Well, then I guess I have to take their word for it. Just like i believe everything I read. /s
Synergistic Research HFT
- Thread starter RBFC
- Start date
Well, then I guess I have to take their word for it. Just like i believe everything I read. /s
Negative? No. I see it as a pragmatic approach to a product of this type. I would not "TRY" a $1000 product just because someone tells me to do so when I see no valid studies, data, that makes me feel like it's something plausible.
If someone sent me the product, I would amuse them by trying them, but I honestly wouldn't expect any major difference.
I would rather sit back and wait until someone unbiased, credible that would go through an exhaustive amount of testing that understands how to test room treatment before I get on any bandwagon trying to "sell" this type of product.
I was VERY skeptical of high end audio cables back in the late 80's when I first came into contact with them. I tried them, but did not spend a dime until AFTER i listened to them enough to be satisfied with the difference. It also took me quite some time to get my ears trained to actually figure out what to listen to as it does take time. I also read about how at least one company tests audio cables and the technical discussions behind WHY one cable has a different tonality to another. But there are plenty of different tests to prove that one cable does have a variety of different response curves that will lend itself to sounding different better or worse. Now, when it comes to room treatment, I'm the same way. That's a discipline that's been proven and in existence for MANY years and it's an actually something that is taught in colleges around the world, plenty of books written, explanations of the physics, etc. behind it. But in all of the research that's been done in the area of acoustic treatment, no one has this product mentioned as being something credible. So far, it's just some marketing fluff and a handful of reviewers from profit making magazines, and a few people on message blogs that say they work. But I'm assured that this product needs to be validated by the acoustic engineering society or something similar in credibility that's completely un-related to the mfg, resellers, etc.
Do any reputable mastering studios use this product as a form of room treatment? NONE that I'm aware of. If a top mastering engineer were to use it, I might be so inclined to maybe think a little differently, but serious consideration?? I really would like to see some acoustic engineers that are certified run a variety of tests before I give it any serious consideration. This is not being negative, this is being realistic, please don't confuse the two.
I've seen products of this type come and go because they didn't earn the credibility from the people that know how to test these sorts of products. There was a product that one dealership showed me that you attach the back of a speaker cabinet that was supposed to improve imaging, or something of that nature. They stopped carrying the product after a few months, and that product didn't last long. It had some reviewers that gave it thumbs up too and I'm sure some people swore that it worked. But I'm sorry, I just didn't feel comfortable with that product enough to take it home, even as a demo. I have stores that will give me loaner product when I ask, but there's no Synergist dealer near me.
I prefer to have some credibility for products such as this and to me, a credible source would be from a certified acoustic engineer that shows test results and has spent a lot of time measuring and testing the product, especially in environments similar to my own.
I don't know who you are and you haven't provided me with exhaustive testing. So if you have the product and know how to test it with measurement equipment, then by all means, show some sort of proof that the changes the product makes is measurable and it's worth the money. I know I can spend $1000+ on room treatment that I know WILL make a noticeable improvement to my room acoustics if I feel so inclined to do so.
The only thing is that the last thing you're doing is "sitting back". You're actually going from thread to thread, making sure everyone knows how much you love and demand measurements, while you yourself do not move a finger to provide such measurements.
I'm very sceptic of this kind of gizmos too, but I don't feel the need to demand people prove their results to me, nor do I demand the company sends me freebies so I can test, like you did.
alexandre
I'm not qualified to perform measurements, I'm a consumer and in this case, it's not proven room treatment by any independent acoustic engineer that has tested and measured this product to deem it a valid form of room treatment. Why does this not sink in? Seriously, if a company makes a claim, they should be prepared to have it validated since this is not traditional technology for room treatment. Does this work on a large scale for a concert hall? How they are getting away with this is beyond me.
It's just word to the wise, if you have technology, be prepared to show some form of test measurements to back up the claims. Reviews by people that work for resellers of the product or magazines that get paid advertisements is not credible enough without test measurements.
Well, I'm not going to pay money to test the product. I don't have test measurement equipment at my disposal.
Well, I can't help it if you are gullible to use this product without it having been validated by credible sources with test measurements to back up the claims. I won't pay for something like this unless there are definitive tests to back up the claims. I was just mentioning they would have to send a product to me for free because I won't pay for it. Even if they say I would get my money back if I didn't like the product. By law, they have to anyway.
Either way, I wish more people weren't so gullible with strange products where there are no measurements to validate the product.
Rich
You are not alone in your skepticism. The most interesting thing is how much the video fails. There is no difference at least from the video. yet people still defend the product. The usual barbs are furiously at play: " you didn't try it, your system may not be resolving enough, you are too bent on measurements, etc" . It is the kind of products made for those who want to believe and are able to bear with no consequences to their financials health, to spend a few thousands dollars on what satisfies their soul.
We have had this discussion before of some products from the same company:
and
Same bold claims ... Some will shell a few thousands dollars and honestly think they hear a whole new level of "spaciousness" , "bass definition" and feel more connected to the music, etc. Measurements (the dreaded, despised and so vilified term) before and after will show absolutely no difference, yet those who believe will continue to claim they did hear vast improvements .. No harm done it is just a hobby and most of those who buy these will not suffer from the separation with a few thousands dollars but truth and science were pilfered in the process, not an unusual occurrence in our audiophile universe.
You are not alone in your skepticism. The most interesting thing is how much the video fails. There is no difference at least from the video. yet people still defend the product. The usual barbs are furiously at play: " you didn't try it, your system may not be resolving enough, you are too bent on measurements, etc" . It is the kind of products made for those who want to believe and are able to bear with no consequences to their financials health, to spend a few thousands dollars on what satisfies their soul.
We have had this discussion before of some products from the same company:
and
Same bold claims ... Some will shell a few thousands dollars and honestly think they hear a whole new level of "spaciousness" , "bass definition" and feel more connected to the music, etc. Measurements (the dreaded, despised and so vilified term) before and after will show absolutely no difference, yet those who believe will continue to claim they did hear vast improvements .. No harm done it is just a hobby and most of those who buy these will not suffer from the separation with a few thousands dollars but truth and science were pilfered in the process, not an unusual occurrence in our audiophile universe.
I give up. Continue preaching to the usual "measurements first" crowd.
And, for the record, I'm not defending the product, as I've never heard it, nor do I have the intention of doing so. I just oppose the systematic thread crapping that's going on.
alexandre
And, for the record, I'm not defending the product, as I've never heard it, nor do I have the intention of doing so. I just oppose the systematic thread crapping that's going on.
alexandre
Alexandre,
Do not give up. Even if only one in one hundred of this type of products that do not have conventional science and measurements results in systematic improvements in sound reproduction it is worth keeping an open mind.
Considering the quality of most recordings nowadays, I'd do the exact opposite they recommend.
BTW, do you think mastering engineers listen for the same attributes on recordings that audiophiles do? Hardly. But does anything help those Auratones?
In the end, money talks. No one is forcing you to buy them.
Rich,
We get what you're saying, so constant repetition is pointless and wastes space. I started this thread to ask about the HFT because I won some FOR FREE. Please relax a bit and enjoy discussions at WBF that involve products that have been acceptably measured.
Lee
We get what you're saying, so constant repetition is pointless and wastes space. I started this thread to ask about the HFT because I won some FOR FREE. Please relax a bit and enjoy discussions at WBF that involve products that have been acceptably measured.
Lee
Engineers that design audio products, and other products for that matter DO MEASUREMENT TESTS of their designs from the first prototype to the finish product. PERIOD. Depending on what they are designing will dictate what measurements they are taking and how to refine their product to achieve a desired end goal. That's the design of ANY product. I've worked with engineers designing test measurement equipment for industrial purposes (NO Audio related) and I know that just don't simply design a circuit (product) without doing any measurements of any kind. Yes, in the audio world the subjective tests, which is what 99% of the population ultimately does since MOST OF US do not have test measurement equipment, know what tests to perform, etc. other than maybe a simple measurement from an OHM meter, that's the most popular test tool that we might have. Some have scopes of various types, some have these other room measurement tools, but by and large MOST people don't have test measurement equipment the mfg use. But in the end, if you are designing something, you should have some means of measuring the product to PROVE that there are differences between the BEFORE and AFTER of installing the product you are making. I'm not suggesting that tests are not going to be the definitive and only tests to look at, but if there are no differences in any test for a product such as this, then there is no valid proof that it does anything. I can go to any power amp, pre amp, etc. and either they publish their measurements/specs, or they don't, but if they do, each test will give us some clue as to why it might sound better or worse than another product with a different spec. Specs are useful to a point, but in the area of room treatment, if you have a properly tuned room to what an acoustic engineer would recommend, your system should response at it's best and produce good imaging, articulation, etc. etc. To just say your product improves imaging, etc. etc. is one thing, but at least prove that it's either improving the response of the equipment or the room acoustics.
Those bowls they sell are based on Helmholtz resonator theory, which IS proven, and it's been discussed by lots of acoustic engineers, etc. so they are just offering their devices in hopes that they will make a difference, but they are based on proven technology, science, etc. I haven't tried their bowls, but I do know that there is a little more to them, but I certainly do think they should be showing how to figure out if you need them, etc. That's what companies like ASC, Aurilex, etc. etc. that make room treatment. They first would prefer to measure your room. ASC developed the MATT test, and there are countless ways to measure room acoustics. Now, what an acoustic engineer will typically do is measure a room, find out what are the problem areas and then figure out what treatment you need and where to place it, and then remeasure and then see if it is smoothing out the curve, and then the listener will do listening tests to see if they hear no improvement, little or big and then they systematically will constantly remeasure to ring out the room. I don't know of a single room treatment product that fixes everything, I think that's impossible. So, what I'm getting at is does this thing do anything first, if so, what? And when should I use it, if it does do anything. Because maybe I can achieve the same result by just doing something different in the room that costs nothing or very little. This is where an acoustic engineer can be handy. But in order to know what the heck these things are doing, we need measurements as to how it changes either the equipment sound quality or the room acoustics. It's going to do one of the two or nothing at all. That's where measurements come in. IF you have a bass problem in your room, the acoustic engineer can identify what frequency they need to go after so they measure your room first and then they'll figure out what tube trap size and placement, or maybe another type of product to cure the problem. But without any measurements or explanation on the product, then the product is suspicious of being BS.
Would you buy a power amp where they had only a response curve of 1K to 10KHz, instead of 20Hz to 20K Hz? I would highly doubt that you would even LOOK at a power amp that didn't have a decent frequency response curve. Some specs can at least tell you SOMETHING about the product before you listen to it. If specs were meaningless, then why do people care about wattage. Knowing the wattage won't tell you how good it sounds, but it's recognized as ONE spec that people care about. Do you buy amps without knowing the wattage ratings? Really? You'd be one of the firsts audiophiles that I've met that don't know what wattage rating their power amp is.
Seriously, get off my back as I'm not the mfg. Do you think car mfg could get away without publishing performance tests? This product is a form of room treatment and ALL room treatment should be measured as to what and how it affects the room acoustics so that an acoustic engineer or consumer can figure out IF they need it, etc. Also, with this product, since it seems like a one size fits all, they should give you some indication as to what size rooms it can be used for. I highly doubt this can be used in a room that's a concert hall size vs a small room. Well, they should figure out what the limitations of room size are and tell people.
Well, it all depends on what recordings you listen to. The audiophile recordings of classical, acoustic jazz, etc. where they deploy simple techniques with no signal processing, yeah, they'll use Audiophile speakers, cables, amps, etc. If you listen to a movie soundtrack that's done by SkyWalker sound, they actually use custom designed MIT boxes on their microphones for both sound tracks and the foley work, and then it runs through MIT cables to the "audiophile' amps (I think they use Bryston, but I could be mistaken) and then it goes to a B&W 800 series speaker. I have a friend that was a second engineer on a Kronos quartet recording and that's where they do a lot of their albums and then they send it off typically to Bob Ludwig, of Gateway Mastering, who just so happens to use Eggleston IVY (he's uses other models previously, and he'll use Yamaha NS-10s if he's told to use them, but he prefers NOT to use them), and his studio has Transparent cable throughout. I did some research and looked up a variety of mastering and recording studios and I see a LOT of the top end mastering studios for both classical recording and pop recording actually using both MIT and Transparent cables. I also see monitors such as Wilson, B&W, Eggleston, Duntech (no longer made), as well as other high end audiophile speakers and they use a variety of amps, but Cello, Bryston, Classe, etc. are common. Yeah, one piece of music can be mixed on a variety of playback systems as they might create a mix just for radio, a mix just for iTunes, a mix just for this and that, so there are sometimes several different mixes floating around of the same pop song. That happens. I like reading liner notes of recordings and I like to know what equipment they used, if possible.
Auratones are generally used when they create a radio mix for the radio stations. Or they are doing a pop recording just to check. These recording studios have and use anything from tiny aura tones, to NS-10s, to big Westlake, custom speakers, Dynaudio, Ocean Way, etc. etc. etc. and everything in between. But I see more and more studios taking a little more care in the playback equipment than they used to. But I generally stay away from the recordings that have lots of signal processing, compression or are tailored for teenage girls. So you won't be seeing Justin Bieber albums in my home.
Abbey Road, which makes a lot of recordings use B&W and NS-10s, Classe power amps and they actually designed their own cables, they actually sell them, but I don't know of anyone that has bought them. But you can buy them if you want.
It's a good thing to read magazines such as MIX as they interview various engineers and talk to them about the equipment they use, plus you can cruise the internet and go to various studio's web sites and see what equipment they use, sometimes they'll mention the cabling, sometimes not, but there is a trend for studios to use more "audiophile" equipment for the top end recordings, but there is the other end of the spectrum where people are doing recordings in their home, but they might not be what you listen to. Some studios might have 5 to 10 different speakers systems at their disposal, some engineer actually travel with their own speakers, some like the Grateful Dead, use Meyer HD-1's and they used Meyer systems for live tours after they ditched their huge JBL/McIntosh PA.
Go check out the various studios, both mastering and recording and check out the equipment they use. AIR studios, which is George Martins, has custom Dynaudio, but he used to go to Abbey Road. Back in the old days, many engineers would use Tannoy, or JBL systems were prevalent. Some still use those old Tannoy mastering speakers. There's a studio near where I live that still use those things, even though they have a variety of other speakers, but this particular studio does primarily voice overdubs for ads and they'll also do music recording from local bands.
It's unfortunate that we don't always know specifically what's used during the tracking, mixing, and mastering of an album or soundtrack, but it's possible to find out for many recordings.
I read an interview with Bob Ludwig who did the Rolling Stones remasters, he explained what he did and used, but a lot of these top mastering engineers don't like using lots of processing if at all possible. Those were done on his Eggleston/Cello/Transparent system and he uses modified Neumann desk with a variety of outboard mastering equipment, but he generally doesn't put that much on the masters unless it's for radio. But they will for radio versions. I think James Newton Howard, that does a lot of famous sound tracks has B&W 800 series speakers, I forget what other equipment he uses, but I think he uses Classe power amps if I'm not mistaken.
Last edited:
At the end of this thread, we still have no majority consensus of how this tweak sounds (if at all) and no desire by anyone to measure its performance, assuming that there is even a way to: (i) measure its performance; (ii) equate that measurement to whether the thing makes a noticeable difference; and (iii) decide that there is a positive/negative noticeable difference.
Personally, I am skeptical that this product works, but I am willing to suspend disbelief and listen with an open mind if given the opportunity.
Personally, I am skeptical that this product works, but I am willing to suspend disbelief and listen with an open mind if given the opportunity.
well, if people wouldn't take this "I trust my ears" attitude, and demanded some test measurements to validate their technology, maybe I wouldn't have to repeat myself. To think for one second that a product is developed without the use of test measurements is so naive. If a product was designed with no test measurements of any kind, that's the sign of a complete idiot. So, again, WHERE ARE THE MEASUREMENTS? If you want to be naive about this, go ahead, some of us want valid proof of a technology that's not been widely accepted.
I am quite curious to try these but... My last trial with the SR ARTS system I took some measurement (albeit with only REW and not some pro rig).
I played with various locations and listened, removed, listened, added them back, listened, had someone else remove them, and listened. I heard no difference...I was hoping to so I don't have to get panels. Then I took measurements and they showed not much difference.
YMMV.
I played with various locations and listened, removed, listened, added them back, listened, had someone else remove them, and listened. I heard no difference...I was hoping to so I don't have to get panels. Then I took measurements and they showed not much difference.
YMMV.
Really? Oh, OK. So the people that buy horn speakers shouldn't care what amp they use because they'll all sound the same? Oh, OK. Wattage is just ONE measurement. I've run into some that only look at wattage, which i think is ridiculous, but that's what some people only look at, but they forget to look at the THD rating as some wattages are measured with .1%, .05%, etc. distortion levels.
Go ahead, spend $1100 on something that's has no valid proof of anything other than what people THINK they hear.
It would be nice for the power cable mfg to take a power amp, test it using the supplied cable and then re test it again using their cable and see how it might affect the specs of the power amp. I would LOVE to see that type of testing. It would make sense if it changed SOME aspect of it. I've played around with power cables and some I didn't hear any difference, some I did. But the differences can range from little to no difference to drastic enough to warrant spending the money.
Keep in mind, a room treatment product should be validated by acoustic engineers FIRST before I would even consider it. I have to know if my room needs that sort of treatment first. Maybe the room problems I have requires a different form of treatment, to think for one second that one form of room treatment will fix all of your problems is ridiculous on every level.
Measurements are not necessarily a validation of positive improvement and while I do not trust anyone else's single pair of ears, I might be persuaded by many temperate responses that the tweak works or does not work as advertised. Ultimately, the final determinant is whether I personally hear a difference and whether that difference improves the sound.
I have never purchased any piece of audio equipment because it measured well. I purchased it because I heard a difference that elevated my enjoyment beyond what I had before. There are tons of products with stellar measurements and none of them sound the same, so even if you could obtain measurements in support of the manufacturer's hypothesis of why his product works, that still does not address the reason why most of us are here.
I have never purchased any piece of audio equipment because it measured well. I purchased it because I heard a difference that elevated my enjoyment beyond what I had before. There are tons of products with stellar measurements and none of them sound the same, so even if you could obtain measurements in support of the manufacturer's hypothesis of why his product works, that still does not address the reason why most of us are here.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |