Comments on: Audiophile Stupidity – the CD lathe

By: Rearcher

Rearcher — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 01:55:35 +0000

I fully relate to the scientific arguments presented here. I understand the arguments and think they make sense.

I also relate to those who hear a difference. At our audio club we we asked to listen to two identical discs. We were not told the difference, although the very exercise implied that there was a difference. After listening to both of them, we were asked which one we preferred. From the 20-30 listeners, there was almost an unanimous preference for one over the other. It was perceived as clearly more spacious, three-dimensional and ‘live’.

We were then told that the vastly preferred disc had been treated in this way. That is the one and only time I have ever been exposed to the system.

I guess it could be argued that the process had not been scientifically scrutineered, but the two discs were available for examination afterwards. Rightly or wrongly, I did not take advantage of the opportunity.

I do believe that true science tests its theories. If a theory appears not to be supported by experiment, then both the the theory and the experiment are re-examined. This is the way science progresses.

Theorists – you are theoretically correct! Audiophiles – if my own experience is a valid one, you are experimentally justified in your assessment.

What we need is someone who has the open-mindedness, the expertise, and perhaps the creativity to synthesise the two sides.

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 04 Sep 2011 08:03:21 +0000

I’ve read the “reviews” on this page with interest. It would appear that those who use CAPITAL LETTERS and preach on about how the lathe can’t possibly work haven’t actually tried it and those who claim it works, have actually used it! To quote Mochan “anyone with a brain” should actually try a product before dismissing it. One of my friends has one of these lathes and swears that it works wonders. Admittedly, he is using it in a system that cost in excess of £15k so the system picks up the minutest details in a recording, but it definitely works. I have heard it myself on his system and you can here it works. We bought identical CD’s, lathed one and then using a third party, did blind listening tests. You could tell which one was which. Simple, before you say something can’t possibly work, try it first!

By: MIKE SARGENT

MIKE SARGENT — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:40:11 +0000

I’m with JW – I had 3 discs treated by a guy who was selling the service on eBay – and the difference is stunning. Really.

By: Johnny Weston

Johnny Weston — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 16:29:40 +0000

I can verify that I have now actually used one of these on examples of both SACD and of CD, and here’s the thing.

You can throw as much techno-balls-talk at me if you like, saying this that and the other – but the simple truth is this – if my wife notices the audible difference about 30 seconds before I do (I was still thinking about it at this point) then you have to know that somethings working well.

She’s never heard anything different in all my “enhancements” before me… ever. She heard the CD before, heard the CD after and noticed the differences immediately!

So there you go. I’ve heard the differences – I am happy – i would recommend it to anyone!

Thanks
JW

By: someone

someone — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 05:49:39 +0000

“This is pure crap. It’s freaking digital people, it doesn’t matter if lasers bounce around or what not, since the data decoded is DIGITAL the quality of the sound doesn’t change no matter how crappily it is read from the disk.”

No – audio CD error correction is a lossy algorithm. Digital does not mean “magically impervious to error” or “sounds the same on all equipment” as many claim.

Of course, this does not mean the lathe is of any use. CDs are already precision manufactured to the required specifications and it seems best not to muck about with that.

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 04:50:34 +0000

Just because it’s digital doesn’t mean that there aren’t ways the stream can be compromised. Digital jitter, quality of transmission media, etc all affect the system. At the very least you could think of balancing a tire. The unbalanced cd/dvd/etc would have to do more corrections for timing variances and missing data. There are some physics principles that could be affected, however I have not tried this device but would not be willing dismiss it without trying it.

By: Lex

Lex — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 10:51:16 +0000

This isn’t a new concept. None of you guys remember the “CD pen” back in the day? It was a green pen that you used to paint around the edge of the disc – apparently it made the sound better by minimizing refractions. There is possibly some physics behind this – it’s said that some laser light is inevitably refracted and bounces around – although I was just a kid and never tried it.

The bitstream delivered to the DAC almost inevitably contains a large number of errors, doesn’t it? I’ve seen tables that give the error rates of different CD media.

It should in theory be easy to measure whether the device in question actually does anything. If anyone can answer this question it would be Bob Katz.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 31 May 2009 23:49:33 +0000

For the last time, IT’S A DIGITAL DATA STREAM, written with an ERROR-CORRECTING CODE. As long as the number of transmission errors doesn’t get high enough to overwhelm the correction algorithm, the bitstream delivered to the DAC is an EXACT copy of the one that came out of the ADC back at the studio. If the disk is dirty or scratched enough to make a difference, it makes an obvious difference, as in dropouts, not the sort of “Only my Golden Ears can detect it” stuff that audiophools love to jerk off over.

I’ve got to give Teleportation Tweak points for sheer chutzpah. Of course, the Federal Trade Commission may give them something else, like a fraud charge.

By: Sean

Sean — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:42:33 +0000

I have no idea if this product does work or not… but the idea is definitely sound. Before I explain, think about fiber optic cable or the plastic in your car stereo dash — think about how easily it carries the colored light to illuminate your controls. Then, look at the LCD on your computer. It’s no secret that light loves to bounce around in glass and plastic. The argument for improving the sound of cds is to blacken or in this case lathe the disc so as to minimize refractions from the laser that will cause errors in the reading of the disc. This is not a binary 1101 = 1101 argument like your HDMI cables, this is a fact that the actual data stream can be compromised because the laser isn’t reading the disc properly. Now I have no comment on how much this will improve sound quality and I personally wouldn’t worry about my cds (but im a vinyl guy) — but I do have to say, the science is sound. So, just because it seems silly doesn’t mean it is…

By: Mochan

Mochan — Mon, 04 May 2009 14:03:27 +0000

This is pure crap. It’s freaking digital people, it doesn’t matter if lasers bounce around or what not, since the data decoded is DIGITAL the quality of the sound doesn’t change no matter how crappily it is read from the disk.

Anyone with a brain should know this.