View Full Version : A very weird upgrade? The PMR (Passive Multi-vocal Resonator)
The Black Adder
30-12-2016, 18:12
Hi all.
On my travels I came across this rather bonkers thing. It's called a PMR (Passive Multi-vocal Resonator) - Sounds crazy and rather like something out of Dr. Who or another 1950's SCI-FI film.
http://www.stereotimes.com/images/1323888624.jpg
You place it directly in front of you between the speakers. Full article below.
http://www.stereotimes.com/acc010412.shtml
Anyway.. has anyone experienced one of these?
early warning system for incoming enemy aircraft?:D
The Foo Fighters perhaps?
sq225917
30-12-2016, 18:34
Its just a buddhist monk prayer bowel on a wobbly stand. It'll make as much difference as a nice Paiste cymbal would.,
I must admit I was in a room at Munich that had one in it. It wasn't the best room oddly.
If you had a pair of them you could sit in between with a couple of hammers and have loadsa fun.
Sherwood
30-12-2016, 18:43
I have had some success with this device: the Gazunder Resonator. Of course this is the standard undamped unit. The designers leave it to the user as to how much damping to apply!
18965
walpurgis
30-12-2016, 18:43
I've got an old dustbin lid in the garden that I could try. I'm sure it would be every bit as effective (at what quite, I don't know?)
Stryder5
30-12-2016, 18:46
I have had some success with this device: the Gazunder Resonator. Of course this is the standard undamped unit. The designers leave it to the user as to how much damping to apply!
18965
I recognise this, I believe it was the bog standard one, l can't tell from the photo, later ones were Harvest Gold.:D
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 18:54
Closest I have come to that - not heard the item being asked about - are the Synergistic Research Acoustic Art System http://www.synergisticresearch.com/acoustic-art-system/
Heard them put into a room, then taken out. I was very sceptical, they made a difference. I can't explain it and no it wasn't placebo. The difference, improvement was large and obvious.
Those taking the piss, go listen to the item in the OP then come back and share a valid opinion based on actually hearing it. If you haven't heard then I would suggest keeping snide, derisory comments to yourself.
Sherwood
30-12-2016, 18:59
Closest I have come to that - not heard the item being asked about - are the Synergistic Research Acoustic Art System http://www.synergisticresearch.com/acoustic-art-system/
Heard them put into a room, then taken out. I was very sceptical, they made a difference. I can't explain it and no it wasn't placebo. The difference, improvement was large and obvious.
Those taking the piss, go listen to the item in the OP then come back and share a valid opinion based on actually hearing it. If you haven't heard then I would suggest keeping snide, derisory comments to yourself.
Santa obviously didn't deliver a sense of humour!
I've tried Zilplex and Mooks. Both are useless.
Sherwood
30-12-2016, 19:02
Closest I have come to that - not heard the item being asked about - are the Synergistic Research Acoustic Art System http://www.synergisticresearch.com/acoustic-art-system/
Heard them put into a room, then taken out. I was very sceptical, they made a difference. I can't explain it and no it wasn't placebo. The difference, improvement was large and obvious.
Those taking the piss, go listen to the item in the OP then come back and share a valid opinion based on actually hearing it. If you haven't heard then I would suggest keeping snide, derisory comments to yourself.
I am not disputing the effects of room treatments but personally find a cheeseplant or some other architectural foliage to be more aesthetically pleasing and a darn sight cheaper!
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 19:02
Santa obviously didn't deliver a sense of humour!
I am afraid I get very tired of these lets slag and take the piss out of comments put forward by folks who haven't actually tried the thing they are taking the piss out of. Yes on the face of it looks like a nice piece of art, rather than something that might effect sound, but I haven't tried it so can offer no opinion. However I have heard something that might share a similar design ethic and it did make an improvement.
Arkless Electronics
30-12-2016, 19:03
Closest I have come to that - not heard the item being asked about - are the Synergistic Research Acoustic Art System http://www.synergisticresearch.com/acoustic-art-system/
Heard them put into a room, then taken out. I was very sceptical, they made a difference. I can't explain it and no it wasn't placebo. The difference, improvement was large and obvious.
Those taking the piss, go listen to the item in the OP then come back and share a valid opinion based on actually hearing it. If you haven't heard then I would suggest keeping snide, derisory comments to yourself.
Oh no no no.... can't be doing anything like that :D
Obviously no matter what/how it sounds one thing it isn't is adding to the accuracy of the reproduced sound and so it is a bad thing.... even if it sounds "good".
It never ceases to amaze me the crackpot ideas some will try and foist on the world of audio... maybe that Buddhist bowl could hold snake oil though... a dab behind the ears before listening....
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 19:03
I've tried Zilplex and Mooks. Both are useless.
I have no direct experience of either.
walpurgis
30-12-2016, 19:30
It's not a piece of Hi-Fi equipment and there's no way it can add 'fidelity'!
It's not a piece of Hi-Fi equipment and there's no way it can add 'fidelity'!
I would think all it can do is react with/agin the soundwaves from the speakers. either adding to or transforming soundwaves. Fair chance its audible, although I am thinking its unlikely to be in a good way on paper. Might sound enough different to give a pleasant effect though to some.
It's a bronze bowl on a stand and it costs over two thousand dollars. Even if it does 'do something' it is still priced outrageously. And I don't want to hear any bollocks about paying for the R&D. Someone who is loaded buy one and we'll pass it around, I'd give it a go. Thing is, even if it does work all it can do is alter the room acoustic and there are a million ways to do that that don't cost the thick end of two large.
It's a bronze bowl on a stand and it costs over two thousand dollars. Even if it does 'do something' it is still priced outrageously. And I don't want to hear any bollocks about paying for the R&D. Someone who is loaded buy one and we'll pass it around, I'd give it a go. Thing is, even if it does work all it can do is alter the room acoustic and there are a million ways to do that that don't cost the thick end of two large.
A potted plant would probably be just as effective.:)
and they are moderators too,shame on them! :lol:
and they are moderators too,shame on them! :lol:
what, we are not allowed to post?;) feck that:ner:
I would think all it can do is react with/agin the soundwaves from the speakers. either adding to or transforming soundwaves. Fair chance its audible, although I am thinking its unlikely to be in a good way on paper. Might sound enough different to give a pleasant effect though to some.
You need to read the review.
The music possessed a more authentic quality in terms of touch, tone and timbre and as a result sounded less electrical and thus less fatiguing. Image density also seemed to gain some weight, giving instruments more decay and "hang time" — the very ingredients that can fool one into believing real instruments are in the room. Harmonic integrity and truth of timbre were phrases that kept coming to mind
This is what these things always do. But there's no cheap way to get this same effect, of course. Can't get them for a tenner from Maplin. Always from these specialist blokes with weird horn and valve systems who have been working on it in a shed for 'years'. Never any explanation for how it works, even though this arcane knowledge might undermine the Standard Model and provide a major breakthrough in our understanding of Physics. None of that 'Nobel Prize' crap for these chaps; much better to keep the secret to yourself so that you can flog a dozen a year to super-wealthy hi-fi enthusiasts who have run out of things to spend money on.
Sorry, Neil, we have to disagree on this one.
Stryder5
30-12-2016, 20:13
I am afraid I get very tired of these lets slag and take the piss out of comments put forward by folks who haven't actually tried the thing they are taking the piss out of. Yes on the face of it looks like a nice piece of art, rather than something that might effect sound, but I haven't tried it so can offer no opinion. However I have heard something that might share a similar design ethic and it did make an improvement.
Perhaps we should be exterminated!
walpurgis
30-12-2016, 20:15
what, we are not allowed to post?;) feck that:ner:
Yeah, bollerx to that! :D (and to the daft metal 'thingy' :eek:)
i love the pic of the bed pan!:lol:
could be, or act like a reverse parabolic mirror, of which there are working examples.
Sherwood
30-12-2016, 21:07
i love the pic of the bed pan!:lol:
Bed Pan? Gazunder Resonator please!
Stryder5
30-12-2016, 21:13
could be, or act like a reverse parabolic mirror, of which there are working examples.
Convex parabolic mirror?
walpurgis
30-12-2016, 21:23
Convex parabolic mirror?
As in parabolic microphone.
http://i68.tinypic.com/2gt9a8x.jpg
RothwellAudio
30-12-2016, 21:24
While I have no comment to make on this particular product or its effectiveness I will say that room acoustics are an important and often overlooked aspect of good sound reproduction. I sometimes wonder if the folks who obsess about the merits of one brand of resistor over another have given any thought to their room's acoustic performance.
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 22:44
You need to read the review.
The music possessed a more authentic quality in terms of touch, tone and timbre and as a result sounded less electrical and thus less fatiguing. Image density also seemed to gain some weight, giving instruments more decay and "hang time" — the very ingredients that can fool one into believing real instruments are in the room. Harmonic integrity and truth of timbre were phrases that kept coming to mind
This is what these things always do. But there's no cheap way to get this same effect, of course. Can't get them for a tenner from Maplin. Always from these specialist blokes with weird horn and valve systems who have been working on it in a shed for 'years'. Never any explanation for how it works, even though this arcane knowledge might undermine the Standard Model and provide a major breakthrough in our understanding of Physics. None of that 'Nobel Prize' crap for these chaps; much better to keep the secret to yourself so that you can flog a dozen a year to super-wealthy hi-fi enthusiasts who have run out of things to spend money on.
Sorry, Neil, we have to disagree on this one.
That's fine Martin.
I think it important folks understand where I am coming from. I am not defending this product. I can't, I haven't heard or tried it in my room, but I won't decry it either, or piss take it because it just might make a difference to the room acoustics and room acoustics are often the overlooked element in folks systems.
Helmholtz resonators are tubes, they effect room acoustics, simple pipes, so why can't other items equally effect rooms acoustics ? I was very sceptical that relatively small metal bowls could effect the sound of a room, and yet they did. I know what I heard. I can't explain it.
My comments were based purely on addressing a sadly familiar pattern of posting from certain quarters and in general, piss taking and offering comments about performance or lack there of, value for money etc based on zero direct experience. How can one talk with any degree of credibility when one has not heard a thing ? One can't simple as that.
I don't care what the item is, you can't and that is it. Go try a thing and offer an opinion. I will then take it on board. Offer a derisory piss taking opinion based on no experience and I will disregard it. Your words will be like a 'a loud gong or a clashing cymbal' all noise, but without value.
Neil - I agree with keeping an open mind and I agree about needing to hear something for yourself.
As you say it is an object and placing it between the speakers may do something to change the perceived sound, but then so will a placing a large rubber plant there. That still leaves some questions unanswered, and that is where my personal criticism lies.
The review does not explain in any way how it works. By the time we have got the sound out into the room, which is where this object has its effect, we are dealing with standing waves in air. So the only effect it can have is on those standing waves. An O level physics explanation would suffice. But there is nothing.
Bearing that in mind why does it need to be made of bronze? Why not plastic, or concrete, or hard baked mud? They would all reflect sound.
Why does it cost $2K? Is it made of bronze so that there is some perceived value that can warrant the price?
If it does have a measurable (and therefore potentially audible) effect, how is this consistent in any room, with any type of speaker or set up configuration? It is a room treatment that works the same in any space? Really?
What I find interesting about this, or similar concept ideas, is that they do not claim to cancel or absorb resonances. In fact they claim exactly the opposite which is to resonate in sympathy with the acoustic signal. As such they ate literally claiming to improve your listening experience by adding peripheral noise to it - extra resonance on top of that replayed. It is conceptually a very difficult thing to equate with accurate reproduction.
In reality, the bowl may well ring strongly when flicked but the force needed to achieve such an excitation to resonance is many folds greater than achievable from free air pressure (or structural vibration). Any benefits are likely due to the conical, and (hard surface conical) reflective nature of the design being directly in line with the listener - an acoustically padded panel in a similar position certainly has a pronounced effect (and measurable).
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 23:22
What I find interesting about this, or similar concept ideas, is that they do not claim to cancel or absorb resonances. In fact they claim exactly the opposite which is to resonate in sympathy with the acoustic signal. As such they ate literally climbing to improve your listening experience by additional no peripheral noise to it - extra resonance on top of that replayed. It is conceptually a very difficult thing to equate with accurate reproduction.
I agree and yet the removal of the Synergistic Research items from a room reduced the quality of sound in the room, and bringing them back in restored it - go figure. I can't explain it.
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 23:23
Neil - I agree with keeping an open mind and I agree about needing to hear something for yourself.
As you say it is an object and placing it between the speakers may do something to change the perceived sound, but then so will a placing a large rubber plant there. That still leaves some questions unanswered, and that is where my personal criticism lies.
The review does not explain in any way how it works. By the time we have got the sound out into the room, which is where this object has its effect, we are dealing with standing waves in air. So the only effect it can have is on those standing waves. An O level physics explanation would suffice. But there is nothing.
Bearing that in mind why does it need to be made of bronze? Why not plastic, or concrete, or hard baked mud? They would all reflect sound.
Why does it cost $2K? Is it made of bronze so that there is some perceived value that can warrant the price?
If it does have a measurable (and therefore potentially audible) effect, how is this consistent in any room, with any type of speaker or set up configuration? It is a room treatment that works the same in any space? Really?
Those are very good questions.
I don't know DS, I've also heard all (or many of) those 'persuasive demos' you quote and, for the most part, they did nothing for me.
Spectral Morn
30-12-2016, 23:31
I don't know DS, I've also heard all (or many of) those 'persuasive demos' you quote and, for the most part, they did nothing for me.
Fair enough.
Sorry, I had to edit some of my previous post because my iPad predicted words I didn't think I had typed - sorry.
I really don't think you can add resonance to a playback of a recording and add anything of real value. I listen to a really broad range of music and recordings and the idea that you can randomly apply resonance to improve it all is simply unbelievable.
Stryder5
31-12-2016, 08:17
As in parabolic microphone.
http://i68.tinypic.com/2gt9a8x.jpg
Not really this is a parabolic reflector, at the focal point the sound will be amplified, the object in front is the acoustic collector.
Lawrence001
31-12-2016, 22:03
I think the interesting fact about this is that some people like the effect of it. It's a bronze bowl which would have the effect of reflecting waves (but not necessarily to a single focal point like a parabolic bowl as it seems to have different degrees of curvature within it suggesting multiple focal points. It is made of metal and when excited by certain frequency sound waves will resonate and produce a ringing sound with harmonics not unlike a bell. I believe early metal dome tweeters suffered from ringing but this was at circa 20khz+ and thus outside the range of human audibility. Given the mass size and thickness of this I imagine the resonant frequency would be well into the audible range so it must do something. It can't be tuned to cancel out room effects in every room it is used, so either it produces a positive result in certain rooms, and the people who rate it happen to have heard it in these rooms, the remainder have not, or it produces a certain result in all rooms and the people who rate it like that effect in a similar way that many people like the "good" distortion produced by valve gear which wouldn't measure well but sounds nice to me certainly. I find it hard to imagine why a metallic ringing would make me prefer the sound but then if someone suggested to me why don't we charge a grid in a glass tube with a vacuum and then use a heater to emit electrons through the grid to a plate and thus act as an amplification device on the voltage of the grid, I would probably think they were nuts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.