Reviewing the Furutec Demag

Gregadd, I'm not Amir, but I know how I would do it. If, and that's a big if, after Feb 10th, we have concensus that the Analog to Digital to Analog chain is sufficiently transparent, I'll record a couple of tracks before and after demag - if I can get a hold of one.

Then we do an ABX double blind test. I'll even post track samples here.

Damn Greg. That was a ton to read!!!

How would I handle what? The review? If so, here is how...

I would treat it as if I was going to declare that watching TV gives you cancer. I am sure a percentage of the population would readily believe that. The problem would be how to convince the rest of the world. By the same token, the challenge is not to be convincing to the converted audiophiles but the unconverted. Positive-feedback set that up, but at the end, used language and proof for the already converted.

To convince people that TV causes cancer would require pretty solid proof. Getting one guy who has cancer who watches TV 8 hours a day won't do. By the same token, here is what I would try to do:

1. First prove the box did anything at all. It says it demagnetizes the CD/LP. Who says it did? It is not like that is subjective. Let's measure the darn thing. 6moon has reports of this from the manufacturer there the magnetization level went down just a little. If that is all they can do, maybe in some circumstances nothing changes. Or perhaps the machine makes it worse.

Maybe as soon as I touch the CD and move it around it magnetizes. So I would also measure it once on the CD platter. And then after it has played once since 6moon says after just one play, the fidelity degraded and they had to demag again.

2. With that data in hand, then I would see if I can make the problem worse. Let's magnetize the CD more. Put a magnet on it. Rub it all over. And then measure to see if we managed to change its magnetism. If we did not, then the device is useless since magnetism is constant. If we did increase magnetism, then let's listen. Did it make things worse? Maybe it made them better!

3. Remember how I started this post: we are not preaching to the choir here. We want to convince the non-converted. To that end, let's do a blind test. No, not the difficult one. Buy two copies of 6 pieces of new music. Play the once as to magnetize them. Then hand them to someone else behind closed door and have them randomly demag some after labeling them. Let's pick a disinterested person so that we are not under pressure to be right in front of them. Then let's listen to see if we can reliably pick the right one.

4. Assuming we hear something, let's do a simple exercise. Let's imagine the sound as if the device had no effect at all. Can we erase its benefits? Can we hear the edginess that we thought was gone?

BTW, I should say that can actually hypothesize why things like CD mats and such improve CD audio. So I have learned to be patient and open minded. Sadly, nothing I read in either review told me anything convincing. Words that digital edge was gone have been uttered a million times about everything audiophile. Words the even the best analog audio system now sounds worlds better? Ditto. And no, saying you didn't expect to hear an improvement but did, doesn't mean anything. We are not in control of our subconscious. That said, I have used that line myself once or twice when it suited my purpose .

Gregadd said:

Did you read the white paper? The Furetech measured gauss. They even have measurements and graphs from an independent lab.

Click to expand...

What independent lab report? This one? http://www.furutech.com/news/FURUTECHdeMagNews2006.htm

If so, it doesn't say anything about an independent lab. It has no description of how the measurement was conducted other than some tiny pictures. Who knows if there was not stray magnetics that caused that tiny difference. I searched for the "IHI Gauss meter." After 10 minutes I gave up as nothing came up. Maybe there is such a company but unless I can find it and look at the specs for the meter, I can't go by anything they say.

The stuff about read rate of CD increasing is just silly stuff. Again, no detail at all. Nothing about whether they tested 10 times and what the variation was from run to run without using the device. And they used just one drive. Why? Are CD-ROM drives too expensive all of a sudden to test on half a dozen of them?

And what the heck are those 70% THD numbers? It is just a bunch of random data that no one even proof read to see if they are cohesive before publishing them.

Guess what, you can treat cables.

Click to expand...

As if that is a surprise. Everything in the world is fair game when it comes to claims of improving cables. Now if you told me it cured the common cold, I would be impressed .

And the parts of the Demag were cryogenically treated.

Click to expand...

So do some woodworking chisels. Would that do anything for your audio system? No.

IIt also comes with an aftermarket power cord.

Click to expand...

Read what I said about cables .

This is another review:http://www.soundstage.com/vinyl/vinyl200702.htm

Click to expand...

Yeh, yeh, yeh. More of the converted sounding converted!

Again, the mission here is to convince the rest of the world. On that front, I see maybe 5% of that with theories of what can be magnetized. Other than that, I am waiting to see anything that tells me the device really removes said magnetism and how we know if it really made any difference.

You said there was a report from an independent. Going to Tokyo university to use their meter is not a report from an independent lab.

Let's put that aside. You say they are a respected company. This is the meter they did not own and had to go and borrow from Tokyo University:



That benchtop device is too expensive for them to own one?

And do you know what a "nano" is? It is a billion. The measured amount was 50 billionth of a tesla lower. More importantly, it still had 520 billionth of Tesla left in it. The reduction was just 10%. If magnetism is so bad, how come leaving 90% in there was OK? Some common Tesla measures:

31 µT (3.1×10?5 T) - strength of Earth's magnetic field at 0° latitude (on the equator)
5 mT - the strength of a typical refrigerator magnet
1.25 T - magnetic field intensity at the surface of a neodymium magnet
1 T to 2.4 T - coil gap of a typical loudspeaker magnet
1.5 T to 3 T - strength of medical magnetic resonance imaging systems in practice, experimentally up to 8 T

So the smallest value, earth's magnetic field, is 20,000 times higher than what they measured. In other words, the environment the player is running in, has a natural magnetic field that is 20,000 times higher than what is on the CD. I am not a magnetic fields person. But it would take a heck of a lot more text to convince me there is some science there than the random tidbits thrown in that document.

As to company being a major establishment, I don't see that anywhere. Their address is Gotanda, Shinagawa, Tokyo. That is where Sony headquarter is. I have been there maybe 30 times when I used to work for Sony. Even Sony doesn't own those high rises they show in the picture -- they lease them. The only thing they say about themselves is that they make cables and such. Sure, they put on a good show with that web page making you think they are a huge multi-national company but unless they can give more data, it doesn't look like they are high-technology company with any serious R&D level: http://www.furutech.com/a2008/profiles.asp. And read this version of it: http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/furutech/furutech-intro.htm

"The FURUTECH company was established in 1988. To begin with, it established a reputation throughout the world by selling PCOCC Audio and Video cables from Furukawa Electronic (high purity single crystal oxygen-free copper used for Audio & Video cables), earning the confidence and support from a vast number of Audio / Video fans."

So they bought cable from Furukawa Electric and terminated them and that is their claim to fame?

And they could cite all the reviews they like. How many good reviews are there for high-end cables? Far more than they have for this thing. Tell me Consumer Reports has tested it and then I listen!

Really Greg, you say you are a lawyer. Would you ever use junk like this as your defense? Call that random bit of writing independent lab? A company that lists only their President on their web page with no mention of employee count, space leased, equipment owned, etc as "established and well respected?"

I am open minded still about this thing but please don't feed me junk without looking into them yourself. It took me all of 5 minutes worth of googling to get the above data. And what the heck you are doing awake at 4:00am in the morning. At least it is only 1:00am here .

i've not tried the big Lp-sized Furetech deMag product, but i own an Acoustic Revive RL-30 which is also a 'full size' demagnatizer that will demag 3 CD's at a time or an Lp.

i also own the smaller Furetech CD demagnitzer and a Bedini Clarifier.

all these products improve performance to various degrees.....the big RL-30 being the best of the demag units.

i also have a Tourmaline Hair Dryer product which has a greater performance effect than any of those above products although it's effect is shorter in duration.

i've never been one who cares a whit about why something works; but i respect that many need some science support to allow themselves to believe their ears.

i have no interest in debate on this subject on any level as everything that could be said has already been said ad nauseum. i don't care if anyone agrees or they don't. i'm not encouraging anyone to go out and purchase any of this stuff.

i only post this to offer visitors to my room the opportunity to request an A/B when they visit using any of these products.

i'll add one little bon bon here about demag'ing.

a few years back when i was messing with the big Acoustic Revive ML-30 and the Tourmaline Hair Dryer my (at that time future but now) son-in-law who was just completing his Phd in Physics was at my home and i showed him these products and asked him for his opinion. he listened and heard the effect. first he said it would be interesting if someone would fund the research for the lab time to investigate what the cause and effect was. then he said it did not surprise him that demagnification would have some effect. his Phd research involved calibrating test equipment and he had found that demagnatizing glass would allow for the surface tension holding microscopic dust to be temporarily eliminated and then the accuracy of his test equipment improved by small amounts. he had no idea whether that could be involved in the effect we were hearing but he said that surface dynamics were significant issues and he could see that a laser or stylus accuracy could be somehow effected.

Gregadd said:

I'm glad Mike decided to contribute. I was prepared to wait until Gary was able to conduct his test at the February 10, 2011. I hope he gets the chance to test it.

My apology to AMIR for baiting him. He certainly took the bait, hook line and sinker. I really thought my comments about Tokyo lab, cryogenic treatment and aftermarket power cords would tip him off.

This is a perfect example of what happens in the highend.

A tweaky product is introduced. Said product appears to have questionable science validity.

OTOH there is substantial observational evidence that the product meets it's claims.

Both camps dig in. Convinced that they are correct. One side presents measurements. The other side thinks measurements be damned. I hear what I hear.

I do know one thing. Once you call someone stupid or question thier motives you have lost them and are not going to be able to convince them of anything.

Click to expand...

Greg

How "substantial" are those "observational evidences"? Evidences? If one indeed want to believe then these would be evidence, if one has a iota of a doubt then ....

i'm happy to offer the loan of my Acoustic Revive ML-30 to Gary to do his tests.

i just want it to be clear that i'm not taking any position on this stuff; i'm only willing to offer people the opportunity to investigate for themselves. i am not interested in participating in any DBX or whatever test.

garylkoh said:

Gregadd, I'm not Amir, but I know how I would do it. If, and that's a big if, after Feb 10th, we have concensus that the Analog to Digital to Analog chain is sufficiently transparent, I'll record a couple of tracks before and after demag - if I can get a hold of one.

Then we do an ABX double blind test. I'll even post track samples here.

Click to expand...

Gary,
aside note that touches on this subject are those manufacturers that use modern techniques with improved compounds for the stamped vinyl.
I feel it also makes sense to investigate this with it, one of the manufacturers was in discussion with Furutech about the behaviour and adjusted their compounds to improve their LPs; is a Northern America LP manufacturer but if I get the time will try to find the info if no-one else has it to link.
Worth comparing 2 LPs (same recordings and stamper but different compounds) they produce; 1 with the improved compound and one that is not.

Cheers
Orb

Gregadd said:

They used the machine as directed and heard varied degrees of improvement. How much weight you give those reports is the subject matter of this debate.

Click to expand...

Hi

I apologize in advance to those who said they heard a difference. If one ever subjects oneself to a "knowledge remove" test one will be verysurprised how easily our ears can be fooled .. the refusal of accepting that it can be so is almost new to me when we know how easily our senses can be fooled ... That a person reported hearing a difference is not a proof even less an evidence ... I wouldn't have any problem with a different choice of words. "Report" would have been fine to me but "evidence"? substantial observational evidence ... ??? Difficult to simply let it pass

Orb said:

Gary,
aside note that touches on this subject are those manufacturers that use modern techniques with improved compounds for the stamped vinyl.
I feel it also makes sense to investigate this with it, one of the manufacturers was in discussion with Furutech about the behaviour and adjusted their compounds to improve their LPs; is a Northern America LP manufacturer but if I get the time will try to find the info if no-one else has it to link.
Worth comparing 2 LPs (same recordings and stamper but different compounds) they produce; 1 with the improved compound and one that is not.

Cheers
Orb

Click to expand...

i have 2 Classic Records 'Reviewer Comparison Sets' of Lp pressings;

"Both Clarity and Black vinyl were pressed from the same stamper and on the same press the only difference being the vinyl formulation."

here is a link to one of them you can still purchase.

http://www.themusic.com/detail.cfm?id=9010425

the other one is 2 45rpm pressings of Holly Cole's
Don't Smoke in Bed'; one Clarity Vinyl and one Black vinyl.

Clarity vinyl looks opaque light grey and you can see light thru it. i have 10-15 sets of Classic Records with Clarity formulations. they do seem to be a bit quieter but not as much better as when i use the demag unit on black vinyl. i have not actually done the direct comparison yet.

one other story for this thread.

3 years ago Winston Ma used my room and Rockport tt to master a recording from direct disc Lp to K2HD redbook. he had three pro audio guys (2 from the Bay area and Bruce Brown) with 2 separate hirez recording paths directly recording off my darTZeel pre fed by the Rockport. we spent 12 hours doing many many test recordings during the process.

a few hours into this day i suggested we try using the Tourmaline gun (not demag'ing but certainly related to it). we did some tests with and without the Tourmoline gun and easily determined that the Lps sounded better with it. what you hear on that K2HD is treated with that gun. we even found that the maximum Tourmaline 'effect' only lasted full strength for 10 to 12 minutes so we did a 'cut' half way thru each side to get the best possible sound for the final 'take'.

remember these were skeptical pro audio guys who did not even regard vinyl as a good format at the beginning of the session. needless to say that part changed quickly and by the end they had bought into the Tourmaline effect hook, line and sinker. doing test recordings for 12 hours with 5 sets of ears will quickly wash away any preconcieved notions.

i wonder if Bruce still has any tracks where we tried with and without the Tourmaline gun that he could offer?

I have heard about this debate for a long time but never engaged in it and would have taken the same stance had Greg not asked me to comment. One thing about me: if you ask me by name, I will come! Not sure what about that is taking the bait Greg as if I had not answered, then it would become, "I asked Amir about it and he was too scared to answer" kind of argument.

Mike, appreciate your feedback. After taking the position that there was no science to back CD mats and such and learning that there was a way they could contribute to better sound (in a hypothetical way), I have learned to not start off with the position of "it can't work." My position in this thread however was not that. It was to examine the work and statements the company and reviewers had done and poke holes in them -- kind of what I do in my regular posts on "reviewing the reviewers." I can't stand sloppy work. Either say nothing or do it properly. Don't set out to say that "I was hoping I could say this product does not work" and after one listen become converted. If you were really that convinced it should not work, then use that to really dig into whether the device really, really works. Ask the company to loan you a Gauss meter. If they don't one, well that gets me into the second rant:

I have no use for a company who claims to have a product that improves audio but has no idea or real data as to why. This is important because without that, they can't test the device leaving the factory to see if it is working. The purpose of a bulb is to make light. Add electricity to it and you can see light and are you are sure the device works. These guys don't have a Gauss meter of their own yet are building a de-magnetizer. Maybe some of the people who are buying these things have non-working machines. Who is to say otherwise? They don't sell this device for $19.95. They sell it for 100X more. The guts of it probably doesn't cost more than $19.95. They can surely afford to buy the proper equipment and test these things. And if they have such test equipment, then they should do some research and characterize it more. It is not our job or the reviewers for that matter, to go and invent the theory of why they might work.

I have to repeat this story that I told in my embarrassing moments thread. When I have failed the null test the first time, where identical files sounded different, one sounding less digital, with more ease and air around instruments (did I cover all the adjectives? ), it was very hard to accept the truth. I was so sure of the improvements. So much so that I was angry at my guy conducting the test on me that he and his team must have been deaf to no here the difference. But there I was with proof that the files were identical. So I listen again, this time with an objective mind and of course, now they sounded the same. Then I forced myself to think that one file is as different as it was. I tried to read more air, ease, etc into one track and it all came back!

So I believe people are "hearing" the differences. Problem is, I can't separate the times that is due to real changes or above episode. Unless you have lived through what I have lived through above, you are never going to accept that it can happen to the level that it does. How hard is it to walk out the room and have someone treat some random number of LPs/CDs and then come back and see if you can spot them. If you cannot, you are welcome to say such blind tests don't work. I much rather hear that, than hear that these devices work . At least then, some of us have objective data -- even if disputed -- that the device may not really work. As it is, we are left with no way of knowing based on *our* standards.

I know you said you don't care if we believe it or not. But I hope that is not the case. We are all here because we share a passion for improving audio performance. The more you believe in these devices working, the more you owe us to help us become converted. That is no different than telling us such and such speaker is better than another. No?