As I know that there are quite a large number of our customers who do not have access to the Internet, I have compiled another selection of 'postings' which have appeared on the P.W.B. Internet Discussion Group over the last few months.
I feel sure that this selection will be of interest as an addition to this P.W.B. Newsletter.
The P.W.B. Internet Discussion Group can be accessed via:-
29th November 2003 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Isn't Peter Belt great?
I recently installed a Quantum Symphony "electromagnetic field conditioner" here with extremely good results. I already had significant amount of line conditioning in form of specially constructed high quality capacitor banks and parallel line purifier (also a Quantum product - the Electraclear). Totally different concept from line conditioning; According to the Quantum web site the thing operates by polarizing electrons throughout the home. Hey, wait a minute! - that sure sounds kind of familiar. Can be plugged into the wall anywhere within about 10 feet or so of the audio system.
30th November 2003 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Isn't Peter Belt great?
Morphic resonance will dictate that others will get onto Peter's wavelength, although he may stay well ahead. Hence the comparison with the New Foil.
What do you make of that?
1st December 2003 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Re: Isn't Peter Belt great?
I think the new Inverted Foil is the perfect P.W.B product to compare with the Quantum field effects devices because they both seem to produce very similar effects. These effects are easiest to describe in terms of improvements to the picture quality of the television -- better color accuracy/intensity and there are more shades of color. The Inverted Foil seemed to allow seeing pastels for the first time, at least in more abundance, for some reason and both the Quantum and Inverted Foil produce better contrast and resolution. With the Inverted Foil these improvements are noticeable right away; with the Quantum one can see gradual improvement over the space of about four days, perhaps longer for maximum effect to set in. Of course, it might seem odd or ludicrous to many to compare a clever electronic gizmo to a tiny strip of foil with writing on it and some colored creams.
December 2003 from V.R. Sola. USA.
Subject: Time to belt the automobile
Time to Belt the car (winterize)
Useful informative articles (Spring Newsletter 2003) and few postings are available on the subject of treating the automobile.
I tried the Richard Grahams suggestion of adding a drop or two of the Sol Electret oil to the engine oil. It works. I also added a drop of Sol Electret to the transmission fluid. Cleaning the glass (interior) with morphic fluid is also impressive. Part of the benefits related to audio improvements, but there are other instant gratifications. Treating the alphanumeric stickers such as vehicle registration, parking permits, license plates, VIN code is also worthwhile with cream electret.
Winter also takes care of freezing and thawing cycle of the automobile
4th December 2003 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Inverting Foil
I can't remember if I posted about the Inverting Foil, so this may be a repeat. The foil was put on my CD player, amp, preamp, and speakers. The effect was amazing. A whole new level of detail was revealed in music. There is a difference in the sound stage that is a little hard to describe. It seems a bit deeper, but more than that, the sound stage seems richer. An odd description, I know, but there is a greater sense of the performers now. I haven't tried it on the TV, but after Geoff's comments it must be applied there. So the Inverted Foil yields excellent results on equipment.
4th December 2003 from Mark Brown. USA.
Subject: The famed Dr. Rupert Sheldrake on Coast to Coast AM
I happened to surf over to www.coasttocoastam.com today (a web site for a late-night American radio talk show) and, low and behold, I found that Dr. Rupert Sheldrake was interviewed during yesterday's show. I barely ever listen to this radio show, and I believe that much of the information on the web site should be taken with a grain of salt and a VERY high degree of skepticism. However, this interview would be of interest to P.W.B. enthusiasts. You can even listen to the interview in which he talks about "morphic fields;" there is also a link to Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's web site.
I plan on listening to the interview myself today. Simply copy and paste the following web address to your address bar:
From the Coast to Coast AM site:
" Experiments in Telepathy Tuesday's guest, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake (www.sheldrake.org) has concluded through his experimentation that telepathy is not paranormal, but in fact, a normal function that may be hard wired into us. In one experiment he described blindfolded people who were able to sense when someone else was looking at them, with accuracy far exceeding statistical chance. Sheldrake named "the morphic field" which living things are plugged into, as the basis for this phenomenon.
When someone is looking at you, their attention stretches out into the morphic field, like an "eyebeam" and that may be what the other person is sensing, Sheldrake explained. Certain people are more sensitive and women tend to score higher in these abilities. Indeed, mothers who are breast feeding their babies can exhibit a kind of "biological telepathy" and sense when their children need them from a distance, Sheldrake reported.
Telepathy has also been observed in telephone experiments, where people were able to sense who was calling them or be thinking of them just before the phone rings. Sheldrake related this to the intention of the caller, theorizing that their "mind reaches out" to the person they are calling just before they pick up the phone and it is during this period that the other person thinks of them. Animals and dogs in particular, have shown signs of such telepathy or precognition. Sheldrake discussed experiments that recorded dogs moving to a window or a door to await their master shortly before their arrival, even when the owner came home at random times. "
Sorry. Subscription necessary. Hello again. You'll need a Coast to Coast AM web site subscription to hear the audio clips. I just found this out when trying to listen to the clips.
It's about $6.95 per month. I guess you can judge how interested you are in Sheldrake's work.
Have a great day.
4th December 2003 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Inverted Foil
In my comments on the new Inverted Foil and its positive effects on the quality of the TV picture I neglected to mention that I had not applied an Inverted Foil to the TV itself, only to the DVD player, DAC, my iMac computer, telephone and cell phone. This probably demonstrates that the Inverted Foil, like many P.W.B. items, do not directly improve the performance of the equipment per se, but indirectly affect our perception of sound and sight by diminishing certain (non-electromagnetic) "fields" associated with the electronic equipment, but also with cassettes, CDs, books, telephones, newspapers, bank statements, etc. So, one might obtain better results by treating the phone book and telephone than directly treating the audio equipment.
11th December 2003 from V.R. Sola. USA.
Subject: Latest News letter.
Received the latest Christmas 2003 New letter.
There are many interesting articles encouraging for a beginner. Thanks to P.W.B. for offering a intermediate level package. and also for the article by May suggesting progressive path after beginners package. This will be of significant help.
Yes there will better audio life after beginners package with intermediate level package.
I tried the Inverting foil. It took me an hour to notice the change and it is significant.
As Geoff Kait mentioned there is also better images in the television and sound stage. There are better skin tones.
My dish network satellite receiver is connected to my pre amplifier.
The audio of satellite is a compressed signal and hence of sub optimal quality compared to my DAC and CD player. Now there is significant improvement.
Get this Intermediate Package and Inverting Foil as soon as you can!
13th December 2003 from Tom Hoffman. USA.
I have been fortunate in finding a stand alone freezer that I would like to use for freezing various items. Does anyone have specific recommendations on how to completely treat the freezer with all the P.W.B. products available? I have had great success using the freezer in our kitchen but now it is full of food. How unique!
14th December 2003 from V.R. Sola. USA.
Subject: freezer & bar codes
I heard a comment that the bar codes on food items (grocery-which are ubiquitous) in the freezer section reduce some of the benefits of freezing.
But that is not a problem.
Red 'x' Pen can take care of them.
December 2003 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Freezer bar codes
I had thought that bar codes on freezer items would be canceled out by the freezing, so it is interesting to note that some have noted the bar codes reduce effectiveness of freezing. More comments on this would be interesting. Has anyone else noticed negative effects from freezer bar codes?
15th December 2003 from Tom Hoffman. USA.
Subject: RE: Freezer bar codes
Use the red X pen to draw a line through all bar codes in the house. It works, but is hard to stay current with food items.
17th December 2003 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: How fixed are our minds?
I have been rather quiet of late because of on-going experiments with the new Inverted Foils and associated Creams. This has involved much discussion with Peter as I wanted to ascertain how the new Foils related to some of the old Foils, especially those which had previously had, say, Green Cream on.
Whilst discussing such questions Peter suggested that I tried placing the jars of the new Creams on top of, or underneath Foils in an certain order, rather like we do for the Inverted Foil, and listen to the effect. Usually one places the items on a loudspeaker, and if the sound gets better or worse, you've usually got it right or wrong. I have always been nervous of my ability to detect any such change and prefer to rely on Peter's astonishing insight. Yet what has blown me away - yet again - is the ease with which I can tell how much better a certain order is. It is not subtle, and I can tell easily. I sort of know this, and yet it seems to surprise me every time.
Sharing these thoughts with May Belt, she let me know of a dark secret that troubled her, and indicated the depth of the psychological issues that P.W.B. devices are up against.
As many of you will know by now, the latest P.W.B. Xmas card is again quite a neat little device in it's own right. Put it on your CD player, and it's a real Xmas bonus! I don't know all of the details, but that card was certainly treated, and is worth keeping.
May told me that whilst the card were being treated, she was out, and on return, was puzzling as to why the TV picture was so astonishingly good that evening. It only dawned on her after some time that the hundreds of treated cards awaiting packaging were having a fabulous effect.
And if May Belt cannot believe the effect, we see the size of the problem.
It seems to me that it throws up many issues but I would wish to echo them again:
1. In all our minds there is the equivalent of a group who hold a position of conforming to the wider societal norms. This has a powerful influence on our thinking, mainly unconsciously.
2. It is very hard to trust one's senses in the face of this internal pressure to conform.
3. To make more open, or public, what our senses tell us is yet more difficult and anxiety provoking. In a sense the 'Emperor's New Clothes' is a good model, but it isn't about the absence of things alone. Negation of what is perceived as present is just as great.
4. Leadership involves the ability to acknowledge what is sensed, and address the matter.
I guess I'm sort of preaching to the converted, but just how converted are we?
19th December 2003 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Treating the deep freezer unit.
Treating the deep freezer unit.
As many of you will realise, some of our customers who have been using our devices and techniques for at least 15 years, will have most of the Foils and devices we have introduced over these past 18 years and will, as they received them over the years, have gradually attached a strip of all the Foils and gradually, over the years, attached many of the devices to the deep freezer as well as to much of their equipment. So, the recommendations for 'treating' a deep freezer which follow are offered on the understanding that most of our new customers will have some (if not many) of our latest Foils and devices and will not have very many of the earlier Foils and devices.
If you are intending to 'P.W.B.' the deep freezer, then you should consider applying the full colour Ring Tie sequence to the AC power cable. Failing that, at least the first two colours (Red and Yellow Ring Ties) should be attached to each extreme end of the power cable and (at least) a small area of the cable's insulation 'creamed' with Cream-Electret. Preferably, for a greater effect, one should use a small amount of the new Morphic Green Cream.
Because it is not possible to attach devices and Foils to the inside of the deep freezer, one has to 'treat' the outside of the freezer cabinet. As many strips of the different P.W.B. Foils as possible should be attached to the outside of the cabinet and beneficial messages should be written with the Red 'x' Pen and attached to the cabinet. Most definitely, a beneficial message label should be attached giving the Brand name of the deep freezer followed by O.K.
I do not doubt that many of our long standing customers will have a wide variety of different 'treatments' on their deep freezer. One thing you have to remember though is that the more you 'treat' your deep freezer unit, the better will be the sound in your listening room, irrespective of whether you have frozen any objects.
If one is going to all the trouble and effort to 'treat' the deep freezer in order to 'freeze' items of audio equipment as well as general objects, then one should also consider 'treating' the item of audio equipment prior to carrying out the freezing technique. At least a small patch of the Morphic Green Cream should be applied to the item of equipment or, if available, a Gold Foil square should be attached to the body of the equipment and a small amount of the Morphic Green Cream applied to the Gold Foil square.
Don't forget to consider all the interconnects and power cables, - they are easily forgotten when concentrating on items of equipment.
My recommendation to people is always to experiment when considering carrying out the freezing technique.
1) Compacts Discs. If you are unsure, do not freeze your favourite CD first, experiment initially with another CD. I know that everyone will have a CD which they never play, which they do not like the sound of, which they originally purchased because of it's musical content and then became disappointed in it's sound. So I always recommend that they find that CD, listen to it again and then put it through the freezing treatment and listen to it again.
2) Similarly with interconnects. I also know that people will have an el-cheapo interconnect somewhere in a drawer or cupboard. An interconnect which came included with (say) the tape recorder or tuner but which they discarded in favour of a more expensive interconnect. Listen to the el-cheapo interconnect, confirm that you still do not like to sound of it, then put the el-cheapo interconnect through the freezing process and then listen to it again !!
If you hear improvements each time, that should give you the confidence to carry on freezing other things.
20th December 2003 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: Re: Treating the deep freezer unit.
I like cranking the thermostats for freezer AND the main section all the way down, that buys about ten more degrees F. That's where A/C Power Corrector device, Four-legged Label, Magnadiscs, Gold Foil, Morphic Message Foils & and assorted Red X Pen messages come in. Needless to say photos should be treated to fullest extent you can muster. There is no end to all of this, by the way, as far as I can tell...
Law of Optimization restated: "No matter how much you wind up with in the end, you would have had even more if you'd had more to start with."
29th December 2003 from Ulf Osterbrink. Germany.
I´m new on this group and ordered the beginners pack which arrived my home today. Please tell me what do I have to use first and so on to hear the effectiveness of these products?? Especially I´d like to try them on my turntable and maybe on my personal computer (notebook). I would be very happy to be guided a bit through all these tweaking possibilities (´cause there is way a lot to read, nearly to much information for beginners). greetings and by the way... good luck in the new year 2004.
31st December 2003 from V.R. Sola. USA.
Subject: Happy new year to you all
A gem in the Intermediate level package.
I received the Intermediate level package yesterday. Though my original intention is to treat my friends daughters system as a gift, I could not resist the temptation of testing the easiest of all - the CCU clip. I have one already in my listening room. I attached the other (safety pin) to the seat cushion.
This is one product which can give instant change to the perception of sound. In my system in a different way. Almost like using a dialogue enhancer and at the same time improve the imaging. One thing surprises me is that one need not sit on the seat cushion. One can hear the changes even across in the adjacent room. Wish you all a happy new year
31st December 2003 from Gary Lee. USA.
Nice to have a newcomer. One by one the world can change, until one day audio people will wonder how anyone ever stood the sound of discs without little bits of silver and red writing on them.
My suggestion is to start with creaming and foiling LPs or CD's. That's what first got my attention. Then a little research on this site should help to learn about treating turntables. You can do a search. I'm a CD guy, so I can't advise you.
It can be a little overwhelming. Perhaps it might help to focus in one area, such as treating your discs and audio equipment. The Spiratube can be used on your power cords, and the Cream and Foils can be applied a number of places. The information on the individual products at the P.W.B. web site will give you ideas of where they can be used. It probably won't take long before you will see the magic that can happen with the music.
Again, searching the archives here can be very useful. And try some of the free treatments mentioned on the web site and in posts here.
3rd January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Gold Foil
I got some P.W.B. Gold Foil for messages and wondered what messages others have found effective. Another question is whether each message should be on a separate piece of foil. For example, if one message is ARCAM CD 92> O.K. and another is COMPACT DISCS SOUND SUPERB, should they be written on separate foils or is it okay to put them both on the same foil if they are going on the same piece of equipment? While we're at it, can messages that have been written before on a piece of equipment or disc be repeated on the Gold Foil and be even more effective?
Thanks for any information.
3rd January 2004 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Red x pen
What is better: 1. use the red x pen directly on the equipment or 2. write it on the gold foil and then attach it on the equipment.
Has anyone experience with this?
4th January 2004 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: power plug charge barrier
Could someone give me more information about the power plug charge barrier? Has anyone tried it?
With kind regards
4th January 2004 from Paul.
Subject: Re: power plug charge barrier
Power plug charge barrier is a good thing and a good price for its effectiveness. When I received mine the sound improved just from having the letter containing the charge barrier unopened in the house on the coffee table in the lounge room.
The peculiar part was I had a friend over who was relaxing listening to some music. I decided I would try out the charge barrier which meant having to cut out the holes for the power pins to go through. At the precise moment my sharp knife pierced the charged barrier my friend who could not see what I was doing immediately said "Hey what happened to the sound" When I had finally finished cutting out the pin holes and installed the charge barrier to my amplifier plug the good sound of course returned. I can not really say if it was better than just having that little square piece of cardboard just lying around in the house. Quite Amazing. That was the first time someone other than myself that did not have much interest in hi fi systems and was not even listening for a change in the sound had clearly heard the P.W.B. effect. It's good to know that I really am not crazy.
Basically try one out it is good stuff.
9th January 2004 from Tim Hancock. N. Ireland.
Subject: Which Foil?
I seem to remember Gary asking about the relative benefits of quantum, frosted and real foils a while back. Well, having just experienced a 'knocked back on my heels' moment with the Cream Electret, I think I've now reached a similar stage of P.W.B. development. Can I ask if anyone (Gary especially!) has any opinions on this choice? Sadly, buying all three is not an option...
8h January 2004 from Tom Grande. USA.
Subject: Re: Gold Foil
I just ordered some P.W.B. Gold Foil myself and am eagerly awaiting its arrival. It's my understanding that this foil (as well as the frosted foil that comes with the Red 'x' Pen) offers superior results to plain paper or scotch tape labels, either as an addition or a replacement. I am also hoping to find out if it would be just as effective to write multiple messages on the same piece of foil. It would save on foil and would take up less space on smaller pieces of equipment. I have on occasion stacked messages with tape or mailing labels to good effect, although I didn't do an A-B test to see if the "unstacked" method would be better yet.
11th January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Tim mentioned three foils that he was thinking of getting. My favorite of the three is the Real Foil. It's near the top of my list of foils. This seems to vary but Rende mentioned it was one of his favorite foils, also. I just remember that when I first used the foil that things really took a jump up, just as the Quantum Cream did for you, Tim. Remember, the great thing about P.W.B. is the 21 day trial. Though I've never used it, it's difficult to imagine that May and Peter wouldn't stand behind it 100%.
And Tom, it looks like we're both seeking the answer to the Gold Foil question. I usually just write directly on everything I can. But Richard mentioned how good the Gold Foil was, so I wanted to try it. My experiments haven't extended to the Gold Foil yet. I'll let you know of anything noteworthy.
I was a bit disappointed when the water heater got treated. There was not a noticeable change in the sound. Perhaps I did something wrong. Foils were put on the heater, along with morphic messages. Spiratube was put on all water pipes leading to and from the heater. Cream was applied before the Spiratube, though not along the whole length of each pipe. What were other people's experience? Any tips?
11th January 2004 from Tim Hancock. N. Ireland.
Subject: Re: Foils
Gary - thanks a lot for that. It would be the most expensive one, of course... Still, as you say, the 21 day guarantee is always there. Any advice as to priority locations, or is it the usual list of suspects? Anyway, I shall report back on results.
18th January 2004 from Robert.
Subject: Some experiments.
Hi everyone, whilst I haven't contributed before I've used P.W.B. stuff since the Black foil squares that Popular Hi-Fi gave away ( guess 15 years).
The experiments were as follows used the audio out sockets on my Pioneer DVD 656, switched of display and video output whilst listing to CD, has anybody else tried these things, as I heard no improvement.
As using P.W.B. products would have been an easy option to hear an improvement, I instead went for P.W.B. tweak, cutting one corner off all labels on the clothes in my wardrobe... Wow it was like the kind of improvement you would get from extensive P.W.B. treatment of 2 CD or a couple of pieces of audio equipment. The thing that hit home to me for perhaps the first time is that any and everything is worth "Belting"
22nd January 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics UK.
Subject: Some Experiments.
I was very pleasantly surprised to read Robert's contribution where he describes his reaction to trying the experiment of cutting one corner from the label on an item of clothing.
As Robert mentions, he is one of the group of our customers who have been using our techniques since the early days of the "Black Foil squares" - which, as he says - were introduced more than 15 years ago. Since that time, Peter has also gradually introduced what we call 'freebies' - experiments which people can try, for themselves, which cost them nothing. Peter introduced these experiments to try to get people in the world of audio to experience how some things can change the 'sound' and, having changed the 'sound', to then realise that there is something going on regarding hearing/perceiving music which cannot be explained from conventional electronic or acoustic theories and which therefore have to be taken notice of - particularly if one is seriously and professionally involved in the world of audio. Freebies such as the one described by Robert, also the one of turning up and pinning one corner of a curtain (any curtain - all curtains).
Of placing a plain piece of paper under one of the four feet of a piece of audio equipment, of tying a reef knot in two adjacent cables or wires or of tying a reef knot in a single piece of cable or wire or tying a reef knot in the pull cord of a window blind. Of freezing various items or CDs or cables or wires etc using a domestic deep freezer.
I congratulate Robert (and all our customers) for their staying power in the face of years of ridicule over such matters. As I have probably mentioned before, I am slowly going through archive material, trying to get it into some form of order instead of being just randomly stacked in boxes. One article I have just come across is by Ken Kessler, published in the January 1991 issue of the American magazine Stereophile. Ken describes a list of our devices, describing Peter as a "sweet little Yorkshireman who cooks up wacky tweaks and has amused/annoyed everybody - At the very worst, the use of Belt's notions could make you look very silly indeed - at best, many believe he Might Be On To Something".
Ken ends his article saying "Peter isn't the only one to cook up wacky schemes but he seems to be the one who receives most of the criticism - and he really is a nice geezer". Unfortunately, Ken only describes our devices, he never actually takes the trouble to TRY them !! Again, unfortunately, many other journalists have also taken the path of only describing Peter's techniques, not actually trying them for themselves.
For example. At the end of a three page article by Alvin Gold in Stereophile in the late 1980s, which is a description of how Alvin, with various other journalists and editors of British Hi-Fi magazines had been given demonstrations of Peter's devices and techniques in Jimmy Hughes house, John Atkinson, the editor of Stereophile adds the footnote
"Peter Belt was for many years the manufacturer of an excellent-sounding British electrostatic headphone, and his accessories are based, in the main, on the work he did with permanently charged electrostatic materials (electrets). We have collected a set of Peter's palliative measures in the Stereophile office, and will report further on their audible effects when I can find a writer willing to suspend his disbelief."
Oh dear me John, why would you find it so impossible to actually try our techniques for yourself I had completely forgotten about Alvin Gold's article in Stereophile until I found it in my archive box. The article is not dated but it must have been written around 1987. It makes interesting reading again. To quote some sections from Alvin's article:-
"We met at the home of Jimmy Hughes because his place is fairly central and Jimmy regaled us with tales of his experiments with ...... no, this must wait............ say "us" advisedly so that you know I have witnesses, including the extremely levelheaded Editor and Assistant Editor of Hi Fi Answers, Keith Howard and John Bamford. They are not suggestible types, which is a good thing in the circumstances. Neither am I............"
Describing the sound of Jimmy's Hi-Fi system, Alvin says:-
"But, I must concede, with some regret that, at the time of writing, I cannot get my system to work as well as his......... It has all the qualities we struggle to achieve with expensive gear, but fail because it is too complicated for its own good....... There was soundstaging - we were sitting in it - but most of all we were immersed in interpretation and performance in a way that parallels live music-making. I guarantee you have never heard anything so musically valid from a roomful of equipment such as Audio Research and Infinity IRS......... But, I've left out certain details: a whole series of bolt-on goodies that come from a guy named Peter Belt."
After describing a series of demonstrations which Jimmy gave using Peter's devices, Alvin ends his article :-
"Had anyone suggested such things last week, I'd have told him where to get off, which not coincidentally is exactly the nature of the reaction that Peter Belt has had so far from trade, public, and press alike........... The trouble is, I've heard it with my own ears."
So, I repeat again, I congratulate our customers on their courage in both trying our techniques and then reporting their results in the face of ridicule when the 'professionals in audio' find it so easy and convenient to hide.
22nd January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Willing to suspend his disbelief
Thanks, May, for the notes, and for reinforcing Shakespeare's observation made through Puck: Lord, what fools these mortals be.
Why would anyone have to suspend his/her disbelief to write about P.W.B. products? Believing has nothing to do with it. Listening is all that is required. Not a difficult task. Didn't all of us start by putting pieces of foil on a recording or freezing something? That didn't require believing. I know I didn't see how some lovely, sticky silver slivers could improve sound, but since they were free there was little to lose. The rest was turned over to my ears. People often talk as though there is something bad about having nothing between the ears. Personally, I think it might be better if that were the case with some audio writers and manufacturers. That way there would be no impedance to their hearing.
24th January 2004 from Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Re Experiments
After reading May Belts Reply to Robert's recent posting, I did a few of the freebie tweaks mentioned. In fact, what I did was pin the corner of about eighteen curtains and tie a reef knot in eleven pull cords that operate various switches and blinds about the house.
This was all I did before trying a piece of music and what I heard is the reason for this posting. I received the mother of all "Knocked back on heels moments". It's at least on a par with some of my greatest moments using the latest P.W.B. Devices and reminds me specifically of one of the early Quantum Foils which seemed to increase the apparent "loudness" of a piece of music along with a lift in "presence". The CD I picked up to play incidentally was the L'OISEAU-LYRE disc "Mad Songs" by Soprano Catherine Bott. This is one of a number of discs I use to check progress (or the lack of) after P.W.B. activity. This is because when I first purchased this disc the sound seemed to be recessed and undynamic. It was a strain to follow the musical strands. Over time each new P.W.B. Treatment about the house has made the listening more enjoyable with even the size of the recording venue now more easily discernible. Anyway, to get back to the important bit. The opening seconds of one of the tracks on this disc nearly made my heart jump from my chest. It was apparent straight away something special had taken place, the sheer presence of the sound had taken a huge leap and, as I said earlier, the loudness seemed to have also taken a jump.
Like Robert, I too have been using P.W.B. Devices from the early days and remember trying some of those suggested tweaks and hearing enough to make me investigate further. But nothing like the results I have just heard. I then realised that after we moved to the present house about three years ago, I did not carry out any of those freebie tweaks thinking that they would be insignificant in comparison with current potent P.W.B. Devices. I seem to have been proved very wrong and I have not even began to cut the corner off clothing labels yet! What puzzles me is the power of those few simple actions. Could it be that the quite extensive Belt treatments to the house in general is having an enhancing effect on those tweaks ? Remember the tip where croc clips are attached to either end of a length of cable with a reef knot tied in it and was then clipped to adjacent water pipes? I am going to re try all those early tips with renewed vigour. Isn't life wonderful when so much fun can be had from tying a few reef knots! I would love to know if anyone else gets a similar result. It took me about thirty minutes to carry out the knotting and pinning.
25th January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Freebies, etc.
Kevin's noting that his work took thirty minutes to complete is inspiring. Sometimes I want things to happen in seconds. It is good to know that others don't just whip up the P.W.B. treatments in a few seconds.
Also, where can I learn to make a reef knot? It seems like there was a description of how to make one in the P.W.B. literature somewhere, but I can't recall the source.
In a recent post I noted that treating the water heater didn't result in any noticeable difference. However, something has changed around here. How long it took can't be measured and what caused the changed can't be pinpointed either. But now listening to untreated CD's is no longer intolerable. That must mean that the environment has improved significantly. What tipped the balance remains unclear. What is clear is that for a while after I started using the Rainbow Foil and Creme, untreated CDs made me restless. They had to be foiled and creamed before I could sit and listen to them. Now new CD's can be listened to without treatments to the disc itself.
Directly treating a disc helps, although the effects of P.W.B. treatments on it don't always seems as dramatic now. In a way that would seem to be a positive.
Finally, some advice is sought from those who have used the Blue Magnadisc. I want to get one for my CD player to start, because May said that was the best way to make use of my new Chunky Blue Pen. However, there is a VR/CD Blue Magnadisc Pen listed whose description says VR/CD Blue Magnadisc. Can anyone clarify what that is? The link doesn't work and I wondered what it was. Apparently, the regular Blue Magnadisc needs to be ordered, but what it the second listing?
Thanks for any information.
25th January 2004 from Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Cannot help very much regards the Blue Magnadiscs but I will try with your reef knot question. Having never had to tie anything more complex than a Christmas gift, knots are a bit of a puzzle to me also. I can tell you straight away that it is far easier to actually tie than explain. I cheated a bit this time round and went to Google (UK), entered "Reef Knots". The first page up produced a Scout web page with a good diagram of a reef knot. Although it shows two pieces of string being tied together it can still be tied in a single piece of pull chord. I hope the diagram will help, I have added the web details at the end of this message.
I have not gone back over the "freebie tweaks" to try and determine which was the more effective action the curtain corner pinning or the knot tying, but it was quite a sound lift and I hope you get a similar return.
When you tie the knot leave a small loop in the chord. The size is not critical as far as I know. But do pull the knot quite tight.
26th January 2004 from Geoff Kait. USA.
Subject: RE: Tweaks
Note the reef knot is identical to square knot; one can make "reef knot jumper cables" with alligator clips on both ends to connect adjacent cables, esp. useful when cables are large diam type... best to use solid core copper or silver - oh, and always use smart solder for 'gator Clips... hope this helps....
27th January 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK
Subject: Reef Knots and Special Blue Magnadiscs.
The way I have to remember how to make a Reef Knot is by a little ditty.
"Right over Left and under, Then Left over Right and under".
The Special Blue Magnadisc you require to treat your CD player is the specially treated VR/CD Blue Magnadisc which is described near the end of the Chunky Pens instruction leaflet. You attach one or more (up to four) of these specially treated Blue VR/CD Magnadiscs to the equipment housing cover, positioning them above the spinning disc.
27th January 2004 from Tom Marsden. UK.
Kevin; the reef knot is my favourite freebie. At the last count there were 21 in my listening room alone. As you can imagine they are scattered throughout the house.
For examples- telephone lines , battery chargers, printers, fax machine, pull cords, table lamps, computer cables (a lot there ). In short if it has a flying lead it will have a reef knot on it -if possible!
Scart leads I give up on. The reef knot was in fact a defining moment when I first became interested in P.W.B. activities. Some years previously a college at work had claimed that tying a knot in interconnect cables would improve the sound but you see I had spent many years in Electrical Engineering and had read the text books so I knew it couldn't possibly have any effect and dismissed his suggestion without actually testing it. So the information was already out there. When I met Peter and he recommended tying a reef knot I then gave it try. The effect when first tried out on a 16ft interconnect was staggering. I was completely "gobsmacked". No reef knot application since has had the same dramatic effect but every one has a beneficial effect. Why does it work? Simple really if you consider that the current in the conductor causes an energy field to travel along the outside of the cable. When the energy wave reaches the reef knot it meets the energy wave coming from the opposite direction and they cancel each other out.
If only life was so simple. The fact is the reef knot effect operates whether or not the cable is carrying current; it operates if the cable is disconnected; it operates on a piece of string acting as a pull cord and it will operate on a clothes line in the back garden. ( I have to admit I haven't tested this one). There is a saying that there is no more an ardent follower than a converted disbeliever and I am fully converted. To Gary's query how to tie a reef knot. From my Boy Scout days - now seems centuries ago. The rule was "Left over Right and under then Right over Left and under". ( I note May does it completely the opposite way round -just like a woman !)
28th January 2004 from Chris Porada. Hong Kong.
Subject: RE: reef knot
Tom (or any other who can help),
Do you tie the reef knot to connect the left and right channel interconnect cables, or try to tie a reef knot in each individual run (channel) of cable? Also, does this work on power cords going to the audio equipment; speaker cables? Sorry if these questions are naive, but I'd like to give it a try and want to make sure I have it right.
28th January 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Reef Knot
Tom is quite right. The cable with a reef knot tied in it does not have to be carrying current and a reef knot is just as effective when tied in a pull cord made of string.
Peter has given numerous demonstrations to Hi Fi equipment retailers in the past. Retailers have the habit of storing such as the Quad Electrostatic loudspeakers passively in an outer corridor or passageway when they were not needed in the demonstration room. Peter has demonstrated the effect of the Reef Knot by going outside the demonstration, into the corridor and tying a Reef knot in the AC power cords of the Quads, then returning to the listening room and everyone in the room has heard the sound be much better.
Peter even demonstrated how tying a Reef knot in the AC power cord of the vacuum cleaner, stored in a cupboard, had a beneficial effect on the sound in the demonstration room.
The Smart Metal can be used by itself - it does not need to always follow the application of regular solder. It is just that it is not necessary to use the Smart Metal (expensive in comparison to regular solder) wholly as a complete solder. That is why our recommendation is usually to just solder with the Smart Metal over an already soldered joint, especially if the already soldered joint is within equipment and quite inaccessible. What you are doing by using the Smart Metal is inducing a beneficial energy pattern into the soldered joint via heat and the specially treated solder - but you do not need to use much, only go over the already soldered joint. That way, you can make the Smart Metal go a long way. It is similar to the Cream-Electret. You can cover the whole surface of an object with Cream-Electret if you wish, it is just not necessary to do so - all that is needed to be effective is to apply a small amount to a small area of a large surface.
28th January 2004 from Heiko Wingender.
Subject: Reef Knot
I'm used to making a Reef Knot with two ropes but cannot understand how to do it with only one like an AC power cord. Could you please give me a hint or point me to a sketch?
28th January 2004 from Kevin Kehoe. UK.
Subject: Reef knots
What truly shocked me after the curtain pinning and reef knotting escapade was the sheer size of the sound improvement. Way back when I first tried those tips I did perceive a change for the better but it was not as great as my recent experience. But, as I said a few days ago, this was the first time I tried those tips in our new house- mainly because I was silly enough to think that there would be little or no change due to the number of sound "lifts" I have experienced using Belt products since moving in. I would never ask anyone to spend their precious time trying something that I was not sure would bring some results, but this is a definite one to try.
I shall pick up on what you said Tom and get to knotting every piece of string and cable long enough to tie. I shall also make some lengths of cable with a reef knot tied in it's centre with alligator clips soldered to each end (with Smart Metal) and attach to the water pipes. I think this was the very first Belt related tip I tried!
30th January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: Ring Tie inquiry
I want to try the first phase of Ring Ties on my audio gear and have a question for those of you who've gotten further down the road. My preamp is passive, with just a "wall wart" (a step-down transformer) needed to supply power to the remote control. The wire is very thin. Does that make any difference in needing Ring Ties? I'm not sure if the wire is large enough to take any Spiratube, which I've used with the Red Ring Ties on my CD player. I wanted to be sure to get enough ties for all the equipment.
30th January 2004 from Andreas Makrides. Greece.
Subject: Reef knot filtering?
I believe that the reef knot effect, has something to do with EMI filtering, like the spiral effect, but much stronger.
Trying it, the changes in the sound reminded me of the effect of using power filtering devices - for example, attaching ferrite clamps to the power conduit wires (but leaving the earth wire intact) : The sound became more dynamic, analytical, rhythmical and bright.
A reef knot of the refrigerator power interconnect, make the lights of the house brighter, too.
Of course, it is always the question, how does a reef knot of a cable not connected to some electricity voltage, may alter the perceived sound: Well, attaching a ferrite clamp to some "dead" wire, results to some kind of alteration too.
Everything influences everything, but I believe that the explanation of the reef knot effect, is closer to conventional science's terminology, than anything else in the P.W.B. world.
A treat, nevertheless!
30th January 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Reef knots.
If you have two audio interconnect leads or two AC power cords adjacent to each other, then you can make one reef knot with the two leads. One thing to be aware of however. If you have the extremely thick and heavy audio cables and you tie a reef knot in two adjacent (already heavy) cables, the reef knot could add considerably to the weight of each cable as it enters the equipment connection. In other words, the added weight may, gradually over time, loosen the connecting plug of the cables going into the socket of the equipment. Just something to be aware of.
As you will be aware, when you make a reef knot in two wires, you start with two wires, parallel to each other. With a single wire, you start by making it into a U shape then, as you will observe, you will have two parallel sides of a single wire to start making your reef knot as usual.
30th January 2004 from Bob. USA.
Subject: alternatives for a reef knot
For those with thick power chords, or short stiff interconnects, can anyone suggest an alternative knot or cable configuration that would be an effective variation to the reef knot? anyone try this in speaker cable?
31st January 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: More Reef knots
The Great Reef Knot Adventure is underway, but after starting, my expectations didn't match the results. So I wanted to check the procedures.
This is a little difficult to explain, but here goes: when I take a pair of interconnects and tie a reef knot, the general shape of the knot looks roughly like a zero (0) on its side. Assuming that one cable has red plugs and the other black, that means the two red plugs end up on the same side of the knot. In other words, one red plug loops around and back, ending up above the other red plug. To use a pair of ic's, a red and a black are needed at each end to go in/out of equipment. So to use the ic's after knotting them, the ends of the cables have to go against the natural flow of the knot. Thus, the reef knot must be turned 180 degrees, so the shape of it now looks roughly like a regular zero (0). That allows a red and a black plug to be on each side of the knot. Is this right? Or is my explanation hopelessly confusing?
Also, to tie a reef knot in a single cable, it means the cable ends up with two loops, right? The "u" end of the cable is a loop to start with. Then a second loop is formed by actually tying the reef knot. Or did I do something wrong?
Finally, which is preferable: to use two cables to form the reef knot, or for each cable to have a knot? I gathered from May's comments that it is better to use two cables when possible.
Thanks for any help in this new adventure.
3rd February 2004 from Paul Topic. Australia.
Subject: Re: More reef knots
Maybe your reef knot has turned into a granny knot. That's what we used to call it in Scouts when the reef knot did not work out right.
3rd February 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Reef knots
The Reef Knot is the only knot we know which creates a beneficial effect. If your cords are too thick or too stiff to tie a Reef Knot, then you will have to 'treat' using P.W.B. methods i.e. 'creaming' a small part of the outer insulation of the cord/cable or attaching a short section of Spiratube around the cord/cable.
4th February 2004 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Reef knots
And of course more can be done than that May, from putting the thing into the freezer, to adding Ring ties.
I haven't put reef-knots into some cables at home because pulling cable through loops, when ring ties are added is not easy, but as with recent postings on clothes labels, it's amazing the effect such simple steps can have.
The other matter that preoccupies me is the captive lead. With the standardisation of the IEC socket and plug, if a piece of equipment fails or is replaced, you can lose the valuable attachments. I saw though in an accessory brochure, a device (well, a socket!) that allowed one to cut off the fixed lead, close to the equipment end, and attach an IEC socket. That way, you could hold onto the precious, treated leads indefinitely. Probably doesn't help with warranties, but what does.
Haven't had a chance to try it yet, but a new Fridge/Freezer beckons. Has anyone else tried this approach, even with those non P.W.B. 'Mains Cables'?
4th February 2004 from Gary Lee. USA.
Subject: The Great Reef Knot
My questions seem to have been answered through experience. All the power cables, speaker cables, and ic's in the main system were tied up, except for one pair of 47 Labs ic's that can be a bit tricky to unplug and replug. Maybe I'll get a bit bolder in a few days.
However, the results of the knots were spectacular. Now I believe what others have knotted, er, noted. The change in sound was amazing. One would think I'd learn by now and not be amazed by P.W.B. products and techniques, but that hasn't happened yet.
Unless this is all an illusion or self-hypnosis (as some suggest vis a vis P.W.B. treatments), the sound stage widened and the bass got more detailed and fuller. How is it that the bass can increase without getting out of balance? That never seems to happen, even though the bass has increased dramatically on several occasions with different treatments.
I was going to ask how tight the knots need to be, but most of them are not very tight, some being just glorified loops. Yet a strong improvement has occurred. This seems like a safe tip to pass on to others, since someone suggested that this treatment has a more Newtonian basis and won't threaten belief systems as badly. When it works, the suggestion of foiling albums might not seem as radical. Guerilla P.W.B. treatments in action. Today the speaker cables, tomorrow the world of creams, foils, and ring ties. Gary
5th February 2004 from Graham Mountford. UK.
Subject: Reef Knots
Like Kevin I pinned the corners of curtains many years ago but did not bother with reef knots (couldn't tie them). At that time (circa 1989 approx) to be honest I cannot say that I noticed any great improvement in sound.
In the last week I have pinned up all the curtains and tied a reef knot in everything that hangs (at my age it helps with incontinence!) except my extremely thick and stiff Kimber power cables. I don't know what to do with those. Anyhow, on listening afterwards I experienced Kevin's reaction, the uplift in sound quality was amazing for what had been done. It was certainly on a par with some of the more expensive treatments. By the way I have replaced two of my captive power leads with male IEC sockets to plug my Kimber leads into. These were obtained from Russ Andrews and cost something like £3.25. The power lead was cut off about 3 inches from the amps.
9th February 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: The Great Reef Knot.
I am delighted that you have now had success with the Reef Knot technique.
It pains me greatly to remember that it was as long as 16 years ago when certain British Hi-Fi magazines published Peter's Reef Knot technique (with drawings even!). In today's culture of the magazines being so terrified of being ridiculed, I doubt whether they would have the courage to publish it now. And, I cannot help feeling that if they did publish it, they would make sure not to mention Peter Belt's name (because they would lay themselves open to the usual vitriolic attack from certain members of the audio profession) and the reef knot technique would come under a heading of "A Tweak" (which is a category used to put weird things which cannot be explained by conventional electronic or acoustic theories and so do not have to be taken so seriously by 'serious' audio engineers !!). What the audio industry is not appreciating is that very many of the so called 'tweaks' are actually telling the audio industry that there is something going on which affects the 'sound' but which cannot be explained by conventional electronic or acoustic theories.
Let me expand a bit more.
If you are hearing improvements in the sound by tying a reef knot in a cable, then this means that you are hearing additional information. If you hear improvements in the sound after tying a reef knot in curtain cords or the pull cords of curtain blinds, or in passive, unconnected electrical cables, then this also means that you are hearing additional information. But, you have not CREATED that additional information by tying the reef knot. You therefore have to ask the question "Where was all that additional information before I tied the reef knot ?"
The sound does not get out of balance Gary when doing any of our techniques because you are not altering the actual audio signal nor are you altering the acoustic air pressure waves. So, even if you 'treat' the left hand speaker or the left hand speaker wire, or the left channel in the amplifier only, the improvement in the sound would not be left dominant. What you are altering is your (human being's) reaction and that reaction is neither predominantly left nor right !!
I know what you mean Gary when you wish to link the reef knot into an explanation with a Newtonian basis (into already known science) and you, Andreas, with EMI filtering, in order to get Peter's techniques more widely accepted, but it does not fit there and therefore, when you think about it more seriously, you cannot stay with those easy explanations for long. Yes, it would be so much easier for Peter to gain acceptance if his discoveries could be fitted so neatly into conventional theories. As a skilled (and well respected) electronics engineer, Peter's journey these past twenty years would have been so much easier if he had been able to link any of his discoveries with conventional theories. Believe me, he has been down all those paths and come to a brick wall each time.
Back to the question "Where has the additional information come from ?"
If you tie a reef knot in a cable and improve the sound, and the reef knot is not altering the signal going through the cable, (and, obviously, it cannot be if the cable is unconnected and therefore not carrying a signal or if it is a pull cord made of STRING) this means that prior to tying the reef knot there must have been something adverse happening around that cable. Tying the reef knot has just reduced that adverse effect. Peter and I have always emphasised this from the very beginning. All the audio journalists who wrote regularly about Peter's techniques acknowledged this each time. Our techniques are not 'improving' the sound i.e. producing additional information, they are REDUCING adverse effects - which give the same result i.e. an improvement in the perception of the sound. What is so challenging to the audio industry is that if what we say is true, then all the additional information you are now hearing (after our 'treatments' or after tying the reef knots etc) has been there, in the room, all the time (and all the years) you have been playing the disc!! - you just have not been able to perceive it previously. And, in addition, this means that your existing audio equipment has been capable of (and is capable of more) handling a wealth of information - far more than anyone has ever realised. This is the concept the audio industry cannot come to terms with. Trying to stay within conventional theories to gain acceptance just allows the audio world to judder on without having their belief structure challenged. Within that scenario, our Foils, Creams, Ring Ties, Freezing etc, will still not be accepted or experimented with because they would still not make conventional sense.
To bring in the Joseph Lister parallel again.
Imagine 100 years ago, the majority of the doctors and surgeons believing that the micro-organisms which caused so many of their patients to develop septicaemia were in the patients own blood and that these micro-organisms could erupt (or not erupt) spontaneously - in other words it was purely chance.
It is like somehow persuading these doctors and surgeons to apply an antiseptic gauze to their patients open wound, and that these doctors and surgeons found that more of their patients survived, but the doctors and surgeons were still allowed to retain the belief that their patients survival was still because of 'pure chance'. Whilst ever they were still being allowed to cling on to the old belief structure, they would never therefore acknowledge the necessity to wash their hands, wash their instruments or change their blood stained, pus stained frock coats for clean ones !! To understand antiseptics, you have to leave behind the old belief structure and realise Lister's concept that the 'germs are in the air' and that you have to do everything possible to exclude the air getting into the open wounds.
Peter demonstrated the Reef knot technique and all the other (what we call) free techniques to audio journalists to try to get them to realise just what range of things could affect the sound. Our own specially treated devices are much more effective because Peter realised, over 15 years ago, what must be happening and began to develop very special treatments for specific materials.
I have been following the 'cable controversy' for the past 30 years, ever since the publication of Jean Hiraga's concept that different cables could give different 'sounds'. The controversy over cables is still raging today. What I find amazing is that all the audio journalists who review the different cables and 'hear' improvements in the sound of their audio system, do not end their review with the sentence
"Wait one moment, wait one moment, there is something strange going on here. I must investigate further".
They just do not seem to appreciate that when they hear improvements in the sound (i.e. hear additional information) by using the different (exotic?) cables, what the results of listening to the different cables are actually telling them is that the normal, standard, (non exotic) cabling and wiring throughout the audio system is also perfectly capable of 'handling' this additional information. It must be - otherwise the reviewer would not have been able to 'hear' that additional information coming out of the loudspeakers !!
These last two sentence run counter to what the audio industry believe and to what the manufacturers of the different cables believe. They believe that the reason why the (exotic) cables give an improvement in the sound is because the (exotic) cable is 'handling' the audio signal better.
I will try to expand on this theme in the forthcoming Newsletter.
So, Andreas, a brief response
There may be an electromagnetic wave travelling on the outside of a cable. Tying a reef knot in that cable may alter that electromagnetic wave (flip it somehow ?) But it does not necessarily mean that there is only one explanation - the conventional one - i.e. that any changes to the electromagnetic wave affect the signal going through the cable !!
There is yet another explanation - that the human being is sensitive to the electromagnetic wave travelling along the outside of a cable, that the human being's reaction is an adverse one, that by tying a reef knot you (somehow) change that electromagnetic wave (flip it somehow ? - to an inverted pattern ?) so that the human being has less of an adverse reaction, is more relaxed and can therefore perceive more of the information available. That could be why the measurement engineers who try to measure the output of loudspeakers to see if they can detect (by measuring) if any (exotic) cable is actually 'handling' the signal better than the normal, standard cable cannot measure any differences. Similarly, if they 'measured' to see if there were any changes in the signal between a cable with a reef knot tied in it or without one, their measurements would be identical. Because the signal is not changing !! It is you (the human being) who is doing the changing.
I am back to my old theme again. The earliest of early creatures must have been able to read/sense numerous energy patterns within their environment, in order to make sense of their environment, in order to know what action to take in order to survive - long before the senses of hearing and sight developed and that what was successful Nature has replicated again and again. If you are prepared to move away from conventional electronic and acoustic theories, tying reef knots in passive, unconnected, cables, in the string pull cords of window blinds, in the pull cord of the bathroom light etc, begins to become more understandable - as will so many of the so called 'tweaks' one reads about. One very good example is the colouring of the edge of a CD. Many people in the audio industry heard this improve the sound. Many others threw a 'wobbly' saying that it was impossible - digits are digits, they cannot be altered and they certainly cannot be altered by a coloured pen !! The explanation usually put forward for the improvement in the sound heard by many was that (somehow) the laser beam was being reflected or refracted by colouring the edge of the CD. But, this explanation again will not hold up under scrutiny because you can make a similar mark on the extreme edge of a vinyl record and on the outer edge of the plastic housing of an audio tape with a Violet/Purple pen and get a similar improvement in the sound as with colouring the edge of a CD - and there is no laser beam involved with either a vinyl record or with an audio tape.
9th February 2004 from Andreas Makrides. Greece.
Subject. Reef Knots.
Since there is no scientific theory to describe the connection between body and soul, matter and consciousness, all explanations lead to some dead end.
It is an old argument of the philosophical idealism: "You show me molecules and their interaction, but you cannot show me how these molecules produce thought!"
The argument is unbeatable, but there would be no progress if we would stick to it.
We don't know why the x chemical affects the brain, but we are nearly certain for the symptoms of its use under certain conditions - at least we believe that our doctor is certain!
Thirty years ago, there was the belief that the better some equipment measured, the highest was its fidelity. Twenty years ago, people that believed that there were differences between the sound of cables, or that certain equipment supports had their own sonic signature, were ridiculed. Is the situation the same now? Of course not!
There are tests for the sound of cables and supports and there are efforts to explain the differences. In the beginning, there was the belief that for a cable, the only parameters that count were the capacitance, inductance and resistance. Now, we reckon that there are and other factors: The phase shift, the speed of the signal, the radio frequency rejection. The electromagnetic interference between the cores - and the research goes on. Four years ago, the HFN magazine issued a mega test of loudspeaker cables, that were put under 15 different tests.
We may not know why the big capacitance of an interconnect leads to a warmish and generally "slower" sound, but this is a fact acknowledged by tens of companies who construct cables. The search for a different, better geometry has not ceased.
When I wrote that the reef knot effect is closer to scientific terminology than anything else in the P.W.B. universe, I meant exactly this: The reef knot, is not a plastic sticker, it is not a peace of paper with some strange (or not so strange) figures on it: It is just a different geometry.
Of course you have all the right in bitterness and accusation of the establishment, but that isolates your unique universe even more. I would suggest a different algorithm:
1) First we prove that the reef knot effect does exist and that it really makes some difference to the sound
2) We measure the cable and the differences that the knot induces. If there are no differences at all, then there is a very strong point but it is likely that the reviewers will forget this very strong point, since there will be no explanation as to why this effect exists - according to your experiences. It is possible though, that there will be some differences, that may be a bridge between your universe and the "established" one. Which kind of differences and why? I don't know of course - let there be discussion!
Since cables are the least scientifically covered area of hi-fi research and it is widely acknowledged that companies do not elucidate with the Newtonian physics their products (or their explanations are particularly inadequate), I believe that this area is the perfect one for a bridge to be made between P.W.B. and the world of respectable tweaks. It needs only the release of a P.W.B. interconnect in the market, ( I insist as you see!), that could beat some cables costing several hundreds of pounds more.
That, would have and an adverse weird effect: It would conjugate the strictest hardliners of objectivism (that believe that paying hundreds of pounds for a 1m cable is pure absurd) with the happy beltists! Don't you agree?
It would only need, maybe, to hide at first the name of the designer!...
10th February 2004 from Tom Marsden. UK.
Subject: Reef Knots
Thank you May for your comments in the 10th Feb. posting. As always your contributions are thought provoking and I find them fascinating reading.
Here are a few suggestions, I offer, for those just starting to discover for themselves the benefits of applying this ridiculously simple - and cost free - technique as a way to better sound. First ; tie a reef knot in the interconnects between CD player and Pre-amp; again between Pre-amp. And Power amp. If your Loudspeakers are bi-wired then a reef knot using the two sets of interconnects otherwise tie a reef knot between the pos+ and neg - wires. With mains power cables there are options; if there are two adjacent cables then tie these together otherwise loop individual cables with a reef knot. If by looping a cable it becomes to short; then obtain a spare piece of cable , preferably of the same thickness, and use this to tie a reef knot; excess spare cable can be cut off. I suggest that 'before and after' listening be carried out with every reef knot. (not as a precaution against the possibility of degrading the sound ; rather to note how some wiring may have a more noticeable effect). Once the audio system has been 'knotted' then look around the listening room for any other cables/pull cords that can also be knotted. You can now start on the rest of the house.
I support the school of thought that all audio wiring should be as short as possible; should be as thin as possible and should have as few strands as possible. This works to the advantage of reef knots since the thinner the wire the tighter the reef knot and therefore, I believe , more effective. However I have no proof of this. Every one of my power cables and interconnects - except scart - is custom made and I would dearly love to be able to compare them with some of the incredibly priced products that are advertised.
The last time I applied a reef knot was when I recently visited some relatives ; Roy listens to his music on headphones while Ellen watches TV. After I had tied a reef knot in the jack lead of the headphones; Roy looked up with a some what puzzled expression , smiled and exclaimed "It's now much clearer". I suggested next time he visit me to bring along the headphones when they would become really clearer. I was thinking in terms of 'Real' Foil, 'Freeze Effect' Foil, 'Inverting' Foil, 'Clip' treatment and the 'Green Cream' ( what a product!).
One final thought ; since one reef knot in a interconnect can be hugely beneficial , why not use two and so double the benefit are for that matter three knots etc. It is as well to remember we are in the strange world of P.W.B. where things do not always behave in a otherwise logical manner. One knot works fine whereas two knots cancels the effect. Anyone like to explain that one?
Regards Tom Marsden
11th February 2004 from Mark Kirby. USA.
Subject: RE: The Great Reef Knot.
I've only had a little time to try out the reef knots at home. Getting behind the equipment rack is a something of an athletic feat, so I do it only when I have to; I reef-knotted the pull cord on my blinds, my phone cord, and a couple of light cords. The effect on the sound was dramatic and involving - something I would have paid big bucks for, although, as with other P.W.B. techniques, describing it in standard audiophile terms seems a little inaccurate. It felt, very simply, like I could hear more, and that the music was independent of the equipment producing it.
My playback system runs on a dedicated line, none of the knots I tied was connected in any way to the system - one was on a length of cotton cord; so whatever happened would seem to have nothing to do with RFI or other of the phenomena that are generally deemed to be the culprits that exotic cords and such are designed to address. I'm inclined to believe these things are in fact enemies of good sound, and that the engineers working to combat them are doing real work; but, as May might say, "Something else is going on here."
I will at some point tie the reef knots in the wires in my music system. My main interconnects, made by Mapleshade and very thin, look too fragile to be knotted. But they have been Belted already - frozen and creamed, and written on with the Red 'x' Pen.
22nd February 2004 from Bernhard Knoop. The Netherlands.
Subject: Violet Chunky Pen
Hello P.W.B. friends.
The pen is expensive but this is not normal anymore. I've used different treatments from P.W.B. but this is excellent.
You get more detail and air around voices instruments etc. Your mid/bass will change: it's more natural.
Did someone tried it out on fuses? What were the results?
Regarding the Red 'x' Pen
I was wondering, what is better: write directly on the equipment or
use gold message foils.
25th February 2004 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Red 'x' pen
No question about it - the Gold Foil is much better. But as this has a cost attached, you can still achieve good results e.g. signing every disc you have etc.
25th February 2004 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: Re: Violet Chunky Pen
It is always astonishing to hear/see the benefits of treating items like fuses. The combination of the Violet Pen, Red Pen (tiny writing though!), Cream and Sol-Electret, plus a holiday in your freezer makes a substantial difference. Try one and see.
25th February 2004 from Richard Graham. UK.
Subject: A Four Legged Friend
I've been rather busy with a demanding new job, and wrote to May with an order along the lines of 'Make them easy to fit, I'm pretty desperate!', and one of the items I received surprised me in its effectiveness. That's right, it is the plastic label to place under one foot of any piece of equipment with four feet or legs. You can slip one easily under a foot to get a result.
I wanted to place some under the different pieces attached to the computer, and listened to those rather dodgy speakers that one gets with a PC. Well the sound was so much better it was darn right scary.
And it probably took less than a minute to apply them. They are fairly cheap too.
I'd be interested to know how others found them.
You can of course get a taste of the benefit by placing a small piece of plain paper under one foot, but that result is not in the same league - at all.
25th February 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Jonathan Scull's article
Three separate people have told me of a new article by Jonathan Scull which has just been published on the Internet audio magazine "positive feedback online."
The article is entitled "Relativity and Quantum Mechanics" - (information for many of our non American customers, Jonathan Scull was a regular contributor for the American Hi-Fi magazine Stereophile).
To give a brief description of Jonathan's latest article. Jonathan describes a recent experience and this experience mirrors what can happen, so often, in science - how hearing about a concept in one field of science can ( and often does) trigger a response and a curiosity as to whether this concept could possibly apply to another field of science. Jonathan describes how he was listening to a radio broadcast describing the concept of 'string theory' and Jonathan became intrigued and began to ask himself the questions "What if listening to music is all about finding a system that communicates by synchronizing your vibrations with it's sounds ? How does some music, on some systems, reach you in that fundamental way you always recognise ? I wonder if 'string theory' could be used to explain phenomena I have experienced myself. Could it explain the effect on the sound caused by such as Harmonix and Shun Mook devices ?"
Where, I ask, does Jonathan imagine those synchronizing vibrations might be occurring ? In the signal travelling through the audio system ? Or on the information which is present in the room, before it reaches the human ear drum ? Or, actually within human beings as they struggle to process the information which has already reached them ?
I have copied below my reply to one of our customers regarding Jonathan's article
Referring to one sentence from Jonathan Scull's article.
"In some awful but endearing way, we're all descended from that Neanderthal nebbish."
I know what Jonathan is trying to say but I do not think that Jonathan has gone far enough back in time. I find that I get a much better understanding if I go back even further - long before Neanderthal man - to the earliest of early creatures - before the senses of hearing and sight developed. These early creatures MUST HAVE been able to sense certain energy patterns in their environment - to be able to detect danger - to be able to take what action necessary in order to survive - to then be able to replicate ! And survive they did, or else we would not exist today. And Nature replicates what has been successful in the past - so, I believe, we (human beings) still retain many of those ancient abilities - which were established long before the sense of hearing developed. I also believe that these early creatures must have been able to communicate with each other, within their species, before the individual senses as we know them now had developed. How did these early creatures communicate ? By sensing chemical changes or electro chemical changes ? And, to be able to communicate, they must each have had some sort of receptor and also some sort of transmitter !
At least Jonathan Scull is trying to explore mentally - to try to understand some of the phenomena he has experienced in the past. This cannot be said about the majority of the people working in the audio industry - in fact, in my experience, discussion and debate on such matters is actively discouraged or ridiculed. So, audio engineers will not begin to understand how they can take two steps forward in engineering terms but can actually (inadvertently) be taking five steps back in terms of how the human being is going to react. Or, alternatively, that they can do something simple such as repositioning the same components in the same circuit (where they would not expect any changes in the sound to take place) but could (inadvertently) actually be moving two steps forward in how the human being reacts.
Only something like this can explain the results of many of the audio equipment reviews I have read. Reviews such as one by Martin Colloms ( a well respected British reviewer) when he did a multiple review of five CD players. He described how a certain CD player - with measurements "an engineer would give his right arm for" - actually came bottom of the group listening tests and the CD player which was voted the 'best sounding' by the listening panel actually had the poorest measurements of the CD player group. To which result Martin ended his review by saying that he did not really understand why the CD player which measured the best should sound the worst and why the CD player which had the worst measurements of the group should sound the best.
At least Jonathan Scull is prepared to explore mentally and to be brave enough to put that exploration in print !! But, Jonathan's concept that the 'strings' (activity ?) may be playing a part in hearing/perception of sound still does not explain why different chemicals can have an effect on the sound., why different colours can affect the sound., why marking through a bar code with the Red 'x' Pen and writing beneficial messages or signing your name or initials with the Red 'x' Pen can affect the sound, and why treating other things in other rooms can have an effect on the sound in the actual listening room.
As I explained in the talk I gave. I regard concepts as 'stepping stones' which allow one to explore - providing one does as W. Scott Murray always advised and that is to remember to put up a marker flag at the point where you begin your exploration.
I personally find that to go far back, looking for explanations and using my imagination, (but still based on the results of Peter's experiments) I have to visualise a hypothetical situation. I visualise a cooking sauce mix consisting of vegetables, herbs, spices etc within which is cooked some fish. During the cooking process, the fish absorbs many of the flavours present in the sauce. Something along these lines I feel must have existed at the beginning of the earth. That there was an exotic mix of different chemicals, different gases, different minerals and different energy patterns (and yes, Jonathan, if the scientists are correct - 'vibrating strings' along with such an energy force as gravity were there at the beginning of the creation of the earth). And that all these things existed when the first creatures began to evolve. That the early creatures made use of what already existed to assist development and progress (and survival !) -and this was before the senses as we know them developed. Then, at this early stage, comes in Rupert Sheldrake's concept of 'morphic resonance' because energy patterns were beginning to be created.
I lost my inhibitions regarding using stories to illustrate our concepts after reading Michio Kaku's book "Hyperspace". If the great scientist Michio Kaku can use stories to illustrate how difficult it is to get so called scientists to 'take the blinkers off', then, I decided, so can I. Michio Kaku uses the story of the Flatlanders - the people who live in the land of the Two Dimensions. How some of the Flatlanders found themselves in the land of Three Dimensions and saw many wondrous things. When they returned to the land of Two Dimensions, they tried to describe to the other Flatlanders what wondrous things they had seen but the other Flatlanders could not understand. Another story Michio uses is one he has had since his early childhood. He used to imagine a fish, jumping from the water onto land and seeing wondrous things going on. When the fish returned to the water, it tried to describe what it had seen to the other fishes but they could not understand.
From the chapter on Superstrings in Michio Kaku's book is "According to string theory, if we could somehow magnify a point particle, we would actually see a small vibrating string. In fact, according to this theory, matter is nothing but the harmonies created by this vibrating string."
Jonathan's article implies (but does not spell it out in sentences) the concept that it is the human being's reaction which affects their perception of the (musical) information. I wonder just how long it will take for Jonathan to reach the point when he can actually say, in words, that in very many cases it must be the human being who is reacting to and within their environment and that it must be those reactions which are changing the perception of the sound - which is what Peter Belt has been trying to tell the audio industry for over twenty years. Then the next point for Jonathan to reach is the realisation that the improvement in the sound (additional information) he has been able to perceive on many occasions has actually been in the room all the time he has been trying to listen - which, again, is what Peter has been trying to make people aware of for over 20 years.
The main stream audio industry cannot allow a debate or discussion to take place. It must maintain the status quo - which is that 'better' sound can only be achieved by better engineering of the audio equipment and by 'handling' the audio signal better or by alteration of the room's acoustic air pressure waves.
25th February 2004 from Tom Marsden. UK.
Subject: Jonathan Scull
May, your story of the `Flatlanders` reminded me of the H.G Wells book I read many years ago called "The Country of the Blind".. The gist of which is ; In a valley lived a people who, due to the water supply, were slowly losing their sight. Over many generations, though now totally blind, they had had time to adapt perfectly in their sightless state to live a very fulsome existence. When a stranger arrived in the valley and described to them what a colourful world was all around them; they called him mad and persecuted him. I imagine there have been many times when Peter can equate with that stranger.
29th February 2004 from Geoff Kait. UK.
Subject: Re: Totally off the wall
Something I have not seen discussed is the use of Blue Magnadiscs on vertical wall surfaces. I had found the Green Magnadiscs to work very well on ceiling surfaces, as suggested by P.W.B, not only for the listening room but other rooms in the home as well. Could be the paint or the wallboard, or some other reason, but a single Blue Magnadisc on any vertical wall produces a very noticeable improvement to the sound here. Of course any steel or wood items also are good candidates for the Blue Magnadiscs.
2nd March 2004 from A. Martherus. The Netherlands
Subject: Pictures of reef knots
As I'm new to this group, I'll try to make a contribution by publishing images of reef knots. They were found on the Internet.
3rd March 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics. UK.
Subject: Re. Totally off the Wall
Yes, you are correct Geoff.
Walls are important and the perception of the sound benefits from 'treating' the walls. Also, colours are significant. I have described previously (in the talk I gave) how Peter made the discovery of how different colours were important and how they could change the sound and how different materials responded best to particular colours. Peter and I know how important different colours are but exactly why we do not know. Our knowledge is from the results of numerous experiments not from a technical thought process. Although what we do know is that it is all not as simple as the audio world would have people believe i.e. purely to do with room acoustics.
Some twenty years ago, Peter was beginning to find that he could 'treat' walls and get an improvement in the sound but, like so many of his early experiments, he found that 'treating' some walls gave a better improvement than 'treating' other walls and there was no obvious reason why this should be. As his experiments progressed he began to realise that the walls which responded best were several load bearing walls as opposed to inner partition walls. He then had to consider what differences there might be between these two types of walls. Could the gravitational pattern be the subtle difference between them ? Peter also considered the concept that one thing where there could be a difference could be the pressure energy - greater with the load bearing wall ! Another wall which, when 'treated', gave quite a considerable improvement was an outer boundary wall of the house - even though this was not necessarily a load bearing wall ! And yet another wall which, when 'treated', gave a good improvement in the sound was an inner wall, but this particular inner wall was a wall shared with the house next door - again, a wall associated with our boundary ! Peter began to realise that the boundary walls of the house (territory boundaries) were quite significant to us (human beings) and that we must be sensing the various energy patterns going on within our own boundary.
Let us now have a look at the subject of colours.
I have seen reported, a few times, in the audio magazines where some people have claimed that certain colours when used in the plastic insulation around cables gave a better sound than other colours. Any explanation for this has usually centered around :-
(1) the particular colour pigmentation, when added to the plastic insulation material, (somehow) affects the resistance which, in turn, (somehow) has an effect on the signal traveling through the cable.
(2) the particular colour pigmentation, when added to the plastic insulation material, (somehow) has a dielectric effect on the signal traveling through the cable.
(3) it must be the effect of less or more of the carbon added to the plastic insulation material.
None of these explanations will stand up to further scrutiny especially when similar improvements are perceived in the sound when the cable is a passive cable - not carrying any signal. So, we have to look elsewhere for possible explanations.
If the scientists are correct that an object absorbs all the colours of the colour spectrum except one - the colour we can actually see, then this means that this state of affairs must have existed at the beginning of the earth and the beginning of the presence of light.
If the scientists are correct that all the different colours have a different frequency, then an object must have absorbed all the frequencies except one and this state of affairs must have existed at the beginning of the earth and the beginning of light.
Scientists use the expression "a primeval soup" to describe what must have existed at the beginning and from which the earliest of early creatures must have emerged.
I start my concepts at the next stage, having accepted that the early creatures now exist, and this is where I use my expression "an exotic cooking sauce" to describe the rich environment within which the early creatures lived and survived, to replicate and evolve. That the earliest of early creatures must have used what was available and what was available was a rich mixture of different gases, different chemicals, different minerals and different energy patterns, including the effect of the light energy on objects in the environment - long before the sense of sight developed.
Already present was the energy pattern of gravity and there must also have been the energy patterns I have just described concerning light energy as well as energy patterns concerning pressure. So, were the early creatures (before the sense of sight evolved) able to detect the energy patterns created on objects by light energy ? Were the early creatures sensing subtle differences to do with gravity, pressure etc ? All these things must have been involved with development and evolution.
To use one of my outrageously simplistic hypothetical examples.
Say there existed Chemical No 1 which the early creatures soon learned (from a survival point of view) to 'avoid at all costs'. There was also present in the environment Chemical No 2 and Chemical No 3 but the early creatures had no way of making use of them. Then Chemical No 4 was created and Chemical No 4 was able to combine with Chemical No 2 and Chemical No 3 to make Chemical No 5 - which the early creatures could make use of and therefore were able to make a considerable evolutionary leap forward. But, even with that evolutionary leap forward, the older instinct of 'must avoid Chemical No 1 at all costs' was still there and was being replicated again and again.
Since Peter's early experiments he has had the dilemma of which was the important bit to 'treat' first. Was it the 'boundary energy pattern'., was it the 'territorial energy pattern'., was it the 'pressure energy pattern', was it the 'colour energy pattern'., was it the 'dimensions energy pattern'., was it the 'vertical, horizontal or angled energy pattern'., was it the 'different energy patterns of materials'., was it the 'magnetic energy patterns' and the 'electrical energy patterns' ? Different energy patterns needed different 'treatments'. Some he has been able to combine - hence quite a few of our different Foils have different layers, built up, layered, one by one, on the computer and then the resultant pattern printed out onto whatever material had proved to be the best for those particular energy patterns and for that particular purpose.
Why not try the following experiment. Place a piece of plain Blue paper under the plant pot of a house plant or under a vase of flowers and listen to some music. Then remove the Blue paper and listen again. Now, with the Blue paper removed, the sound will be perceived as not as good it is with the Blue paper under the plant pot or vase !
9th March 2004 from Ron Adamson. UK.
Subject: Hi everyone.
I am new to the chat forum having only just acquired a computer courtesy of my son but have been a 'user' if that is the correct word of Peter's devices since Jimmy Hughes' first articles. Previously I have been able to keep up with the chat forum thanks to May's stirling work in sending out the Selection with each Newsletter.
My son has got me into the new technology of computers and the Internet but I was able to assist him with what I regard as older technology - older being nearly 20 years old. Just before last Christmas my daughter in law had treated herself to one of those inexpensive audio systems for her kitchen. During a conversation with her making arrangements for me to stay with them over the Christmas period, I promised to make her some audio tapes from my collection of classical music for her new audio system. She said that it was a lovely idea but that she had been disappointed with the sound of said audio system as it sounded hard at times. Her description of hard sound rang a bell so as well as taking a selection of audio tapes I took with me my trusty pack of P.W.B. bits and pieces. Both Jenny and my son watched me carry out some treatments and looked at me as though I was performing some ancient rituals creaming and foiling all over the equipment and particularly when I took the front of the speakers off and creamed the cones and domes of the speaker drive units. When they both listened afterwards my son shook his head in disbelief - you just don't change the sound of something by applying a cream to it - and Jenny was gobsmacked. I felt almost as though I was the one introducing new applying Peter's cream to the cones of my own loudspeakers when I read the recent discussions about reef knots on the P.W.B. forum. I remember the first mentions of the cream being around the same time as the publicity surrounding reef knots around 16 years ago.
A telephone conversation this past weekend with my son has prompted me to now post something on the P.W.B. chat forum. During the conversation with my son he mentioned that in last weekend's paper he had just read details of a new JVC speaker with a wooden cone drive unit. What particularly caught his eye was the mention that the wood for the speaker cone had been soaked in saki (rice wine) to make
it pliable enough to mould into shape. This new speaker was reported as sounding good. My son commented that it reminded him of his experience when I creamed the cones of Jenny's speakers.
I had a reason to speak to May by telephone yesterday and told her of this news and asked her if she had heard anything about this new development and commented that I could not understand what was stopping the audio industry getting their act together. May answered that those are her thoughts on a daily basis. May also suggested that I write of my experiences for the P.W.B. chat forum - so here I am.
Best Wishes to everyone.
9th March 2004 from Chris Porada. Hong Kong.
Subject: RE: "creaming" cones and domes on loudspeakers
I just read with great interest Rons article about treating the loudspeakers with electret cream, and am writing to see if anyone can provide me with instructions on how to do this. I had thought that you could only treat the cabinet and metal frame from the drivers; I had no idea that you could also cream the cones themselves. Can you also treat the dome of a dome tweeter? Does the cream have any deleterious effects on the performance/vibration of the tweeter? It would seem that adding even a very thin layer of cream might change things somehow. Any tips or advice from anyone who has treated their loudspeakers would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance for any help,
10th March 2004 from Paul.
Subject: creaming cones
Just cream them as usual. Be very careful of the tweeters not to dent them if you have aluminium tweeters. May said that the green cream is only needed in a very small amount on the centre dust cover of a woofer.
I wish I had a kit like you to amaze people with. Although I think you have to wait for someone to complain about the sound they already have or the difference will not be fully appreciated.
10th March 2004 from May Belt. P.W.B. Electronics.
Subject: creaming cones.
I agree with Paul. Be careful when creaming the cones and domes of speaker drive units. Also remember that you do not have to cream the whole area, you just apply a tiny amount of the Cream (either Cream-Electret or the new Morphic Green Cream) to a tiny area of any surface. Cream nearest the edge of the cone or the dome (where it is attached to the outer ring or role surround) where it will be the strongest (firmest).
I also agree with Paul in that if you ever contemplate 'treating' someone else's audio system, you usually have to wait for them to complain about the sound before they would even consider being prepared to allow you to do any 'treatments'. The next hurdle which you will then come up against is their belief structure. My first story in the talk I gave was to illustrate this important aspect.
For example. Most people end up believing that the 'over bright' sound they have is caused by (say) the cartridge being on the 'bright' side, or the tweeter being a 'bright' sounding tweeter. Or, if the sound is dull and 'sat on', they may blame (say) the amplifier. They usually console themselves by saying "The cartridge may sound a bit 'bright'- but it was the most detailed cartridge I had heard, that is why I bought it" or "The tweeter is known to be a 'bright' sounding tweeter but this speaker system had the best bass I had ever heard, that is why I bought it" or "The amplifier is known to be bit dull but it had the best 'middle' of any amplifier I had heard, that is why I bought it." Then, when you have treated just a few general things, and in many cases many things in the environment which are not connected in any way with the audio system, and you suddenly have created open, shimmering, sparkling sound with no longer any dull, 'sat on', bright, hard sound, - they just respond by saying "Wow, that's amazing." But, what they do not do is to go back and reassess and challenge their old beliefs. They do not say "Wait one moment, the over brightness has gone, the dullness has gone, I have open, detailed, exciting sound - but you have not touched the cartridge, you have not touched the tweeter, you have not touched the amplifier".
No, they usually just say "Wow, that's amazing" and continue with their old beliefs.