anyone ever use AC line conditioners?

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
. . .again, this might be a waste of time to describe such...


I guess I have to agree with you

A while back I mentioned that I liked the sound of 6BQ5 outputs (a rather inexpensive and common tube), and someone accused me of tossing about esoterica and being an "audio snob"!

Good grief.

 

[sleddriver]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
good Audio is a dying art - Video really did kill the Audio star

I agree with the first part, but not the second. They're too different things. The first, visual. The second aural.

Big video is easy to get these days: You buy it, take it home, hang it on the wall, plug it in and you're done (usually).

But where to you go to buy 'great audio'? Surely not the same place you bought your big video!

(In most cases). They don't even sell audio, much less great audio. Besides you just blew your budget on big video. Women (in particular) used to complain about 'big, ugly' boxes. They're not complaining about 'big' TV's though, eh? Particularly since they're thin and off the floor.

What they do complain about is poor audio intelligability and loudness when watching 'big video' with their husbands. Why? Because at middle age, her hearing is probably better than his. Forget 20kHZ, forget 15kHz. He may be limited to 10kHz or worse. If he's having trouble with the consonants in dialogue, it is worse. On top of that, his sensitivity is lower as well so it needs to be louder. Both of these drive his wife up the wall. He needs it louder to hear the dialog, and more treble to make out the consonants.She complains it's too loud and sounds like 'breaking glass' it's so brittle. Further, Mr. is too stubborn to get his hearing checked, much less get a hearing aid. He's 'too young' for that. So she leaves to go read a book where it's quiet. This could be solved with better audio.

But I digress. . .

I see a lot of big screens these days...accompanied by a lot of lousy, distorted audio. But more people are interested in aquiring big video instead of great audio. It's also much easier to obtain. When they are out-of-balance though, you're really missing a lot. The eyes have it and the ears are left to suffer.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
good Audio is a dying art - Video really did kill the Audio star

Loudness war killed audio.

 

[westom]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
What the heck are you talking about? Most of what you just said makes no sense.
Others who actually understand line conditioning would first define the anomaly BEFORE recommending a solution. But that means learning numbers. You demonstrate no grasp of even basic electrical concepts. And discuss no numbers. Subjective claims: a first indication of a scam.

Which anomaly does a $30 Isobar solve? Power factor? No. Noise? No. EMI/EMC? No. Floating neutral? No. Brownout? No. Frequency variation? No. Harmonics? No. So what exactly does it solve? Oh. It is a 'line conditioner'. So it solves everything? No line conditioner does or makes such claims. So why did you?

An anomaly was never defined. How can you recommend a solution when you do not even know which problem to solve? Do hyou have a Kazooba at 7%. No problem. A line conditioner will protect from that.

Most anomalies are routinely solved best inside each appliance. At lower costs. Better designed equipment features even better solutions. If anyone needs a line conditioner, then the problem is directly traceable to a consumer who foolishly spent too much money for an inferior product.

Now you will buy an Isobar, that is electrically equivalent to a Monster product, and solve all those other anomalies? The cure is recommended subjectively - called a 'line conditioner'. So it solves all anomlies? Nonsense so easy promoted to consumers educated only by color glossy brochures, advertising, and hearsay.

Which anomaly was solved by each Eaton model? Not a rhetorical question. A question asked to expose insufficient technical knowledge by the resulting silent answer. Where are spec numbers in that brochure? Writing such brochures is much fun. Legal is to manipulate the naive with fears, mythical problems, lies, and outright scams. But most important, it is extremely profitable.

RiceCake accurately defined the problem using obvious technical knowledge. As he said
Quote:
Most equipment where this may generate interference already have numerous other things in place to eliminate it
Layers of better filters and galvanic isolation. Each layer alone usually does more than a typical 'line conditioner' or that Isobar.

As Kruse notes
Quote:
They are wonderful for the manufacturers. They make a lot of money selling them. They are also a big revenue generator for the audio magazines when they run ads for them.
Profits selling solutions for mythical problems are obscene. One even cited a color glossy that has no spec numbers. That proves anything? Yes, it proves how fun and profitable it is to scam naive consumers. It says so many will cure problems they cannot even define; that do not exist.

Why could Monster sell $7 speaker wire for $70. Because so many audiophiles could "hear" the improvement. Similar scams are also sold under the name "line conditioner". It costs more money. Therefore it must be higher quality? Monster has a long and profitable history simply selling a $30 Isobar equivalent for over $100. Others (ie Furman) sell an equivalent circuit for $200 by calling it a 'line conditioner'. What is the most expensive part of that 'line conditioner'? Its color glossy brochures.

How many are also recommending Geritol. Another 'cure' to problems never first defined. Promoting such scams is fun, profitable, and legal.

 

[Volvohead]

Sir,

I have repaired/rebuilt/reconditioned/modified more electronic and computer equipment in over four decades than you have likely ever owned or touched.

I never recommended a "line conditioner" to the OP. I recommended a TVSS/SPD (that happens to have mild EMI-RFI filtering) for his digital source devices. Got a problem with that?

Next time read the posts more carefully.

So take your wild insults and your attitude and take a hike.

 

[westom]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
So take your insults and your attitude and take a hike.

Posted were requests for technical answers. For example:
Quote:
Which anomaly does a $30 Isobar solve?
No reply. Somehow that question is an insult?

Another technical question:
Quote:
Which anomaly was solved by each Eaton model?
Somehow that is insulting? Well, only if the recommendation was made without basic knowledge. He cannot post specifications because the manufacturer does not provide them. So why did he post a subjective Eaton sales brochure as a technical fact?

Another question:
Quote:
Now you will buy an Isobar, that is electrically equivalent to a Monster product, and solve all those other anomalies?
Which anomalies does it solve? Why no answer?

A warning to all told to buy a line conditioner. Most retail 'line conditioners' are expensive scams. Recommended by some who get angry when challenged to provide technical facts and numbers. Defined by multiple engineers and demonstrated by no answers to multiple technical questions. A line conditioner is not the 'cure all' solution since superior solutions already exist.

Since he cannot provide any specifications, then he claims to be a vicitm? Of what? Asking for the technical spec numbers? Asking for the numbers that any technically informed poster can provide? Victims were consumers who paid good money for those bogus and expensive products.

 

[Volvohead]

Which of your brilliant electrical concepts would you like to discuss first?

1. That power conditioning is a scam and snake oil? I think we've exposed that mis-statement. But it is too expensive and usually unnecessary for most residential applications (including this one), as all those Eaton "snake oil" devices make plain. I picked Eaton, but APC/Schneider, Liebert and Emerson also sell "snake oil". Don't try to weasel out of it now with qualifiers such as "retail", or demanding product spec sheets for problems no one said existed. You got caught saying something profoundly stupid, and you don't like it.

2. Or should we discuss your more technical electrical concepts of dirty, dirtier and dirtiest?

. . .

Just so we're clear, an Isobar, like any other competent local TVSS device, provides principally MOV-based clamping protection against transients that ALL residential mains supplies are subject to. If you dispute that common fact, then you've exposed yourself further than you already have. I won't even bother asking if you know how a MOX Varistor functions.

I think I've now described three times what a TVSS does and protects against in this thread. While an Isobar does have a modest wide-band choke/inductor/capacitor filter stage across isolated banks as a bonus (6 db suppression at 500 KHz, 12 db at 1 MHz, and 30 db above 5 MHz), a TVSS is NOT a line conditioner. But a $30 Isobar is an excellent last line of defense against a serious transient, at a reasonable price.

You DO have a reading problem.

More importantly, I don't think you'd know a Pi filter design or how to correctly manage supply impedance if they bit you on the backside, let alone how a floating ground or suppressor circuit functions.

This conversation has degenerated enough. Say whatever you like, as I'm now done with you. It's Sunday, and I have family to see off.

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: westom

Why could Monster sell $7 speaker wire for $70. Because so many audiophiles could "hear" the improvement.



It's a very old challenge, but most audio salesmen are not stupid enough to make the same bet today that happened years ago.
More than a decade ago, an audio salesman by the name of Steve Zipser, who owned Sunshine Audio out of Miami, made a bet that he could do blind testing of his $14,000 mono-blocks against other systems on the market. A guy by the name of Steve Maki took him up on it and Zipser lost his bet against a $400 Yamaha system. I imagine a few of you veteran "audiophiles" remember it. If not, use a search engine and enter the names of the individuals and the name of his store for some interesting reading.
But for the sake of the audio industry, keep buying the hype. Some of the old audio critics (who have LONG lost their ability to hear the highs) need the employment.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Man, all the usual suspects check in here!

Interesting read, and the usual snobbery presents itself. The simple fact is sound is completely subjective.

And most people are not, as evidenced by this thread.

 

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: Kruse
. . .
More than a decade ago, an audio salesman by the name of Steve Zipser, who owned Sunshine Audio out of Miami, made a bet . . . I imagine a few of you veteran "audiophiles" remember it.


You seem to remember it. You must be an audiophile. I'd be running if I were you.

Amazing how a simple electrical question morphs into a raging hate fest against audiophiles and the audio biz.

I'm glad I'm not one.

 

[westom]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
Amazing how a simple electrical question morphs into a raging hate fest against audiophiles and the audio biz.
No hate of audiophiles was posted. A disgusted frustration exists of the so many who just know because they feel. Who become adament because subjective reasoning must be the ultimate truth. Who are easily brainwashed by advertising and hearsay. Who forget that responsible citizens first learn facts and numbers before having an opinion or conclusion. The word ideologue is defined.

Some audiophiles forget what was taught in elementary school science. How to not be a victim of junk science reasoning. We even have kids dying because Jenny MacCarthy used the same junk science reasoning to prove autism comes from vacines. Poople are suffering from Lyme diseases even though vacines exist to prevent it. But again, "I feel, therefore it must be true" reasoning means that Lyme vacine is unavailable. Another trophy for junk science reasoning.

Everyting here addressed a classic example of junk science and the resulting scams. Many who would promote those myths and scams on line conditioners then get angry when challenged. Refuse to learn from their mistake. Lash out at others rather than admit to using subjective reasoning and the resulting junk science conclusions.

'Hate and anger' rather than 'learn why they made such a glaring mistake'. They did not even read manufacturer spec numbers for line conditioners. They used the same reasoning that Jenny McCarthy has used to kill kids. Junk science. Subjective reasoning. Wild specualtion that somehow becomes a fact. I feel it is true. So it must be true. Then get emotional when facts and 'evil' numbers say otherwise. A problem not restricted to audiophiles.

 

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Many don't "HATE" the "high dollar" audio game, we simply object to, in the end, being told we "can't hear the difference" and "can't afford to buy it it if we could" attitude of the "audiophile".


HerrStig,

I agree with you. Audiophiles (whatever that really means) can be very obnoxious at times. Many are more interested in the price than the sound, and many spend more time listening to the system than the music playing on it. Not all, but many. Spending more does not automatically = better sound and the measure of one's satisfaction should not be defined by how much one spent.

But we seem to have a herd of "anti-audiophiles" running about who are just as irrational, spout really stupid things (like electrical line conditioning is snake oil) and are as aggressive, close-minded and obnoxious as the audiophiles with anyone who disagrees with them. Some really do hate, which just blows my mind. And anyone whose technical knowledge, vocabulary or experience exceeds theirs or that found at BB, Sears or the Bose store is declared a "snob". This is just the other end of the same ugly rainbow.

I'm all about honest technical conversation. Just don't say really stupid things as part of a critical exchange and I'm cool with it. I'll respond to that whether it's from an audiophile or anti-audiophile.

If you hang out with people at Submarine Signal who sit at an electronics bench, as opposed to a salon or a big box end cap, then you're in good company on these matters. Just don't let them come here, or they might be called snobs.

The OP asked if he needed a line conditioner. He most probably doesn't, a line analysis is required to see what's on it, and real-to-goodness line conditioners are God-awful expensive. But a decent TVSS (aka a surge suppressor) is probably a very good idea for digital sources, which are notoriously fragile devices in the face of today's routine line transients. No worse than a doctor reminding you to eat your vegetables.

This wasn't really an audio question at all, but a basic electrical one. But it sure is staggering how it got twisted into one at the mere mention of the word "audio". That's like a kind of fight bell for some here. Someone else mentions "Monster" and the place goes apoplectic. Then all the anti-audiophiles and other vultures come out and the discussion (and all reason) goes straight to the toilet.

Line conditioning is snake oil? Please don't tell that to the server farm manger that is hosting this board. That's like saying the same thing here about 20wt oils. And we know both are based on genuine engineering, are effective and have their place -- when used when appropriate to the conditions.

 

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: westom
Everyting here addressed a classic example of junk science and the resulting scams. Many who would promote those myths and scams on line conditioners then get angry when challenged.



I have no problem exposing junk and psudo-science and shoddy engineering.

But you overstated your frustration. Power conditioning is real engineering. When you say "line conditioning", that means commercial and industrial grade units to me, some of which cost more than a car. It goes on in every server farm complex and in quite a few server rooms, too.

If you meant some colorful box marked up 1000% over what it should sell for because it has a three pound faceplate and 29 cents of filtration caps inside that filters nothing and claims to cure cancer, then I agree with you. When I hear "line conditioning" those devices are NOT what I think of.

So perhaps we are speaking the same fight.

I will reiterate -- I did not recommend line conditioning to the OP. I recommended a TVSS (surge supressor), for a part of his system. The digital part. And a TVSS (together with a smart cascaded transient strategy starting at the service entrance) is warranted by the nature of the devices involved and the normal line conditions found across most of the US. And that's wise advice.

It was the violence of your position, and your attack response that caused mine.

If you want to go after "scams" and "snake oil", I'm happy to help. The classic ones that I'll call "dubious" are the Tice clocks and the little rocks and wooden things that people put on wires, some of the psudo-science gobbledegook describing the wires themselves -- some of which fleece at $1000+ per FOOT. Wires are the worst offenders. More recent ones include the bybee purifier things -- and some of the cottage mod houses that peddle them for more than the original device costs. A Squeezebox 3 has a poor OEM wallwart power supply that allows noise back all through the local mains. So I built my own regulated supply for $12 in parts from Mouser (I splurged on Panasonic caps), not the $800+ that the mod salon charges for the mystery parts and solder drawn from Pluto. THESE are the dubious prospects in audio today.

And while some here don't like to hear this, IMO the whole Bose and B&O thing is a dubious adventure in separating a man from his money (if you've ever seen the sampled native frequency plots of some of them, and what's actually inside some, you might agree). That bothers some here -- a lot. For less money, there are great alternatives. But I don't hate the people who buy and like these things. I actually don't hate anybody. It's their money to spend. If they like the sound, it makes them feel good, who am I to argue. But if you say it's objectively better than someone else's, you're no better than the audiophiles.

Of course that's different than the person who wants to spend an extra $1,000 on a pre-amp that is only marginally better than a $250 one. That's not snake oil, that's the law of diminishing returns. There's nothing wrong with that either if that's how one wants to spend their dough. My only advice to them if they ask, buy a used one.

But AC line conditioning, as I understand it above, is not snake oil. That's why I didn't understand your first post.

 

[97tbird]

Originally Posted By: westom

Why could Monster sell $7 speaker wire for $70. Because so many audiophiles could "hear" the improvement.


Actually all well-infornmed the audio-picky people/fans **I** personally know and most Audiophiles HATE Monster Cable - and they get their cables at Bluejeans cable or Monoprice and pay a lot less, and actually ending up owning a better cable with simple packaging and cut to custom lengths. They know most Monster stuff is a scam.

It's mostly the HALF informed general public that buy the Monster kkrrapp and overpiced Bose.

and by Video killing Audio I meant that due to the super big video/TV screens that everyone jumped on, manufacturers of Audio products ONLY lost a lot of customers and sales, and got 'killed' in the whole Video/HT madness.

But those of who still take an interest to listen to music and not ONLY watch movies with a 17.2 HT system, still have some options from a few select audio-only makers...I hope it lasts...

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

Interesting read, and the usual snobbery presents itself. The simple fact is sound is completely subjective.

And most people are not, as evidenced by this thread.


Keep it going, the self aggrandizement sounds remarkably like many other threads around here.

Not offended, remarkably entertaining!

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead

You seem to remember it. You must be an audiophile. I'd be running if I were you.

Amazing how a simple electrical question morphs into a raging hate fest against audiophiles and the audio biz.

I'm glad I'm not one.


I repair and collect antique Pilot (the brand name) tube gear. I have for 25+ years. If Pilot made it, there's a good chance that I probably own it. However, I don't regularly listen to my music on the Pilot pieces, just like a Barbie doll collector doesn't take the dolls out of the box to play with them. Am I an audiophile? Absolutely not. I do not subscribe to any audio magazines whatsoever. (I don't believe the hype that they tell about their advertisers) When I listen to music, it's normally on cheap Koss headphones. If the music is on in the house, it's on my wife's $150 integrated solid state stereo with some cheap two-way speakers. My shop has a solid-state POS stereo I got for $2 (speakers included) on a garage sale. Unlike some people here..(cough, cough), I don't fall for the hype, especially when the difference cannot be felt in any way except the wallet.
You say that you are not an audiophile? If this group was to compare my system to what you have put into yours, this whole group would beg to differ. And usually the hate is spewed by people who have spent thousands of dollars on their equipment, but are afraid to take a blindfolded listening test. Yes, it truly is amazing how thin-skinned an audiophile can be and how quickly the hate, or regrets, intensifies.

 

[Volvohead]

Originally Posted By: Kruse


I repair and collect antique Pilot (the brand name) tube gear. I have for 25+ years. If Pilot made it, there's a good chance that I probably own it. . . .

You say that you are not an audiophile? If this group was to compare my system to what you have put into yours, this whole group would beg to differ.


I think you and I have more in common than you think.

Pilot tube? Great stuff. Sleeper stuff. You should listen to it more. I've pursued the exact same thing with tubed Fishers and some Scotts of the same era. I've gotten rid of most of it, but keep a handful of personal favorites around for the long haul and the kids.

What makes you think I spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on our equipment? Most of it is used and very old. I suspect it's not much different from yours. Is that the test for even-handed conversation, what we spend?

I don't subscribe to any of the audio mags for the same reason as you. The correlation between the ads and the good reviews was uncanny. SR or Stereophile, they all did it, IMO. People citing them as authority should know that. The early, early mags were all about the kits and building off of published schematics. That's the stuff I grew up around. That, and the Hamfests.

FWIW, I do remember Zipser. He's dead too (rip). But he was a jerk when in NY, and a jerk when in FL (rip again). Sane hobbyists kept using orange drops and humble polyesters in the old vintage gear and ignored him. He didn't like that.

 

[westom]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
But AC line conditioning, as I understand it above, is not snake oil. That's why I didn't understand your first post.
Context is critical here. For example, I repeatedly summarized the 'line conditioner' recommended here by some. It solves everything. A key phrase:
Quote:
If any line conditioner does something useful, then the relevant manufacturer spec number was quote[d] here. No numbers quoted for one simple reason. Numbers often claim 'near zero' performance.

An expensive line conditioner in a semiconductor fab might only replace a missing AC half sine wave peak. A special and expensive line conditioner that only addresses one of maybe 25 anomalies. That is completely different from what some recommended here.

Perspective was posted early on:
Quote:
Which anomaly does a $30 Isobar solve? Power factor? No. Noise? No. EMI/EMC? No. Floating neutral? No. Brownout? No. Frequency variation? No. Harmonics? No. So what exactly does it solve? Oh. It is a 'line conditioner'. So it solves everything? No line conditioner does or makes such claims.
If you ageee, then say so that long ago. But others recommended a line conditioner to solve all problems that were not even defined.

Context is a 'line conditioner' that magically solves all anomalies. Therefore a $7 protector circuit can also be sold for $100 as a Monster product. And then called a line conditioner; sold for $200 as a Furman. Many recommend that Furman only because it costs so much and is recommended by advertising or hearsay.

Context. We were discussing line conditioners recommended to even solve anomalies made irreelvant by circuits already inside all electronics. Again:
Quote:
Most anomalies are routinely solved best inside each appliance. At lower costs. Better designed equipment features even better solutions. If anyone needs a line conditioner, then the problem is directly traceable to a consumer who foolishly spent too much money for an inferior product.

Yes, some rare anomalies can overwhelm that existing protection. For example, a destructive surge, that might overwhelm protection already inside all appliances, might occur once every seven years. But then many recommend miracle 'line conditioners' to even solve that. Recommend when even the manufacturer makes no such claims in specifications.

Nothing stops or blocks that anomaly. It must be averted by something completely different and not located adjacent to appliances. Again, first an anomaly is defined. Then a solution unique for that anomaly is located where it best solves the problem.

No retail 'line conditioner' solves all or even most anomalies. Line conditioners recommended here to do that magic are snake oil. That is the context. Context is not about special facilities requiring special and expensive solutions for each anomaly. Context here is the magic 'line conditioner' recommended to solve all anomalies for but a few $hundred or less. To do things that even manufacturer's specification numbers do not claim. That miracle solution that so many recommend was defined, with clear facts summarized at a layman's level, as snake oil.

Best line conditioner (that solves so many anomalies) is already inside electronic appliances.

Apparently we were saying same once that confused context is defined.

 

[Volvohead]

I have but one question to all of that:

WHO in this thread recommended a line conditioner?

I know for a fact that I did not.

I'm not going to address the rest that concerns the native transient control of instruments and on-site transient suppression strategies. I don't think it will lead anywhere productive under the circumstances. Suffice it to say, I think I have fully explained the function of a TVSS does in THIS context.

I think we can both agree that magic is not acceptable engineering data.

I'm curious -- why do so many posters keep quoting themselves?

 

[westom]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
WHO in this thread recommended a line conditioner?
You said
Quote:
It's usually not a bad idea for digital sources, which are more sensitive to power irregularities, particuarly the modest-priced gear. It can also have minor benefit in some analog sources.
Even low end systems internally have superior conditioning.

Nick R also posted:
Quote:
Does using a UPS count? ... Our home theater uses a Monster Surge Protector/Line conditioner.

Also discussed were some audiophile rags that recommend these expensive cures.