limpansson

Jag läste nyligen någonstans att sidomonterade basar ska riktas utåt för att inte påverka mellanregister/diskant. Mvh Anders

A lovely girl but I think I could be her father anyday... By the way this is an Audio-forum, not a "nice girl of the month" forum... Regards Anders

Vårsolen skiner, fåglarna kvittrar ikapp och ändå vill jag bara sitta parkerad i sweet-spot och lyssna på den inspirerande musiken som flödar från min anläggning! Kanske har jag fått en mild form av solsting eller har det möjligen, gjorts någon ny, mirakelgörande investering i ljudsystemet? Svar nej, kontot är inte speciellt belastningsbart... Mitt rum är 472 x 407cm vilket skulle kunna betraktas som ett nästan kvadratiskt rum. Kvadratiska rum är tydligen bland det sämsta man kan råka ut för som audiofil... Jag har känt till detta länge men ändå varit (ganska) nöjd med ljudet. Eftersom jag med jämna mellanrum kikar i boken ”Get better sound” av Jim Smith så råkade jag fastna på en sida som beskriver just det här problemet med kvadratiska (eller nästan kvadratiska) rum. Hans lösning på problemet är att spela på diagonalen! Tror fan att jag måste prova iallafall! Jag kan nog säga att detta rum aldrig har låtit bättre! Högtalarna är placerade väl (ca 80cm) från bak/sidovägg. B.M.C-riggen står ca 120 cm ut från hörnet. (Det optimala för riggen är annars att placera den en bra bit ifrån högtalarna, vilket jag troligen kommer att göra i en framtid.) Avståndet mellan högtalarna är ca 190 cm och avståndet mellan högtalarna och sweetspot är ca 210cm. Som det är nu så låter det väldigt bra! Jag upptäcker detaljer som tidigare försvann pga reflexioner och basen är så gott som utan resonanser och är mer detaljerad! Jag fick trixa en del med avståndet högtalare- bakvägg. Vid vissa avstånd fanns nästan ingen bas alls! De goa gubbarna på Akkelis brukar säga att ”rummet är 90% av upplevelsen”. Jag är benägen att hålla med dem! Skulle vara kul med kommentarer, egna erfarenheter om det här med att spela på diagonalen! Med vänlig hälsning Anders

Hej Nej jag har varken sett eller hört denna spelare men jag har förstått att det är en riktigt bra och prisvärd produkt! Har själv varit sugen på en Cambridge-rigg men det blev B.M.C istället. Lycka till! Anders

Hos Svalander Audio! Vet ej om den är bättre än bitumen men jag vet att den är bra! Mvh Anders

Jag sitter mycket nöjd med mina Vienna B.C.G i Rosewood! Mvh Anders

Jag får nog inflika att när jag märkte hur mycket mitt Solid Tech Ref 4 förbättrade ljudet så blev jag ganska förvånad och naturligtvis glad! Ljudet blev klarare, lugnare och mer detaljerat. Framöver kommer maskinerna också att få Feet- resp. Disc Of Silence. En annan och något billigare investering som jag varmt kan rekommendera är att montera Antiphon på insidan av apparaterna. Hos mig ökade både klarhet och detaljering ytterligare! Mvh Anders

CAMBRIDGE Azur 840C kanske? Mvh Anders

Hej Calm Vill bara säga grattis till de nya högtalarna! Har läst en del om dem och sett ett antal bilder. I mitt tycke är det en av de absolut vackraste och mest attraktiva högtalare (oavsett pris) man kan tänka sig! Det är otrolig tur för mig (mina fonder) att den inte verkar finnas i Red Violin, då hade pressen förmodligen blivit outhärdlig! Lycka till! Mvh Anders

Att du bara orkar att jobba dig med den här "nonsens"-tråden. Och ändå märkligare är att folk faktiskt verkar läsa vad du skriver... Mvh Anders

Även jag får passa på att önska alla här på forumet ett Riktigt Gott Nytt Musikår!! Mvh Anders

Artikeln i Aftonbladet berörde mig mycket starkt. Mitt djupaste deltagande i sorgen. Anders

Stort grattis till nyförvärvet! Mvh Anders

!

Tack för din förklaring! Man får tro vad man vill om detta medlet och självklart ska man vara skeptisk! Men när man läser att både PS Audio och Von Schweikert Audio har använt det så kanske det inte enbart handlar om placebo? Mvh Anders

Min inledande fråga var om någon kunde förklara och/eller hade testat produkten. Jag säger inte att det är en bra produkt. En produkt som 3 år i rad får "Editors Choice Award Winner" från TAS borde väl ändå kunna vara lite intressant? Det handlar tydligen om något som kallas "Optical impedance matching" och därför tänkte jag att typ conan skulle kunna ge en hint om vad det hela handlar om. Enjoy The Music´s Bill Gaw testade produkten 2007 med en Teac Esoteric DV-60 (ca $6,000) och Robert Harley testade den tydligen med en Spectral SDR-4000 Pro (ca $17,500). Min B.M.C-spelare fungerar f ö utmärkt men kan man med ett enkelt medel få ännu bättre ljud så varför inte? Mvh Anders

"The Problem Any ambiguity or confusion between the high and low reflectance states will probably corrupt the data stream with digital glitches and dropouts. Starting with a clean disc, what factors could impede the reading process? One factor is the partial reflections of the laser beam(s) at the disc’s reading surface (which is made of polycarbonate and labeled TRANSPARENT SUBSTRATE in the illustration) which it crosses twice, once on its way to the encoded surface, and then back again on its way to the reading and tracking photodiodes. Another factor is the scattering of the laser beam off the pits (bumps) toward the disc’s inner and outer rims (edges) and partial reflections back (because of the .55 difference of the indexes of refraction between the air and disc’s rims, explained below) to the reading photodiodes that may interfere with the main reading or tracking beam(s). Measurements at an optical laboratory show that UBP lets more light out at the disc’s edge than opaque treatments absorb which makes it more effective than any of the opaque edge treatments we tested, and unlike opaque treatments, you don’t need to worry about getting UBP on the reading surface because it’s meant to be applied to the entire disc. Misreads may also occur when the laser is defocused and dispersed or diffused due to unwanted refractions by imperfections on the disc’s surface. CDs may appear flat and smooth to the naked eye, but under a high magnification with a scanning electron microscope even the best CDs look rough and uneven. A scratch, so tiny that otherwise it might have gone unnoticed, could dominate the view. Reflection and refraction occur at the interface of the disc’s surface with the air because the refractive index of air and polycarbonate are different from each other (approximately 1.00 and 1.55 respectively). The index of refraction of a coating that minimizes the disc’s reflectivity is about 1.2455, the geometric mean of 1.00 and 1.55. If the indexes of refraction of air and polycarbonate were equal, then applying UBP to the disc wouldn’t be optically impedance matching, as the two mediums would already be perfectly impedance matched. Partial reflection takes place each time the laser beam crosses the disc’s surface (air and polycarbonate interface) and disturbs the intensity of the reflected returning beam. In optical physics this is called constructive or destructive interference depending upon whether the relative phase between the reflected beam and returning beam reinforces or cancels respectively the returning beam’s amplitude. Refraction and diffusion of the beam by surface defects or imperfections also takes place in both directions causing a defocusing and diffusion of the beam that disturbs the amplitude and integrity of the signal received at the photodiodes. Therefore, although the laser beam starts out tightly focused and nearly 100% coherent, it may end up much less focused or coherent and will be diminished in its overall intensity. The net effect is that a disc treated with UBP improves a beam’s reading and tracking by focusing it to a smaller more precise spot at its focal point on the encoded layer. This allows a beam to track and read the data with greater accuracy with quicker more distinct transitions between low and high signal states due to greatly reduced reflection of the laser at the interface of disc and air with less diffraction or diffusion of the beam by surface scratches. UltraBit Platinum applied a CD player’s photodiode lens will also improve the optical impedance matching of its interface with air, but it should be applied very carefully to avoid damage. Erratic shifts of the beam’s intensity or amplitude at the photodiodes may cause the bit stream to become so corrupted by errors that even the most advanced error correction algorithms, currently in use, could fail to reconstruct the bit stream sufficiently which causes the audio output to be interpolated or muted. If this occurs, it forces the player’s error concealment circuits to take over, which inevitably results in a serious degrading of playback fidelity and musicality. In addition, one shouldn’t be surprised when the player or transport tracking servos also misbehave if they are triggered by false signals from their photodiodes. Misread digital words that represent the encoded data may have any number of digital signal glitches and dropouts randomly distributed from the least significant bit to the most significant bit and anywhere in between. If errors go undetected, frequency components of the audio signal will not be harmonically related to the original signal and consequently will not be well masked by the music. Then music that’s meant to be enjoyed may turn out less emotionally fulfilling than it is enervating, which is another possible source of digital listening fatigue. Again, if there’s interference with analog circuits or undetected data errors get to the DACs or there’s excessive jitter, the random nature of digital glitches dropouts that may occur, means at any particular instant the number of ways the playback sonics are degraded and detract from musicality are not strictly predictable. The following is a list of possible musical and sonic deficiencies that may result: • Generally increased harshness or roughness that distorts the high frequency harmonics and contributes to an overall loss of smoothness; • Poor articulation of bass and mid-bass notes; • Attenuation of dynamics and smearing of transients; • Increased noise with loss of both inner detail and intertransient silence; • Reduced mid-range presence that diminishes clarity and transparency; • Loss of image specificity and focus; • Reduction of the apparent width and depth of the soundstage, virtually eliminating the possibility of holographic imagery; • Decreased resolution of the low-level detail that is so necessary to the recovery of hall ambience; • Altered instrumental and vocal timbres that lack coherence or cohesiveness; and • A loss of rhythmic drive and pace. From a musical standpoint the above list barely begins to scratch the surface. Some of the musical values that suffer are listed below, and again the list may not be complete: • Subtle breath effects on brass or wind instruments become more difficult to discern as are nuances of fingering and bowing on string instruments. • Vocal texture and expression are obscured. • Instrumental lines and musical themes are more difficult to sort out. • Complex rhythms and tempos are less easily followed. • Above all, it will not be as an emotionally involving and satisfying musical experience than might otherwise have been possible. Given the above list of possible faults it’s no wonder so many music-loving audiophiles are so vocal in their criticism of the sound of laser-read media. The Search for a Solution We decided early on that the best place to begin searching for answers was at the beginning, because the first stage in the reproduction chain we could improve was the reading of the disc. The logic of this approach appeared to be self-evident, since the disc is the first element in the reproduction chain the consumer has the option to modify or treat. In theory, the perfect solution would be to immerse the player’s optical system, disc and all, in a liquid with an index of refraction equal to polycarbonate’s in order to make the disc’s surface optically disappear, scratches and all. By eliminating the air, we also eliminate the .55 difference between its optical impedance (index of refraction) and that of polycarbonate. Although surface reflection and refraction would now be nonexistent, a new problem arises because the .55 difference of the air’s refractive index and that of polycarbonate helps to focus the laser on the disc’s metallic reflective layer where the encoded data is found. You may want to refer to the illustration of the DISC PROFILE. But even if the index of refraction air and polycarbonate were the same UBP would still be a good disc cleaner and static discharger because it protects the surface from contamination and the disc’s tendency to become re-charged. With the immersion approach eliminated from serious consideration, we set out to find a more realistic soluton. The result is UltraBit Platinum the Digital Solution™. UltraBit Platinum represents our best effort to strike an ideal balance between scientific analysis and aesthetic judgment. As a single layer interface, UBP’s formulation had to be tailored with two conflicting requirements in mind. The first is the necessity of minimizing surface reflections, and the second is filling in surface imperfections to eliminate the diffraction and diffusion they cause. The first objective requires an index of refraction equal to the geometric mean of the two different indexes of refraction (air and polycarbonate), whereas the second objective requires the single layer to have the same index of refraction as the polycarbonate substrate. By concentrating on the first objective, to the exclusion of everything else, we were able to cut surface reflections roughly in half. The improvement in the sound and musicality was nothing short of dramatic. However, despite our wonderful first impression, like so many music-loving audiophiles, we soon craved even more improvement. Even though the elusive goal of ultimate playback fidelity had once again escaped our grasp, which probably meant a lot more research and development, we refused to be deterred. Next we investigated interference coatings that potentially can reduce reflections to almost zero, but it soon became apparent there might be certain insurmountable drawbacks in our specific application. Interference coatings are wavelength specific, whereas lasers used in current CD players may have somewhat different frequencies, at least according to their published specifications, and DVD players have blue lasers of a much shorter wavelength than CD players so an interference coating won’t work. We could have made different versions of UBP for the most popular players, but then to play a treated CD on different players you’d need to remove one version before applying another version. And although UBP can easily be cleaned off with our CleanDisc™ disc cleaner, we quickly discarded the idea, because we felt it was too much trouble for the small gains that might be realized. More critical yet, an interference coating is extremely sensitive to the angle of incidence of the light passing through it. Because different angles of incidence represent different film thicknesses to the laser beam, since laser beams consist of both parallel and nonparallel rays, interference coatings wouldn’t work all that well anyway. The Listening Test and Finding the Solution Now that we had done the science it was time to do the art. If we could optimally combine UBP’s Optical Impedance Matching properties with its ability to reduce the degrading effect of surface defects, perhaps we would finally hear a compact disc achieve its full musical potential. Our only goal was the maximum improvement of the sound and musicality so listening tests were absolutely crucial. To avoid setting our sights too low we wanted to find out what the improvement would sound like if the only objective was enhanced musicality. This would create a reference standard we could use to gauge the success of formulations that might be only slightly less enhancing but much less costly to produce. Next we had to make sure UBP would also satisfy our other requirements. Having made excellent progress, with the release of a finished product appearing imminent, we suddenly realized we overlooked one of the most important requirements of all, that the use of UBP would never harm musical or sonic values. When the tests for possible negative effects failed to produce any usable results, it was abundantly clear we had grossly underestimated the difficulty of the listening task. We decided the best way to beta test UBP was to enlist the aid of a panel of expert listeners dedicated to advancing the state of CD fidelity. All panel members were experienced music loving audiophiles and most had at least some musical training and/or technical degrees. They listened to practically every type of music on a huge variety of systems and players. This included a full spectrum of CD players, DVD players, from inexpensive portables to very elaborate and obscenely high priced two or more piece players as well those with tubes analog sections. Nor did we leave out modified players and accessories such as disc dampers, damping rings, disc edge trimmers, static dischargers, demagnetizers, isolation feet, just to mention a few. Many of the listening sessions were conducted in double-blind fashion to minimize the effect of listener bias. Many other disc optical surface treatments were included to be sure we had a real winner. CDs were compared with their vinyl counterparts whenever possible, but our ultimate reference remained the sound of live unamplified acoustic instruments and voices heard from an aesthetic distance in a natural acoustic environment, which many audiophiles and audio gurus define as the absolute sound (TAS). We needed over one hundred iterations to perfect UBP’s unique formulation and sonic properties before it attained the highly refined state it enjoys today. Last but not least, to solicit opinions from listeners with impartial perspectives, numerous samples were sent out to both prospective customers and potential distributors. Their perceptive and very astute feedback gave us many useful insights and much encouragement. We are especially gratified by their enthusiastic support for the concept behind Utrabit Platinum™. Simply stated, “Maximum playback fidelity begins at the disc surfaces.” Conclusion When at last the testing was completed and we tabulated the results, the evidence was overwhelming. The listening panel had established a consensus. “If a laser read media disc hasn’t been treated with UltraBit Platinum then you haven’t really seen or heard it.” We carefully analyzed and reanalyzed the test results from every perspective we could think of to see if we could find even the slightest discrepancy, but nothing turned up to change our minds. At last there was positive verification that UltraBit Platinum meets or exceeds all of our original goals! We believe that UltraBit Platinum sets a new reference for disc treatments that enhance fidelity and musicality, and we think you’ll agree with us that its price is more than commensurate with its results. We honestly believe that for the fore-listenable and foreseeable future UltraBit Platinum will remain unequaled in its ability to bring forth music and video images from laser-read media. We worked long and hard and used all of our technical know-how and listening skills so you could make the UltraBit Platinum listening test. Our ultimate purpose will be fulfilled if UltraBit Platinum enables you to enjoy the greatest possible emotional involvement with the aesthetic values of music. But ultimately for you, it’s only your “let the bits fall where they may critique” that matters." *For an explanation of optical impedance matching see “Optical Physics”, Second Edition, Chapter 4 by S. G. Lipson, Ph.D. & H. Lipson, F.R.S., Cambridge University Press. Finyl the Digital Solution™ was one of the first CD surface treatments. This new white paper is an updated version of The Finyl Word, a White Paper on the Art and Science of Optical Impedance Matching as it Applies to Laser-read Media to explain the rational behind Finyl, for its manufacturer Digital Systems & Solutions, authored by George S. Louis, CEO and copyrighted 1989 with all rights reserved. Finyl the Digital Solution™ won numerous awards including a European Golden Triangle award and was a recommended CD and laser disc accessory by Stereophile and the Perfect Vision magazines. The RealityCheckCD Audiophile Duplicator™ was named 2005 product of the year by EnjoytheMusic.com Copyright December 2007 all rights reserved by George S. Louis Digital Systems & Solutions 1573 Kimberly Woods Drive El Cajon, CA 92020-7261 Phone: 619-401-9876 www.ultrabitplatinum.com

Nu var det ju så att det handlade om lite mer än rengöring av skivan... Steg 1 är att, om det behövs, rengöra skivan. Steg 2 handlar om något helt annat, om man läser på lite, som jag tror att kanske just någon som Du kan uttala dig om.

Dök på det här när jag slösurfade lite... Det verkar väldigt intressant! Någon som kan berätta hur det funkar och/eller har testat? www.ultrabitplatinum.com

Absolut! Och visst borde alla subar säljas parvis men till priset av en! I en perfekt värld hade så varit fallet... Mvh Anders

Hej Enerr-kablarna var tyvärr tillfälligt inlånade men jag jobbar med en lösning och givetvis kommer även Low End-dosan att bytas ut mot något mer rejält! Tyvärr handlar det i nuläget om brist på pengar till FLER uppgraderingar men det kommer! Mvh Anders

Den byttes in samtidigt som övriga medlemmar i familjen Densen! Jag saknar den faktiskt lite... Mvh Anders

Hej Behöver och behöver... Mina Vienna spelar ned till ca 28Hz så visst kan det tyckas lite onödigt men jag upplever att de sista Hz:en ned till ca 21Hz ger ett härligt tillskott av djupbas i viss musik. Vad gäller min placering så hänvisar jag till kände Jim Smith som i sin bok skriver: "Technically, a subwoofer should be in front of your main speakers for the best time alignment. But that almost never happens, due to physical limitations regarding space and due to the fact that a forwardplaced sub will not have good bottom octaves." Jim anser f ö att: "A singel sub kills acoustically recorded music." Hmm, ord och inga visor från Mr Smith! Brytfrekvens har jag lägsta möjliga, dvs 40Hz. Det ska tilläggas att jag skaffade suben till mina förra högtalare, B&W CDM7SE som spelade ned till ca 40Hz. Mvh Anders

Då var det dags för mig att försöka delge detta trevliga forum mina lyssningsintryck av B.M.C-riggen! Högtalare som används är Vienna Acoustics-Beethoven Concert Grand och högt. kabl. är Real Cable- HD TDC Master, singelwire. Efter absolut första inkopplingen inföll sig tyvärr en viss besvikelse... Det lät tämligen exakt (vilket iofs inte är fy skam) som de ersatta Densen-maskinerna! Min fästmö tyckte t o m att det lät sämre... Fast till 4 gånger pengarna... Nåväl, efter en period av spelning, dygnet runt, så vändes skepsis till musikalisk njutning! Maskinerna består ju av en hel del komponenter så jag förstår att det kan ta ett tag innan de presterar maximalt. Kortfattat kan jag beskriva ljudet som öppet, detaljerat, kraftfullt men med en behaglig mjukhet! "Love Can Move Mountains" och "Show Some Emotion" med Celine Dion är 2 favoriter som återges med allt från härlig stämsång, distinkt bas, detaljerad tamburin till friskt klingande cymbaler. Visst finns det "s-ljud" i sången men det beror nog mer på inspelningen än på anläggningen. Testade nyligen några gamla cd med klassisk musik som tidigare inte gått att lyssna på... På den nya anläggningen låter dom faktiskt riktigt njutbart! Det verkar som kombinationen Vienna BCG och B.M.C är ett bra val och vass diskant lyser med sin frånvaro! Det har blivit riktigt angenämt att lyssna på musik igen och även min fästmö tycker numera att det låter väldigt bra! Mvh Anders

Vienna Acoustics Beethoven Concert Grand