Do you believe in Magic?

Mr Tennis I can't speak for the OP but it seems clear to me that "Magic" is being used in lieu of a clear understanding as to what is going on to cause the sonic change. Based on his thoughtful comments and quest for understanding the "why" of it all I doubt it was meant in any literal sense. The key statement in his opening is "known physicals laws". Of course there is a reason that things happen in audio and other disiplines that often seem contrary to logic nor can be explained by current measurement parameters but what is it, real or perceived? It happens all the time in this hobby and who really believes it's magic? You can only believe what your ears tell you.

Wasnt that song by the Loving Spoonful.

Wasnt that song by the Loving Spoonful.

Yes it was! John Sebastian, to whom I referred earlier, was their lead singer, and the composer of the song.

Do You Believe In Magic?

Great song, IMO.

Regards,
-- Al

01-23-12: Mrtennis
no one has defined magic.

I did. It was the second sentence in the OP: "Let's say that Magic is any effect not explainable by known physical laws." That is a definition. It may not be a definition you like.

i suppose in audio "things", which seem on the surface have no reason to have an effect upon the sound of a stereo system, might be construed as magic...

i doubt magic is the apt word to use to describe such a product.

Ahh... literalism. MrT, the use of the word 'magic' is ironic. I said as much in an earlier post. Tubegroover was exactly correct in his interpretation of my remarks. I'm using the word 'magic' to refer to an effect about which there is little understanding, even among experts.

The contrast to magic is mechanism. So that I'm not accused of failing to define 'mechanism,' let's say that a mechanism is any physical entity, property, or law that explains an observable effect.

That brings me to an observation about magic and mechanism that I hope will constructively contribute to this thread...

One man's magic is another man's mechanism.

That is to say, the understanding of physical laws varies from individual to individual. Al has an expert's understanding of physical laws. I have a layman's understanding. As a consequence, some things that are magic to me may be nothing more than mechanisms to Al. Put another way, magic isn't magic to a magician.

Which brings me to Geoff's reference to the famous Arthur C. Clarke quote about sufficiently advanced technologies being indistinguishable from magic. The essence of that insight is identical to the observation that one man's magic is another man's mechanism.

Which brings me back to magic in audio. No doubt there are some observable effects that are unexplainable to me but are explainable to experts. But there are other observable effects that are unexplainable EVEN TO EXPERTS.

And that is why I call it Magic.

Bryon

"Any sufficiently advanced self delusion is indistinguishable from marketing hyperbole."

Ken