Holographic imaging

Are we talking about time induced distortion (TID)?

Last time I heard about TID was in the manual for the Mission 777 amp of the 80's. That designer attacked the problem with an abundant power supply, local feedback instead of global, very wide open bandwidth and a slew rate that has only been bettered since in OTL and possibly some switching amps. Possibly, the best manual ever. Wish I made a copy.

That amp was ahead of it's time and incredibly dynamic but didn't come near the detail of modern amps, probably due to the evolution of parts.

http://www.fl-electronic.de/neuklang/cyrushistory.html

It also reminds me of the difference between redbook CD vs SACD and DVD-A. There are time issues there that are not directly related to jitter or sampling rates.

Anyway, despite the inevitable obtuse answers, there is room for an open mind.

Roger says "Let the free market decide".

Couldn't agree more.

The market decided on Edsel, New Coke, Betamax, etc.

RIP cat.

I've read many posts where requests have been made to explain cable "technology", so I don't agree that it's been given a pass

Yes but there is always an army of followers out there ready to jump to the defense of even the most dubious scientific claims for amazing differences between cables - (where no electrical science has gone before - cryogenic treatments - you name it - the wackier the cable theory the better it would seem!)

So why not Herr Doppler effects?

Roger, obviously you have spent no time with these musical instrument tuners. I have. They are so sensitive that they can show variation in pitch that is really hard to hear. The one I have is a rack mount unit and can show a deviation in pitch of one whole note over nearly that entire width. Its when you get to the center that its hard to hear what its telling you.

It is a fact that some people hear pitch better than others, but from what you are saying, none of this has any bearing on your 'phenomena'.

So: we still have an unquantifiable phenomena, no math to support its existence (whereas there is math to support the existance of anything else real in audio). On this point I should point out that as a manufacturer I have heard plenty that did not seem to show up on the 'scope- until I got a better scope that is... and while I agree that test equipment comes well short of what we hear, it is only because it is measuring the wrong things, not because those things can't be measured! They all do, after all, exist within the medium of electronics.

So it can't be measured, no math, no proofs of hypothesis nor any sought, if I get the previous posts, the pitch variation so slight as to be well below audibility, therefore the 'gain variation' caused by an amplifier's distortion is also too slight to be audible or measurable (since in any amplifier the gain is something we **do** measure)... conceded by a comment about 100th of a db (or less), and apparently, other than listening, no other way to explain that this is the right hypothesis. IOW, because an effect is heard, therefore it **must** be Doppler Effect! -and can't possibly be anything else...

Occam's Razor is still suggesting a simpler explanation: the whole thing is a made up story and the actual truth of the matter is something far simpler. For example I know that slight tonal enhancement at certain frequencies can cause the image to jump out, and we are talking here about 'Doppler Effect sensors' that are sensitive to a '100th of a db', yet the effect cannot be measured by any test equipment- but it can by the 'special' sensors! So I will point to this as another glaring contradiction.

If it were me, and in the face of the Occam's Razor, the amazingly far more complex explanation I knew to be the right one, I would have hooked these 'detectors' up to some sort of device to measure their output (they are affecting the circuitry in the audio path anyway, so they have an output...). This has not happened, and yet is the blatantly obvious thing to have been done a long time ago, and I think the explanation for why that has not happened is also obvious.

09-28-08: Tvad -
“As in the case of the H-Cat's "Doppler Correcting" circuitry, the lack of measurements has always been a sticking point.”

Tvad,

Can you tell me the difference between a standard fuse and an Isoclean fuse? (besides more than $30)
The answer is – one sounds good the other sounds fantastic. It is a sonic or acoustic recognition of superior performance. But how can this be? You surely cannot measure any difference electrically.

How about AVM (Anti Vibration Magic) paint? Simply applying it to transformers and wires and other components makes a HUGE difference sonically. How can this be? Nobody can measure it so you must be wasting your money. But behold – a not so subtle transformation of an existing audio component into something very special. Is it real or imagined? Actually it is real.

The reason these things work is because they operate at microscopic levels. IOW they take care of the really small issues that can have huge sonic effects on the outcome. Much like the microscopic phase errors that I have observed in amplifiers that cannot be measured but have a profound impact on the acoustic performance.

My work has been in the area of the microscopic to nanoscopic regions of amplifiers. This is why it is called Holographic (Cloning) Amplifier Technology. I deal with the structural integrity (shape) if a signal at levels that can go to 100 db below the noise floor. The Wavefront Timing Control is designed to make adjustments in velocity using circuitry that operates in parts per billion.

These are things that your average designer has not “tinkered with” nor do they have a clue as to where to begin.

09-28-08: Audiofeil
“The market decided on Edsel, New Coke, Betamax, etc.”

Audiofeil,
Were these all the brands that you have carried?

Happy listening!