Anyone have experience with the Nanotec Nespa?

There is a lid which when opened turns off the mechanism. There is also and on/off switch. Don't drop it in your bath while plugged in.

Has anyone compared sonic difference between CDs treated with Nespa#1 versus the Nespa Pro?

The literature refers that the flash applied by Nespa#1 alone is rated at 1000mW/sec, has a temperature of 5,500K and light intensity of one million Lux. The intensity of the Nespa Pro is much stronger. This may sound stupid, but is there adequate precautions to safeguard accidental exposure, such as vision damage to unknowledgeable persons inadvertently fooling around with these conceptions?

This weekend my wife and I had 3 couples over for dinner. All non-audiophiles but they know about my passion, or obsession as they call it. We were listening to a CD and after 5 minutes I stopped it, I forgot to Nespa it> They asked what the hell I was doing and I said just wait. After a 60 cycle blast I inserted the CD again and the reaction was wow! Especially the woman. They said the top end was easier on the ears, no more, and this is where it's strange, they couldn't discribe it just they now thought an edge was gone, sounded cleaner and more relaxed. One even suggested more dynamic, although they described it as seeming to go softer but louder all at the same time.
Just thought I'd share this experience, I hope this thing never burns out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Leec, I do think the Nespa treatment is more significant than duplicating and proper cleaning. Of the many cd-rs I have made already, I found one where Nespaing the original and then making a second cd-r and Nespaing it was better than just Nespaing the cd-rs I had already made.

Being lazy I decided to just Nespa my old copies. In every case there has been a further substantial improvement. I cannot, however, say that I will rely only on the Nespa. It may be a majority of the improvement you can make on cds, but I want it all.

I have abandoned the Audio Desk trimmer on all but my sacds as it make no improvement either on the copies I make of cds. It does improve the originals, but this doesn't seem to transfer to copies made of it.

Curiously the Furatech demagnetizer has a minor effect on cd-rs. Nothing of the magnitude of its effect on cds, however.

Tgb,
So you must have used your Nespa on many discs now, I value your thoughts (even though I know what I hear) please tell us how much of an improvement you hear after a light treatment?
Lee

I have heard of such mods but am unlikely to try them as I think discs will soon all be put on to hard drives with a USB dac playing them. I have pretty good reasons to suspect that duplicate benefits to not pass to the hard drive. I would not be surprised, however, were Nespa benefits on the originals to pass to the hard drive.

I have found myself that computer copies of originals are not the equal of the RealityCheck duplicates and to some degree the Cool Copies. I don't know why this is true.

The power supply on the RC is quite small and must be even smaller on the CC. I also don't like using a transformer on the ac.

Tbg and Leec, Thanks for sharing your info.

Does anyone know of a modder who is offering modifications for the Reality Check duplicator or the Cool Copy duplicator or any other standalone duplicator (one that doesn't use a computer). Such modifications could include installing a linear power supply (which Gary Loh considers very important), software similar to the Exact Audio Copy or Plex Tools (to guarantee accurate duplication), a Super Clock (to reduce jitter), and a hard drive. Using software to first get an accurate copy onto the hard drive, then using software to select which tracts you want to duplicate from the hard drive onto your black CD-R discs offers a nice flexibility. Making a compilation of several favorite selections from a number of CDs onto a single black disc is more convenient when it comes to listening.

Best Regards,
John

Leec, I grant that using the RealityCheck cleaners and duplicator, which copies at a much slower rate than even the Cool Copy's Raw Disc copy, takes much time. But knowing how much better the discs sound drives me to doing the entire process.

I have AudioTop digital, RealityCheck original and RealDisc, and several older cleaners around. Of these the ClearDisc and ClearBit originals proves best. Perhaps at some later date I will try the 8500 after the others have been used. My disappointment with RealDisc has put me off for further experiments.

I had hoped that my first disc showed that Nespaing only the copy was best, unfortunately the second showed the benefits of copying both the original and then the copy,.

Now that my tests are done, I will be settling down to enjoying the fruits of this, including listening to vinyl.

Tbg, I sold my RealityCheck dup, bought a CC dup but have found just Nespaing at the 30 then again at the 120, is all I need. Yes, a copy "can" sound better but then I don't have the time to LISTEN and isn't that what it's all about?
PS: Forgot, another must is cleaning your CD's with a good cleaner, I've tried most and have settled on this fluid made by the makers of the Nespa unit called Intron Protect #8500. It's quick and easy to put on and sounds better than the original fluid by Mr Louis, that 2 step process was a pain......

I Nespaed another original and then copied it only to Nespa the copy. This was a Basie big band cd. This time the double Nespaed disc was better than where only the copy was Nespaed. How do I predict when double Nespaing will be better? I don't know, but I will probably not do the remainder of the 60 discs I have already copied.

Once again I used both the RealityCheck and the Cool Copy to make copies. These are the fifth and sixth discs where I used both, but only these two had been treated with the Nespa before copying. On both I prefer the RealityCheck as having a better leading edge and a better sense of the recording stage. I am selling my Cool Copy.

Norm,
It's fine we don't agree on everything, we all hear different things and we all have different priorities what we listen for. There are several people who feel the RC duplicator is better than the Cool Copy but there MANY more who feel the CC is MUCH better than the RC, no matter, everyone agrees that duplicating is a big benefit.
As for Nesaping an original disc 1st, or just Nespaing the copy, I still hear an improvement doing both. Again, in my system, this always sounds better.
As for why the Nespa can make a CDR sound better, no, I've not asked Japan. Their is a big communication gap on most question I have asked, since I don't speak Japanese and no one at Nanotec speaks English. All I know is I've heard from over 100 customers that ALL agree, there is a positive improvement on ALL formats. Many customers report huge improvements on video discs, a cleaner picture, brighter colors....I've yet to try this since I don't watch any TV.
Keep the reports coming in, love to hear your further experiments.
Steve

Steve, I, of course, have not tried the 8500, but I cannot agree with you about the benefits of Nespaing the original and the copy.

I actually preferred just Nespaing the RC copy. Nespaing the copy of the Nespaed original did not change my opinion. I am greatly relieved about not having to redo the 60 cds I have already made. All I have to do is Nespa them.

I also did CoolCopy versions of the Nespaed originals but have not yet listened to them.

Basically the Nespaing of the RC copies greatly enhances the realism of the sound stage and gives bass more impact. I can fell the change in my listen chairs vibration.

In passing I treated an sacd that already was improved by Nespaing for 60. I redid it as others have recommended for an additional 120 (I don't know what the unit is here, but I think it is seconds). This greatly improved the one sacd that I treated.

I really have no idea given what I have read about how the Nespa works why it has any effect on a cd-r with no metal layer. Have you asked Nespa about this?

I can say that the cleaning of the original disc with either cleaner is essential to get the best sound. Also cleaning a blank BLACK CDR before duplicating is also a MUST to get the best possible sound. To not clean a blacn black CDR before copying is a no no. So first clean your original, and the blank CDR, Nespa the original, make the duplication, then Nespa the copy. A simple but well worth process for FULL enjoyment.

Sksos and Leec,

Have either of you compared the sonic improvements made by Intron #8500 Protect and the Reality Check's cleaning fluids PRIOR to duplication. Also, what is the sonic comparison between the DUPLICATES that were made using these two cleaners.

Best Regards,
John

Norm (Tbg),

WOW, a score of 5 as compared to 1, 1.5 or 2. That is attention getting.Thanks for the info. Great work! The one thing that is consistent in your experiment as well as Leec's and Sksos' experiments is that Nespaing an RC cd-r is beneficial. Leec's results suggest that Nespaing a cd-r before duplication is detrimental. While Sksos Nespad the original CD before duplicating it, he did not give us a comparison between an RC copy of a Nespad CD and a Nespad RC copy of a Nespad CD. Your tonight's experiment should provide this missing piece. Please let us know your outcome.

Best Regards,
John

Okay, Puremusic, I have done some comparisons that might interest you.

I used a cd by Nnenna Freelon called Live. She has a great voice and the backup is very driving. Also being live there is a clear sense of space. I had already made a RealityCheck cd-r using ClearDisc and ClearBit, the original fluids. I listened to the original which had been cleaned with these same fluids. I then Nespaed the original and listened to it. Then the RC cd-r, and finally that cd-r Nespaed.

The original is quite clean and pleasant. I arbitrarily will assign it a 1. I treated the original at the 60 setting, where 30, 60, and 120 are the choices. It was strikingly better, with more detail, sense of space, and improved dynamic. I would assign it a 1.5. I struggled with these numbers and do not really mean to imply that it was 50% better.
Next I listened to the old RC copy. Sometime I will make a Cool Copy cd-r as I have one now. Thus far I prefer the RealityCheck copies slightly.

The RealityCheck copy would get a 2 on my scale. It was strikingly more detailed than the Nespaed original and had greatly more detail and sparkle. It all so had the drive that I have always found with the RC process, if you stick with the original fluids. The bass was far superior than just Nespaing the original, and this disc has driving bass. There was a greater sense of soundstage depth.

Then the ultimate. I double treated the RC cd-r on the Nespa. The first was a run at 60 and then another at 120. My jaw dropped on hearing this. I was there. Her voice was so distinct and real. The soundstage was quite realistic with incredible detail and realism. I could hear those sitting near where she was singing. I would rate this as a 5, clearly greater than its parts.

My understanding of how the Nespa works would suggest it could be of no benefit to cd-rs as they have no metal layer, but it clearly works better on cd-rs. This is troublesome to me as I have been impressed with what the Nespa does for sacds, which of course, cannot be copied.

Tonight I will make another copy using the RealityCheck of the now Nespaed original. I will probably listen to it first and then Nespa the new copy. Again I am inclined to expect no improvement, but given my prior experience, I will not be at all surprised if further Nespaing adds further.

I know better than to generalize from a single disc, but that is the best I can do for now.

To answer some questions and concerns Norm. The way I did things in the past was to clean both the original CD and the Black CDR FIRST. Then I would Nespa the original CD. Now I'd make the copy (either with my previous RC machine but now with the improved Cool Copy unit) then after the dup was done I would Nespa the dup'ed copy. I've tried Nespa'ing the Black CDR before coping first but heard no differences, only hear great improvements AFTER the disc has been copied.
As for the settings, I've found the 30 or 60 selection just fine, the 120 I don't hear any further improvements. Japan tells me you cannot ruin a CD if you Nespa one 100 times, it's just a waste of time and energy.
Hope this helps.
Steve

Puremusic, I do plan such comparisons, but there is also the CoolCopy duplicator. My life is also complicated by the fact that I just got an Esoteric X-01 limited ed.

Leec, if I recall correctly, never tried Nespa treating the original before duplicating.

Last evening I treated one sacd, which of course cannot be duplicated. I was shocked at the improvement. Once again I could listen to sacds. I should again point out that since I have a new player, I need to do a before and after test, which I did not do.

Tbg, Have you had a chance to compare the Nespa and RC treatments? The cleaning fluid is another variable here. It would be interesting to compare "copying" with "zapping by light". So, to do an objective comparison, perhaps you can clean the CD and all CDRs with the same fluid and then compare as many of the following as your patience will allow: plain CD, Nespa, RC, Nespa followed by RC, RC followed by Nespa. I found Leec's comparisons very interesting, but I don't recall if he removed the cleaning fluid out of the equation by cleaning all discs first.

Sksos,

Steve, what do you recommend 30, 60, or 120? Can you overdo a cd?

Thus far I have only treated sacds as they have lost favor with me after experiencing duplicators. In a word, wow!

So I've now stopped making Black copied CDR's, instead I'm just using the Nespa unit BUT cleaning the CD 1st with this new cleaning fluid from Japan (from the makers of the Nespa) called Intron #8500 Protect. Best cleaning and CD treatment yet. I was told by many it was special but that was an understatement. Anyone else try this cleaning fluid?

Norm, It's not that I don't think the RC is necessary, I know it's a PITA, but it works, and it works in combination with the Nespa unit. Actually I have ordered a Cool Copy duplicator, have heard from George's beta-testers, this Cool-Copy dup is better than the original, we shall see (hear).

Sksos, I thought there must be a substantial backlog of orders.

I have put off further copying using the RealityCheck until I have the Nespa to treat the originals. I know you don't think the RC is necessary, but I have got to hear it for myself.

Stanhifi, there is so much interest in this device we are now 2-3 months in back-orders! (Germany ordered 200 units alone!)
Japan can't keep up with demand. 3 shipments are in route to the US, unfortunately these will fill a small part of the current need. Customers are still calling and ordering on a daily basis :-)
(Norm, your Nespa Pro will be in the next shipment)
Steve
SOS

Wrong as usual and equally irrelevant.

>>This thread dropped off suddenly<<

No surprise. There is no interest in this and/or the realitycheck.

This thread dropped off suddenly. I suspect because no one else has gotten a unit. I am impatient to do the Nespa of the original before RealityCheck copying myself.

Where did I ever say they should not, but I deny your judgment that if they buy the RealityCheck they are fools.

Tbg, you are putting words into my mouth again, and I cannot let it stand. I have reviewed every statement I made in this thread, and nowhere have I said that buyers of the RealityCheck CD kit are fools. If you can find the quote by me where this is stated, I will immediately offer an apology to you and the rest of RealityCheck CD system owners.

Fools buy into lucky rabbit’s feet, palm reading, magic crystals and other products that are based on pseudo science and nonsense.

If the science behind a device is real, the process can be repeated and the product can be reverse engineered and patented.

I don't know if that definition applies to the RealityCheck CD system. There's simply not enough real information available from Mr. Louis regarding "BetterBit Technology", "BetterBits for Better Sound", or "NanoBit Ultralog Reprocessing with Bezier Curve Re-Algorization" to make a determination, and that is the core of the issue as far as I'm concerned.

You say, "So consumers who buy the RealityCheck are fools because you find they did not do their due diligence? In light of the recent information presented on AA, which points to the possibility of lower cost alternatives to the RealityCheck CD system, I believe it would be foolish for consumers not to do some thorough homework before spending their cash. You can't disagree with that, can you?"

Where did I ever say they should not, but I deny your judgment that if they buy the RealityCheck they are fools.

End of my participation in this useless discussion.

No, I don't try putting words in my students' mouths, but I do hasten to point out the felicitous arguments and assumptions.

Thank you, Tbg. That's a nice compliment.

So consumers who buy the RealityCheck are fools because you find they did not do their due diligence?

In light of the recent information presented on AA, which points to the possibility of lower cost alternatives to the RealityCheck CD system, I believe it would be foolish for consumers not to do some thorough homework before spending their cash. You can't disagree with that, can you?

Who made you the judge?

Never claimed to be. Everyone is free to purchase what they want to purchase, but they should have all the information before making their purchase, shouldn't they?

What’s the problem, Tbg? I find your debates entertaining. While I’m admittedly one of the Show Me members of Audiogon, you have to be the Mikey of Audiogon. You’ll try anything.

BTW, I find sitting on Styrofoam cups increases strength in my glutes and hamstrings. Fabulous benefits while cycling in the hills. My lower torso Magic Conditioning Devices are available for $795/pair. Act now.

Tvad, too many "mays" and "apparently" in your argument. No, I am not calling you a communist, but yours is the same argument Lenin used. How the hell you determine what is an appropriate price I don't know. No, I don't try putting words in my students' mouths, but I do hasten to point out the felicitous arguments and assumptions. So consumers who buy the RealityCheck are fools because you find they did not do their due diligence? Who made you the judge?

I suggest we just drop this useless posting.

Tvad, we are talking past each other as usual. For some unknown and unjustified reason you believe the RealityCheck is unmodified and that the cd-rs are available at a much lower price.

My reasons have been documented by those who have apparently tracked down the identical items offered for lower prices elsewhere. You are caught in the unfortunate position of an early adopter who got caught spending more than you had to spend.

You also deny that the research that went into the selection of this burner

No, I have never denied this. In fact, in my earlier post I gave George credit for finding the burner, discs and liquid and assembling the "kit".

for modification

No modification has yet been proved by Mr. Louis by way of a patent or patent pending number, for which he claimed to have applied.

Your is basically a naive consumer's perspective that no one is entitled to a profit or that the profit should be what you judge to be appropriate.

No, I have never denied Mr. Louis a profit, nor have I made any suggestion of what profit he should charge, although I have said that I personally find a 150% mark-up exorbitant. I have offered information to potential buyers of the RealityCheck CD product that lower cost alternatives are available that may offer the same performance adjustments to burned CDs. Do you put words into the mouths of your students at Texas A&M?

Lenin also believed this and, of course, it is the basis for communism.

Now, you're accusing me of being a communist? That's where this has gone?

I know this does not matter to you, and that you will continue harping that consumers are fools, a lament that many businessmen who tried to sell something that no one bought have often uttered.

I have never harped that consumers are fools...only consumers who do not do their due diligence. Actually, I consider consumers as a whole to be quite bright.

What else ya got?

Onhwy61, I have never found much benefit in deductive theories like economic theory. There never has been such a thing as free and quick dissemination of information, although the internet is moving that way with its search engines.

Perhaps Mr. Louis' genius is in trying various burners and picking the best for modification which he also conceived. No one has proved that the RealityCheck unit is just an off the shelf piece.

Tvad, we are talking past each other as usual. For some unknown and unjustified reason you believe the RealityCheck is unmodified and that the cd-rs are available at a much lower price. You also deny that the research that went into the selection of this burner for modification or these cd-rs, even if only for remarketing fails to justify any profit.

Your is basically a naive consumer's perspective that no one is entitled to a profit or that the profit should be what you judge to be appropriate. Lenin also believed this and, of course, it is the basis for communism.

Maybe George will sell no more RealityCheck burners, although my email would suggest this is not true, but it is also possible that those buying the cheaper unit, which George is also going to sell, fails to give them the benefits that others have gotten with the RealityCheck. I know this does not matter to you, and that you will continue harping that consumers are fools, a lament that many businessmen who tried to sell something that no one bought have often uttered.

The lack of perfect information flow, despite the internet, can allow someone to market a generic product from one market as a custom made product in another. This is probably what happened with the CD burner.

I wholeheartedly agree, Onhwy61, and I suspect it explains the Nanotec Nespa, too.

Tvad, the free market is a continuous process. At any given point in time sub-markets may exist where supply and demand are not in balance. Think of the plywood market in the Gulf coast a few days before a major hurricane. The audiophile market is also a sub-market with its own barriers of entry. The lack of perfect information flow, despite the internet, can allow someone to market a generic product from one market as a custom made product in another. This is probably what happened with the CD burner. In the long run (just before we're all dead), market forces will drive the so-called custom product down to the price of the generic version. It doesn't happen over night, but I imagine George Louis cancelled his IPO plans.

Tbg, have you been reading Ayn Rand lately? Innovation rarely is the work of genius, it is more commonly the product of hard work, persistence, luck and a lot more hard work. Free markets don't work without the flow of information. To say the internet, a universally available channel for the quick dissemination of info, may inhibit innovation is a gross misreading of basic economic theory.

The notion that you continue to propound, "exorbitant mark-up" is just sales rhetoric for those seeking to undercut the innovator's price as well as non-capitalist critics mimicking Lenin's notion of intrinsic worth.

I see your point more clearly, Tbg, but you misunderstand my point as well with this statement. I do not believe Mr. Louis was the innovator of a new burner. I believe he purchased burners identical to the IO Shop burners and re-sold them without doing a thing to them. Believe me, CD duplicators existed long before Mr. Louis' product. He himself says in one of his Positive Feedback replies that the burners he uses are sourced from Alesis, among other manufacturers. The next clue to indicate that he doesn't do anything to the burners is his firmware mea culpa on AA. Therefore, I do not believe this is a case of an innovator's product being copied and sold at a lower price. His appears to be a case of someone taking an off-the-shelf item and re-selling it at a 150% mark-up. That's exorbitant.

The same exorbitant mark-up applies to the black CDRs that are available for $30/100 that he re-sells fo $100.

His innovation would seem to be the packaging of a good quality burner, excellent quality black CDRs, and some mystery fluid. I'll give him credit for discovering the recipe for the package, but until he offers some proof of his technical innovation, or the patent for which he claims to have applied, he remains no more than a re-packager, and is deserving of the attention he is getting.

I'm all for innovation. I love innovation. True innovation that's verifiable. Not pseudo-innovation that's cloaked in mystery, ambiguity and double speak.

Tvad. you missed my point. Innovation takes genius and money. As technology evolves, some will see it potential in new areas and take it there in the hope of making money as after all we are a capitalist system. They will set a price for their new product and make it available. If it does not sell, they lose. If it does, others will seek to benefit from the break through by improving on it or by cost cutting, such as making it in China.

The notion that you continue to propound, "exorbitant mark-up" is just sales rhetoric for those seeking to undercut the innovator's price as well as non-capitalist critics mimicking Lenin's notion of intrinsic worth.

We still do not know if the look alike burner is the equal of the RealityCheck burner nor whether the look alike cdrs are the same as the RC cdrs, but I suspect that many will try the cheaper versions as well they should.

My other point was that even if Louis merely repackages the burner and cdrs, before the internet this would never have been discovered. As such, the internet may discourage innovations or certainly make their shelf life much shorter. Those with access to cheaper overseas labor may be the only ones with the true potential to innovate, safe with the realization that their secrets can be kept.

02-12-06: Onhwy61
If the product works as claimed and the price is exorbitant, then market forces will drive the price down as competing, lower priced copies enter the marketplace.

True, in the development of most products.

However, it appears that in the case of the RealityCheck CD burner, an existing CD burner was co-opted and marketed at an exhorbitant mark-up. This is in contrast to the market forces argument, and the crux of the debate currently surrounding the RealityCheck CD burner.

If the product works as claimed and the price is exorbitant, then market forces will drive the price down as competing, lower priced copies enter the marketplace. The question is, will audiophiles recognize the value of the cheaper, but equivalent knock-offs, or will they ascribe some greater effectiveness to the original and continue to pay the higher price?

02-11-06: Tbg
Tvad, yours is a curious post.

Why? Because I question the possibility of re-packaging at a ridiculous mark-up?

Of course, tweaks and everything else in audio is also outside the world of audio. Even if it is the case that the Reality Check unit is the same as that available for a lower price, there are other units, namely most computers that fail to achieve what is achieved in this unit. Why?

Because out of cost cutting concerns, most computers do not have the same high quality DVD/CD drives that are installed in dedicated duplicators. Basic economics.

And if the RC unit is better than what appears to be the same, what would you conclude?

The RC unit thus far has not been demonstrated to be better than the IO Shop burner, so I conclude nothing.

Interestingly in the case of the CLC and the IC, where people cannot reverse engineer the tweak, they demand to be told how they work or refuse to be interested.

Every invention with substance and a basis in science can be reverse engineered, as history has proved. Only devices based on pseudo-science cannot be reverse engineered because their benefits are myth, and their science is non existant. Like crystal balls, rabbit's feet and palm reading.

Tvad, yours is a curious post. Of course, tweaks and everything else in audio is also outside the world of audio. Even if it is the case that the Reality Check unit is the same as that available for a lower price, there are other units, namely most computers that fail to achieve what is achieved in this unit. Why? And if the RC unit is better than what appears to be the same, what would you conclude?

Similarly with the bright light and the Nespa.

Both George Louis and the inventor of the Nespa have spent time developing this and hopefully both will get a return on their successful developing it. Perhaps, the internet limits the return they can get and perhaps many will be discouraged from bothering given the limited return. If so, the internet will have killed tweaks and possibly all innovations.

Interestingly in the case of the CLC and the IC, where people cannot reverse engineer the tweak, they demand to be told how they work or refuse to be interested. Were I to be an inventor, I would, of course, tell such people to go to hell.

I've heard several Nespa'd discs, and there is a difference. Whether the Nespa disc is better than the original is for the end user to decide.

The AA RealityCheck thread demonstrates that when it comes to tweaks, there is nothing in the audiophile world that doesn't exist outside the audiophile world.

I'll be interested to read the first post that provides a link to the same CD spinner used by Nespa, and the corresponding light bulb. The flashlight aisle at Fry's Electronics is full of extreme intensity LED flashlights with bazillions of lumens. The bulb used in the Nespa can't be hard to track down and install in a generic spinner for considerably less than the Nespa's asking price.

Norm, maybe, maybe not. I'm only the importer and with 75 now sold, many are on back-order (I think yours will be in the shipment if you are getting one from our mutual friend) we shall see. It does change the sound of CD's, for the better, I've never claimed, nor do I understand, how this works, but once Nespa'd there's no doubt there is a BIG improvement. So much so I've already sold my RealityCheck duplicator. Yes the duplicator works also but it's also a PITA.
I'm told by Japan that there are now over 500 Nespa units sold :-)
Please keep us posted, once you receive yours, about what you think, your thoughts are much valued.

Steve, I think the Nespa is next. See: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1130940695&openflup&192&4#192

Hi Norm, I've asked this same question and currently Japan wants to just send me new replacement units. Seems excessive but at this time that's the way it is. I've not tried to open the units so I can't answer your first question.
Steve

Steve, is the bulb inaccessible or wired in? Why is it not just possible to unscrew the bad bulb and replace?

Norm

George,
Thanks for your interest in the Nespa units. First once a CD is treated with either the Nespa #1 or Nespa Pro units, it is permanent. As for how long do they last before the bulb burns out? Japan can't even tell me this but so far, with over 50 units sold, only one has burned out and that was my own unit. I used it on hundreds of CD's then sent it to Bill Gaw of ETM for review, who had it for several weeks and did MANY cd's himself, many more than I had already done. From Bill it travelled with me to CES and then it was given to Clark Johnsen of PF to travel with throughout CA. In Clark's travels the light stopped working.
Japan's policy is to have me ship the units back and they replace the units with a brand new unit, no charge, to the customer, just the customer will pay the postage to return the unit to SOS and pay for having a unit shipped back to them, a very small fee.
We now have 4 dealers and more are coming on board. Please feel free to contact Sounds Of Silence for your local dealer.
Steve
SOS

PS: We are currently over 50 units in back-orders.

Guys a question(I did read the 6 moons review).
Are the Nespa treated cd's permanently improved?Yes,No?
How do we buy one?Who carries the product?
Assuming the bulb lasts for 800cd's,then what?Do you change the bulb and you are good for another 800 cd's?How many cd's an average audiophile have?I would think it makes sense for the unit to be able to be rented ,used and returned for a fee.That is if the Nespa treated cd's are permanent.
Any ideas?
Thanks
George

Does anyone know what the difference is between a Normal and a Pro Nespa?
More Light/
Shorter Zap time?
and most of all for the numerous CD's that we have differentiating the Nespaing (thanks Lee) treated CD's from zapping them again in the Nespa by mistake and it's effect of it!
Nev

Leec, Thanks for your comparisons; that was helpful. John