Uberbuss

[ssh]

I'm not putting a dog in this hunt, but I'm reminded that some years ago, when I first renovated and moved into my current residence, I had serious problems with my system "cutting out". I traced every connection, just as you would. After hours of failure, I noticed the output meter on my Monster conditioner fluctuating from 120 to 90, and I called the power company. There was a loose ground on the main at the pole (I was told.), and it was an easy fix and has been steady since.

SSH

[minermark]

 

 

It is not an isolation transformer. There is a specifically tuned capacitor network on each outlet, Power Factor Correction, and a passive EMI/RFI brick, as he calls it. This is the secret sauce that is not visible within the unit.

 

I'll see if I can get some specs and post them.

I just posted simple easy to understand Iso Trany network, now i can dig into all the Ham circuits i used to play with, and you are correct, you can "Tune" anything with proper Capps.

 

 

If a the transformer in your schematic has a center tapped secondary, grounding the CT turns the unit into a balanced power delivery system which reduces AC line noise quite a bit.

 

Well back in my Ham days there was always had someone with a BadBoy tektronics scope, we would hook that critter up, back it up with a chart recorder and have a Beer, first to see if there was indeed dirty power, then the guys would hook up their creations to "Slove" the problem. we drank a lot of beer.

The best we ever saw was a guy that had a Variable Cap wired in, as he would say, "Tuned to the location" he was right.  

[Mallette]

Yeah, I know Minermark.  We're here, we have ear, so get used to it...

 

Dave

[Ski Bum]

The "science" of how we process and perceive things is so crude as to be barely science.  I am just trying to get you to understand that, as well as the limitations of our abilities to have any real idea what another perceives.

 

 

I'm seriously not trying to yank your chain with this, but the research has been going on for a hundred years or so.  Most of what Bell Labs figured out in the 1930s applies as much today as ever.  The body of knowledge, particularly as it applies to our shared hobby, is rather huge.  It's almost as big as your audacity at curtly dismissing an entire branch of science that just happens to have a rather long and interesting history.  

 

Or were you strictly referring to the cutting edge cognitive research using fMRI and other schnazzy newfangled tools you've probably never heard of?  

[Mallette]

I dismiss any science that tries to tell me what I perceive.  Don't run with that, as there are areas in which I work where you know what your are perceiving isn't real, Oculus Rift being one of them. 

 

You place totally belief in science.  I approach it skeptically.  Further, I trust highly trained ears over specs, ABX, or whatever.

 

Dave

[Don Richard]

I trust highly trained ears over specs, ABX, or whatever

 

It's the "trained" part that throws a wrench in the works. If you want to see what I mean, go to any autosound installer and ask him to show you what he thinks is a "good sounding system". Most of these things aren't audio reproduction systems, they are percussion instruments. 

[Ski Bum]

You place totally belief in science.  I approach it skeptically.

 

 

Science by it's nature is skeptical, Dave.  But since you are attributing beliefs to me (kind of hypocritical since you just falsely accused me of "claiming to know what others hear", isn't it?), I'll freely admit that I do believe this: empiricism and the scientific method are the best epistemic framework to hang your intellectual hat on, if knowledge and understanding of reality are your cup of tea.  

 

Credible evidence of the audible benefits of the magic buss might sway my opinion, or a technical explanation that doesn't appeal to the dubious tenets of audiophile religion.  At this point it's looking like a thousand dollar ticket to willful self deception.  So far all we have "it's great", "I trust his ears", and "shun, shun the non-believer!" in typical magic wire thread fashion.

 

So Dave, when you make recordings, do you follow an evidence based approach to your craft, or more of a whimsical, anything goes approach and hope for the best?  Considering your defense of the magic buss, or uber buss, or whatever it's called, how were you able to make such good recordings without the benefits of using magic buss purified electrons?  You better get one of these thingies, pronto, the improvements to your recordings will be HUGE!

[paul79]

And they just might be hugely improved!

 

You responded with a simple BS in your first post, to imply what the OP is hearing is not applicable or correct. Pretty sure you are just pot stirring and having a good time getting people riled up.

 

Take the Uber challenge! Would love to hear your thoughts of it after all this BS you are spouting.

Edited December 30, 2014 by paul79

[Ski Bum]

You're making the same mistake Dave did.  It's up to the one making the claims of audible improvements to support them. 

 

The OP said, "it made a very noticeable difference."  So, assuming we're using the same definition of "noticeable" to mean "a distinct audible difference", that's the sort of thing that requires some explanation given the cost of the device, don't you think?  And in order to be convincing it had better be more than "it's a must for 2 channel" and "well worth the cost."  

 

That still seems like straight up shilling to me, and I stand by my initial response.  In the intervening posts, no real information was presented, just a circling of the wagons around some audiophile sacred cows.

 

Ah, the challenge.  No,thanks, I have absolutely no desire to give Pi Audio a non interest bearing loan of $1095 to satisfy your demand that I, what, disprove a subjective claim made by another?  As has been pointed out, subjective experience is private, inaccessible.  He heard it, whatever it was.  Was what he heard the result of genuine dramatic improvements due to the equipment, or was it from the influence of subconscious bias?  Without knowing one way or the other, and given the cryptic and non-technical justifications presented, both from current users and the Pi Audio web page, I remain skeptical.

 

I have to tip my hat to them, though.  It's a clever guerrilla marketing tactic, as they have you, A1UC, and even Don Richard (really?!?) to suggest it, doing their work for them, free of charge, and acting like a tribal gang of audio thugs. Brilliant.  

 

Besides, my education is in the lowly biological sciences, and you know I'm biased, so someone else would be a more appropriate choice to take the uber challenge.  I propose you send yours to Don.  I'm sure you would trust his feedback more than mine.   

Edited December 30, 2014 by Ski Bum

[A1UC]

Enough now , we all get it . you have drilled it in everyones head its BS now stfu move on

[paul79]

More useless babble. So your comments are to save the audio world from such products, of which you know nothing about. Guess you were not implying anything. My apologies.

Edited December 30, 2014 by paul79

[A1UC]

blah blah blah

[Thaddeus Smith]

since you've been so incredibly happy with the Auralic equipment and it's improvement over the analog gear you were using at the time (which was arguably just as top notch), what did the uberbuss improve to make you so pleased with it's role in your system?

 

*I certify this post to be free of snark and troll baiting. I'm genuinely interested.

[paul79]

[Thaddeus Smith]

 

[paul79]

[Schu]

this thread is VERY entertaining...

[paul79]

_{this thread is VERY entertaining...}

 

[Mallette]

So Dave, when you make recordings, do you follow an evidence based approach to your craft, or more of a whimsical, anything goes approach and hope for the best?

 

Plenty here have heard my recordings.  They've been compared to Chesky and others.  I do it with a fraction of the cost in equipment and still get results that satisfy golden ears.  That is my evidence. 

 

As to this thread, I think I've said more than once what I meant to say and do not care to repeat it.  I am not here to win a debate. 

 

Science aside, when a fellow forum member reports an improvement in their system I think it rude to suggest it's all in their imagination.  I personally hear no difference in various interconnects, speaker wires, and such.  I am, however, totally unwilling to place myself as judge of another's experience and consider it rather arrogant to do so with or without science.  It's not my job to save people here from spending money as they see fit in pursuit of the hobby.  I've read many of AU1Cs posts over the years and have no reason to doubt his ears nor any science that I have adequate faith in to explain what he is hearing.  Your mileage obviously varies.   

 

Dave

[Thaddeus Smith]

I'm waiting on a pair fresh jupiter cap crossovers from DeanG. I haven't had the opportunity to hear them myself, but enough people here (including Schu) were able to describe what the sonic improvement was in their system that I felt comfortable spending that kind of money without any prior experience. It's only fair to expect the same sort of feedback and description - which you provided for your Auralic gear - on this item and I think that's the frustration received from some members revolves around your unwillingness to describe the positive changes and instead rely on your hyperbole to make a decision.