发烧论坛

注册

 

返回列表 12345678» / 13
发新话题 回复该主题

最近动力水之类垃圾又甚嚣尘上,翻老帖子打鬼! [复制链接]

查看: 20277|回复: 129
11#

白菜 在 2004-8-3 12:15:29 发表的内容
看来有人是大饼白菜帮子吃撑了然后来考虑什么打鬼,饭后运动吗?


大饼白菜帮子可不是我说的。
您的观点是怎样的?不要一味息事宁人,来讨论嘛。
TOP
12#

自己听当然无所谓,拿出来作为评测依据,盲听当然是必要。怎么排除你自己的心理暗示呢?
懒得说了。
我不再回这个帖子了,等他投票到100个,版主删了吧。
最后编辑ppzz
TOP
13#

博大家一笑吧。
不过估计有些喜欢戒指的烧友看不懂英文,我就翻译了一些。
Digital Recording's CD-CHECK proved to be an outstanding tool for checking the quality and serviceability of CD players. It has found a welcome home in my bag of tools when evaluating players. Highly recommended!

这篇文章的上半部分,介绍了作者检测音频CD机的两个工具,CDCHECK和DED,我就不多说了,大家自己看原文。
"Disc Enhancement" Products -- Do They Really Work?
碟片加强工具,它们有用吗?
Having satisfied myself that CD-CHECK and DED worked as claimed, I decided to give some of the more esoteric audio products a run for their money. After all, now that I had a way of objectively quantifying the errors introduced using these tools, it made sense to substantiate or refute the claims made by various manufacturers of disc enhancement products.
有了两个检测工具,作者想对市面上的碟片加强工具进行检测。
Note that I did not personally purchase any of the following products myself (I don't like to throw my money away). Different audiophile friends who were nice enough to loan them to me for these tests purchased the products.
作者自己并没买,是借了一些这类东西。
Also note that each test was tried in three different manufacturer's CD players. This was done to rule out the possibility of one player not allowing the products to be shown in a favorable light.
每次测试试用了三种品牌的CD机。
Last, but not least, I was unable to obtain all the tweak disc enhancements I've seen advertised.
最终完全没有任何提高。
Since I was relying on the kindness of my audiophile friends and did not wish to purchase the products myself, I was at the mercy of what they had to offer. For example, I had wished to conduct this test with CD-Backlight and some CD stabilizer rings I had seen advertised. Alas, none of my friends had these items and therefore they were not tested. I don't suspect I would be overly impressed even if they had been available. (OK, I'm a cynic).
有一些碟片加强工具因为朋友中没人用,就无法测试了,但作者自己有信心这些东西没用。
The first and second products I tried were something called "Statmat" and a product called the "Orpheus CD tuning mat." The marketing types who push the "Statmat" would have you believe that the Statmat's specially engineered conductive polypropylene film is specially formulated with conductive inks that somehow mean that you obtain vastly better sound. Supposedly, this diaphanous sheet of plastic sits on top of your CDs and helps to control static build up with can degrade the sound of your player. In much the same vein, the makers of the "Orpheus CD tuning mat" claim that its use will result in a vast sonic improvement.
Statmat和CD tuning mat,据厂商说能改善声音,放在碟上的塑料片片能提高CD机读取的稳定性。
Using the DED I tried the Statmat and the Orpheus CD tuning mat with three different discs both with and without the mats. In each case, I noticed absolutely no audible improvement in the sound quality with the Statmat or with the Orpheus CD tuning mat. Conversely, I did not notice a decrease in listening quality either. To my ears, the sound remained unchanged.
用DED工具,试验了三次,放了片片和没放,每次声音上完全没有区别。当然也听不出音质下降。
However, the DED error count rose higher whenever either the Statmat or the Orpheus CD tuning mat was used. This happened in every case. Apparently, the use of the Statmat or the Orpheus CD tuning mat actually resulted in a decrease in data quality, although the player's error correction and concealment circuitry compensated for this with no audible differences being noted. I cannot recommend that anyone buy or use either of these products.
使用DED的错误计数,使用任何片片,都会引起数据错误增加。
The third through sixth treatments I tried were "coating oil" made by Yamamura Systems; "anti-static spray" made by Nordost; and "boundary layer optical fluid" and "compact disc edge treatment"made by Marigo Audio Labs. The Yamamura Systems "coating oil" is said to form a thin film surface on the disc which is claimed to improve the disc's "transparency and light permeability." The Nordost "anti-static spray" is said to collapse the magnetic field generated by signals passing through metal, (but they advertise it can also be used on CDs as well). The "boundary layer optical fluid" is said to result in increased clarity, dynamics, and low-level resolution from discs that have been treated with it. The "compact disc edge treatment" is a green marking pen which can supposedly improve the performance of any player when a disc is played which is so treated.
六次试验中的第三次是使用药膏,"coating oil" made by Yamamura Systems,"anti-static spray" made by Nordost; and "boundary layer optical fluid" and "compact disc edge treatment"made by Marigo Audio Labs.据说能提高声音的透明度。等等等等。
I tried all of these products on a number of discs and in no case did any of them result in an audible improvement in the sound quality or in a decrease in the error count as evidenced though the use of the DED. On some of the products I was suspicious of the chemical reaction between the disc surface and the treatments themselves. What would be the long-term consequences of using these chemicals on a plastic disc surface? Would their use promote the breakdown of the disc surface itself? My recommendation is that you leave these products on the shelf as well.
试用了N多次,完全没有声音的提高和下降,无论是听觉还是DED的仪器测试,但是作者对这些药膏长期和CD表面发生化学反应表示担心。作者建议把这些垃圾扔掉。
The last product I tried was the "Bedini Ultra Clarifier." The product looks like a small box. You put your CD inside and then push a button. The device spins the disc at a high rate of speed over magnets, supposedly "degaussing" the disc, the end result purport to be a disc with increased fidelity. Despite the fact that this entire process seems to make absolutely zero scientific sense I tried it anyway. As I expected, treated discs resulted in zero difference --- both audibly as well as quantitatively as shown by DED. My recommendation is that you stay away from this device and don't waste your money.
最后一个产品是Bedini Ultra Clarifier.,神奇的去磁器,除了作者认为这个行为在科学上没有任何意义,正如作者期望的,测试的结果没有任何区别。作者建议不要浪费钱财。
The bottom line on all these supposed disc enhancements is the fact that they don't work --- period! As the saying goes, a fool and his money are soon parted. If any of these devices had actually proven to result in better sound, (when proven via double-blind testing) or in reduced error rates on DED I may have felt differently. Readers would do better to hold on to their hard-earned cash and invest the difference in more discs.
所有这些的共同点:没有任何用处。傻子才花钱买这些(a fool and his money are soon parted笑死了)。当然作者建议读者捏紧手里的赚来不易的钱。

Excerpted with permission from Issue #72, Nov/Dec 1998, of "The $ensible Sound" magazine. tel. (716) 833 - 0930, fax. (716) 833 - 0929, E-mail: SensiSound@aol.com
选自The $ensible Sound杂志。
TOP
14#

白菜 在 2004-8-3 12:04:57 发表的内容
世界上绝对纯洁的地方是没有的,大家忍着点

何况有两句话:“群众眼睛不一定是雪亮的”,“真理有时掌握在少数人手里”
还是有一定道理的。

靠群众力量搞一刀切可能不是好做法。


民.主不一定是绝对正确的,但是民.主是最不容易出错的。
何况这里也是讨论嘛。不这么讨论,烧友们还以为大家都觉得这个好。
现在的投票比例不是很好的教材吗?
TOP
15#

dcm 在 2004-8-5 14:58:19 发表的内容
“有位国外著名录音师,把一块没加工的结晶铜放录音室,据说声音比较活泼,不知他是否傻了?”一点都不奇怪,按理还应加上”细节更多了”。原因是金属是一个硬反射体,拿一块金属板放到录音棚里与辅块地毯带来的声音影响效果一样大,问题是录音棚体积的大小,带进来金属反射面的太小是否能达到可闻性的听觉变化。并且好坏是不一定的!最重要一点这种方式严肃的、专业的录音棚是不会去效法的。另外什么叫“没加工的结晶铜”从化学分子构成而言它应是一个能形状还请赐教!
最后,在严格的论证意义而言“有位国外著名录音师”这种引证是一种:“无厘头”式的引证。


我也赞成。
TOP
16#

LEISURE 在 2004-8-3 13:50:54 发表的内容
无论线材有作用还是神油之类的东西没作用,关键是这些东西太暴利了,就算他们作用大也要抵制!抵制暴利第一,抵制日货第二!


说得好就是太暴利,
TOP
17#

继续。
看一下古河的网站。不是富昌兄那个,是古河的原装正版。
ping www.furutech.com
IP是:210.243.192.178,查一下,在......台湾!!!!
网页里提到台湾了吗?哦,没有,经销商有,但是把日本放在了第一个。
哦,原来是湾湾的公司嘛,支援下准民族工业吧。
仔细看看主页吧:
第一页发现错误几处:
语言:language,作langurage
简体中文:simplified chinese,作simplifiedl chinese
原来湾湾的英文不过关呢,但是人家华硕、技嘉的网站咋不出错呢?
嘿嘿,这可是发烧名牌阿,线够粗,插座够厚实。  
当然,您可以说网页可以有错,但和产品无关,那我就不多说了,这个留给众烧友自己去体会其中奥妙吧!
富昌兄把我写错字和古河网页错字相提并论,我想这是不能作为借口的吧。
最后编辑ppzz
TOP
18#

再看看这些吧~~~

真正的十大暴利商品成本曝光
 1、化妆品
      男士也许该怀疑,大宝是暴利产品吗?NO。这里的化妆品是指进口高端产品。SK-II著名的神仙水在中国零售价格为560元,而其制造成本仅为人民币6.5元。惊讶么?就算研发成本都加进去,每单只成本也不超过人民币10元。资生堂650元/50克的眼霜连包装成本也只有10元不到。而欧伯莱那些150元左右的低端眼霜成本仅在3元左右。呵呵女士们,现在不再认为你们往脸上涂抹的是什么高科技产品了吧?在这里,女士是第一受害大头!

 2、日用品

  其中以个人清洁化学制品利润最恐怖。以牙膏为例,其中最贵的成分—发泡剂成本仅为600元/吨左右甚至更低,而这600元的发泡剂足足能够装满6000只最大号的180克牙膏。剩余的有效成分成本更是可以忽略不计了,碳酸钙粉末每吨用量成本仅为120元左右,最高级的含氟牙膏其有效成分—单氟磷酸钠每吨成本不过100元。国产的低端产品就不算了,就算是用硅磨料的佳洁士,180克装市场零售价为13元左右,6000只能卖多少钱?洗头水就不说了,比这个更恐怖。


  3、饮料

  这其中,非碳酸类果汁饮料的利润最大,市场零售价2块钱的果汁饮料连包装成本+设备成本只有7分钱,而易拉罐饮料则更低,仅有5分钱。

  4、白酒

  以五粮液酒厂为例,每吨粮食能够生产100市斤左右白酒,其中10市斤最品质好的是五粮液,其余则被用作什么五粮春啦、浏阳河啦类似低端产品。每吨粮食的收购价格大概是400块钱,而生产出的产品在市场上零售则最多可达到15000元左右。大家不要相信某些白酒所谓的N年陈酿,厂家没那耐心真的去陈酿,只不过是用现代工业的催化剂加快发酵过程罢了。

 5、药品

  药品的暴利大家是知道的。在一般人的眼睛里,药品的利润应该是最高的。但事实却不是如此。比较以上行业,药品的设备、厂房及研发成本都要高出许多,所以只能排在第5。而进口药品的配方研发一般是在国外进行,导致其研发成本更高。虽然其有效成分不值几个钱,但厂家的时常出新却是实实在在的。当金六福卖不动的时候,五粮液可以注册一个金七福的品牌继续卖以前的酒,而药品却不行。新药就是新药,没听说过麦迪霉素淘汰以后改个名字继续卖的。

6、保健品  


  这东西是咱中国人民的老朋友了,从太阳神到脑白金,就从来没有一个保健品能真正起到其宣传效果。这里排行的保健品是指真正意义上的由正规厂家通过正规配方生产的产品,并非假冒伪劣产品。由于行业竞争激烈,保健品在前两年的暴利状况已经改观了很多,尤其是异军突起的脑白金,虽说是购买美国的淘汰配方,但其不到200的售价比起其每单位十多元的成本(包括包装成本、配料成本、广告成本)来说,比例显然低了很多。与药品不同的是,保健品的研发及设备成本相对较低,吃不死人就成,最好也别吃出事来。


  7、通讯

  其中以移动通讯更甚,典型的一次投入长久收益的例子。GSM基站每台的造价约为人民币20万,但其确可以负担最多15万门的信号流量,以每人40元月租算,就算这15万人不打电话,一个月的月租就能买30个基站。当然,移动通讯行业还有其他设备及科技成本投入,这里就不细算了,总之将其排在第七位比较合理。

 8、软件

  任何软件在中国卖的都不好,这里我们只针对买正版的人。每张光盘的制造成本是9分钱,高档软件的包装成本不过5元钱,但软件的大头往往在于研发。WINDOWS98卖了近8年,赚的钱已经足够再研发40个WIN98了,但是这是外国。如果比尔盖茨生在中国,相信其早被饿死或还在中关村当装机工。

  9、小家电

  比起冰箱彩电,小家电的成本最低,利润最高。飞利浦就是做小家电起家的大公司之一。其实,1800元的刮胡刀制造成本往往只比180元的刮胡刀高1.5-2倍,但在零售时却可以卖到10倍价钱。谁用飞利浦刮胡刀举手:您好几百的高科技产品其实也就值20块钱。

  10、汽车

  国外的汽车利润已经很透明了,每辆成本在8000美金的车零售能卖到10000美金就不错。但国内却不然。本田飞度那种车大家都觉得很便宜,其实那车在中国的售价足足比国际参考价高了1000美金。更低的材料成本,更低的人员成本,更高的利润,中国人很多人还被蒙在鼓里,天真的人为汽车真的便宜了。其实那群洋生产商正躲在被窝里偷着数钱呢。
TOP
19#

所以说,引证例子就要说明清楚,免了事后解释。
自从厌烦了陈大师的主编通告后,己有几年不看发烧音响了,那家录音室不会是香港那种“蚊型”录音室吧!至于JIM ANDERSON本人是否著名我确实不知,我记忆中的录音大师大都在摸拟时代,在起码我知道的大都是在EMI DG DECCA RCA等机构就职,况且在下并不认同只会做“发烧”碟的就是著名录音师!这样的人物国内也不少吧!
“结晶铜就是原始状态.而且只有鞋盒大小”对了,为什么没有锣鼓这么大呢?关指挥我当然知道是谁,但我更了解中国出了几个世界级的器乐演奏家,好象并没有世界级的指挥家。他的弟弟还是哥哥不是因为做胆机的事跟人论战了一翻吗?
TOP
20#

站在震动地板上唱歌呢?就不同.
TOP
发新话题 回复该主题