or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Shades of Tesla... My Bi-Wiring Experiment
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Shades of Tesla... My Bi-Wiring Experiment

post #1 of 370
Thread Starter 
I am a rational person. I've seen diagrams for bi-wiring, and logic and reason tells me that there is no electrical reason why it would sound superior to a standard wiring setup. (Bi-amping is another kettle of fish)

Here's where stuff gets strange for me. I was bored this evening, and decided to actually try bi-wiring, just for the hell of it. Polk LSi7's and a Cambridge Audio 540R v3. Sub is a Polk DSW Pro 400. The original wire is the higher-quality generic stuff Fry's sells... The 14 gauge stuff with the thick red stripe running down one side. I used the same stuff for the new lengths used for the bi-wire.

Allow me to preface the following observations with this: I am not one of these guys who can trick themselves into hearing/seeing/feeling an improvement just because I want there to be one... Example- when I was first looking into higher-end systems, a friend and I ended up buying identical Bose systems (gimme a break, I was even more of a noob then). Try as I might, I just couldn't like it. My friend, on the other hand, seemed to only the hear the 2k he'd just dropped. It was excellent sound because he had been told it was excellent sound, and he had paid for excellent sound. I returned mine.

Here are my observations as to my bi-wiring experiment: The difference is dramatic. Listening to Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue" and "Summertime", the piano is much more clearly defined following the bi-wiring. Detail in key stroke and play that were absent before are now present. The strings, particularly the plucked bits, resonate more clearly. High violin strains are clearer and display better pitch. The brass is more defined and punchier. The bass is tighter and cleaner (I switched off the sub to discern this). The trace of muddiness present before during particularly busy parts of "Rhapsody" has vanished. Overall, the sound stage is larger, clearer, more complete.

That all said... According to what I've read and understand, this should not be. It bugged me. I had more time. I set them up with standard wiring again. The positive attributes vanished, the negatives returned. I bi-wired again. See the above paragraph.

The whole experience reminds me of reading Tesla's notes and ideas he penned during the infancy of electricity... Popular understanding of electricity hasn't changed much since then, but Tesla believed it to be a much more mysterious force than it was given credit to be.... He made wild claims about what it could do, and disturbingly, many of his experiments (which detractors claimed he fudged results for) appeared to assert that many of his claims were possible...

Anyway, my "strange experiment" has yielded agreeable results for me when I was expecting nothing, so I'm excited... A significant sound upgrade that cost me around $4 in extra wire. Good times.
post #2 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by maguire View Post

Allow me to preface the following observations with this: I am not one of these guys who can trick themselves into hearing/seeing/feeling an improvement just because I want there to be one....

No one is immune from subconscious biases.
post #3 of 370
I doubt there's any real "mystery" here.
1) You've halved the DC resistance of the signal path to your speakers.
2) You combined new wire with old wire. If your terminations are bare wire, it's entirely possible that the ends of your old wire have become oxidized enough to make a difference.

Since you're not bi-amping, there's no harm in bi-wiring with the jumpers left in place on the speakers. Try this, and if you still hear a difference between the standard and pseudo-bi-wired configurations, you'll have determined that your old wire is noticeably degrading your signal, either due to impedance or terminations.

Then try standard vs. bi-wiring (no jumper) with only new, identical wire. If no difference, then impedance of one cable vs. two is not a factor, and it's all in the terminations of the old wire. If there is a difference, then you've identified impedance as the culprit, and while your bi-wired configuration solves it, you'd likely see the same change just by switching to heavier-gauge wire.
post #4 of 370
Indeed, no one is immune.

I know this has been beat to death ....fwiw;

I've heard differences when bi-wiring. At first, they were repeatable, then with continued testing I could no longer repeat the results. On separate occasions, I've experienced similar results. So, playing devil's advocate here..., which result side did the subconscious bias exist? I'm skeptical due to legions of individuals stating bi-wiring is bogus. Given ample AWG for the application, and sound connections, few differences should exist.

However, I'm convinced a synergy can exist in the "circuit", that being between the speaker cable, the crossover elements, and the associated drivers. No voodoo in synergy, just an ideal complex impedence characteristic that allows all aspects, ie...proper bandwidth, phase, etc.., in the entire circuit. If less than ideal L/C/R characteristics can be introduced, so can the ideal.

Maybe that means it's a poorly designed speaker/crossover.

Is that what I heard, .. I don't know.

If biases can't be discounted, .. which equation side did they enter? Both?

Aural memory is short, and that has been well discussed. When I mix live, I try to analyze and make adjustments accordingly.... but I try not to over-analyze. I get a snapshot and move on. I'll come back and assess again.

I believe, due to the nearly infinite complexity of the ear/brain interface, there are many aspects of our hobby that the finest gear cannot begin to measure.

Where am I wrong?
post #5 of 370
Congradulations, you just doubled your gauge!
post #6 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

I believe, due to the nearly infinite complexity of the ear/brain interface, there are many aspects of our hobby that the finest gear cannot begin to measure.

Where am I wrong?

I'll agree that the ear-brain interface is complex, and perhaps not fully understood. However, if your ear can be presented with two signals that cannot be distinguished quantitatively, but your brain can interpret them differently, that's a software problem.
post #7 of 370
A true scientific experiment would be to have an assistant randomly single-wire and bi-wire the speakers without your knowledge and see if you could tell the difference.
post #8 of 370
Thread Starter 
I'm thinking the halving of the resistance by doubling the cable is the best explanation so far... While nobody can claim absolute immunity from subconscious bias, it's worth pointing out that these differences were fairly dramatic... For instance my girlfriend noticed as she occasionally went in and out of the room during the process, and commented, thinking I had "dialed in" the speakers somehow. Also worth pointing out that I've only had the LSi7's for a few days (bought them used, excellent condition, $260 ), so the original wire was new... No signal degradation there.
post #9 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaball77 View Post

A true scientific experiment would be to have an assistant randomly single-wire and bi-wire the speakers without your knowledge and see if you could tell the difference.

To do it right, one would need a third person as well to set up the "cabling test set"... whatever that is, then that person leaves. Then person two does the switching .., logging results. Then when complete, somehow you reveal the preferred circuit.... be it the 10 K stuff or the sjow

Quote:
Originally Posted by cra1g View Post

I'll agree that the ear-brain interface is complex, and perhaps not fully understood. However, if your ear can be presented with two signals that cannot be distinguished quantitatively, but your brain can interpret them differently, that's a software problem.

I don't understand.

"if your ear can be presented with two signals that cannot be distinguished quantitatively"
"but your brain can interpret them differently"

Sorry, I don't understand. Do you mean that if we were doing a supposed bi wire test, ...however nothing was being switched? No quantitative differance, however you assume one is supposed to be better,.. so you pick one. Is that it?




Back to bi-wiring;
I'd bet a significant amount of people that debate the issue haven't even tried it. Try it, the same goes for a lot of the so called tweaks. It's fun, rewarding, and can be very revealing..., good and bad.

Attention to detail, top to bottom throughout the entire signal path, pays dividends.

What so many people involved in this hobby neglect is perhaps the one tweak that clearly provides the biggest bang for the buck, the speaker/room interface. As many of us know, huge gains can be had for free,.... and huge gains can be had thru expensive sig/pro stuff.

What I've noticed is the individual debating some esoteric tweaking stuff, then they post a pic with their Left Main 1 foot from a big untreated, highly reflective wall....

Also, the speaker/room interface begins with the front baffle. I've experimented a great deal with diffraction controlling felt etc... Once even I used a series of dozens of foam earplugs, lightly glued on end, totally surrounding a soft dome tweeter in some in-walls I had back in the 80s.

Anyway, try stuff.... including bi-wiring. Like the OP...Find out for yourself.
post #10 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

I don't understand.

"if your ear can be presented with two signals that cannot be distinguished quantitatively"
"but your brain can interpret them differently"

Sorry, I don't understand. Do you mean that if we were doing a supposed bi wire test, ...however nothing was being switched? No quantitative differance, however you assume one is supposed to be better,.. so you pick one. Is that it?

You seem to be saying there are aspects of sound reproduction which can't be measured, but the ear-brain interface, with its infinite complexity and all, can detect them.

I'm saying what arrives at your ear absolutely can be measured, as can all the physical and acoustic properties of the equipment upstream from your ear. If you perceive a difference where no measurable one exists, it's quite literally in your head.
post #11 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by maguire View Post

I'm thinking the halving of the resistance by doubling the cable is the best explanation so far...

Put the binding straps back in place and see what you think.
post #12 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by cra1g View Post

You seem to be saying there are aspects of sound reproduction which can't be measured, but the ear-brain interface, with its infinite complexity and all, can detect them.

I'm saying what arrives at your ear absolutely can be measured, as can all the physical and acoustic properties of the equipment upstream from your ear. If you perceive a difference where no measurable one exists, it's quite literally in your head.


Well, the ear-brain interface hasn't changed much in the past few decades. What we are able to resolve today, with our ears, is very similar to what we could resolve back in the 70s and 80s. (w/ the exception of a lil' top end for me)

However, understanding this resolution, and how it relates to our hobby, has grown significantly in the interim.

As far as measuring equipment development goes, that segment has grown by an order of magnitude during the same period.

So with those two givens, it would be very naive for me to believe that we can measure everything we can hear.






So, no, in my opinion we can't measure everything that arrives at our ear. Eventually we'll be able to measure more and more, and that's why the people @ Sencore, Tektronix, B&K, etc... continue their work.
post #13 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by cra1g View Post

You seem to be saying there are aspects of sound reproduction which can't be measured, but the ear-brain interface, with its infinite complexity and all, can detect them.

I'm saying what arrives at your ear absolutely can be measured, as can all the physical and acoustic properties of the equipment upstream from your ear. If you perceive a difference where no measurable one exists, it's quite literally in your head.

I also don't agree with this statement. As I heard recently, these type of tests present 2 problems: 1) You are testing the listeners ability to hear, not always what the equipment is capable of; and 2) what if the "engineers" don't know what to measure, such as before we knew jitter affected DAC's. Before we knew the engineers said if 2 DAC's measure the same they must sound the same. But the DAC's souned different...engineers eventually discovered jitter was an issue that affected sound but wasn't being measured.
So no, I can't agree with the absolute statement that if two pieces of equipment measure the same any difference in sound is in the listener's head.
post #14 of 370
I know how polarizing this topic can be...but it needn't be

I also know that it's been beat to death, both here and elsewhere.

The issue of bi-wiring shouldn't produce so much ire. Just like any other change in the system. Either one tries it and it produces reasonable results or it doesn't. There is more science that backs up bi-wiring than a lot of other so called tweeks.

As I stated earlier, I've done it... with mixed results. Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure every cabinet I've owned, that was bi-wire capable, I've tried it. Since I don't use exotic speaker cabling, it's reasonably priced.



"Hello everyone, my name is FOH, and I'm an audiophile"
post #15 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by cra1g View Post

You seem to be saying there are aspects of sound reproduction which can't be measured, but the ear-brain interface, with its infinite complexity and all, can detect them.

I'm saying what arrives at your ear absolutely can be measured, as can all the physical and acoustic properties of the equipment upstream from your ear. If you perceive a difference where no measurable one exists, it's quite literally in your head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BP View Post

I also don't agree with this statement. As I heard recently, these type of tests present 2 problems: 1) You are testing the listeners ability to hear, not always what the equipment is capable of; and 2) what if the "engineers" don't know what to measure, such as before we knew jitter affected DAC's. Before we knew the engineers said if 2 DAC's measure the same they must sound the same. But the DAC's souned different...engineers eventually discovered jitter was an issue that affected sound but wasn't being measured.
So no, I can't agree with the absolute statement that if two pieces of equipment measure the same any difference in sound is in the listener's head.

The two statements don't necessarily have to disagree. Engineers may very well be able to measure everything that arrives at our ears, but BP is saying that history has taught us many times, not just in the audio industry, that sometimes we just don't know what to look for, which means we might, in fact, not be measuring everything even if we are capable of doing so.

Just a note: I'm an electrical engineer so I don't believe in bi-wiring. I just wanted merely to point out that your two statements do not contradict.
post #16 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by yelnatsch517 View Post

Just a note: I'm an electrical engineer so I don't believe in bi-wiring. I just wanted merely to point out that your two statements do not contradict.

From an engineering perspective, am I correct when I stated;
"I'm convinced a synergy can exist in the "circuit", that being between the speaker cable, the crossover elements, and the associated drivers. No voodoo in synergy, just an ideal complex impedence characteristic that allows all aspects, ie...proper bandwidth, phase, etc.., in the entire circuit. If less than ideal L/C/R characteristics can be introduced, so can the ideal." ?

Or what about the CEMF of the motor of a large driver settling, after the LF aspect of the signal has been removed, or any aspects of a larger signal modulating a very small signal that contains the "air" or the hf spectra that contains the auditory clues of the recorded environment.

I've heard the effect of bi-wiring in that situation.
post #17 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

From an engineering perspective, am I correct when I stated;
"I'm convinced a synergy can exist in the "circuit", that being between the speaker cable, the crossover elements, and the associated drivers. No voodoo in synergy, just an ideal complex impedence characteristic that allows all aspects, ie...proper bandwidth, phase, etc.., in the entire circuit. If less than ideal L/C/R characteristics can be introduced, so can the ideal." ?

Or what about the CEMF of the motor of a large driver settling, after the LF aspect of the signal has been removed, or any aspects of a larger signal modulating a very small signal that contains the "air" or the hf spectra that contains the auditory clues of the recorded environment.

I've heard the effect of bi-wiring in that situation.

So you're saying that with bi-wiring, the tiny distortions from settling drivers will be separated into two channels as to exclude the interference of one onto the other? Maybe, but those distortions would have to be infinitesimally small. I'd think it would be like the water coming out of a faucet creating interference on the water coming out of a fire hydrant. It would create an interference, but would it be anything noticeable?
post #18 of 370
Yes, that's one explanation for what I've heard.

Oftentimes, the audio hobbyist focuses on the phenomenal bottom end, and other sexy topics that are in vogue. I include myself in that category as well. But some of the most important signals regarding realism, lie in the HF, where the small auditory clues as to the recording environment ambiance etc.., exist. Recording engineers, and everyone else handling the recording, go to great lengths preserving this smallest of information. In my opinion, we should handle that information as carefully as well.

All these steps are additive (or destructive when careless), so I tweek when there is some physics to back up my actions.

I don't know if the differences I've heard (rarely) are attributable to the larger LF fields modulating the smaller HF signal. Maybe it's some kind of driver settling CEMF interaction, or maybe it was my expectations, I don't know.

Regardless, if there's no science precluding me from doing it, I'm in. From my perspective, I don't use exotic cables, so cost isn't a concern. A scientific case can be made to bi-wire.

One can't enjoy the benefits of it if you don't do it
post #19 of 370
Fwiw,

Tried another bi-wire experiment, unfortunately under less than ideal conditions, could tell no difference.
post #20 of 370
Entire AVRs and amps have been swapped out in double blind listening tests and could not be identifed from each other (not ever, not by anyone).
So somehow moving the crossover strap location from the back of the speaker to the output of the amplifier is supposed to improve the sound ??
Snake-oil....

A thread worth reading http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post12678573 and if you are unwilling to read this...
At least read this article http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

I really don't care if anyone wants to bi-wire their system, but from an objective and engineering perspective there is simply no controlled experiment that supports improved sound through bi-wiring.
post #21 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Entire AVRs and amps have been swapped out in double blind listening tests and could not be identifed from each other (not ever, not by anyone).

I really don't care if anyone wants to bi-wire their system, but from an objective and engineering perspective there is simply no controlled experiment that supports improved sound through bi-wiring.


"(not ever, not by anyone)" I wasn't aware of this...




However, the physics of electrical theory clearly indicates that gains can be made. Or more accurately, less destructive non-linearaties (distortion, etc..).

As we've stated here, the audibility of the benefits are suspect. Given the expense of reasonably priced cables, do it.., bi-wire. One may benefit from the increase in AWG, as well as the other potential benefits.

Now masking prevents us from delineating a lot of information, so in the scenario where benefits exist,..they would be dependant on source material.

Every aspect of the chain matters, just some aspects more than others.



My bottom line; Bi-wiring can help, and using reasonable cabling, can't hurt.
post #22 of 370
Check out the links, its interesting reading no matter which side of the fence anyone is on.

"However, the physics of electrical theory clearly indicates that gains can be made. Or more accurately, less destructive non-linearaties (distortion, etc..). "

Actually in regards to bi-wiring, electrical theory supports that no gain can be made.
All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals.
You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way.
post #23 of 370
Have you tried Bi-wiring with pear cables yet?
http://www.pearcable.com/sub_products_bosc_sc_ht.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Check out the links, its interesting reading no matter which side of the fence anyone is on.

"However, the physics of electrical theory clearly indicates that gains can be made. Or more accurately, less destructive non-linearaties (distortion, etc..). "

Actually in regards to bi-wiring, electrical theory supports that no gain can be made.
All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals.
You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way.

Seriously though, Does tining the strands of wires really help? if so then maybe I should stop buying my cable from monoprice
http://www.knukonceptz.com/productDe...ID=KAR16SS-100
post #24 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Check out the links, its interesting reading no matter which side of the fence anyone is on.

"However, the physics of electrical theory clearly indicates that gains can be made. Or more accurately, less destructive non-linearaties (distortion, etc..). "

Actually in regards to bi-wiring, electrical theory supports that no gain can be made.
All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals.
You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way.



Thanks for the links, I'll read them.

Help me with this though; As the signal voltage (potential) source is present accross a load, but the elements in that branch (lows or highs) determine the current through each branch.

If the links provided explains otherwise, I appologise in advance. I will read them. I'd like to read all I can on this topic because it's generally overblown, and it seems so simple to me.

Just as any series paralell circuit; You've the same voltage present across both branches, you've got the total current..., which is the sum of the currents thru each branch. So each branch exists as a seperate entity, right? Maybe I'm wrong.
post #25 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

Check out the links, its interesting reading no matter which side of the fence anyone is on.

Ok Charlie, I'll try to be very polite;

I read the links you provided, correct me if I'm wrong, neither of which had any detail on bi-wiring.

One link you provided on the bi-wiring topic was a very thorough, albeit entry level, 12 page thread on AVR faqs. wtf?

The other link was the worn out Richard Clark amp stuff, "thousands of people have taken the test". You may want to research that yourself if you're going to put that up in your corner. I'd be glad to elaborate.

So, your links, I may have missed it, but there was nothing discussing bi-wiring.

Onto your statements;

Charlie, you stated "Actually in regards to bi-wiring, electrical theory supports that no gain can be made.
All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals.
You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way."


Now, if you read my statements throughout this thread, I'm anything but a hard-core bi-wiring advocate. But stating untruths in response to me needs to be challenged.

"Actually in regards to bi-wiring, electrical theory supports that no gain can be made." Not true. That's the only solid thing bi-wiring has in it's defense, the physics.

"All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals." Not true. Draw the circuit on a piece of paper, you'll see.

"You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way." Not true. By definition, the current splitting between the wires is parallel, thereby reducing the resistance.
post #26 of 370
You fell for it! Bi-Wiring= Buy More wire!
post #27 of 370
Remember the old Rodriguez hi-fi cartoons?

Maybe he's got one on "By-Wiring"
post #28 of 370
Not to derail this thread, but I just wanted add my 2 cents.

I tried bi-wiring and found it to be a parlor trick...ridiculous. High-end cables...no better than lamp cord. High power amplifier headroom...rubbish. Tining strands of wires...tedious, but useless. I could not discern any difference in the sound of my Sony HTIB system with any of those pseudoscientific "remedies". There seemed nothing I could do to improve the lack of soundstage and muddy detail.

Then, I found these - http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html. Placing these behind the tweeters of my speakers and surrounding the Sony HTIB receiver in a hexagonal pattern resembling, but not imitating, a pentagram resulted in a soundstage the size of Madison Square Garden in my single-wide trailer. The placement of instruments was so precise in the soundstage I could hear the smile on the bass players face, and the slight - but unmistakable - passing of a silent, but deadly, flatulence from the rear of the guitar player.

I don't believe this could all be in my head as I take my medications religiously. When I remove the Blackbody's from the system I lose all the positive attributes. I was curious if anyone has had a chance to rigorously test these devices.

PS - My chronic back pain no longer bothers me........
post #29 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by chashint View Post

All that bi-wiring does is move the crossover strap from the speaker terminals to the amplifier terminals.
You don't even get the benefit of reduced wire resistance since the wires are not in parallel. The current is split between the wires but the amplifier still applies the same signal to both wires so any reflections or mismatches are still present and will affect the amplifier in the same way.

I'm not so sure about that. Granted, this example considers resistance only (which is as far as I'm going to go with MS Paint ), but bi-wiring does cut resistance in half:


R1 - 14 ga. is .00297 ohm/ft, let's say 10', so .0297 ohm
R2 - jumper, very low, let's say .001 ohm
R3 - tweeter network, let's say 9 ohm
R4 - woofer network, let's say 11 ohm

Standard wiring:

R1 + ( R3 || ( R2 + R4 + R2 )) + R1
R1 + ( 1 / (( 1 / R3 ) + ( 1 / ( R2 + R4 + R2 )))) + R1
.0297 + ( 1 / (( 1 / 9) + ( 1 / ( .001 + 11 + .001)))) + .0297
.0297 + ( 1 / ( .1111 ) + ( .0909 )) + .0297
5.0098 ohms

Bi-wiring:

( R1 + R3 + R1 ) || ( R1 + R4 + R1 )
1 / (( 1 / ( R1 + R3 + R1 )) + ( 1 / ( R1 + R4 + R1 )))
1 / (( 1 / ( .0297 + 9 + .0297 )) + ( 1 / ( .0297 + 11 + .0297 )))
1 / (( .1104 ) + ( .0904 )
4.9801 ohms

Difference = .0297 ohms, which is exactly (to 4 decimal places, anyway) half the combined resistance of the + and - legs of the wire. I have my doubts about whether that's an audible difference, but it's certainly a measurable one.
LL
post #30 of 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooddoc View Post

Not to derail this thread, but I just wanted add my 2 cents.

I tried bi-wiring and found it to be a parlor trick...ridiculous. High-end cables...no better than lamp cord. High power amplifier headroom...rubbish. Tining strands of wires...tedious, but useless. I could not discern any difference in the sound of my Sony HTIB system with any of those pseudoscientific "remedies". There seemed nothing I could do to improve the lack of soundstage and muddy detail.

Then, I found these - http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html. Placing these behind the tweeters of my speakers and surrounding the Sony HTIB receiver in a hexagonal pattern resembling, but not imitating, a pentagram resulted in a soundstage the size of Madison Square Garden in my single-wide trailer. The placement of instruments was so precise in the soundstage I could hear the smile on the bass players face, and the slight - but unmistakable - passing of a silent, but deadly, flatulence from the rear of the guitar player.

I don't believe this could all be in my head as I take my medications religiously. When I remove the Blackbody's from the system I lose all the positive attributes. I was curious if anyone has had a chance to rigorously test these devices.

PS - My chronic back pain no longer bothers me........


I wish I'd seen these a long time ago. Could saved me big bucks on upgrades.

I've got a cryogen/autoclave combo that all my gear gets hit with prior to use,... bet that bad boy would double the effect after I'd treat it.

Thinking,... I'm thinking how I can implement this into my next show I mix. I'll bet I could get a little more talent out of the monitors... I've got my people contacting Lithuania now.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Shades of Tesla... My Bi-Wiring Experiment