Black Ravioli

[MikeToll]

A little while ago I heard about BR and was intrigued but lost interest when I found out the price but as the idea still intrigued me, at my wifes suggestion, I bought a rubber stable mat (4ft X 6ft) for the princely sum of £25. They are thick and heavy with various surfaces available and I have now cut enough mats out to go under the record deck, CD player, tape deck (still got one!), blue ray player, humax, tuner and enough over for more if I so wish. I have not put one under the amp as it would leave little room for air flow and cooling. The shelving of the cabinet they are in is only moderately thick wood and the mats completely cover each shelf so masses of damping.

The difference in sound is subtle but I think there is an improvement in the base and stability of the record deck and possibly the CD player. I can understand that as they have moving parts, particularly the record deck. The solid state pieces of equipment sound no different to me or so slight I can't be sure. Anyway all the bits of rubber have been left in place to match visually apart from the amp.

As I said experiment done for £25 and I am very happy to leave BR on the dealers shelf.

 

[MikeToll]

A little while ago I heard about BR and was intrigued but lost interest when I found out the price but as the idea still intrigued me, at my wifes suggestion, I bought a rubber stable mat (4ft X 6ft) for the princely sum of £25. They are thick and heavy with various surfaces available and I have now cut enough mats out to go under the record deck, CD player, tape deck (still got one!), blue ray player, humax, tuner and enough over for more if I so wish. I have not put one under the amp as it would leave little room for air flow and cooling. The shelving of the cabinet they are in is only moderately thick wood and the mats completely cover each shelf so masses of damping.

The difference in sound is subtle but I think there is an improvement in the base and stability of the record deck and possibly the CD player. I can understand that as they have moving parts, particularly the record deck. The solid state pieces of equipment sound no different to me or so slight I can't be sure. Anyway all the bits of rubber have been left in place to match visually apart from the amp.

As I said experiment done for £25 and I am very happy to leave BR on the dealers shelf.

 

[Covenanter]

Small beer. The real master:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/

I read an interview with him where he was honest enough to admit that his tweaks worked not by changing the sound of equipment, but by changing (or not) the listeners perception of the sound.

Also the problem doesn't necessarily lay with someone who sells stuff like 'rainbow foil', but with the eejits who buy it...

However, when it comes to isolation I'm 100% convinced for TT's, 99% for CD players, but less certain for amps etc. Also, I would be very surprised if there really was a real difference between the very expensive BR and far cheaper sorts of rubber or sorbathane isolating pads. In fact, is not BR probably just sorbathane by another name?

Agreed. I don't have a TT anymore but as it is a mechanical device isolating it from vibrations seems sensible and when I had one in the 1970s/80s I did isolate it. The same would seem to be true for CD transports and speakers, there is at least the possibility of mechanical feedback so why not try to reduce that? With pure electronics it seems less likely to have any effect. I have therefore put some "Isolation Pads" under my CD player and as they came in a pack of 8 under my Amplifier too. |Did they make any difference? Not that I could tell but as they only cost £14 (AudioSerenity from Amazon) I thought it was a cheap bit of insurance. (Other users have said they work wonders.

)

Chris

PS I wonder how strong is the psychological effect which says that because you have spent a lot of money on something you are more likely to think it is wonderful!?

 

[andyjm]

This goes to the heart of my point, which is atm we cannot measure all the subtle changes that the ear picks up on. This debate would not be happening if the subject was speaker stands, as people have generally come to accept the benefits.

Current test equipment is many orders of magnitude more sensitive than the ear when it comes to resolving changes in phase, frequency response and amplitude. You do have a point however that it is the combination of these factors that we perceive as audio - and it is much harder to quantify this combination of factors with a single parameter.

It is however quite easy to detect when something has changed, if you are prepared not to care about what has changed. So statements like 'I put squashy rubber under my CD player and the sound improved' are very difficult to prove, but statements like 'I put squashy rubber under my CD player and the sound changed' certainly can be objectively tested.

Back in 2008, software was developed to answer exactly that question - has anything changed? It is available free, and effectively takes two recordings - one before the change (be it a fancy interconnect, squashy feet, green pen on the CD edge) and then compares it with a recording taken after the change. After doing some slick software alignment of the the two recordings, any differences are highlighted. One can only guess why this hasn't been more widely used in the HiFi press when evaluating the claims of manufacturers.

Have a look - http://www.libinst.com/Audio%20DiffMaker.htm

Andy.

 

[CnoEvil]

Current test equipment is many orders of magnitude more sensitive than the ear when it comes to resolving changes in phase, frequency response and amplitude. You do have a point however that it is the combination of these factors that we perceive as audio - and it is much harder to quantify this combination of factors with a single parameter.

It is however quite easy to detect when something has changed, if you are prepared not to care about what has changed. So statements like 'I put squashy rubber under my CD player and the sound improved' are very difficult to prove, but statements like 'I put squashy rubber under my CD player and the sound changed' certainly can be objectively tested.

Back in 2008, software was developed to answer exactly that question - has anything changed? It is available free, and effectively takes two recordings - one before the change (be it a fancy interconnect, squashy feet, green pen on the CD edge) and then compares it with a recording taken after the change. After doing some slick software alignment of the the two recordings, any differences are highlighted. One can only guess why this hasn't been more widely used in the HiFi press when evaluating the claims of manufacturers.

Have a look - http://www.libinst.com/Audio%20DiffMaker.htm

Andy.

Andy, thank you for that.

 

[acalex]

Small beer. The real master:

http://www.belt.demon.co.uk/

I read an interview with him where he was honest enough to admit that his tweaks worked not by changing the sound of equipment, but by changing (or not) the listeners perception of the sound.

Also the problem doesn't necessarily lay with someone who sells stuff like 'rainbow foil', but with the eejits who buy it...

However, when it comes to isolation I'm 100% convinced for TT's, 99% for CD players, but less certain for amps etc. Also, I would be very surprised if there really was a real difference between the very expensive BR and far cheaper sorts of rubber or sorbathane isolating pads. In fact, is not BR probably just sorbathane by another name?

I think this is quite a disrespectful post for those who were open-minded enough not just to judge and tag that as rubbish but to go there, pick up some demo units, try them in their own system and report back. This has been done without spending a single pound on that but just having the willingness to go through the process.

As reported already, the BR also proven to make the sound worse in some cases so not sure how this is due to bias expectations.

Then I agree on the fact that maybe a few improvements can be obtained in a less fashionable way and cheaper...but who are we to judge people who spend their money on nicely built and finished products that, after being tested at home with no pressure, have been reported to make some sort of improvements? In my case, I wouldn't like some kind of foam put like that under my system as I also think that the visual aspect is important and maybe do not mind having the same result spending a bit more for a better finished product. Or maybe I am just not capable myself to make something like that?

There are tons of explanations but seriously this aptitude of labelling buyers or potential buyers as idiots just because we think it's rubbish without even considering the idea of trying them...well not sure this is the right approach in anyhting in life (and trust me not trying to teach any life lesson here).

 

[relocated]

All about 'changes' . . . it is then up to the individual if he or she thinks its 'better', that is 'completley subjective'. One mans (or womans) better is anothers worse, we dont all think or like the same things. However over many years there are fundamentals that individuals can get very passionate about, there are equaly individuals who dont undestand said fudamentals, or even, dont want to understand!

Personaly, one has not tried BR, although one has tried rubbery items claimed to do things for 'vibration' in a hifi system . . . :wall:

I'm happy with my own views on the subject.

CJSF

IMO. Stands make a difference to the way a speaker sounds, and different designs have different effects...and generally people would agree, because they have used them at one time or another. My question is, can the full effect of this "improvement" be measured, and if not, would get the same verdict as BR?

Exactly and that's why I made my little comment under the link to the article.

Btw Cno, this post wasn't raised to point the finger at you, just thought it was something that should be brought to the forum. So apologies if you have been dragged into defending a product you and many other people believe in.

Never having tried it, I am not qualified to have an opinion myself, so as with all such things, cables, stands isolation platforms, etc I keep an open mind.

Mac

If there is an actual change when adding or removing this type of accessory, it is possible to measure it. This is a fact. Audiometric equipment is far more accurate than our hearing and I would imagine that most people on this forum have either never had a proper audiometric test or do not have regular checks. If anyone believes that they can hear more than what is measurable, I suggest a visit to the Doctors for a check for Tinitus.

Be careful when having an open minded approach that your mind is not so open that your brains fall out!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

[Macspur]

All about 'changes' . . . it is then up to the individual if he or she thinks its 'better', that is 'completley subjective'. One mans (or womans) better is anothers worse, we dont all think or like the same things. However over many years there are fundamentals that individuals can get very passionate about, there are equaly individuals who dont undestand said fudamentals, or even, dont want to understand!

Personaly, one has not tried BR, although one has tried rubbery items claimed to do things for 'vibration' in a hifi system . . . :wall:

I'm happy with my own views on the subject.

CJSF

IMO. Stands make a difference to the way a speaker sounds, and different designs have different effects...and generally people would agree, because they have used them at one time or another. My question is, can the full effect of this "improvement" be measured, and if not, would get the same verdict as BR?

Exactly and that's why I made my little comment under the link to the article.

Btw Cno, this post wasn't raised to point the finger at you, just thought it was something that should be brought to the forum. So apologies if you have been dragged into defending a product you and many other people believe in.

Never having tried it, I am not qualified to have an opinion myself, so as with all such things, cables, stands isolation platforms, etc I keep an open mind.

Mac

If there is an actual change when adding or removing this type of accessory, it is possible to measure it. This is a fact. Audiometric equipment is far more accurate than our hearing and I would imagine that most people on this forum have either never had a proper audiometric test or do not have regular checks. If anyone believes that they can hear more than what is measurable, I suggest a visit to the Doctors for a check for Tinitus.

Be careful when having an open minded approach that your mind is not so open that your brains fall out!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

A little disrespectful comment at the end there, but so glad you found it amusing.

In life, I try to have an open mind generally, rather that than being narrow minded , find it makes things so much easier.

Mac

 

[Frank Harvey]

The problem here is, like other similar situations, you have two groups.

The first group have a firm belief that a certain product (whatever that may be) will not make any difference at all to the resulting sound because they believe there would be no difference in any measurements taken. Therefore, it is all BS and those that have tried it and heard a difference and are living in a different world where science doesn't exist, so are open to ridicule.

The second group are those genuinely into music and hi-fi. They are open minded enough to try it, whether it makes a difference or not, and decide for themselves by actually listening to see if it does make a difference.

Sound fair?

A forum should be for open discussion rather than ridicule (there's plenty of specialist forums for that), so its members shouldn't be stifled by those that are waiting to pounce on them if they are open enough to admit to trying something and hearing a difference. Feel free to state that you think a product is voodoo and why you think it is voodoo, but I think trying to run literary rings around those that have tried it to make them see an end result as predicted by those rubbishing the product is wrong, and just leading to a forum where people are scared to air their views or ask particular questions.

 

[richardw42]

BR is not for me.

Ive no problem with the product existing, or people buying / trying it. Why shouldn't they ?

What does annoy me is the ridiculous advertising and the fact the manufacturers pretty much get away with it. By the time the ASA act the advertising cycle may have moved on.

I was part of a group tring to get a potentially dangerous Xmas ad removed. End of January and the ASA still haven't ruled.

 

[richardw42]

just leading to a forum where people are scared to air their views or ask particular questions.

Perhaps you should start to rethink some of your contributions on threads re a certain manufacturer.

 

[Craig M.]

The problem here is, like other similar situations, you have two groups.

The first group have a firm belief that a certain product (whatever that may be) will not make any difference at all to the resulting sound because they believe there would be no difference in any measurements taken. Therefore, it is all BS and those that have tried it and heard a difference and are living in a different world where science doesn't exist, so are open to ridicule.

The second group are those genuinely into music and hi-fi. They are open minded enough to try it, whether it makes a difference or not, and decide for themselves by actually listening to see if it does make a difference.

Sound fair?

No. The first group may require objective proof that something works, but that has nothing to do with being "genuinely into music and hi-fi". If a product such as BR could be picked out in a proper blind test, I'd be happy to say it worked whether it could be measured or not. Otherwise I'd bare in mind the fact that our perception of things isn't always reliable or accurate. I'd be in the first group, not because I'm not into music, but because I don't like spending money on things that my mind might tell me is making a difference when the difference happens to only be in my mind.

I agree with the last part of your statement but I'm not sure you do, given your attempt to tar people who recognise subjective opinion can be unreliable.

 

[chebby]

.... but I think trying to run literary rings around those that have tried it ...

There's never been any danger of anything 'literary' happening here.

 

[andyjm]

The problem here is, like other similar situations, you have two groups.

The first group have a firm belief that a certain product (whatever that may be) will not make any difference at all to the resulting sound because they believe there would be no difference in any measurements taken. Therefore, it is all BS and those that have tried it and heard a difference and are living in a different world where science doesn't exist, so are open to ridicule.

The second group are those genuinely into music and hi-fi. They are open minded enough to try it, whether it makes a difference or not, and decide for themselves by actually listening to see if it does make a difference.

Well put.

I would argue however that there is a third group who are open minded enough to try it, decide that there is a difference after listening, even when there is no measurable difference to the sound at all.

As all perception is subjective, it becomes a philosophical question if a listener perceives a change whether that change is real. It is certainly real to the listener, and ultimately that is all the listener cares about.

So it is quite consistent for one individual to say that there is no audible difference, there to be no measureable change, and another to say it sounds better to me. Listening is done with the brain, not just the ears and is the result of many inputs, not just pressure waves on the eardrum.

As an engineer, I know that there are many products which don't have a hope in hell of making a difference to the sound produced by the speakers, but if it makes the sound better for you, who am I to argue?

 

[BenLaw]

It's obviously well known that there can be measurable differences that are not audible. Does anyone know of a documented case of a proven audible difference that cannot be measured?

 

[Covenanter]

The problem here is, like other similar situations, you have two groups.

The first group have a firm belief that a certain product (whatever that may be) will not make any difference at all to the resulting sound because they believe there would be no difference in any measurements taken. Therefore, it is all BS and those that have tried it and heard a difference and are living in a different world where science doesn't exist, so are open to ridicule.

The second group are those genuinely into music and hi-fi. They are open minded enough to try it, whether it makes a difference or not, and decide for themselves by actually listening to see if it does make a difference.

Sound fair?

A forum should be for open discussion rather than ridicule (there's plenty of specialist forums for that), so its members shouldn't be stifled by those that are waiting to pounce on them if they are open enough to admit to trying something and hearing a difference. Feel free to state that you think a product is voodoo and why you think it is voodoo, but I think trying to run literary rings around those that have tried it to make them see an end result as predicted by those rubbishing the product is wrong, and just leading to a forum where people are scared to air their views or ask particular questions.

No it isn't fair! There are many music lovers like me who generally look for objective measurements and who very much doubt the smoke and mirrors stuff that is associated with hifi. I don't love hifi though! It's simply a means of allowing me to hear music. I know there are people who it seems love hifi for hifi's sake and that's fine but it's not for me.

Chris

 

[jcbrum]

As an engineer, I know that there are many products which don't have a hope in hell of making a difference to the sound produced by the speakers, but if it makes the sound better for you, who am I to argue?

A voice of educated reason, perhaps ?

To counter the effects on the gullible, by the advertisements of quackery ?

JC

 

[jcbrum]

source: http://archive.nlm.nih.gov/fdanj/bitstream/123456789/39387/4/fdnj04406.pdf

 

[CnoEvil]

We are The Borg.

Lower your resistance and surrender your system, which is now redundant. Your opinion is irrelevant and your individuality will be assimilated and added to our own. Your culture will adapt to service to us. Resistance is futile.

The Borg Queen

 

[Singslinger]

We are The Borg.

Lower your resistance and surrender your system, which is now redundant. Your opinion is irrelevant and your individuality will be assimilated and added to our own. Your culture will adapt to service to us. Resistance is futile.

The Borg Queen

If I remember correctly, played by the luscious Alice Krige... :bounce: :bounce:

 

[relocated]

The problem here is, like other similar situations, you have two groups.

The first group have a firm belief that a certain product (whatever that may be) will not make any difference at all to the resulting sound because they believe there would be no difference in any measurements taken. Therefore, it is all BS and those that have tried it and heard a difference and are living in a different world where science doesn't exist, so are open to ridicule.

The second group are those genuinely into music and hi-fi. They are open minded enough to try it, whether it makes a difference or not, and decide for themselves by actually listening to see if it does make a difference.

Sound fair?

A forum should be for open discussion rather than ridicule (there's plenty of specialist forums for that), so its members shouldn't be stifled by those that are waiting to pounce on them if they are open enough to admit to trying something and hearing a difference. Feel free to state that you think a product is voodoo and why you think it is voodoo, but I think trying to run literary rings around those that have tried it to make them see an end result as predicted by those rubbishing the product is wrong, and just leading to a forum where people are scared to air their views or ask particular questions.

Oh David, please do get over yourself. This is one of the most pompous and inaccurate assessments I have come across.

 

[byakuya83]

Listen with your ears, don't try to measure, there is equipment for that.

It seems only those with golden ears can enjoy and love music.

 

[atticus]

Crumbs!

Black Ravioli must be loving all this free publicity!

 

[steve_1979]

Just my 2 pence worth.

Last year I tried Black Ravioli in a shop and couldn't hear any difference. I tried it with both solid state amplifiers and a valve amp and it made no noticable difference to the sound.

I also tried putting the amplifiers on top of the speakers (without any Black Ravioli) and played bassy music to maximise the vibrations being transmitred to them and even this didn't make any difference to the sound quality.

My conclusion from this experiment is that a small amount of vibration shouldn't have any effect on an amplifier. If an amplifier does sound different when it's vibrated a little bit then it should be avoided IMO.

 

[CnoEvil]

Just my 2 pence worth.

Last year I tried Black Ravioli in a shop and couldn't hear any difference. I tried it with both solid state amplifiers and a valve amp and it made no noticable difference to the sound.

I also tried putting the amplifiers on top of one of the speakers (without any Black Ravioli) and played bassy music to maximise the vibrations being transmitred to them and even this didn't make any difference to the sound quality.

My conclusion from this experiment is that a small amount of vibration shouldn't have any effect on an amplifier. If an amplifier does sound different when it's vibrated a little bit then it should be avoided IMO.

I remember, but it's not quite the whole story.

When I asked about the demo, you said the shop guy had placed the pads under the feet instead of under the chasis. If placed under the feet it has little or no effect, and I pointed this out at the time.

Here is the thread (post 4 onwards): http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/this-is-the-black-ravioli-investigation-thread-it-may-be-fun?page=13

You are more prepared than most to give stuff a try, but whatever chance this has to work, it needs to be used as instructed.