I found a bunch of links typing in the color orange and circle shape in google.
but felt it was unnecessary and disrespectful, or misinterpreted. So I removed it.
When the post stated that the color and shape of the sticker was important, it made me consider why, and did some searching on line.
Originally Posted by RnB180 it still does not attest to why the reviewer perceived a difference when the clock was out of sight. Maybe its the mental image?
In the review, the clock was hidden in the drawer and it still worked.
Originally Posted by saint.panda In the review, the clock was hidden in the drawer and it still worked.
Apparently the clock still affects your home audio rig if it's located outside your house, in your car, according to the Machina Dynamica website. Removing it from your car will eliminate the effect inside your house.
So it's not a visual thing. Geoff Kait hints at how it works in various posts on AudioAsylum, but he's never explicit about it.
can you pm me the links to the forum, I want to read what his explainations are.
I agree color and shape should not be an issue. I was just trying to undestand why the sticker was so important.
otherwise all those black speakers and boxy components would sound like crap
I would PM you with the links, but I'd have to go over and search. It's easy enough to search yourself. Just go to www.audioasylum.com and use the search feature. Geoff Kait's username there is GeoffKait.
I've reread the review again based on the comments in this thread, and I think now that it is intended to be serious. That is, it does not appear to be a spoof. Although it may be a hoax. In any event, I am mystified.
I tend to believe more and more that it's not the review that's a spoof, but the clock itself. Nobody can say all that with a straight face.
A best-of:
Quote:
The clock's operating principles are the domain of PBW Electronics. It's no doubt safe to say these principles are not part of what's usually considered "conventional science." Not the usual mechanical resonance, EMI/RFI absorption, quantum resonance, magnetic/electric field effects, etc. But science nevertheless.
Quote:
As I have already said, both pebbles and clock fall into "uncoventional science" or difficult to explain" science camp, not the "supernatural" camp.
Quote:
As I think I already said, the Clock works in an environment where music is played back, via digital disc or vinyl, but not a live concert or outdoors.
The Clock only addresses a specific problem with CD and vinyl playback. This specific problem is related to sensory perception - i.e. how we hear (and see). I.e., the Clock does NOT operate via electrical or magnetic means, nothing at all like that, nor does it affect the acoustic waves in the room.
That's why it's called the clever clock. It can differentiate between live and recorded music.
Quote:
As I said before, the Clock can be serruptitiously taken into a room where people are listening to music (but not live music), in which case everyone in the room will observe better sound (without knowing the Clock is in the room or how the clock operates). The Clock will operate in quite large rooms; just how large is yet to be determined. To eliminate the Clock's effects, the Clock must be entirely removed from the building.
If you took the Clock on a bus, everyone on the bus would notice how musical the portable radios suddenly sounded, even non-audiophiles.
Oh, and two Clocks is considerably better than one!
Quote:
The Clever Little Clock is pretty much a "tour de force" of PWB concepts and products and isn't really that simple in concept or construction. The orange dot is a visible part of the clock's construction; its removal would render the Clock somewhat less effective, but the Clock would remain quite powerful.
Originally Posted by saint.panda I tend to believe more and more that it's not the review that's a spoof, but the clock itself. Nobody can say all that with a straight face.
I think you're right. It's sort of the audio equivalent of a pet rock.
I hate it when these so-called "objectivists" come into threads and crap all over anyone who's a fan of products that they don't like. If you don't think it's a good product, why bother posting? Just don't buy the product, you don't have to loudly advertise that fact, whether to ruin other's enjoyment or to make yourself feel superior.
Peter Belt has alot of experience in high-end audio, I trust him to make good products. His ears are not inferior to that of most audiophiles.
Edit: For me, so long as it sounds good, I don't care what kind of technological claims he makes or if it uses quantum technology or MFET or if he says that the clock was made by an angel. What matters is how it sounds to my ears.
I'm not going to draw a verdict on the Clock without hearing it, but I do find it interesting that the Clever Little Clock generally has far fewer defenders on most audio forums than either Brilliant Pebbles or the Intelligent Chip. I wonder why that is? Is this product so outlandish, so far out there, that very few people believe in it? Where is the dividing line between believable and unbelievable? What makes a jar of rocks more believable than a clock with an orange sticker on it?
Originally Posted by AlanY I always find it interesting that the more people spend on "upgrades" to speakers and gear, the less enjoyable their favorite music often becomes. Sometimes I wonder whether such things are really "upgrades" since they reduce your enjoyment.
You certainly selected the appropriately absurd themed thread for that boner!
Originally Posted by AlanY I'm not going to draw a verdict on the Clock without hearing it, but I do find it interesting that the Clever Little Clock generally has far fewer defenders on most audio forums than either Brilliant Pebbles or the Intelligent Chip. I wonder why that is? Is this product so outlandish, so far out there, that very few people believe in it? Where is the dividing line between believable and unbelievable? What makes a jar of rocks more believable than a clock with an orange sticker on it?
Where is the dividing line? I think that clock just stepped over it!
Personally I agree with that poster who referred to the wikipedia entry for "nonsense." How a clock somewhere in the room can influence things is just plain nonsense. I really think the persons who made this were sitting around making bets on just how stupid they can make something and still have people spend money on it.. then later on they laugh uproariously. It's the equivalent of a pet rock, as someone said, but the difference is a pet rock cost way less.
Originally Posted by K2Grey I hate it when these so-called "objectivists" come into threads and crap all over anyone who's a fan of products that they don't like. If you don't think it's a good product, why bother posting? Just don't buy the product, you don't have to loudly advertise that fact, whether to ruin other's enjoyment or to make yourself feel superior.
Peter Belt has alot of experience in high-end audio, I trust him to make good products. His ears are not inferior to that of most audiophiles.
Edit: For me, so long as it sounds good, I don't care what kind of technological claims he makes or if it uses quantum technology or MFET or if he says that the clock was made by an angel. What matters is how it sounds to my ears.
I would generally be one of the first to agree with you and I don't consider myself to be one of those objectivist types, but as I understand it, this thing is supposed to make music sound better even when you don't know it's there and even though it has no effect on acoustic waves in the room, is not plugged in, and does not even make a sound. How can that be? What am I missing, that suggests this is not just an intentional put on?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
