Synergistic atmosphere field generators

marty

Active Member
Apr 20, 2010
1,107
1
38
Far Hills, NJ
#41
I just read patent 8,737,632 - good to know one can a get a patent based on groundless claims, as long as no one else has done that, and as long as it's presented in a semi-credible way. Nice.
So does that mean you will not be re-painting your room when he licenses his paint technology to Sherwin Williams? :eek:
You can probably get a paint discount if you buy some of those gong bowls in a matching color!
 
May 30, 2010
13,919
9
38
Portugal
#42
are you sure? i thought he was a printer by trade before SR.
Do you know that the earliest known sound recording device was developed by a French printer and bookseller? As a printer by trade, Scott de Martinville was able to read accounts of the latest scientific discoveries and became an inventor. Au Clair de la Lune is the first existing recording of singing, almost three decades before Edison wax cylinder.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 26, 2015
2,555
0
36
Eastern WA
#43
Thanks for the comedy.

"so what is your patent on?"

"it's on using or not using piezoelectric materials to make paint that is intended to make sound more warm"

"I thought you had another one?"

"of ya it's on placing objects that are or are not metal or of any defined measurements, in the front AND back of a room to affect bass frequencies"
 
May 30, 2010
13,919
9
38
Portugal
#44
A skilled Ham radio operator should be able to tell what the box is transmitting.

But it works (or doesn't work) a lot like noise cancelling headphones and loudspeakers. Noise cancelling headphones work rather well. Noise cancelling speakers work OK for one listener with their head in a fixed position, like a car's driver's seat. But in a room with more than one listening position, they don't work at all.
Considering the wavelengths involved in these processes the boxes must be work in a completely different way from noise cancellation in the audio frequencies, that simply generate an out of phase signal to cancel the noise in a band of audio frequencies.

Some of these devices simply use the RF harmonics created by programmable devices. The critical part is just the software that controls the frequency patterns and may be the amplitude.
 
May 30, 2010
13,919
9
38
Portugal
#45
(...) The biggest issue is that most people don't understand that rfnoise isn't audible 99% of the time by itself, but the effect it has is... Everyone is under an extremely false belief that they "hear" the noise in the playback (rfnoise & enoise), and not the abberational effects of it (which is what you do hear). Because of that, it's nearly impossible to be truthful about what you're doing with lots of cables, grounding boxes, etc. People won't stand for it because conceptually it's too much for them. For them, RF means the radio in the car, and that's all.
In the good old analog and AM days you detected a RF problem in your system because you could listen to the news or strange foreign voices in your system ... Nowadays, as most RF is just the carrier of digital signals we do not realize easily that RF is really affecting the performance of our systems.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
5,149
6
38
Boston, MA
#46
So does that mean you will not be re-painting your room when he licenses his paint technology to Sherwin Williams? :eek:
You can probably get a paint discount if you buy some of those gong bowls in a matching color!
I don't think we give him the credit he deserves. His paint is totally transparent, so that you can use any color of your choice underneath it; and it's conductive, so you can plug it into your favorite ground box; or perhaps we can use it as an antenna... there you go, the antenna paint, I just came up with a smashing new patent... And those bowls... do I hear sex toys???? I think all of his inventions must have started out as a joke, but then... he took himself seriously. How about The Audiophile Jackhammer - that'll break new ground
 

awsmone

Active Member
Apr 7, 2014
1,061
2
38
Canberra Australia
#47
Yes, they do all of that. It is by creating a lot of RF in a spectrum that doesn't cause other problems. Certain ranges of RF tend to sound bad, others do exactly what you describe. Either way it's a pretty impossible "sell", so no one claims it.

Measurements show it, too. All known electronics knowledge support it. But most people stand around scratching their heads because if something 'positive' happens, how can it come from something traditionally 'negative' in engineering terms? Well it isn't hard to figure out. First off the positive isn't accurate to real life, but helps give some things back that were taken while recording. In general, with live music that is acoustic, you NEVER get the level of "resolution", detail, or "imaging" that you can with a stereo. Sounds and our ears simply do not exist that way. It's because that low level information is trumped by the actual music itself. However the scale tends to be helped by RF as well, which is often a problem. The panning location is helped too, which can often be soft without a natural environment; and so forth. It gives us qualities we may want, by a different means than you'd expect.

The RF is "retrieving" lower information because it makes voltage growth occur, so the really tiny stuff gets bigger. This also has been measured in various forms, many times. Imagine feeding a tiny pure line through an audio piece of equipment, and grafting a signal to it. Now imagine feeding a fat line through it, that is a skinny line in the middle but looks fat because it has a lot of small RF on it that's high enough in frequency you can't really tell it isn't just a fat line... now graft a signal onto it. That is a complex thing, with many other elements, but should give you a sense of what occurs.

There is nothing wrong with it. It is what it is, and many people enjoy it. The biggest issue is that most people don't understand that rfnoise isn't audible 99% of the time by itself, but the effect it has is... Everyone is under an extremely false belief that they "hear" the noise in the playback (rfnoise & enoise), and not the abberational effects of it (which is what you do hear). Because of that, it's nearly impossible to be truthful about what you're doing with lots of cables, grounding boxes, etc. People won't stand for it because conceptually it's too much for them. For them, RF means the radio in the car, and that's all.
Interesting, just read a research piece, which purported to show that, people can pick differences between different dithering strategies and that stochastic algorithms are better tolerated by listeners
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#48
No one wants to admit they pump noise into something, in order to get the results audiophiles want and believe are lower noise....

And when you start asking, well...
In my opinion, this theme of "adding noise" is not really a fair characterization. I think Ted's gear is actually reducing noise.

1. His ground plane blocks reduce the noise floor.

2. His PowerCell UEF12 SE reduced the ac noise in my system by quite a bit as well.

3. The Atmosphere towers send out waves that "excite" the UEF chemicals in his room tuning devices. That actually lowers acoustical noise and opens up the sound ina listening room. I have experienced this in both my house and my new town home. This was one of the bigger improvements I have heard, on par with component upgrades.

4. The FEQ generator eliminates the effects of Schumann resonance so that is reducing noise as well.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 26, 2015
2,555
0
36
Eastern WA
#49
Case in point, Lee. Your ears are hearing the opposite of what's really happening. But the opinion is formed from listening and constructing a guess, not changing something in an engineering aspect and recording observations based on changes in measurements.

I am not giving a "characteristic", I am giving cold hard facts. It's not about opinions. My observation is the reaction to cold hard facts, that audiophiles appreciate a lot of what noise can do for them.

But my point at large is, does it matter, if you are getting what you want? I just don't agree with telling people it is doing what it sounds like, when it's the opposite. Conceptually it's a million times easier to just tell audiophiles you reduced noise, so I can see why they do it - but I'm just not like that.
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#50
Case in point, Lee. Your ears are hearing the opposite of what's really happening. But the opinion is formed from listening and constructing a guess, not changing something in an engineering aspect and recording observations based on changes in measurements.

I am not giving a "characteristic", I am giving cold hard facts. It's not about opinions. My observation is the reaction to cold hard facts, that audiophiles appreciate a lot of what noise can do for them.

But my point at large is, does it matter, if you are getting what you want? I just don't agree with telling people it is doing what it sounds like, when it's the opposite. Conceptually it's a million times easier to just tell audiophiles you reduced noise, so I can see why they do it - but I'm just not like that.
Seems like we are splitting hairs in a way here. If radio waves change the sound field is that really noise?

If RF waves are noise, then I guess it could be yes.

If RF waves are lowering the noise in the room, then I suppose the answer could be no.

But it seems we agree we should simply be happy if the room works better. I'm happy with the results I have gotten from the HFTs. I'm keeping them.
 
Oct 1, 2010
910
0
16
Cleveland Ohio
#51
Seems like we are splitting hairs in a way here. If radio waves change the sound field is that really noise?
If RF waves are noise, then I guess it could be yes.
Anything that is not part of the original signal is noise or distortion. Now it seems that some audiophiles in some situations enjoy some added noise/distortion, so in those cases we could consider it euphoric coloration.

If RF waves are lowering the noise in the room, then I suppose the answer could be no.
As a retired broadcast engineer (and a short time in commercial antenna manufacturing) I wonder how that is possible ?
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#52

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#53
Anything that is not part of the original signal is noise or distortion. Now it seems that some audiophiles in some situations enjoy some added noise/distortion, so in those cases we could consider it euphoric coloration.


As a retired broadcast engineer (and a short time in commercial antenna manufacturing) I wonder how that is possible ?
1. The HFTs are not adding any colorations. They are room treatment devices, effectively an electrical version of acoustic panels.

2. UEF technology changes the air flowing over a panel. So strategically placing the devices on a wall or speaker can open the sound up by eliminating acoustic problems.
 

barrows

New Member
Jun 28, 2012
93
0
0
Boulder, CO
#54
"Anything that is not part of the original signal is noise or distortion. Now it seems that some audiophiles in some situations enjoy some added noise/distortion, so in those cases we could consider it euphoric coloration."

Speed, so in these terms, dither in a digital system would be considered noise/distortion. But, dither actually results in higher resolution (this is proven and accepted digital theory). Dither does not result in added coloration or euphonic distortion.

(some, I have not used them all) Synergistic products like the Powercell UEF, do result in increased resolution, the Powercell UEF does not add color, or something additional to the perception of music, it strips away problems which allows the listener to hear deeper into the noise floor. This result is indisputable, and anyone who tries will have the same result.

Just because you do not understand the mechanism by which it works, does not mean it does not work. I do not understand it either, but I am thinking it may work in a similar fashion to dither, or perhaps, it adds a noise component which is in the inverse to noise prevalent on AC power, resulting in some cancellation.

In any case, the Powercell UEF does result in increased resolution, this is not debatable, one can hear details which were not present without it, not added color, actual detail. This perception is not to subject to any bias, as the details were not there before, a bias cannot make previously unheard details audible.

I have no experience of Synergistic products adding a "color" (tonality shift). In terms of adding color, say a warm sounding tube amp, for example: this amp will add the same color to all music, it will make Aaron Copland (listening to now) warmer, and it will make Nine Inch Nails warmer. Synergistic products do not do this. Synergistic products do not create a tonal shift which effects all music the same way. Synergistic products give you more of what any music is offering, Nine Inch Nails gets edgier, more dynamic, and more spatially defined, etc.
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#55
I might also mention to SpeedSkater that I am a recording engineer and we recently used the HFT devices on AKG C414 mics to good success. We are always looking to upgrade the sound we are getting.

SR will soon post files with the SR listening room recorded both with and without these devices so people who can't attend a demo can hear for themselves.
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#56
In any case, the Powercell UEF does result in increased resolution, this is not debatable, one can hear details which were not present without it, not added color, actual detail. This perception is not to subject to any bias, as the details were not there before, a bias cannot make previously unheard details audible.
My experience as well.
 
May 30, 2010
13,919
9
38
Portugal
#57
(...) Just because you do not understand the mechanism by which it works, does not mean it does not work. (...)
Surely - this applies to most high-end equipment and could be part of the definition of "tweak"! :)

Some people have this reductionist approach to sound reproduction - they refuse to use any think they do not fully understand. I have tried assembling a system strictly following this rule in the past, and could get a decent sounding system, but nothing else.
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#58
Surely - this applies to most high-end equipment and could be part of the definition of "tweak"! :)

Some people have this reductionist approach to sound reproduction - they refuse to use any think they do not fully understand. I have tried assembling a system strictly following this rule in the past, and could get a decent sounding system, but nothing else.
Well said.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 26, 2015
2,555
0
36
Eastern WA
#59
1. The HFTs are not adding any colorations. They are room treatment devices, effectively an electrical version of acoustic panels.

2. UEF technology changes the air flowing over a panel. So strategically placing the devices on a wall or speaker can open the sound up by eliminating acoustic problems.
The concept is good, but Kevin (speedskater) simply used a poor description. The RF doesn't cause what audiophiles call coloration. Coloration is mostly current restriction when it happens, which is the antithesis to what audiophiles believe is related to coloration, but that isn't the point.

The RF noise causes elongation of voltage, so it doesn't typically look a lot like distortion since the time domain doesn't seem to change at an appreciable level.


For certain, if something works, go with it. But if you want to know why, and how to reason it, I'll do what I can to help (even when you hate the answer).
 

Lee

Active Member
Feb 4, 2011
1,402
0
36
Alpharetta, Georgia
#60
For certain, if something works, go with it. But if you want to know why, and how to reason it, I'll do what I can to help (even when you hate the answer).
I very much welcome any insight you can provide Folsom.