutral or positive expectation that the products will work. If you think about it, Peter's products address the morphis resonances which trigger the human 'danger' mechisim. If someone who can minimize this danger mechisim to begin with will hear better, and the Belt products will have an effect of reducing this alert mechisim even futher.
If some of Peter's products are stronger than others, then it would make sense that these products should be used to demonstrate the effects of neutralizing the morphis resonances that impacts our ability to listen. I say this because the perception seems to be these products and this unique approach to enhancing the listening experience that mainstream audiophiles have their defenses up before they ever try the products!
As a personal testiment, I bought the starter kit after a positive experience with the free samples of cream and foils. More positive results were achieved with the starter kit products. Then I tried the morphic cream. At the time, to me it was expensive and truth be told, I didn't really have the extra money to afford the purchase. My results went counter to everyone's experience, I didn't hear the improvement that I expected. The product didn't work. Or did it, but was my stress over paying for it so strong that my danger could not be neutralized by the morphic cream?
To generate a success story for the Belt's and their life-long work, I would like to see the most powerfull product or products made available to the members of this forum at very, very resonable prices, so price is not a factor like it was for me with the morphic cream. With powerful products in the hands of people that have a postive attitude and believe in the products and problem these products are trying to address, we may see success stories and a new ground-swell of support and endorsements for May and Peter and their work.
Thanks
Bob
13th September 2005 From: Richard Graham, UK
Subject: Re: www.TNT-audio.com
And greetings from London!
I think the best state of mind in which to apprehend something new was captured by our local lad John Keats, with his idea of negative capability, which is 'when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason'.
As we all know, few of Peter's critics stay clear of irritability.
I also wish I could be so clear that it is just state of mind that plays a part in our receptivity. I am sure price/cost plays a role, and have often urged Peter to invent something that could be housed in a huge slab of metal - value for money and indeed quality these days often seems rooted in the presence of large amounts of unnecessary metal. In this month's HiFi News there is a photo of the innards of some new Musical Fidelity CD Player. The electronics scarcely fill 50% of the innards - it is scandalous.
It is also an interesting point that high costs tend to give rise to scepticism - not something the critics address. Most of us do not think 'As I have paid vast amounts for this snake oil, it must work'. Many years ago I learnt, on purchasing an expensive Logic turntable from Howard Popeck as a student, nothing focuses the mind, and ones critical faculties better than extravagance. I spent days in a panic thinking 'what have I done!'. Later, I could appreciate it's values.
Of course I do wish Peter sold enough stuff for him to be able to reduce costs, given the development time, but the man has to survive in a hostile climate, satisfy a need for occasional ice-creams, and we must do our bit. And if you want value for money, get the Sonic T amp, some of his products, and laugh in the face of orthodoxy.
Richard
14th September 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK
Subject: P.W.B. - Second Music Web International Article.
Hello Everyone.
Bill Kenny has written a very good second article on his findings of some P.W.B. products.
If you are a member of any Audio or Hi-Fi discussion group, can you please post a message letting everyone know of this new article. It could be the start of a new discussion of P.W.B. in a more positive note.
The link to his article is below.
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2005/Sep05/Snark.htm or it can be reached via the front page of the P.W.B. Webpage. http://www.belt.demon.co.uk
Kind regards
May
12 October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK
Subject: Internet Articles re P.W.B.
Dear All.
Some internet articles and Feedback comments that have come out in the last week or so can be found via the links below or via the front page of our web site.
http://www.belt.demon.co.uk
Dave Clark has written another article called "Audio Ramblings - Faith and Belief in Audio"
And it can be found at the link below, http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue21/audioramblings1.htm
A comment in the Bulletin Board section of MusicWeb International and Bill Kenny's reply can be found via the link below
http://members2.boardhost.com/MusicWebUK/msg/2262.html
http://members2.boardhost.com/MusicWebUK/msg/2266.html
If you find anymore articles please let us know.
Kind regards
May
13th October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: "Audio ramblings" article.
Dear All
On reading the Dave Clark article 'audio ramblings', I can fully appreciate the difficulty which writers who have been involved in audio for many years have in trying to describe the effect on the sound when using our devices and in trying to describe our concept to others.
I would be very interested in knowing, from the many people who have been able to view the DVDs of my talks, is how easy (or difficult) it has been for them to understand the concept we arrived at over 20 years ago.
I am aware that on various Internet sites, whenever the name Peter Belt or whenever any of the various P.W.B. Devices are mentioned, there is inevitably a hostile reaction - such as "If anyone can hear any changes in the sound after using P.W.B. Devices, it must be because of blind faith, or autosuggestion, or the placebo effect, or imagination, or mood changes, or effective marketing ! Because, the devices, as described cannot possibly work - they cannot possibly have any effect on the sound."
It seems that many people are just not able to come to terms with the general concept we put forward - which is - "If, after using our techniques or devices, the sound is perceived as having improved and additional musical information can be heard and our devices cannot be having any effect on the signal travelling through the equipment nor can they be having any effect on the acoustic air pressures in the room, then the additional information which can now be heard must have been there - available - in the room - prior to our treatments !! Which means that the audio equipment (whoever manufactured it or whatever it's cost) must have been perfectly capable of handling all the additional information, all the time, and presenting it into the room through the loudspeakers. And that 'something' must have been preventing this additional information being perceived correctly."
This is a different concept to understand and come to terms with, particularly when it challenges audio engineering conventional training i.e. That there are only two ways to change sound.
a) to have an effect on the actual audio signal
b) to affect the acoustic air pressure waves in the room.
In addition, even when our new concept IS understood, it is then difficult to write about it, particularly by people who have probably spent a lifetime writing about audio matters in a conventional way, from a conventional theory background.
It is a courageous man (or woman) who attempts to introduce a new concept into an entrenched world. Fortunately (within history) some brave people did - one such person being Joseph Lister with his "the germs are in the air" concept which eventually (but not without years of ridicule) revolutionised medicine.
Even after Dave Clark had experienced the improvement to the sound when his wife placed beneficial messages on the speakers and then experiencing the sound going so much worse that he had to shout STOP IT when she changed the messages to a 'bad' message he could only respond with the expression "Weird" !! He still has not been able to advance further in his thinking - he still has not been challenged enough to say "Wait one moment, wait one moment, there is something strange going on here - I must investigate further." Which is the point I would expect any 'professional in audio' to reach sooner or later !!
Dave Clark had no idea what his wife Carol had been doing, so his experience could not be explained by blind faith, autosuggestion, placebo effect, imagination, mood changes or effective marketing.
Regards,
May.
13th October 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe, UK.
Subject: Re. Audio ramblings article
Dear All,
To the best of my recollection, during the first years I used PWB devices I had but a vague idea of how they worked. This in spite of the fact that I read all the PWB papers associated with the products. It was all just too far removed from my normal understanding of cause and effect where sound reproduction is concerned. I recall quite clearly having thoughts that Peter Belt might be some sort of charlatan – even after quite clearly hearing several sound improvements using Belt products. Such was my reluctance to accept the explanations presented in PWB literature. The trail I followed to get a better grip on the whole concept was to read some of the books recommended in the PWB papers: Rupert Sheldrake's "Presence Of The Past" and John Gribbin's " In Search Of Schrodinger's Cat". I have read many books of a similar nature since, but those two books sparked the realisation that the world we inhabit is a very strange one indeed and opened a window of acceptance within me to new ideas and concepts. Consequently, by the time I watched the first video of May's talk and the subsequent DVD's, I had a preparation that was of great help. Even so, the full realisation that Belt devices are altering only our perception and that the sound was there in the room all along took the longest to sink in. It is more enlightning to relate my attempts explain PWB to others. There are now a number of people I occasionally discuss PWB with when the opportunity arises. Unfortunately, they are not driven by a love of music, as are most of us Belt users, so they are not as likely to dip a courious toe in the water so to speak. Even so, there are now two of those who say that they hear an improved sound following some PWB treatment I carried out to their hi-fi and CD's. In spite of many attempts at explaining what is going on, getting across the notion that the sound is there in the room all along is a stumbling block – just as it was for me. And that the Devices are working on our perception and not the piece of equipment it is attached to. The final retort will nearly always be "How can a little bit of foil stuck to a disc possibly have any effect on how it sounds" all the previous conversation has been disregarded! It is the bridge too far in their acceptance of what I'm trying to say. People seem to have fixed ideas on how the world turns and do not like their understanding of it challenged. I felt the same challenge to my way of thinking when I read those first Belt papers and kind of turned off dwelling on them, only taking in enough to know how to use the product and get a sound lift. Of course I have since read and re read all those papers many times over – just cannot get enough knowledge on the workings of Belt devices now. I found that the video and DVD talks were then a good supplement to the papers. They still have to be watched through a few times to gain the most from them however.
A heroic attempt at reporting his findings after reviewing PWB devices I found only recently was from a link on this very site. You will find by clicking on links and it is currently about the third item down: Head-Hi Forum re.Silver Rainbow Foil. Please excuse me if it is old news to all of you but I bumbled across it only days ago.
As May says, "It is a courageous Man (or Woman) who attempts to introduce a new concept". It seems that it takes an equally brave man (or woman) to show support.
Kevin Kehoe.
16th October 2005 From: John Nicholls. UK.
Subject: Re: "Audio ramblings" article.
May,
In response to your question, I found the concepts spoken of in the DVD's very easy to understand, I found them to be clear and common sense.
However that is approaching them from my background and education of 15 years investigation into the unseen worlds - simply put the understandng that the causation of everything physical originates or condenses from that which is unseen.
This is the kind of education that I wished I had been given at school as it would have saved me a lot of pain and confusion, but alas real life isn't on the curriculum.
What really caught me about your concepts was how they dovetailed with my understandings and unlocked whole new areas of knowledge.
I believe that the primal instinct unsettlement that many of your products address, is a profound foundation upon which a human life is built and as such your products have a significance way beyond audio.
What is clear though is the challenge your concepts pose to 'most' people, and how irrational the objections can be. As an example I have a work collegue into HIFI who won't have dimmer switches in his house because they affect the sound, he has mpingo discs (expensive rare ebony) on his speakers and swears they make a huge difference, yet he scoffs at the idea of freezing a cd or putting some foil on it affecting the sound. Yet at the end of the day he enjoys his system and I enjoy mine.
I don't envy you as a business trying to grow in the face of the hostility you face, but I am thoroughly grateful that there is a small group of people in this world doing what you keep doing.
Thank you
John Nicholls
17th October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: Audio ramblings.
Thanks Kevin, your reply was very helpful. I raise my hat to your perseverance in struggling to understand.
Talking about perseverance. It is now October 2005 and it was 15 years ago this month (October 1990) that Robert Harley's article on Cryogenic freezing appeared the American magazine Stereophile. And, Robert Harley's article was the result of an earlier discussion he had with the Canadian Ed Meitner with Ed Meitner describing how one could get improvements in the sound by cryogenically freezing CDs, components, interconnects etc.
If any of you have logged onto the positive-feedback magazine web site mentioned in an earlier posting, if you scroll down on the contents page you will see that Dave Clark has published two interviews with two people involved in cryogenic freezing. I am pleased to see Dave Clark investigating this subject but I cannot help asking "why does it really take so long for a subject such as this to be discussed openly in an audio magazine ?"
I have copied some snippets from the interviews below.
From "An interview with Craig Goff."
Some of those who use cryogenic processing as an indigenous part of their manufacturing process have undertaken the task of attempting to quantify the effects. The manufacturer of a high-end cryogenically treated DAC states unequivocally that he can measure the differences between treated and untreated DAC units. Is he sharing the nature of these tests with the audio community? It's not a surprise that he is not; since those are proprietary findings and part of his intellectual property.
Furthermore, there are some who are using cryogenics in their production without announcing its presence. For them it is a "secret weapon", since there are no readily discernible visible changes to an object that has been cryo treated. How then will objective measurement and evaluation of cryogenic processing take place?
I doubt that the audio community will be the open source for this information. It is more likely that industrial research will reveal these secrets in time, assuming that there is an interest in pursuing knowledge in this particular vein of audio physics.
So then people may say it is all a bunch of snake-oil!
On the one hand, those who have the opportunity to compare identical cryo treated and non-cryo treated components will hear a difference, assuming that the playback system has sufficient resolution to reveal them. The fact that the reasoning for that difference is not yet found in abundant scientific or analytical discussion, relegates (for some) cryogenic processing to the place reserved for debate about tubes vs. Transistors, cone vs. rollerball isolation, etc.
However, if an effect in nature can be reliably perceived and reproduced by and for a large enough audience, then it exists. The lack of a scientific description does nothing to denigrate the effect's existence. It simply means that our scientific capacity to describe the effect has not yet been sufficiently developed.
The future of cryogenic processing as a whole is very bright, since new industrial applications are constantly being discovered. Within audio, cryogenics will continue to play an advancing role, with the likelihood of it moving into the mainstream once suitable data is available to support those who doubt its premise. Until then, I am concerned that it will be viewed as "one more of those things that we can hear and like, but don't yet know how to quantify".
******************************************
From an "Interview with Charles Beresford."
I then had the idea to process a few CDs in the late 1980s to see what would happen. To my amazement, the improvement was dramatic.
Can any of this measured?
In a sense, yes. Audibly, the benefits have been measured for many years and by many ears.
******************************************
I have written about this numerous times over the past 20 years - the fact that improvements created by freezing cannot be openly discussed within the traditional audio magazines - especially the magazines which carry advertising. No reviewer or editor can write about how audio equipment can be improved with cryogenic freezing when the magazine relies upon the advertising revenue from manufacturers and retailers for its very survival - adverts from manufacturers and retailers who are trying to sell new UNFROZEN equipment. When there are millions and millions of pounds/dollars worth of unfrozen audio equipment in manufacturers stockrooms, coming off the production line today, yesterday, tomorrow, in retailers stock rooms and showrooms, in overseas agents stockrooms, in containers on the high seas going to overseas agents - ALL UNFROZEN !! No one, with any sense, would purchase anything unfrozen after they had been told that it would have sounded so much better if the components and materials had been frozen beforehand !! Craig Goff is correct when he says that he knows of some manufacturers using the freezing process without disclosing that fact and, even more importantly, I have known people to specially 'freeze' only the one item of equipment being submitted for review whilst all the other identical equipment, coming off the production line and being sent out to the retailers to be sold to the buying public, has not been through the freezing process !! - only the review sample had been frozen. How would a reviewer know whether something had been frozen or not ? There is nothing obviously different to be seen so the equipment could get a rave review and people purchase the (unfrozen) equipment inspired by that rave review. As Craig Goff says "I doubt that the audio community will be the open source for this information."
I applaud Dave Clark's courage in introducing this (freezing) subject again but I don't think Dave would tell us of any backlash from the audio industry - my experience has been that the magazines just keep quiet - preferring not to 'rock the boat'.
What would be even more courageous of Dave Clark (or anyone else in the audio magazines) if he/they were to get two identical CD players, or tw identical DVD players, or two identical interconnect cables and have one of them frozen, keeping it's twin as an untreated standard. To do comparative listening tests and then to write about his experiences in his magazine. From the past experiences we have had with audio magazine journalists and editors I do not think that will happen. When such a thing was done in the UK (an inexpensive 'treated' CD player compared to an expensive 'untreated' player) the result was a seismic earthquake - the rumblings of which are still carrying on. The magazine, editor and journalist in question, were jumped on from a great height and the repercussions are still evident. How could Dave Clark (or anyone else) carry out such an experiment and write about it when their advertising revenue comes from manufacturers advertising, trying to sell new, UNFROZEN equipment. ?
Just last week, in the Internet magazine Audio Asylum (Tweakers Asylum section) some people have been describing how they have gained improvements by freezing things in their own domestic deep freezer. Again, much of the reaction to this posting has been from people saying :-
"It's a pretty poor waste of time".,
"What you've suggested with the freezer is pure doodoo."
"It cannot do anything".,
"Molecularly, I do not believe any differences can be found."
"It cannot have any effect on the sound"
I constantly guard against getting involved in a cryogenic versus domestic deep freeze 'shoot out'. The reason why we introduced people (some 20 years ago !!) to the freezing technique using their domestic deep freezer was to encourage people to experiment for themselves. Because if EITHER freezing technique (cryogenic or domestic freezer) gives improvements in the sound, then this should make people in audio sit up and take notice.
Regards,
May
24th October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK
Subject: Jim's article is "Hearing is Different"
Dear All.
Earlier this year I was involved in quite an exchange of views with Jim Austin in different sections of the Internet Audio Asylum site. Jim Austin had previously published an article in the American Hi Fi magazine "Stereophile" criticising certain devices and concepts, stating that, in his opinion, they could not possibly have an effect on the sound and if anyone claimed to be able to hear any effect from these particular devices, then it could only be because of 'autosuggestion', 'the placebo effect', 'imagination', 'mood changes' or 'effective marketing' !! That there couldn't be any other explanation.
Jim Austin has just published a further article on the Home Page of Stereophile - (it can be accessed through Google). The title of Jim's article is "Hearing is Different".
As the Stereophile internet Home Page changes each week, I would recommend that people try to read the article in full as soon as possible.
http://www.stereophile.com/news/102405brain/
Very briefly,
Jim's article starts "Want to improve your hearing ? Have someone tickle your toes, or lightly stroke the palm of your hand. Sounds crazy, but it works, and things get even weirder."
The articles refers to some research done recently by the Max Planck Institute in Germany which points to "the experience of hearing is directly affected, at the very earliest and most primitive stages, by other senses."
Over 20 years Peter realised that what goes on in the brain has a direct effect on the way we perceive the information contained in the sound we hear. And, in addition, that what is going on in the modern environment has an effect on how our brain reacts and that these brain reactions, in turn, affect how the information from our hearing mechanism is processed.
And, for the same length of time, Peter has been mocked and ridiculed for having such a concept, as have others who have dared to speak of their own personal experiences.
Very nearly 20 years ago, in a paper I wrote in March 1986, I described some recent research by Ian Russell of Sussex University. Ian Russell had discovered that the hearing mechanism is a two way system, that information travels to the working memory from the hearing mechanism but that, in the opposite direction, the brain sends signals and instructions back to the hearing mechanism. So, the hearing mechanism is not solely responding to the acoustic air pressures and nothing else, it is also responding to signals sent from the brain - which in turn can have an effect on the 'sound' information being processed by our working memory.
As so many of our customers have experienced. Treat the environment and you improve the sound. Jim ends his article by asking the question "Does it work the same way with the other senses ?" Again, as so many of our customers have experienced - Yes. After treating the environment and improving their sound, they have also reported that suddenly they find that the TV picture is better !! Better definition, better colours, better textures of materials, sparkle of glass, sheen of metals, shine of brass musical instruments etc.
After reading Jim Austin's article, I wonder "Is there really a chink of light, at long last, which can challenge the dogmatic, dismissive and narrow objective approach by so many involved in the audio industry ?"
Peter described, 20 years ago, how someone telling a lie in a room playing music can cause the sound to be perceived as worse - not just by the one person telling the lie but by everyone else present in the room. How individuals, changing their body posture can adversely affect the sound for everyone present in the room. Such as crossing or uncrossing their ankles, crossing or uncrossing their legs, folding or unfolding their arms - all these changes can have an effect on the 'sound'. Take this thought process a stage further and you can then begin to realise why the sound in some Hi Fi show demonstrations rooms can be so abysmally bad and that the commonly held belief usually put forward by the audio industry that the poor sound is caused by poor room acoustics may not be valid.
Regards,
May
24th Ocyober 2005 From: Mark Kirby. USA.
Subject: RE: "Hearing is Different"
Dear All.
For me, the audiophile proof of the interrelatedness of the senses is the one so common that everyone takes it for granted - music with the lights on versus music with the lights off. So far as I know, no one claims that turning down the lights changes the sound waves. And no one disputes that the listener experiences the sound in a radically different way.
Does anyone even think twice when the house lights come down before the concert begins? It's easy to ignore the obvious. What I appreciate about Peter Belt's work is that it began by paying close attention to what is, so to speak, happening in front of your face.
Mark
25th October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: "Hearing is different"
To use an expression Mark, you have 'hit the nail on the head'. Yes, Peter's work and discoveries came about because he paid close attention to what was happening, as you put it, 'in front of his face'.
I am in the process of writing quite a long article, concentrating on this very subject.
This week (October 2005) Jim Austin is reporting what researchers at the Max Planck Institute have just found - that the hearing can be affected by other things going on in the brain - but, when you think about it more seriously,
Jim Austin SHOULD HAVE been aware of such things HIMSELF, for quite a number of years, if he has been a serious listener ! Because so many of the things which affect how we 'hear' and interpret music have been there 'in their faces' for everyone involved in audio to discover !! As I repeat so often, as long ago as 20 years ago a few of the British Hi Fi magazines were publishing articles telling people some of the things which affected how we 'hear'. Put quite simply - the information was there - available - for everyone to discover - it was 'staring them in the face'. Peter was not unique. It has been hard work for him, his conventional training in electronic and acoustics being challenged with each step he took. At the beginning he did not have a unique insight - he just was not prepared to accept simplistic, dismissive explanations such as the ones put forward by such as Jim Austin was putting forward just a few months ago!! And, of course, put forward by numerous other commentators reporting on various unusual 'tweaks'. I.e. That if there are changes perceived with the sound and there have been no changes to the audio signal or to the acoustic air pressure waves, then the changes CAN ONLY BE because of 'auto-suggestion', 'placebo effect', 'imagination', 'mood changes', 'effective marketing' !!
So many times, in the course of history, discoveries have been made by people who observed things that were happening around them. But, these same 'things that were happening' were also there, for so many others to 'see' - but were missed !! So, looking back into history one can ask two questions
1) Why was that one person able to make that particular discovery ? AND
2) Why didn't others (most of the time of equal training and intelligence) make the same observation and come to the same conclusion and make the same discovery ?
What comes through from history is that the pioneers, the discoverers seem to share a common attribute - an already prepared mind which was open enough to take advantage of an unusual, unexpected or chance event.
We personally know that the major deterrent for many audio reviewers reporting what they had heard was the fear of being mocked and ridiculed. Also, why does it need some sort of proof by researchers in the Max Planck Institute (researchers who are not actually in the audio industry !) Before Jim Austin can begin to consider a different explanation than the usual (and dismissive) 'auto-suggestion' etc ? For the people who have had the courage to describe what they have experienced, they have usually been met with what I refer to as the "Dr Hughes Bennett Syndrome" named after the doctor in the Joseph Lister story who said "Where are the germs? Show them to us and we will believe. Has anybody seen these germs ?"
The observation which was available to Joseph Lister was also available to all the other Doctors and Surgeons, including Dr Hughes Bennett - as well as to the other Doctors who found it so amusing to chant "Close the door or Dr Lister's germs will escape".
Regards,
May
25th October 2005 From: Tom Marsden. UK
Subject: "Hearing is different"
My question to you Mark is - what effect does the level of illumination have on you? Does the sound seem better in total darkness, low level light or very bright light?
Tom Marsden.
25 October 2005 From: Mark Kirby. USA.
Subject: RE: "Hearing is different"
Tom,
For me the sound is always richer and more detailed and the imaging more solid in the dark - dark except for a few glowing tubes (the audiophile's hearth?) and light from the city night coming through the one big window in my listening room.
The improvement is roughly proportionate to the decrease in the amount of light, low level light being gentler to the ears as it approaches darkness.
When I switch off the reading light (sits behind my left ear) the sound relaxes markedly.
Mark.
26th October 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: "Hearing is Different"
Regarding the subject of listening with the light on or off. Peter has done a lot of experimenting with the effect of light - both artificial light and light entering through windows. Yes, you are right Mark with your observation that you perceived the sound as worse with the light on.
However, if you attach a strip of Foil to the light shade then, with the light on, the sound will not be as poor. Further, if you apply a small amount of Cream-Electret to a small area of the light bulb and to a small area of the light shade and to a small area of the outer insulation of the cable going to the light fitting, you will find that now the sound is better with the light on and when you switch the light out, the sound will be perceived as 'not as good'. This is particularly important when the listening room is the family living room or when the listening room is a Hi Fi Retailer's showroom or the demonstration room at a Hi Fi Show when the lights have to be on, when you can't have the lights out.
Even better. If you have our Morphic Liquid then apply some of the Morphic Liquid to the glass of the light bulb and you will be amazed at the improvements in the sound.
One or two of our old established customers have expressed a worry that I may be being too harsh regarding some audio journalists and some other members of the audio industry.
But, imagine Mark (Kirby) - who has just described his experiences to us - being a 'professional in the audio industry for some 30 years', telling audio journalists, audio equipment retailers, audio equipment manufacturers what he had observed - that turning off the lights improved the 'sound' - which conversely also means that after hearing the sound with the lights off, when the lights are switched on again, the 'sound' is perceived as worse !! And then imagine Mark watching the retailers installing more and more spot lights in their listening rooms, watching manufacturers installing more and more spotlights in their demonstration rooms at Hi Fi Shows and they and the journalists saying to Mark personally ( and in print) "Don't be silly - lights on or off cannot possibly affect the sound. If you think you can hear changes, then it must be auto-suggestion, or your imagination, or your mood changes." These people, if they claim to be 'professionals in audio' should have also been observant enough to know that lights on or off can have an effect on the sound !! Nor was it only a single person recounting their experiences with lights on or off affecting 'sound'. To then have one of these journalists who, just a few months ago, was still dismissing many peoples' various observations and still regurgitating the same "It must be autosuggestion, imagination, mood changes etc " to suddenly announce "Wait a moment, wait a moment, someone is now finding that hearing can be affected by other things which are going on in the brain."
I have also seen a few references over the years in various audio magazines of people reporting that their audio sounded better when they removed their spectacles. Again, these observations were ridiculed by the audio press. However, if, like me, you wear spectacles the whole time, if you apply a strip of Foil to the spectacle frame or apply a small amount of Cream-Electret to the spectacle frame the sound will now be good when you are wearing spectacles and will be perceived to be not as good when you remove the spectacles !! Explain that using conventional electronic or acoustic theories !
Regards
May
27th October 2005 From: A.Martherus. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: "Hearing is Different": crossed legs
I have an additional exercise (taken from 'Touch for Health'). It's meant for those who have had a bad day at the office, or are in a stressful period, or experience an unexplicable hifi sound detoriation.It only takes two minutes of your time. It's no yoga!
This is called the Wayne Cook posture; the meaning is to deliberately confuse your body/brain so that it even doesn't know what is left or right anymore. In other words you're giving your body a clean boot, like a computer reset. I perform this exercise on a daily basis.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/amartherus/my_photos and click Wayne Cook
and hold every position for about half a minute. After this you should be better 'balanced', or relaxed, to enjoy the music. Needless to say, of course without your arms or legs crossed.
A. Martherus.
27th October 2005From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: "Hearing is Different" .
At the end of his article "Hearing is Different", Jim Austin asks "Does it work the same way with the other senses ?"
20 years ago, there was a dinner party 'fun'experiment which used to be performed by a few audio equipment manufacturers and audio journalists who were 'in the know' about Peter's discoveries.
The experiment went like this :-
Two identical wine glasses were selected and wine poured from the same bottle of wine into each glass. The wine was tasted from each glass to confirm that the wine tasted the same. Then a small piece of Spiratube was wound around the stem of one of the wine glasses. Some wine was drunk from this 'treated' glass and the wine was described as 'good', 'smooth', 'very nice'. Then some wine was drunk from the untreated glass and the wine was now described as 'not so good', 'no longer smooth and pleasant'. When the piece of Spiratube was removed from one glass and wound around the stem of the other glass and some wine drunk from the newly treated glass, the good smooth taste was perceived to have transferred over with the Spiratube and the wine in the previously treated glass was now described as not so good. Of course, this was never reported in the audio press because a similar effect happened with sound !!!!
If wine was drunk from the wine glass with the Spiratube around the stem and music was listened to, the sound was described as 'improved'. But, when wine was drunk from the untreated glass and the same music listened to, this time the sound was described as 'much worse', as 'much harsher', as 'no longer enjoyable'. Again, if the Spiratube was transferred over to the other glass, some wine drunk from it and the same music listened to again, the improvement in the sound transferred with the Spiratube.
Regards,
May
1st November 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: Another Belgian Articles
Dear All
Jacques Thys, editor of the Belgium internet magazine audioforum.be has just written another article - link below.
http://www.audioforum.be/article603.html&mode=nested
These articles are written in Dutch. To get a translation copy the URL above to the http://babelfish.altavista.com/ Translate a Web page section and then pick which language you require.
Please will you go to the translation page and enter the URL and see if it easily translates for you in the various languages of the members of this chat group.
We have found that the translation into English is not straightforward, as some of the words do not translate completely correctly e.g. Peter Belt becomes Peter Ring.
Many thanks
May
3rd November 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: The Freezing Technique
On reading Jacques Thys latest article in the Belgian magazine audioforum, I see Jacques describing being ridiculed by some readers after writing his previous articles about Peter Belt's techniques and devices. Even though these same people who were doing the ridiculing had not even been prepared to try things for themselves !
Regarding the freezing technique using a domestic deep freezer which we have been describing to our customers for over 20 years, I am sure that many of our chat forum members have also experienced being ridiculed when describing the benefits of this freezing technique to others.
In the latest POSITIVE FEEDBACK ONLINE issue (issue No 22), Dave Clark has published a further two interviews with people regarding the cryogenic freezing of things which are involved in audio. One sentence of one interview is particular relevant. When asked the question "Are there different ways or methods of cryoing ?" Lee Weiland answers that putting items in your freezer or surrounding them with dry ice is not Deep Cryogenic Treatments as the temperatures reached by these methods is not as low as Deep Cryogenic Treatments. - True, the temperatures ARE not as low as DCT.
However, Lee Weiland goes on to say a very important sentence that "While many report positive results using the domestic deep freezer etc, it is just a glimpse of what true DCT can offer to the audiophile.
This is, in essence, what we have been saying for over 20 years and why we have encouraged people to try the freezing for themselves using their own domestic deep freezer.
I.e. That it will give people a GLIMPSE of what is available and what improvements to their sound can be achieved !!!
Regards,
May
13th November 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Taking It For Granted
Mrs Belt has indicated that I am rather preoccupied with a number of things that will prevent me editing a Newsletter before Christmas; but they ain't gonna stop me posting - well possibly. Some of you may have gleaned from previous postings or articles that I massively appreciate any device that treats ones self. Photographic treatments are a case in point - the benefit occurs wherever you are, or at least where you are on this planet/ in this universe.
Another approach follows from the Garden of Eden. Since birth for reasons of modesty, as well as heat retention, I have tended to wear clothes for most of the day. I have never been convinced by naturalist arguments about good sound - how would they even get into a concert hall?! - and so was relieved when Peter devised the 'Garment Pin' to attach to ones clothing. Not one of their cheaper products, but impressive. And so every day it is pinned inside a shirt, and off I toddle into the world of sensory bombardment and metal.
Today I did something foolish, and left the pin on when the shirt was refreshed in the washing machine. As you may know, detergents and other chemicals can really destroy the benefit from a deveice, and so I was rather gloomy as to my actions. I then thought "Does it still work anyway?" as if I could mange without it. And so the testing began, using a mono recording of 'Fidelio'. I wasn't expecting much as the sound seemed pretty good, but when I applied the Garment Pin I was completely thrown by just how much improvement occurred from one shirt receiving a treatment. The increase in detail was truly mesmerising. It is quite humbling as to how much I had taken something for granted, without really holding onto what I had - something probably true of many of us. The fantastically simple question then arose - "Is this a reason why Peter's work flounders in relation to the masses; it is easily taken for granted?" It isn't a matter of just being lost in good sound, but even the hardened user struggles to acknowledge what it is that helps our appreciation. So no more careless wahing for me - it's just too risky.
Richard
13th November 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: Fidelio
Here am I Richard, encouraging sympathy for you on account of you being overworked and there are you, relaxing, listening to Fidelio !
I love Fidelio. Particularly the Prisoners Chorus. Many years ago Peter and I went to a Leeds theatre to see the Scottish Opera performance of Fidelio Halfway through the performance it was announced that the lead singer had been taken ill and the rest of the performance was cancelled - so I have never seen Fidelio through to the end !!
It is a coincidence Richard, you mentioning the effect of the Garment Pin as I have just finished recounting to a customer how, when you go to a theatre or concert, if you have no other device with you except the CCU pin, you attach the CCU pin into the upholstery of the seat you are sitting in or into the seat in front of you.
Regards,
May
13th November 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Fidelio
May, having delivered one paper on Friday, I thought the 'prisoners chorus', of being let out into the sun once a year, was well suited to my situation, and so it was more therapeutic than pleasure....
It is an amazing piece that I grow to love more with time, and the last moments are some of the most thrilling in all music. The last chorus concerns praise for a woman who has stood by, indeed risked all for her husband. I think you might like it.
And although the pins are wonderful with live music, they are just as good in a highly treated home, with 1950s recordings. You can just see why we get so much trouble with the HiFi press and certain groups: it's the musical values that count, not good sound per se. And I had a very pleasant morning.
But in the absence of any Newsletter, I will immediately switch off any musical equipment!
Richard
Ps Do other people feel the music listened to by the average HiFi reviewer is highly dubious? They often seem poles apart from the music critics.
21st November 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: The Treasure of the...
John Huston was far more able than I at building suspense, at telling a tale, yet it is upon my conscience that I must share some news, and I want people to sit up and listen.
We often talk about the PWB effects, but it is very hard to capture the emotional experience of the perception of the change.
Jettisonning any concerns as to how alleged 'scientific people' might read this, I need to describe my experience of freezing things. There is much hassle asssociated with putting equipment in the freezer, although I do not have any examples of risk to the equipment. Peter has tried for many years to get the benefits of this process into a product. There are various products even called things like 'Heat/Freeze Label', but nothing so far has captured that bonus that comes from putting things in a good freezer. I have to say - and it's up for discussion - that I have yet to feel the very low temperature 'Cryogenic' processes offer up significant differences from that achieved by a domeestic freezer.
For me, when items are frozen, they seem to disappear, or more accurately, the speakers appear to. That sense of 'sound images hanging in cathedrals of sound' denotes not just a falling away of the awareness of the equipment, but massive increases in awareness of the recorded ambient detail. It is just more natural.
The point of this is that he's possibly 'done it'. A new Foil, with two creams, achieves from my perspective all of the benefits of freezing, without the hassle. It's called Memory Foil, and the thinking behind it is far more complex than my version ('it's like putting it in the freezer!') as you can probably guess by the name. But this is an early communication, and I can't just say 'I love this stuff' because I always say that.
Let's just leave it that you deserve a trial of this Foil, and you should beg, steal or borrow some of it.
May be this is the gold.
Richard Graham
23rd November 2005 From: Andreas Makridis. Greece.
Subject: Re: The Treasure of the...
Is there any meaning in the namings of the various foils and products? - I wonder. What has "memory" to do with the small plastic device?
Just another mystery thing in the mystery world of the mysterious Mr Belt!
Andreas
23rd November 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: The Treasure of the...
I think you'll find the answers in the works of Mr Sheldrake, if we consider the term 'memory' as a pattern of information stored in nature.
Mind you, the name is far better than my suggestions. I would have suggested Xenon, or Omega, or Chlamydia, mainly because I am rather naughty. Can you imagine the angry postings, and attempts to divine a meaning?
Seriously, the answers are there in the writings, in Peter's and in the Newsletter, or in Sheldrake - 'The Presence of the Past'.
Still, why worry? Just try it.
Richard
24th November 2005 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK.
Subject: Re: The Treasure of the...
Yes, Andreas, the words on our various Foils and devices are absolutely relevant - as many of our customers who have written their own beneficial messages will confirm.
Kind Regards,
May
29th November 2005 From: Mats Lindberg. Sweden.
Subject Re [PWB] Feedback from May's talks
Dear May,
Please excuse my late feedback. I have watched the DVD of your first talk, and like anything connected with P.W.B it was most interesting. Some of it I recognized from earlier information that you have been sending or publishing on the website over the years. But I had little knowledge of Peters background, which was interesting to learn more about. Also, I had not heard of some of the early discoveries, for instance that different materials preferred different colours.
As for the topic of a wider acceptance of P.W.B. techniques: when will there be a major breakthrough? You have strong interests (in the industry) against you, as well as the great number of prejudiced minds who will never try anything new. The present situation with an article popping up now and then in some internet based magazine, creating interest among a number of readers, should at least result in more people evaluating your products. Hopefully, most of them will realise what P.W.B. products are capable of.
This is a slow procedure, but I cannot see how this situation is going to change. Supporting letters from us customers appearing in all areas of the Hifi scene, might perhaps help a bit?
When you wrote about the Audio Ramblings article, you asked how easy or difficult it was to understand the P.W.B. concept. I did not find it difficult to understand that we human beings could be affected by things around us, and that your products were made to remove the negative influence of those things, as opposed to improving the equipment. The difficult part, for me, to understand is how you do it. How you manage to isolate a certain problem, find a remedy and turn it into a functioning product is quite fascinating.
Kind regards,
Mats Lindberg
30th November 2005 From: Graham Mountford. UK.
Subject: Memory Foil
Richard has hit the nail squarely on the head when he described the effect of the new Memory Foil. It does have the effect of making the speakers disappear. I placed strips of the foil onto all my equipment (if you will pardon the expression) and power supplies but not the speakers. This was late on Sunday night so I was not able to test the effect immediately. My first listen was on Monday when Mahlers 1st was broadcast on R3.
At first I could not pinpoint what made the sound different from normal, I just knew it was better in dynamics and instrument separation but could not put into thoughts as to how best to describe the overall change. Having received Richard's posting I realised that his comments were spot on.
One's ambition with music systems is usually to create the illusion of "being there" and I now feel that I am approaching that goal (even allowing for the drawback of a room only 14' x 13'). With orchestral music I feel the I am transported to the auditorium and on other music particularly vocal the effect is that the performers are with me in a much larger environment.
Many years ago things like small instruments, such Harps, Triangles etc, were drowned by others sections of the orchestra. Backing vocals were indistinct but now all these sounds can be heard and the backing vocalists lyrics clearly separated from the main performers.
I don't know how much more these improvements can go on but Peter seems to keep on pulling rabbits out of the hat. Long may it last.
Graham Mountford
12th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Has yours arrived?
Still thrilled by the results that I have achieved with the new memory foil, something came, which, although not unexpected, proved a major delight.
I am referring to this years PWB Christmas Card, which on top of the TV, seems to be a major 'room device'. Indeed, unless I am going simple (which is always a possibility) I have found the card to be very, very effective, along the lines of the memory foil's effect.
What other manufacturer hands out such pearls, free of charge, just before the holiday season. It really makes me feel that those that accuse Peter of 'medicine show' fraudulence should be ashamed of themselves.
The only problem is the '12th Night', and editing a Newsletter to compete with this wonder.
Richard
12th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Memory Foil
Dear All,
No Christmas would be complete without a sample of Memory Foil! Yes, I have had a sample of the new foil and I am just as excited as Richard and Graham in the recent postings. A Joshua Rifkin recording of piano rags by Scott Joplin on vinyl happened to be the first piece of music I listened to after application of the Foil to some of the elements of my system. I never experienced the sound of a piano like this. It is hard to imagine that it is being recreated by an electro-mechanical process - such is the sheer sense of involvement. The same goes for CD. Even discs of 78 recordings made in the 30's show an astonishing wealth of information had been captured. Carter Family recordings of that period consisting of acustic guitar, autoharp and three part harmonies, ring with amazing clarity and soul – simply a joyous experience. It does make me wonder if there really are such things as cold or sterile music recordings - whatever the format or content. Everything I have played so far reveals even more the wonderful human ability to create music.
Kevin Kehoe.
13th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: A Holiday Treat
This may be greedy, since my last post indicated much satisfaction with current sound, but I found myself wondering....
Many of you will remember our global attempts to improve sound, by synchronised clipping, of trees and posts, and other objects close enough to clip.
Well this year we have had some significant progress, including an update of the clip with the red and black creams. In the spirit of spreading peace, and goodwill, and making the home system just that bit better for Xmas, should we have another go?
What I have in mind is some clipping on Saturday 17th December at 18.00 hours GMT. I plan to re-do lamp posts, railings, fences, and anything else I can reach in the dark, without arrest!. I am genuinely interested in how this affects things globally, or even for myself, given the efficacy of the clip currently. I am not interested in science this time, just a 'free' tweak.
Anyone else 'up for it'?
Richard
13th December 2005 From: Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: A Holiday Treat
Please count me in on the PWB global clipping experiment on Saturday 17 December, 1800 GMT.
By the way, 1800 GMT equates to 1 PM Eastern Standard Time in the US (East Coast). [As 1800 GMT is still daylight here in US, I will probably have to wear my tree surgeon uniform :-)]
Geoff K.
14th December 2005 From: Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Holiday Treat - Oh, rats!
Not literally, fortunately. I would love to join the clipping frenzy. That won't work this weekend, though, due to a sojourn to sort-of nearby Los Angeles on the 17th. Could I interest anyone in clipping on Christmas Eve, so Santa could have the benefit of better sound as he's working around the tree?
Otherwise, I wish you all the best. I'm still waiting to use the Memory Foil, but it's good to hear the enthusiasm. Having just gotten a T amp, perhaps it will be the first "victim" of the new foil.
I must agree with Richard that no "snake oil" salesman would offer free samples - or a money-back guarantee. Bah, humbug to the ghosts of sonic doubters past, present, and future. But Happy Holidays to all my fellow true believers.
Gary
14th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Holiday Treat - Oh, rats!
I guess it won't really matter if you do your bit later. As you say, it will be a bonus on top of what is achieved on the 17th.
I am very interested in your getting the T Amp. I haven't put Memory Foil on mine, as I use it in the summer mainly. Keep us posted as to what you make at each step.
Richard
14th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: A Holiday Treat
Although I am a marked man in this neighbourhood from the last escapade, I shall bravely step out, (Clip in hand) come rain, wind or snow on the 17th for the greater good of the PWB Group!
"I am just going outside and may be some time" Capt. Laurence Oats 1880-1912.
Kevin Kehoe.
14th December 2005 From: Bernhard Knoop, The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Holiday Treat - Oh, rats!
Well I would like to join the experiment but I cannot make it this weekend. Christmas Eve would be PERFECT!!!!!
I also received a sample of Memory foil. (thanks Peter and May) You'll hear more music. Suddenly I hear stuff that i never heard before in that recording. I also think that the sound is more involving.
Greetings from the Netherlands;
Bernhard.
16th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Electret Disc Update
For those of you fortunate enough to have one of these, and some remaining Memory Foil (not so easy), a strip of Memeory Foil on the clear part of the disc (preferably both sides) brings a very nice lift, especially as the Electret disc is a room device. I have yet to try the Foil on those devices we attached to our speakers, but imagine this will work well, but need to try with a bit of Blutak first.
Looking forward also to tomorrow, for the Festive Clip. I keep thinking of trying to do the equivalent of 'Extreme Ironing', where someone takes photos of us clipping in extreme circumstances. If I could only find a Santa Suit!
Richard
17th December 2005 From: Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Holiday Clipping
Perhaps we can have two consecutive weeks of World Clipping, since Bernhard can make it on Christmas Eve, also. Anyone else ready, willing, and able to give the world a Belt before Santa starts flying around?
Should we keep the time the same? 6 p.m. Greenwich? Or was it 8? I forgot to check before I started writing.
Richard, and all other T amp owners, you will get reports of my progress. Right now it has 150 hours of its 200 hours of run-in. That was recommended by Bill, another highly-respected audiophile owner and relatively new member of this forum. I can't remember Bill's moniker here. After listening to the amp without any hours on it, the run-in would seem to be necessary. While it was most impressive for a cheap, plastic amp, in real audio terms the amp left much to be desired. The 200+ hours are said to remedy much of that.
I wanted to hear it "unBelted" first and then start applying treatments. Clipping, Quantum Cream, and Rainbow Foil will be the first three tried. Then what else is done will be decided. What treatments have others found good for this amazing little amp?
Let's hear from other Christmas Clippers out there.
Happy Holidays, all.
Gary.
19th December 2005 From: Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Xmas Clipping
I heard a noticeable improvement to the sound when I played a disc around 1900 GMT on the 17th...
Geoff Kait
19th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Clipping
Dear All,
Managed to get out on Saturday evening for a twenty minute Clipping spree about the neighbourhood. It would have been much more extensive but we had unexpected visitors and had to cut it short.
After the previous neighbourhood Clipping event a year ago, I did think that there was a small sound lift resulting from it. As I thought at the time this lift could have come from my Clipping of service covers and the like within our territory before I extending out further, all the treatments this time were carried out away from our boundaries. With our guests present most of the evening, I got to listen for any sound change on Sunday morning. If there was a sound lift, then it was too small for me to feel certain I could hear it. I would like to add that some time ago, I took the Clip to work and clipped my tools and multimeters as well as quite a lot of the plant including electrical power distribution, gas supply and water. This, I felt, produced a detectable sound lift at the time – so I do strongly feel that there are gains to be had from this activity.
I too shall be out Christmas Eve for a more prolonged Clipping expedition. There is an electrical sub station quite near us and I would dearly love to have official access to the transformer within to Clip its steel container just to see if it produced a sound lift – of course I shall confine my Clipping to it's perimeter iron fence. There is a difference between "Extreme Clipping" and getting arrested!
Now, if there were a small PWB like prize for the winning example of "Extreme Clipping" the possibility of arrest would be but a trifling hindrance.
Kevin Kehoe.
19th December 2005 From: Brian Hannen. UK.
Subject: Xmas Card
My first posting .I've come to all of this by a route that some of you will be all too familiar with ie. James M Hughes , free black squares, a long period inbetween and a recent thought 'Whatever happened to PWB?'. A dull moment at work led to me looking at cryogenics on the Net, saw the PWB site and sent for the SR foil freebie.To date I have read all of the info on the site, sent for the Intermediate kit and have tried to adopt what I think is a hierarchical approach. CDs are foiled , creamed( label side only) and frozen. Foils and cream on equipment and throughout the whole of the bottom floor of the house, including the garage.Spiratubes on pipes and the electricity meter tails. Wonderful results so far and there's still a syringe of Sol Electret, cable ties and freezing of cables to go.I have also to tackle upstairs. What prompts this is that I, too, have received the Xmas card and the free sample of the Memory foil. Very kind , I thought. I plonked the card on the hi-fi stand and , today, when I came in I decided to see what effect it had.(Have I not read somewhere that some things take time to bed-in and some are almost immediate?)
Wow!! It was just like those days when you feel that the electricity supply is perfect, if you get my drift. The recent disc ,'Mu', by Jah Wobble has some very low notes. Well, today they just got whole lot lower. I swear that I heard the patio doors starting to 'sing-along'.Trouser-flappingly good! What was also amazing was that the delicate cymbal work also became clearer and sweeter. I have a couple of discs called 'Transatlantic Sessions' recorded in a Scottish country house featuring folk and country musicians. The sense of real musicians playing in a real space became truly apparent.Hell,even the country -tinged tracks sounded great and I don't do country. Whoops , sorry for the Kessler moment there!
A question, please. Would it be best to save the memory foil until I've completed the other tasks , or can I do it now? You guys are scaring me with this clipping outside business. Mind you , I am eyeing up the cat for a Spiratube leg and a creamed and foiled collar. If only he'd stay still long enough! Here kitty, kitty.
Sorry about the length of this. Promise to be briefer next time.
Brian Hannen
19th December 2005 From: Andreas Makridis. Greece.
Subject: Re: Xmas Card
Dear Brian
Welcome to the club.
This year's Xmas Card, I believe, exceeded the previous ones, (and my expectations indeed!) and I have to confirm what Richard stated: it partners Memory Foil perfectly.
Now: Can you wait to try the foil?
Andreas
19th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Clipping
Dear Brian,
If the "Transatlantic Sessions" you refer to were taken from the TV series hosted by the Shetland fiddle player Aly Bain then I could not agree more - superb stuff. I have used up the last of my sample of the Memory Foil now and one place I attached a piece to is the TV screen. Our TV has a small black margin around the screen and it has become a place I attach the occasional Foil. I don't find it intrusive when watching. If you can stop yourself using it all on the HI-FI, try a bit here - the resulting sound and vision lift should be very noticeable.
Kevin Kehoe.
20th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Clipping
Kevin,
Having taken a PWB box into the Albert Hall, for the infamous Prom experiments, during a bomb-threat season in London, such concerns seem minor. Still the new Anti-Terror laws might make me think a little more. We could have 'Extreme Clipping' in the form of Photos of clipping at famous sites. Might try a few London spots during the holidays. The London Eye is just begging...
I managed about 20 mins too, mainly of steel lamposts. Whatever the reason, the increase in contrast (inky blacks, vivid colours) whilst watching a film on Saturday took the breath away. My impression was we achieved something, and I felt I clipped 'new' objects. Still, with the lift in the effect from the updated Clip, I am not sure that we need to be too concerned about that matter.
The irony remains though that despite the wonders of Global 'Free- Clipping', a few strips of Memory Foil would shame the improvements.
Do others agree?
Richard
20th December 2005 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Card
Welcome again Brian,
You raise many issues, but to deal with one of them first, we can never have to much detail about the experience of listening to music, and of how this is enhanced by Peter's curious devices. Similarly, the refreshing honesty about the 'outside clipping' is also welcome. It is disturbing, and not just because Kevin might get arrested (although he'd have more time for cartoons then...)because it is so 'outside the box'. Of course it appears we are out of our minds to many, but they don't get to hear Jah Wobble in the way you just have.
Many people are preoccupied by issues of order and hierarchy in relation to Peter's products. Sadly, and I have discussed it with him many times, whilst some products seem to be more powerful than others, none lose their efficacy, and there are interactions such that they enhance each other in a sort of symbiotic way. And so you do not need to apply X before Y, unless it is part of the product, such as the two creams with the Memory Foil. Personally, I would apply that Memory Foil as soon as possible, so you can assess it's merits, but also enjoy the benefits. It might make the season very merry! Still do not underestimate that oil, and get cracking on some electrical contacts.
If I were to prioritise anything, I still tend to start with my photo. With Memory Foil on that (preferably front and back) you get some benefit wherever you are.
Keep us posted.
Richard
20th December 2005 From: Brian Hannen. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Card.
Dear Makridis,
Thank you for your welcome. Richard has also mailed me and has suggested that I try the foil as soon as I like. Will do so and report back to the forum.
Brian
20th December 2005 From: Brian Hannen. UK.
Subject: Re: Re: Xmas Clipping.
Dear Kevin,
Yes, you are absolutely right about the Sessions.As an aside, I am a big fan of John Martyn and can recommend him highly, if you have not already heard his stuff.
Memory foil will be used asap. Richard has already said that I do not have to stick to the heirarchical approach. Will report back to the forum soon.
Will the foil work on any part of the TV? My wife has already noticed and commented on the number of SR foils stuck all over the place!
Brian.
20th December 2005 From: Brian Hannen. UK.
Subject: Re: Re: Xmas Card.
Dear Richard ,
Many thanks for your comments. I'm off out on a birthday bash tonight but will reply in more detail when my head has cleared.
Brian
21st December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Re: Xmas Clipping
Brian,
After I posted the suggestion regarding attaching the Memory Foil to the TV screen, I very nearly posted straight back to warn of the very thing you mentioned. The two places I get comments on for attaching Foil to are the TV screen and the front of the speaker cabinets. I think it is an example of my hang-up using PWB Products - putting it on the screen is (in my mind) going to get me the greatest result. Of course it as bound to be just as effective attached to the rear of the cabinet. Regarding John Martyn, I am well aware of him but have not got around to getting any of his music yet. The only track of his I have is on the Andy Kershaw compilation CD "More Great Moments of Vinyl History". It's called "Johnny Too Bad ". Thanks for the tip - a sizeable proportion of the music I own comes from recommendations.
Kevin Kehoe.
22nd December 2005 From: Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Christmas Eve Clipping
First, a welcome to Brian. It is great to hear so many details and to be reminded of the enthusiasm of discovering the greatness of Peter's work.
Now on to that daft multi-continental clipping on this Saturday. We are agreed on 6 p.m. Greenwich, correct? At least those east of the Atlantic Ocean will have the cover of darkness to lurk about in. We here in the U.S. will be operating in brilliant light the whole time, prime targets for visits from the local gendarmes - or mental health professionals. (Hmm . . . so who would Richard get to examine him?)
Usually a time limit has been set, if memory serves. Should we stop clipping at 6:30? After all, the kiddies might get mad if daddy spends all of Christmas Eve tramping about outside. Quantum Clipping just isn't in the same category of building a snowman or a snowball fight, except to those of us looney about audio.
Happy Holidays and Happy Sounds.
Gary Lee
22nd December 2005 From: Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Sonic Impact T amp
I noted in another post that my impressions of the little Sonic Impact T amp would be given, so here they are. First, it is astonishing that something this good could be so inexpensive. It puts the lie to the belief that good sound has to cost a lot, much as Peter's work does.
When first hooked up, the amp sounded amazing for its tiny price, under $40USD including tax and shipping, ordered directly from Sonic Impact. That said, it was still far from satisfying. The sound was thin in the treble and weak in the bass. Still, I had to remind myself that the amp cost what a few CDs would, so perhaps it wasn't fair to hold it to a very high standard.
Then it got played and played and played, for about 150 hours. WOW! What a difference. The whole sound changed. The treble and midrange were very detailed and pleasant; the bass was still a little light, but that turned out to be the speakers, a pair of stand-mounted Ryans. When hooked up to my regular floor-standing Clements 206di's, there was plenty of bass.
The sound got even better when the amp was hooked up to my Sonic Euphoria passive preamp. This was all fun. Terrific sound from a ridiculously small and cheap package.
After 200 hours of being run-in, I decided it was time for some PWB treatments. That's when things changed, and not all of it was satisfying. Anyone's opinion or experience would be appreciated, because nothing like this has ever happened after applying PWB treatments to a component.
Just a few treatments were applied at first:
1) Sol Electret to the battery springs and connections and anywhere else it could be applied, though there were not many places
2) One strip of Rainbow Foil to the main case and one piece to battery cover plate
3) Morphic messages with the Red X pen on a strip of message tape "Gary Lee>O.K." "'x=PRESENT TIME" "'x 26 'x"; all these were on one strip of the message tape
4) Cream Electret to the case and over the Rainbow Foil and Red X Pen messages
5) Case and various exposed parts were Clipped
These treatments produced some of the most profound changes I've ever heard on a piece of equipment, but not all of them were to my liking. The soundstage got wider, which was great, but there was so much more detail to the sound that it was almost disturbing. Has anyone else encountered this? It was really too much of a good thing.
Also, although the soundstage was wider, it got so deep that it moved up along side me. I like to feel like I'm at a concert, not in it. But even though the soundstage was bigger, the placement of instruments seemed a bit less focused. Again, this may be more realistic, because at a concert it isn't always easy to aurally pinpoint instruments, but somehow it wasn't as pleasing. Maybe I'm just used to the artificial pinpoint placement of instruments some equipment reproduces. The whole effect after the PWB treatments was novel, but somehow less than satisfying.
Finally, the Sonic Euphoria was taken out and the T amp just run by itself as an integrated amp. That was a little better but still there seemed to be too much sound.
I decided that perhaps more treatments would be useful, so the next night the following was done:
1) Morphic message on Gold Message Foil "T amp = BALANCED SOUND"
2) Green Cream on inside of empty battery case
The additional treatments tamed things somewhat, but still the sound was almost overwhelming. It seemed like on some recordings the mix was quite apparent. For example, on Paul McCarney's "Wonderful Christmastime", before the treatments his voice came from back and center in the soundstage. After the treatments his voice came from at least three places: back left, back right, and center on the soundstage. It was an interesting effect, but I couldn't help wonder if it was very realistic. Certainly in person such a thing couldn't be achieved, but in the recording studio it would be possible. Was I hearing the real mix for the first time?
The T amp is noted for its clarity and detail, but the results thus far seem almost ridiculous. Is it possible that for the first time I'm hearing the bad engineering present on so many recordings?
Forgive the length of this post, but I am really interested in other PWB enthusiasts experiences and views on this. It has not changed my opinion of PWB treatments, but I've never had such a strange experience before. Whenever a piece of gear has been treated in the past, the sound has improved in very positive ways. Nothing confusing has happened. The only odd thing in the past was one slight problem with my overly enthusiastic application of some treatments to the inside of an Arcam CD92 cdp. That was worked out without much problem.
Richard and others, what treatments have you applied to the SI T amp and what results did they yield?
Thanks for reading this tome. Any remarks will be greatly appreciated.
Happy Holidays. World Clipping starts again in two days.
Gary Lee
24th December 2005 From: Brian Hannen. UK.
Subject: Re: Re: Xmas Clipping.
Kevin,
Your point re placement on TV is taken. I have a very long-suffering wife who has put up with a lot since I moved into what was her house, pre -marriage. This did involve demolishing the inside porch so that I could get my Meridian actives located properly and, later , trying to persuade her that the suitcase sized centre speaker sat on the top of the telly was much bigger than I remembered it being in the shop!! ( Have you tried treating DVDs ? The only one that I have tried so far is 'The Fifth Element'. The colours appear richer and the voice of the Alien from the Dark Planet really seemed to hover in the middle of the room and was very deep and resonant.)
Your best entry into the world of John Martyn is with ' Solid Air' followed by ' One World' and 'Bless the weather' All have been re-mastered lately and the extras are well worth having. His later output went into more of an electric field. 'Grace and Danger ' is a good one.
I use www.Allmusicguide.com as a reference site (it tends to be largely US- centric, but the assessments are usually spot-on ). I also use www.trouserpress.com for the more left-field stuff and also www.epitonic.com .
Like you, a lot of my stuff comes from recommendations . That's what is so good about it.You get introduced to a lot of stuff you may never have tried, despite trying to have open ears.
Anyway, the Xmas period will give me time to try out some more treatments and I will keep the forum posted.
Have a good one,
Brian.
27th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Re: XMas Clipping.
Brian,
I sure have treated DVD's and got results as you describe. We still have a video recorder which has had lots of treatments over the years. Playing a treated video can also be a revelation - within its mechanical constraints. The TV sound too has come on remarkably – especially following some recent treatments including Memory Foil. Our TV is nothing special – built in speakers provides the sound from either side of the screen and no additional satellite units are used. But the sound stage has greatly expanded and the detail within the sound is sometimes startling. Wildlife programmes for instance, where birdsong can be that real it seems to originate from outside the room. On some music, strands of it appear to project well out into the room.
I'm almost ahead of you regarding John Martyn. I checked him out in some of the large music stores and did not realise so much of his stuff was available. There seems to be quite a lot of remastered and re-released albums so I'm grateful for your advise as to which would be best as first purchase. Thanks too for the links - one of which (Trouserpress .com) I am aware of. Back to PWB though, and by means bordering on the criminal, I've now acquired the purchase price of a strip of Memory Foil and shall put the order in after the holiday.
Enjoy the rest of the holiday,
Kevin Kehoe.
27th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Christmas Eve Clipping.
Dear All,
Survived the Christmas Eve Clipping expedition with only minor incidents to report. While hunched over a telecommunication box in the street opposite the newsagents shop, I am sure I saw Mr. Sokhi the proprietor make a note on his pad. And, a little later, a lady had to restrain her dog from using me as a convience as I Clipped a manhole cover. When I got back to the house I waited for half an hour – just in case the police called – I then replayed the tracks I played before the exercise. Before I continue though, I would like to register my enormous respect for Gary who performed this escapade without the cover of darkness – a true PWB Hero! In the time I spent Clipping, I managed to treat three telecommunication boxes, one telephone box, numerous telegraph poles and lamp posts. I also took the Quantum Cream with me and applied some to many of the items before Clipping.
And the result? A small sound lift could be detected. But this, I have to admit, could not fall outside the bounds of wishful thinking on my part. To put it in perspective, as a Christmas gift this year, I purchased a PWB Garment Pin for my partner Wendy and one for myself after reading a post from Richard recently concerning this Device. The sound lift brought about by those devices was unmistakeable in comparison. This is not to say that the exercise was not worthwhile or even crazy – I see no reason to doubt the possibility that treating the environment around a territory (especially things like telecommunication boxes and telegraph poles) has the potential to bring about a beneficial sound change. They are after all, in most cases, linked to the residence. In our case, both telephone and telecommunication cable.
Best Wishes to Everyone for the New Year.
Kevin Kehoe.
27th December 2005 From: Mats Lindberg. Sweden.
Subject: SV: Re: Xmas Clipping.
Hello all Christmas clippers!
I forgot to listen on the 17th, and i cannot say that I detected any general improvement after your activities on that evening.
On Christmas eve I decided to do a little before and after listening. Five minutes before your starting time, I listened to the beginning of Nat King Cole's version of "Frosty the Snowman", and then I listened to it one hour and twenty minutes (roughly) later. It seemed to me that I could hear a small improvement in the sound. The song sounded more natural, less artificial. I asked my partner, and she thought that there might have been an improvement.
Could your global clipping have affected us in Sweden? Was it something else that caused the improvement, something that just happened to coincide with your clipping? Or were we just imagining it?
Just to be clear: I did not do any treating on the 17th or on Christmas eve.
Mats Lindberg
27th December 2005 From: Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Sonic Impact T amp.
Gary,
I do not yet own one of those little Sonic Impact T amplifiers, but your description of the results of PWB treatments sound remarkably similar to some of my experiences of recent treatments to my main system. My system was never that hot when it comes to pinpoint placement of instruments and voice - that is, if conventional HI-FI wisdom would consider 400 UK pounds worth of amp and £300 speakers capable of achieving this. I don't think PWB has made a big difference either way in this respect. The big differences for me are in the areas you mention: Sound stage, detail and apparent loudness. I have likened the effect of PWB treatments on our perception of sound as similar in some ways to that of the restoration of an old oil painting on our sense of vision. Pre restoration, the painting contains all the detail and information that the artist wanted us to see, but it has been masked by decades or more of grime deposit. After restoration, the painting should again expose all the information that was there at the time the artist considered the work finished. But things are never that simple! Critics will then discuss whether the restoration has gone too far, not gone far enough or, even worse, the hand of the restorer can be perceived in the cleansed painting. My personal opinion regarding the effects of PWB devices is that each treatment is allowing us to hear a recording more true to its origin. I think you have a good point when you say that you might be hearing the shortcomings in the recording process. I have a number of recordings that fall very short of the HI-FI standard but are, none the less, still a wonderful listen. The hum from what I assume to be an old valve guitar amp is present at the start of several tracks on one Blues recording I have from the 50's. As PWB treatments progressed, the hum can be heard in almost holographic detail – several frequencies can be perceived running together much like a number of guitar strings vibrating together as a chord. But, as the music is now also far easier to discern in all its detail, the hum is not any more intrusive – in fact it is part of the charm of the recording. Some early 60's Reggae recordings provide further extreme examples.
With the bass line so important in this music, there was a tendency for the engineer to push this to the limit at the recording stage and I have several recordings where tape overload can now be clearly heard. But again, I find that Belt treatments enhance the enjoyment of this music. There are however, areas where PWB treatments have made already bizarre effects even more so. I refer to "Electronically Enhanced Stereo". I still have a few of those terrible bits of vinyl that were remixed from original mono to this crazy sound stage. The slightly disorientating effect of the phased sound gets even more so as treatments progress – it makes me wonder how they got out of the mixing studio in the first place. I hope some of this will make sense.
Best Wishes for the coming New Year,
Kevin Kehoe.
29th December 2005 From: Mark Kirby. USA.
Subject: RE: Sonic Impact T amp.
Is it at all possible that your speaker wires have gotten out of phase?
Mark Kirby
1st January 2006 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Clipping Update.
After the festivities, it is good to catch a moment to feedback about my experience of the clipping on Xmas Eve. We were away from home, and it is difficult to be entirely clear about the results on someone else's TV. However, whatever was going on, the excellent edition of 'TOTP2' was quite a revelation. 'Top of the Pops 2' showed the traditional Christmas songs, interspersed with party anthems, and choice cuts from 2005. It was a great show, and good to have on, sort of in the background. What amazed me was the depth of field, and overall clarity of the picture, of those great 1970s performances. Noddy Holder's great carthorse of a voice bellowed in just the right way, and everyone's glitter, glittered. It truly seemed 'HiDef'. More modern pieces, especially from the great Alison Goldfrapp were truly 'Ooh la la'! This was about as subjective as one can get, and for those feeling that this might all be put down to alcohol, just wait for my piece on that! I do think that the Clipping had an effect, as earlier in the day the TV seemed just 'alright'.
Many thanks for those that gave that lift to our Christmas, more so given the considerable thrill of recent products.
Richard
ps Happy New Year
1st January 2006 From: P.W.B. Electronics, UK
Subject: Happy New Year.
And a Happy New Year to you Richard, and to all our fellow "Belters".
One thing you have to be aware of now, Richard, is that if after being invited to stay with others over Christmas and giving them the "Belt" treatment, if you are invited back next Christmas you will have to give an even better performance/treatment next time!! You cannot rest on the laurels of this Christmas - you will be expected to do even better next Christmas - so, I think 2006 should be spent practicising !!
One story which you all might find amusing.
When Peter and I used to visit London regularly to see audio journalists, retailers and manufacturers, we used to stay at the same hotel in London and Peter would 'treat' the hotel bedroom we were in. After a year or so of staying regularly at this particular hotel Peter and I began to wonder why the owner kept putting us in a different hotel bedroom each time, even though we always requested one particular room. Then, on one particular occasion, the owner confessed that he had realised that if he housed us in a different room each time we stayed, eventually, over time he would have all his hotel 'treated' !!
Anyway, many thanks to you Richard and to everyone else who ventured out to assist in improving their listening environment.
Regards,
May
1st January 2006 From: Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Clipping Update
Hello.
Everyone a Happy New Year!!!
Well Christmas Eve I had suddenly visitors but i could listen a half hour before and 15 min after. I could hear more into the records. More depth.
It was not a big improvement. But it could also be that I had a little bit clean power from the wall. Greetings
Bernhard.
3rd January 2006 from Richard Graham UK.
Subject: The Devil Drink
It is often reported in forums and magazines that a great way to enjoy music is to listen later in the day, with a glass of wine to hand. I had usually agreed with this, and it made a psychological sense if the alcohol led to a more relaxed state. Well it may be a side effect of recent products, but I am curious if others still agree with this. Not wanting to promote 'new puritanism', I myself am less sure now. I think I noticed it first in the concert hall, where I often felt the sound after an interval was worse than before, conciding with a glass of dry white. I can consider other reasons for this, but it occurred even when I had taken devices into the hall with me. Some treatment of the glass helped, lending support to the hypothesis.
We are familiar with the effects of certain chemicals on our systems and environments, such as cleaning materials, but I had not suspected wine amongst them. It may be my love of New Zealand wines is to blame - the French would probably accuse them of putting chemicals in - or is it the metal screw tops?
Anyway, I would be interested in what others think, and you may wish to test this out at home, with a friend...
Richard
From: Richard Graham. UK.3rd January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Nordost Question
Attached to the current HiFi Choice magazine in England is a tissue that one uses on cables to remove static. It sounds very 'PWB', although rather '1988', but I wondered if anyone had tried it or used it on their cables. I am always anxious about something that might remove the PWB effects on the cable, from Creams and Ties, but it is of course possible that Nordost is applying something Peter learnt ages ago. Morphic resonanace would suggest that this would happen.
Perhaps Mrs Belt has bought a copy?
Richard
3rd January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re; Nordost
Richard,
It is really amazing that you should mention something produced by Nordost. Because I have just finished writing quite a long paper and in it have actually made reference to a chemical Nordost produced quite a few years ago. I also know that I referred to this Nordost chemical in the talks I gave (direct to camera) in November 2004.
I have used the Nordost chemical as an example of how other people in the audio industry have been discovering things similar to what Peter had discovered but had always given a different explanation as to why changes had taken place in the sound, therefore it has never been realised that we are all discovering the same thing !! To quote from what I have just finished writing over the Christmas period.
"Nordost, a manufacturer of Flatline cables introduced a liquid (ECO 3) to apply to the plastic insulation of cables - to gain an improvement in the sound. Nordost's product development director, Joe Reynolds, explained that this liquid was the result of the company's extensive research. That he believed that the electro-magnetic fields generated by current in a cable's conductor caused stray static charges and the Nordost liquid was a way of reducing the static charges to give an improvement in the sound. Furthermore, in an edition of the UK audio trade magazine Inside Hi Fi, the Editor of Inside Hi Fi reported that they had attended a demonstration by Nordost of applying this liquid ECO-3 to the LABEL side of a CD and hearing the sound stage expand, clarity improve etc. This editor commented "Help - am I really so impressionable - or does it really work ?" The editor of the UK audio trade magazine was (somewhat) able to accept what they had experienced because a plausible ? explanation had been given by Nordost from somewhere on the fringes of conventional theory but what would their reaction have been if they had been given a different explanation ? Would they have still been prepared to accept what they had experienced if the explanation had been that it was they (human beings) who had been reacting to the chemical of the liquid and it was their (human beings) reaction which had changed the sound. ?"
The reason why I used the Nordost chemical as one example was to show how the audio industry can stumble upon something which changes the sound, and how they then squeeze, stretch, pull, bend conventional theory in a struggle to find some explanation from within conventional theory. That in the case of Nordost, they chose 'it must be somehow dealing with static' as an explanation even though it is nearly impossible to make sense of how static on the outside of a cable could have such an effect on the audio signal travelling along it. Even more difficult is the SAME explanation 'it must be somehow dealing with static' when the liquid is applied to the LABEL side of a CD and the sound is heard to improve !!! Furthermore, when the Editor of the UK trade magazine was given these demonstrations and heard the effect, they SHOULD HAVE BEEN KNOCKED BACK ON THEIR HEELS. We are talking here about digital information, stored on a CD, somehow being affected by a chemical !! The whole idea behind the storage of digital information is that it cannot (should not) be affected !! It should have been mind blowing for the Editor et al to hear the sound improving and, as 'professionals in audio' they should not have been able to shrug the whole thing off as easily as they did.
If they (Nordost and the Editor of the UK trade magazine) had been prepared to investigate further, if they had not been so easily satisfied with the explanation 'something to do with static', they would have discovered what Peter had discovered over 20 years ago - that it is the human being who is doing the reacting, that it is the human being who is reacting to the chemical and it is the human being's reaction that is changing the sound !!
Imagine now what Hi Fi Choice would have done with the paper tissue if the explanation 'it is the human being who is doing the reacting' had been offered instead of the explanation 'it is doing something with static'. I personally do not think they would have had any involvement with the tissue !! Even though the SAME tissue would be having the SAME effect on the SAME cable, I believe that Hi Fi Choice would not have had anything to do with the tissue because they would not be prepared to accept or put forward a different explanation.
Jimmy Hughes, Paul Benson, Peter Turner and many others have struggled in the past to get this concept over to people but the Hi Fi magazines, in the end, would not allow them to continue. It would have been so much easier for these journalists to toe the line and present simplistic explanations such as 'it is something to do with static, or RF interference, or capacitance, or resistance, or inductance, or the dielectric effect, or vibrations' rather than what they did - try to progess understanding further forward. To do a Joseph Lister and say "But the germs are in the air" in direct contrast to what the medcial profession had been taught.
The reason why I also use such as the Nordost chemical and explanation as an example is for the following reason.
If such as Nordost continue to go along the path of the explanation 'it is something to do with static', they will go down that particular path in doing further research - i.e. searching for even better 'antistatic' chemicals !! Not realising that 'better' antistatic chemicals may create an even worse reaction in human beings - in other words a 'better antistatic chemical' may cause an even worse adverse reaction in a human being, making the sound even worse !! Peter and I went down that path over 20 years ago - I know what I am talking about !! Again, something I have just been writing about !!
Regards,
May
4th January 2006 from Wellfed.
Subject: Re: A Holiday Treat
I was away on vacation from the 17th through the 31st and came home to the best sound my system has ever produced. I was on the phone with Geoff Kait this afternoon and mentioned my discovery, asking what he thought could be the explanation for this. He then told me about the global "clipping" effort while I was away. Thanks to everyone that participated in this project.
Wellfed.
4th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re; Nordost
Can't disagree with much of this May, but being devil's advocate....
Peter's initial formulations were along similar lines to those put forward by Nordost. I believe all of his products, even from 20 years ago still 'work', albeit 'on us', although current ones are far more effective (see Memory Foil). If Nordost, in addition to those cryogenically freezing cables, bring some difference to wider understanding, it can only help. We have seen and heard the benefits of global 'clipping' at Christmas, and if for only this reason, I would love Peter's work to become totally mainstream and widespread.
So...
Would it harm any of Peter's devices to have a go with the Nordost tissue? If nothing else, it would show us where some others have got to, but I do not want to destroy anything I already have.
Richard
ps Of course the magazines still sit on the fence.
4th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Yahoo Problems
There seems to be something odd going on with current postings.
Sometimes the post appears on the board without an email, and sometimes just an email arrives with nothing on the board. Don't know if anyone else is having this problem, but it sure gets in the way of lively discussion.
Richard
4th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: A Holiday Treat
I have suggested something similar to this in another post, but this effect makes the mind boggle as to what would happen if more people had Clips, or Peter's products were more widely used eg in every electrical item. Cosmic!
Richard
4th January 2006 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Re; Nordost
In a similar vein, the Ionoclast from Mapleshade is an anti-static gun that sprays out a stream of charged ions onto the CD or cables. What is interesting is that the Ionoclast doesn't employ a chemical (like Nordost) but provides a very similar effect. But why the Ionoclast anti-static gun improves the sound might not be as obvious as it seems. I.e., does the reduction of electric charge on items, per se, affect the audio signal directly or is this actually more akin to a PWB effect?
Am pretty sure I've always noticed an improvement to the sound when using the Ionoclast gun on clothing in the walk-in closet. See what I mean?
Regards,
Geoff Kait
4th January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re: Nordost.
Richard,
Regarding whether the Nordost treated tissue will have a deleterious affect on P.W.B. treatments is a difficult one to answer simply.
My reply will have to be one of my long and slightly complicated replies.
I do not know what chemical Nordost are using. What I do know is that their initial discovery of the chemical and it's effect will have been made quite inadvertently. And, because their belief is that the effect of their chemical 'is somehow affecting static problems', they will have gone along that particular path and will not have chosen the chemical because of it's 'friendly'., 'relaxing'., 'reassuring' properties (which is the path we take constantly).
As you will be aware, we always recommend that, after applying such as our Cream-Electret or Morphic Liquid, you do not apply any other chemical on top of it so I would always recommend that people are wary of what they apply on top of any of our devices. Also, you are always working against what high standard your own working has become used to.
To attempt to answer the question you ask, I will describe some experiments you can try for yourself.
Chose a cable which has had no P.W.B. treatment applied to it. A cable such as the one on the electric clock, on the table lamp, on the telephone, on the vacuum cleaner etc.
Apply a small amount of the Cream-Electret to a small area of the cable and listen to some music. The sound should be perceived as much better. Now apply another chemical (something like furniture cream) over the Electret Creamed area on the cable and listen again. This time the sound will be perceived as worse - the furniture cream is not a friendly, relaxing, reassuring chemical !!! Now apply a small amount of the Cream-Electret over the furniture cream and listen again. The good sound will be back. Now to test the Nordost tissue. Wipe the Nordost tissue over the Creamed area and listen again. If the sound is the same, then the Nordost tissue has not had any adverse effect. If the sound is worse, then the chemical in the tissue is not providing as good a friendly, relaxing, reassuring energy pattern as our Cream-Electret provides.
We were wiping 'treated' material over cables etc over 20 years ago. If you read my 1986 paper ( http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/ctc.html ) you will see that in the early 1980s, we were using some pieces of the reticulated foam material (the type used for decorative speaker fronts) which we specially treated. We cut a V shaped slit in a piece of the foam so that the cable would fit neatly in the foam piece and could then be easily wiped along it's length. To quote the sentence from my 1986 paper "When we wiped the insulation around the AC mains connecting leads with the treated foam, the sound improved !!" A good number of the members of the UK audio industry have know all this for over 20 years !! All Peter has done is take the investigations further and found that the effect has nothing whatsoever to do with 'dealing with static' - which is the explanation given by Nordost. To repeat the quote from Nordost in the Hi Fi Choice "The static charge on the cable surface has a deleterious effect on the signal passing through the cable. Eco 3 prevents this static charge building up on the cable, hence preventing the deterioration of the signal as it travels along the cables in your system." When (as you will see below) Nordost claim this treatment also gives improvement in the sound when applied to power cables - THERE IS NO AUDIO SIGNAL GOING THROUGH POWER CABLES !!!
One of the claims which the president of Nordost (Joe Reynolds) makes in the Hi Fi Choice article is "We have found improvements when treating video cables, any power cables and even the centre label of vinyl LPs." Now, how many years have you known Peter recommending 'treating' the centre labels of LPs ? as well as the Label side of CDs !!
Regards,
May
4th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Nordost.
May,
I may be one of the geekiest guys around, but do you really believe I haven't put cream on every cable in the home?...However, you make a good point, as many apparently 'worsening' activities are reduced or reversed by re-application. And so it may only be 4th January, but I'm going to have to experiment....
I do think however that there are many fascinating aspects to all of this. The Nordost theory is almost wholesale regurgitation of Peter's early theories, as you indicate. Whilst I'm sure there will remain controversy, there is no outcry. Many theories put forward in HiFi are frankly laughable - from Linn's closed loop, to many cable theories - yet Peter get's it in the neck for suggesting that the influence of the observer is important. I simplify a great deal, but the Heisenberg-esque dimension in HiFi is ignored. The state and impact of the observer even in blind testing is ignored, even though great physicists embrace its importance. Perhaps worse, is the belief that the sense organs are akin to scientific instruments, and that there is no subsequent processing. When one starts to break down the processes involved in the perception of even the most ordinary objects (compared with aesthetic objects which evoke an emotional response) one wonders why there isn't more focus on that dynamic.
Oh well, 'retro' is still in.
Richard
4th January 2006 from Bernard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Re: Nordost.
Hello.
I own the ECO 3 spray for years and I did not use it very often because I was busy with P.W.B. treatments.
The problem is; I cannot use them on my cables because they have a sleeve around it.(Audioquest)
So I can only try it out on cd's.
If you guys want me to do some testing with ECO3,please let me know.
Greetings
Bernhard.
5th January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Yahoo problems.
Dear All.
Happy New Year.
The postings to the PWB Yahoo group are moderated, so that SPAM and viruses do not get distributed around the group.
So there may be a delay in your posting getting onto the system. If you do not see your posting within a day or so please E-mail me direct at grahambelt@belt.demon.co.uk and I will check to see if anything has gone amiss.
Kind regards
Graham Belt
5th January 2006 From: Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Nordost
I, for one, would be interested in you trying the Nordost spray, whether on discs or on cables that do not have a sleeve. If you have the situation that we have in England, where Newspapers often give free CDs, you could even compare the spray with PWB treatments on two free CDs.
I have to say though, the fact that you are not using it regularly suggests you have not been too impressed so far.
I will protect my tissue pending your researches.
Richard
5th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Headphones.
It is ironic that I am posting about this, given that Peter is an expert in the field, and his past Electrostatic headphones were/are in use at the BBC, but headphones do pose a problem. The main one is the tiny size of the product, which affords few opportunities for foils, and one is limited to creams, spiratube and ties. I don't like fitting ties, as the cables are often frail, and if a problem arises, you're stuck.
For a number of reasons I grew interested in a getting a good pair of headphones, and was drawn to the great reviews the Sennheiser 600s and 650s were getting. As you can imagine, auditioning equipment, when one is used to treated equipment, is not easy, so I took the plunge, and relied on the reviewers (a dangerous game, given their dependence on advertising and market politics) and bought a pair of Sennheiser 650s, rather cheaply via an internet site. There were aspects of the design that appealed, including the detachable cable, and companies such as Russ Andrews made a robust substitute for this, which would be ideal for Ring Ties.
On giving them a good trial, I was rather disappointed, perhaps inevitably, and proceeded to apply Electret and Green Creams, Spiratube, a little Sol-Electret, then Clipped and Froze them. Better, but still not the quality of sound I was used to. Rather fed up, I finally pulled off the ear pads and was delighted to see that beneath were multiple small areas, walled off by small plastic walls, which gave many places to stick some foil. And so every bit of free space of this 'mosiac' surrounding the actual driver was filled with different foils. The result was quite marvellous, and finally do I see the Sennheisers as justifying some of their reviews.
I have yet to do anything with Ring Ties, as I would like one of those expensive Kimber cables to put them on - not because I think the Kimber will necessarily be better - different, yes - but because it will be very robust. I'll post when I know more. But if you have a pair of Sennheisers, you may be surprised by the opportunities for 'Foiling', and how this will help the kitchen radio, TV etc...
Richard
5th Jan 2006 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Re: Nordost
Hello Richard.
You're right, I hear more improvements with PWB devices than with ECO 3. But my system has changed so I will try things out, this weekend. I can only use it on cd's.
Greetings
Bernhard.
6th January 2006 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Nordost
I keep mulling this over, and wonder if anyone has a sense of not just the Nordost products, but other 'accepted' tweaks, and of how they compare with some of Peter's products. I write this because some time ago I gave up on the ones the magazines supported, because of my perception of their lesser effect. I have no idea of how any current PWB product compares with Shun Mook, or Harmonix, or Oak Feet, or Stillpoints etc. Many current tweaks do seem to echo (or borrow from?) Peter's earlier work (all those demagnetising discs and machines, or contact enhancers) but appear in different packaging.
Might be a useful piece of work to evaluate the competition.
Is this something for you Geoff?
Richard
6th January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Nordost (Explanation
Dear Group.
Judging from some of the personal e-mail I have received I am beginning to wonder if everyone understands that when I challenge something about the Nordost chemical (or other tweaks for that matter) I am NOT challenging the observation by either Nordost or others that after using a certain chemical they experienced some improvement in the sound. What I am challenging are the various EXPLANATIONS put forward as to why the sound changed. As I have repeated a number of times in my talks, over a period of time observations and associated explanations become so linked and set in concrete that it is difficult at some later stage for someone to challenge the explanation without also appearing to be challenging the original observation.
The reason why I challenge the explanations is because I know that progress forward cannot happen or can only happen painfully slowly unless people are prepared to sit and think things through.
One particular example I use fairly regularly is the painting the edge of a CD with a Green Pen. This effect had been discovered to give an improvement in the sound and the explanation put forward was that colouring the edge of the CD 'was somehow having an effect on the refraction or reflection of the laser beam'. This explanation has been repeated again and again.
This 'tweak' was reported in a few Hi Fi magazines and many, many people tried it and also reported that they achieved an improvement in the sound. I do not doubt or challenge their observations.
However, if people had been prepared to experiment further they would have discovered something quite unusual. The best colour for the edge of a CD is purple not green and you do not have to colour the entire edge of the CD with purple (as was suggested for the Green pen), you only need make a one centimetre mark with the colour purple !! But, the unusual thing and the important thing is that you can make an identical one centimetre mark on the outer edge of a Vinyl Record and on the edge of the plastic case of an audio tape and achieve a similar improvement in the sound !!! BUT, there IS NO laser beam involved with either a vinyl record or an audio tape so the original explanation (affecting the refraction or reflection of the laser beam) no longer holds water - in fact it leaks like a sieve !!
If, as we believe and our experiments have shown, that we (human beings) are reacting to the energy patterns of different colours, then the implications of this are enormous - and extend out far more than the mere colouring of the edge of CDs !! This is why I find it important to challenge explanations which, when considered seriously, can be seen not to be valid.
The explanation put forward by Nordost for the effect of their chemical is that there is a build up of static on the outer insulation material of an audio interconnect which is having some sort of adverse effect on the audio signal travelling through the cable. That applying the chemical to the outer insulation of the cable eliminates the static which then stops the adverse effect on the audio signal so creating an improvement in the sound. This explanation has a feasible ring to it so it is accepted by the audio journalists without challenge, further thought or question. But, when Nordost also claim that applying their chemical to power cords will also give an improvement in the sound, then the explanation no longer holds up under scrutiny - particularly if the power cords belong to such things as the electric kettle, the toaster, the food mixer, the microwave, the computer etc in other rooms and when there is no audio signal travelling along those cables!!
So, as I say repeatedly, there is something else 'going on' which affects the perception of the sound which cannot be explained from within conventional electronic or acoustic theories.
One example I like from history which illustrates this 'challenging the explanation' issue.
A series of severe cholera outbreaks gripped London in the 1830s, spreading very rapidly and killing 32,000 people in 3 months.
William Farr believed that the spread of cholera was caused by the 'bad air' (what he called miasmata) and William Farr's explanation was supported by the majority of the medical and scientific professions.
A local doctor, Dr. John Snow, however, observed that on one side of a particular street there was a high incidence of cholera but on the other side of the same street there were very few cases of cholera - even though all the residents were obviously breathing the same 'bad air' !! So, Dr Snow realised that the explanation being put forward by William Farr that it was the 'bad air' causing the spread of cholera could not be valid.
Dr Snow observed that on the side of the street with the small incidence of cholera cases, there was a brewery and Snow realised that when the brewery workers were thirsty, they drank the beer therefore did not drink the water from the communal water pump at the end of the street. Dr. John Snow persuaded the authorities to remove the handle from this communal water pump so that no one could get water from this source and the spread of cholera was halted. This simple experiment showed that contaminated water was the source of the spread of cholera, not the 'bad air'.
The original explanation (that the cholera was spread by the 'bad air') was no longer valid but if this explanation was accepted repeatedly, never challenged, and Dr Snow's experiences not discussed or even ignored completely, then no progress could be made.
Compare this story from nearly 200 years ago with today's audio industry. The parallel would be that the 'bad air' was the explanation constantly repeated for the spread of the cholera and if this explanation was never challenged, if the majority of the medical and scientific profession were not prepared to carry out any experiments for themselves or, if they did but were not allowed to report the results of such, or were ridiculed if they did attempt to report their results, then the new knowledge would not spread any further !!
Back to the subject of the Nordost chemical. Someone at Nordost obviously discovered that applying a specific chemical to the insulation material of an audio interconnect gave an improvement in the sound. Taking a few steps back, this means that the chemical mixture of the plastic insulation material was a problem - and this was precisely what Peter discovered over 25 years ago. Nordost had presumed that the effect must be on the audio signal travelling along the cable and they provided the explanation that superimposing another chemical on this material solved the problem - which must be caused by a build up of static.
Peter and I believe that the chemical mixtures used in plastic insulation material are not causing a problem for the audio signal but are causing a problem for us (human beings) and this has far reaching implications !!
I believe that the Nordost 'tweak' and many of the other 'tweaks' have been discovered quite inadvertently - by chance - which is what happened to Peter and me 25 years ago. It is through a greater understanding of what is going on which has enabled us to create far superior solutions to the problems we encountered.
Regards,
May
7th January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re: Headphones
I am so pleased, Richard, that you described 'Belting' your headphones. I personally feel that headphones are a huge but largely ignored section of audio equipment with regard to 'treating' and improving their sound.
I remember nearly two years ago on the Head-Fi Internet site (a site devoted mainly to headphones users) someone trying to introduce 'treating' headphones with P.W.B. devices and they were met with a small avalanche of ridicule and attack.
Regards,
May
7th January 2006 from Graham Mountford. UK.
Subject: Chemicals and Headphones
The discussion regarding the chemical used by Nordost reminds of of the wipes and spray sold by Russ Andrews, namely "Relees" and "Reveel". I have used these items for a number of years on all my CDs. One is a wipe for the playing side and is intended to remove the "mould" substance caused by the pressing process. The other is to spray the label side to prevent static. Doesn't that sound familiar!!. However following these treatments the sound does definitely improve. I now follow this with a spray of Morphic Liquid, various labels and white and green creams, with finally a clipping. The "belting" obviously improves the sound even further. I will leave discussion of this to others as it is all beyond me. I let my ears decide the effectiveness of the various products.
I have owned a second-hand set of Stax Lambda Signature headphones with an energiser which is powered by the speaker terminals only through a very cheap Rotel power amp. with the signal coming from my main system pre-amp.
The headphones and energiser have both been extensively treated (but not the drivers which are not accessible). I can say the performance the 'phones increased proportionately withe the treatments of the rest of the system and I would definitely recommend the treating of headphones to the same level as anything else. I must admit that I have not been brave enough to freeze them!!
Graham
P.S. My spellchecker insists that the cable manufacturer is now called Nudist (bare wires I presume)
8th January 2006 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Nordost
Hello.
Well, today I tested ECO 3 spray.
The sound is a little bit cleaner. That was the only thing I could discover. My system let me hear everything I change.
But with ECO3, sound is cleaner, that's all..
About tweaks: I use Aurios Pro through my whole system and I cannot live without it, also with P.W.B. treatments.
About demagnetising; you have Furutech RD 1 and 2.
Bedini Quadro beam ultra clarifier.
I use a big magnet for this, but are there P.W.B. treatments to get the same results as the above mentioned devices?
Oh by the way, if someone is interested in the ECO3 spray from Nordost, please let me know.
Bottle is 80% full (i think even more).
I want to sell it or trade it for some Rainbow foil.
Greetings
Bernhard.
8th January 2006 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Re: Nordost
It might be quite an undertaking to separate the "accepted" (materials science) explanations from PWB explanations for such things as Cardas Caps, CD duplication machines, audio feet, contact enhancers with suspended fine particles. Is it possible both types of effects are at work in some cases?
Geoff
8th January 2006 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Nordost
Eco3 spray is sold!!!!!!
9th January 2006 from P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re: Geoff Kait's posting
You are absolutely correct, Geoff, it is extremely difficult to easily separate accepted science (materials science) from P.W.B. Explanations.
Using one of the hypothetical examples I give in my talks. How would you know whether a polyurethane film capacitor sounds better than a polyester film capacitor - because it has a technically superior extremely low tolerance or because we (human beings) react less adversely to the chemical mix of polyurethane and react more adversely to the chemical mix of polyester ?
Why do some extremely competent audio circuit designers cling onto using their favourite older components (which many other engineers would regard as technically inferior) because they prefer the sound of these components when compared to newer components ? As per the examples I give in my talks, do technicians designing new components take two steps foward (from a technical point of view) but take five steps back by using materials which we (human beings) react quite adversely to ?
Similarly, why do some audio equipment design engineers state quite publicly that they have tried new (technically advanced circuit designs) but finally rejected them because they did not give the required high quality of sound the engineers wanted ? One example which comes to mind is the speaker crossover network the size and complexity of an amplifier being finally discarded in favour of a much simpler (just a few components) crossover network.
One area where a great number of audio engineers are agreed. Most of them prefer the sound of the insulation material PTFE when compared to most other plastic insulation materials. Is this because (as claimed by many people who use it) it has the best dielectric properties - which must mean that it is believed to have less of an effect on the actual audio signal than other insulation materials ? Or, is it because we (human beings) react the least adversely to the chemical mix of PTFE (Poly Tetra Fluoro Ethylene) and has nothing whatsoever to do with any dielectric effect on the audio signal ? From our own experiments we have found that one of the chemicals, Fluoride, used in PTFE could be the answer. In the UK we had a preparation called Fluorigard (a sodium fluoride liquid in a small dropper bottle made by Colgate) but I do not know if it is still available. It was recommended by some dentists for adding a small amount to the water used to rinse the teeth after cleaning. If you add a couple of drops of Fluorigard to a litre or more of water and use this water to water your house plants or fill a vase for cut flowers, you will experience an improvement in your sound !!!
Why does a silver wire wound transformer sound different to a copper wire wound transformer ? Is it because the signal is handled differently by the silver wire than by the copper wire or is it because we (human beings) react differently to the metal silver than to the metal copper ?
Those are all electrronic examples. Let us have a look at an acoustic example - loudspeaker decorative fronts.
Many people (including the actual speaker manufacturers) claim that a speaker sounds better with the decorative speaker front removed. Let us say that the decorative material is made of a polyester fabric. Both the speaker engineers and the material scientists would suggest that the polyester fabric, when placed in front of the speaker drive units, affects the acoustic information coming from the speaker drive units. No one argues with their observations and most people would agree with their explanation. But, if you do the following experiment, then something else is observed.
Place the decorative polyester fabric speaker front back in front of the drive units and listen. The sound will not be as good as that experienced with the front removed. Now, with the decorative front still in place, 'treat' the polyester fabric with something which can be removed, replaced, removed etc - in other words, you can carry out before, after and back to before experiments. Something like our CCU (treated) safety pin. Listen with the CCU in the fabric. The sound will now be perceived as good and, when you remove the decorative front, the sound will no longer be as good !!! This is because the 'treated' decorative front has now become a beneficial device !! If the speaker now sounds better with the decorative front in front of the drive units, what price an 'acoustic' explanation now ?
Did speaker engineers prefer the sound of a polypropelene speaker cone material in comparison to a bextrene cone material because it handled the audio signal better ? Both speaker engineers and material scientists would say yes ! How is it then that you can 'cream' the bextrene cone with our Cream-Electret and the bextrene cone speaker will then sound better than the untreated polypropelene cone speaker - if the bextrene cone was not handling the audio signal equally as well as the polypropelene cone ?
Just this weekend, on going through my files looking for a particular item, I came across something else I had saved. It was a report in the February 2004 issue of Stereophile on Sonus Faber's new flagship speaker. On describing the cabinet construction, it referred to a particular lacquer used by Sonus Faber as being based on Antonio Stradivari's original recipe and as being 'friendly to acoustics' !!! Nobody seemed prepared to ask the question "In what way was that particular lacquer being 'friendly to acoustics' ?" Here we have a chemical again changing the sound and nobody in the audio industry seems 'knocked back on their heels' !!
As I have said repeatedly, I do not challenge the observations by the engineers at Sonus Faber that they liked the 'sound' of that particular lacquer. What I ask is that people, many who call themselves 'professionals in audio', be prepared to ask the question "Why ?"
Yes, obviously Geoff, it is possible that both types of effects are at work but, as I ask in my talks, how will anyone know if people in the world of audio are not prepared to do experiments ?
Regards,
May
10th January 2006 From: Richard Graham, UK.
Subject: Re: Geoff Kait's posting
I have been meaning for the past few days to find a moment to respond to these interesting threads, yet feel very rusty in my thoughts on scientific methodologies, and of how to clarify these issues.
Firstly, as May indicates, we have to consider that some level at least mechanical engineering might be useful. A 78rpm disc will never have the range, detail of a vinyl LP. I won't get into a digital versus analogue debate, but prefer an iPod to older cassette Walkmans. When we get to electrical matters, it seems things are much less clear. I am again very rusty on my memory of electronics, but unless the theory has changed a great deal, much of what audio engineers do relates not to just a flow of electrons. Issues such as topology of circuit boards preoccupy many now - why? Similarly, many high end products have tank like build, when I cannot really understand why vibration should affect electrons flowing down a wire.
What explanation we give to phenomena invariably says more about our minds than the physical universe, and our need for a comforting congruence with past ideas. There was an interesting piece by Keith Howard in last months HiFi News on vibration effects on CD players. I hope I am remembering this correctly, but it seemed players were vulnerable to vibration at around 800Hz. However some CD players - an old Meridian one was quoted - seem to be more resilient and less affected by this particular resonance. Keith Howard is then puzzled as to why Stillpoint feet and stands might still improve things. I could speculate that it is related to the 'three' feet as opposed to four that helps. Yet I suspect other feet in a 'three' formation may be less good than the Stillpoints. Does it then come down to the use of ceramics, or the colours, or the shapes. One starts to appreciate the myriad of experiments needed to move forward. I have a number of experiments that I wish to conduct - not just involving the Nordost tissue! - such as comparing a CD with the CD layer of a Dual Disc. My hypothesis would be that the latter would be superior as there are less of them around, and less ink on the disc. I don't factor in the effects of the glue between the layers, let alone the weight of the disc. Why do I make these assumptions? - are they unconscious deductions masking as intuition. Who knows?
Yet it is these factors which we need to understand. Peter has some grasp, but I always feel a nagging feeling that there is more to it all, waiting to be tapped into.
But here is the scary bit. I have had experiences over the years of very dynamic processes using PWB products - for example when a treated cable is pluggeed in - which make me think there is more going on. In the room, the PTFE, silver or other chemicals remain the same whether it is plugged in or passive. But when plugged in, it becomes 'a device' and somehow has a large effect. A new product may 'interact' with others, and improve them in a quasi-symbiotic way. That is not just a response to chemicals, colours or shapes.
I can only conclude that there are dynamic systems at work, some of which of course are invisible, and we have dynamic not static responses to them.
And one other tricky question. Why does our sound not get dramatically worse every day. We learnt again at Christmas, how a few of us undertaking extreme clipping can raise things significantly.
With just the junk mail, or electronics pouring out of China, things should be worse.
Discuss.
Richard
10th January 2006 From: Richard Graham, UK.
Subject: Re: Nordost
I don't know who got the spray, but would they have a go at comparing it with anything PWBish on virgin CDs. I am cautious in writing this in case Graham's spellcheck gets excited again...
Richard