 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.253.179.5
Not just Elizabeth but also Paul's. The "crystal effect" as I understood it was primarily based on the piezo effect. Elizabeth's posting of the reduction in EMF on her power cord leads off in slightly different direction. This measurement she made coupled with Paul's use of the large fused quartz discs in his panel box follows up on the measurements Elizabeth has made.I was of the belief that the peizo effect meant that the mechanical motion generated by the effect was responsible for the reduction in both EMI/RFI. While it is certainly very true, apparently even if the quartz or other piezo electric crystals are too large to effectively generate movement, they can still absorb both EMI/RFI.
In my past experience with large quartz clusters, the large pieces added a harshness to the sound in the room, largely due to the EMI/RFI being reflected back into the listening environment. This may be a function of the well formed crystalline structure of the mineral specimens I collect. In pieces of tumbled quartz or in Paul's case, fused quartz discs, the crystals are not as well formed and being a bit more amorphous, may not be re radiating the absorbed EMI/RFI energy back.
Since the quartz can absorb EMI/RFI, there is, with hindsight, no reason why they can not be used as a trap for EMI/RFI. On a power cord or panel where the fundamental frequency is either 50 or 60 Hz, a large crystal should be quite effective.
One should also be aware that any mechanical electrical connection is also a source of RFI. Audio and electrical connectors are NOT made to the tolerance of Johanssen blocks, where the molecular attraction is enough to create a bond. There are numerous void spaces in any connector and there is always the RF generated by the arcing through those void spaces.
George Cardas claimed that the reason why he prefers the Rhodium plating is that the metal is extremely hard and unlike the precious metal platings, will not gall upon insertion. Indeed, if one makes careful note, wire connections slowly change sound over time as the precious metals flatten out over time and spring tension. You can simply twist your RCA ends and hear the difference.
The RFI may be better served through the smaller crystals loosely mounted: The EMI through the larger crystals.
Of course YMMV.
Stu
Edits: 04/04/11Follow Ups:
fused quartz? is amorphous and does NOT have any piezo properties.
Too much is never enough
that's why I was puzzled about Paul's results.
Stu
I bought them at the beginning of my crystal journey because they the were same size as the Acoustic Revive RIQ5010 "quartz insulators". While I was waiting for them to arrive I went to as bead shop and got a smoky quartz necklace and a few other crystals. None of these had an effect that I could detect but the impact of these 2" discs was immediate and unmistakable. Why they outperformed the beads, I don't know.
I've left two in my breaker box, but when they were near my speakers and electronics, they changed the sound for the worse. The soundstage was enlarged, but there were some serious problems with sound coloration and distortion, so out they went.
So, fused quartz is not peizoelectric yet they make an audible difference. Now, that is interesting.Any theories?
Edits: 04/05/11
...for God knows what. They sell fused quartz for oscillators and they're called "Piezo Enterprises". I'm no rocket scientist, but here is a company that sells gizmos that are both piezo-electric and resonate.
I mean this could be, like, the Republicans reconciling their differences with the Democrats--they wiggle AND they're electrical! I certainly don't know. I'm strictly an empiricist. When it comes to theories, I gravitate towards explanations that seem to be at least marginally plausible. Right now I'm wondering whether quatum wormholes can account for the improvements I've heard in my stereo, but I really would prefer a simpler explanation. So far unclestu seems to offer the most thoughtful explanations of how this stuff works. Another reason for suspecting that piezo-electric involvement is that crystals' effects are nearly identical to my in-line RFI suppressor. To me, that is strong evidence, even though it's not proof.
I have no doubt whatsoever in what you hear. However data on piezo electricity is rather hard to come by in terms of a technical manual. It is usually confined to a footnote in some physics text.
The situation is even worse when investigating the electrical properties of crystals. Most books emphasize the the nature of the crystals , the coloration and other gemological properties, but not the electrical.
That being said the previously quoted text on electromagnetic waves by Johnk clearly states that it is presumed ( because not everything has been measured) that all materials are diamagnetic in nature, including a sheet of copper, germanium, etc. These are materials which are non magnetic at rest ( no electrical or magnetic field applied) but develop weak magnetism when the fields are applied.
This is based on the looser electron bonds in the outer shells of the material being temporarily dislodged and moved over by the applied field. Obviously, the fewer electrons in the outer shell ( using the Bohr's model) the more of this property is revealed. Obviously the movement of the electrons in the outer shell adds a vector to the magnetic field generated, however weak it is (10^-5 in the case of copper).
Stu
Stu
I experimented (8th grade?) in making a shaded pole motor out of an ALUMINUM pie tin. It spun nicely in a 60hz AC magnetic field.
What is the difference between diamagnetic and paramagnetic?
Too much is never enough
What is the difference between diamagnetic and paramagnetic?
Basically, paramagnetic materials have a very very weak attraction to an applied magnetic field while diamagnetic materials have a very very weak repulsion to an applied magnetic field.
Have you ever seen that superconductor demonstration where they show a magnet floating above a superconductor in a dish of liquid nitrogen?
That's because superconductors are highly diamagnetic.
se
I've done a SIMILAR demonstration using Aluminum.
An Aluminum ring is placed around the core of a simple electromagnet. The Electromagnet is plugged into 60hz ac.
The core, which is a separate piece and is longer than the coil by maybe 3" on each side is pulled to maximum extension on the high side and propped up using a wooden dowel rod. The core could be completely removed.....if you wished.
Anyway, with the core displaced and with the ring in place, apply power and the Aluminum ring shoots into the air. OR if placed into the field while 'on', will simply float. Pushing the ring down deep into the field and resisting the force pushing UP will result in the ring getting HOT. And I mean too hot to touch. The electrical resistance of the Aluminum coupled with the induced current...and more of it as you force it deeper into the field.
I did this in about '66 or maybe '67 at my 7th or 8th grade science fair. People didn't think aluminum was magnetic! Equally 'wowwing' of the crowd was the shaded pole motor...made from an aluminum pie tin.
Too much is never enough
Broadly, there are 2 types of quartz.
'Grown' or 'crystalline' is the first type and if you could see the atoms, most would be in nice rows and columns. see the link for some illustrations. There are areas of 'slip' and 'dislocation'. Nothing is perfect.
The second type of quartz is fused quartz. This is basically the first type which has been heated to a liquid and allowed to cool. Ultra pure quartz is used in certain industries because of its ability to resist many chemicals and it can withstand temperatures to about 1200c. (pretty darn hot).
Upon cooling the structure of the crystal no longer exists and it loses its piezo properties.
http://www.gequartz.com/en/properties.htm
BTW, Quartz is simple stuff...at least chemically. It is 1 atom of Silicon and 2 of Oxygen....SiO2.
Used in semiconductors it is an insulator between certain layers. Generically it is called 'glass' in the industry. But, it is a little more complicated than that since these units 'link' together to form more complicated shapes...the crystal.
I have dealt with both types of quartz. The crystal types will break along the lattice while fused quartz will just break into a million pieces.
Too much is never enough
...here's an article that talks about fused quartz with piezoelectric properties. The quartz that I used is cut from ingots of GE 124 fused quartz.
The sonic effects of these crystals are obvious to me and others who have tried them. It would be nice to know how the damned things work.
I have looked around more and found a single reference to piezo properties of fused quartz.
GE, the #1 maker (?) of fused quartz makes no reference to piezo properties on the datasheet..... but than again, why should they?
Do Shakti stones use single crystal or fused quartz in the manufacture? The patent which I have yet to finish reading has not so far been specific.
Too much is never enough
natural tumbled quartz in a fairly flat configuration
Stu
Since the quartz can absorb EMI/RFI...
Really?
Tell me, what does the "M" stand for in "EMI"? Then tell me what the magnetic properties of crystals are.
se
The "M" stands for Magic!
...just curious. What exactly has been your contribution to this forum other than to badmouth anything you do not believe in?
Faraday. Also check up Lorenz.z laws, too, while you're at it. Gauss also formulated some interesting work too, BTW.
Stu
Faraday. Also check up Lorenz.z laws, too, while you're at it. Gauss also formulated some interesting work too, BTW.
Been there, done that. But reading and understanding are two different things. And you don't show any evidence here of any understanding. You're just spewing names as if they mean something.
se
E and M are part of the unification of forces. You can, in some cases, treat them interchangeably.
Too much is never enough
E and M are part of the unification of forces. You can, in some cases, treat them interchangeably.
But not when it comes to shielding.
se
Could you please explain?
Too much is never enough
Could you please explain?
Sure.
It all depends on the type of source and your distance from the source as it relates to the wave impedance which is the ratio of the E- and H-fields.
In the far field, the wave ratio will essentially be that of free space, or 377 ohms.
The nearfield extends about one sixth of a wavelength from the source and depending on the source, the ratios of the E- and H-fields won't be the same as in the far field.
In the nearfield of a loop antenna, the wave impedance is lower than 377 ohms which means it's predominantly H-field. So magnetic shielding will be more effective than electrostatic shielding.
In the nearfield of a whip antenna, the wave impedance is higher than 377 ohms which means it's predominantly E-field. So electrostatic shielding will be more effective than magnetic shielding.
se
Electromagnetic radiation (often abbreviated E-M radiation or EMR) is a form of energy exhibiting wave-like behavior as it travels through space. EMR has both electric and magnetic field components, which oscillate in phase perpendicular to each other and perpendicular to the direction of energy propagation.
Electromagnetic radiation is classified according to the frequency of its wave. In order of increasing frequency and decreasing wavelength, these are radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, ultraviolet radiation, X-rays and gamma rays (see Electromagnetic spectrum). The eyes of various organisms sense a small and somewhat variable window of frequencies called the visible spectrum. The photon is the quantum of the electromagnetic interaction and the basic "unit" of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation and is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force.
Your complaint should be taken up with GOD. For so foolishly combining what must me kept apart.. according to your 'theory'
What's at issue is EMI/RFI.
Depending on the source and distance from the source, the interference will predominantly be either E-field or H-field. A material that's effective for E-field shielding won't be as effective at H-field shielding, and vice versa.
Since crystals aren't electrically conductive to any degree and have no permeability to speak of, their effects with regard to H-field interference will be virtually nill.
A lump of iron would be far more effective than any lump of crystal. Though a lump of anything isn't terribly effective unless the receiving circuit happens to be in its "shadow."
se
by Carl Johnk, admittedly an older text, but then again I'm, pretty old:
Carl states that the magnetic moment in diamagnetic material is zero in absence of a magnetic field. Application of a magnetic field exerts a a force ( Lorentz force) on the orbiting electron which will generate a small magnetic field. "Diamagnetism is presumed to exist in all materials...."
Typical values are -0.95X10^-5 for copper, -.8X 10^-5 for germanium. Paramagnetic material has a much higher susceptibility: FeSO4, FeO3, magnetite and hematite being on the order of 10^-3. In both cases the net magnetism at rest with no magnetic field applied is Zero.
Stu
If you do, then simply regurgitating something from some physics text isn't the way to make it.
se
to your statement that quartz has no electrical or magnetic effects?
Just wondering,. because I can find reference in a standard electrical engineering text about the magnetic properties of all materials, but you have stated that quartz can have no affect at all.
Please quote your reference. I would greatly appreciate that rather than a shot in the dark formed by only your intellect.
Stu
to your statement that quartz has no electrical or magnetic effects?
Here's what I actually said:
Since crystals aren't electrically conductive to any degree and have no permeability to speak of, their effects with regard to H-field interference will be virtually nill.
Just wondering,. because I can find reference in a standard electrical engineering text about the magnetic properties of all materials, but you have stated that quartz can have no affect at all.
Great. Then get out your "standard electrical engineering text" and tell us what the relative permeability of quartz is.
Because I have several myself as well as texts specifically relating to the electrical properties of materials. None of them give the relative permeability of quartz. Nor do any Google searches turn up anything.
Here's why.
Quartz is diamagnetic.
However the most diamagnetic material outside of a superconductor is bismuth. And even then bismuth is only VERY VERY weakly diamagnetic. For all intents and purposes, it's about as effective as air at shielding from magnetic fields, save for eddy current losses due to the fact that bismuth is a conductor rather than an insulator as quartz is.
So as I said, their effects as far as H-field interference goes is virtually nill.
se
Same thread you state quartz has no magnetic properties at all.
"Virtually nil" seems to be a highly subjective statement, at least in my thinking. I stated the permeability, but now you are stating it is negligible. Now what numerical measurement is significant for you? At what point does the human ear distinguish any change? If you can not answer that question then you have no means of determining what is negligible. Just because a number is numerically small does not mean it may be negligible.
After all, in the medical field there are drugs which can affect the human body in what could be deemed negligible amounts (amount of plutonium to kill you for example,as taken from the headlines).
Stu
Same thread you state quartz has no magnetic properties at all.
No, I did not.
"Virtually nil" seems to be a highly subjective statement, at least in my thinking.
When you're talking about magnetic properties on the order of that of air, then I think it's safe to call such magnetic properties "virtually nil."
I stated the permeability, but now you are stating it is negligible.
No, you didn't state the permeability. You simply said the book said it was similar to that of copper. And didn't mention the permeability of copper either.
The relative permeability of a vacuum is 1.
The relative permeability of copper is 0.999994.
The relative permeability of sapphire is 0.99999976.
Now what numerical measurement is significant for you? At what point does the human ear distinguish any change?
A change in what exactly?
se
your post earlier in this same thread where you refer to a wikipedia entry.
Stu
your post earlier in this same thread where you refer to a wikipedia entry.
In that post I said crystals had "no permeability to speak of."
That's NOT the same as saying they have absolutely NO permeability. Only that it is very very small. So small that it doesn't warrant any mention.
You seem to have problems with comprehension, which would explain why you came up with the erroneous notion that permeability was measured in Webers per meter per second.
se
is a subjective statement. The text gives the permeability of Germanium, a crystal as being about the same as copper.
Where is your text and statement? You criticize but present no backing for your statements.
Stu
The text gives the permeability of Germanium, a crystal as being about the same as copper.
And the permeability of copper is, for all intents and purposes, about the same as air.
se
It is significantly higher being a solid.
Also have you examined the units used to measure permeability? Webers per square meter per second. A Weber is equivalent to a Tesla. That's a huge unit. The only speaker I know that measures its magnetic field in Teslas is the neodymium magnet Lowthers.
Stu
It is significantly higher being a solid.
No, it's not. Copper's permeability is measured as a solid. As I said previously, copper's relative permeability is 0.999994. For all intents and purposes, no better than air.
Also have you examined the units used to measure permeability?
Yes, I have.
Webers per square meter per second.
*BZZZZZZZZZZZT!*
Wrong.
The SI unit for permeability is Henries per meter (H/m).
The Weber is the unit for magnetic flux.
You simply don't have a clue what you're talking about.
se
"Since crystals aren't electrically conductive to any degree and have no permeability to speak of, their effects with regard to H-field interference will be virtually nill."
I don't think anyone would argue that with you Steve. Apparently they are believed to behave as lossy space to E-fields with the mechanism being them squirming around from the field and thus converting some of it's energy to heat. Naturally that would mean that they need to be at a high-Z node to do their thing.
Rick
Piezo electricity is simply a figment of a physicist's imagination.
Stu
Piezo electricity is simply a figment of a physicist's imagination.
You're good at creating straw men, I'll give you that.
se
beginning to sound like Geoff Kait: any relation?
Stu
Didn't you accuse me pretty much the same? But now you're harping on someone else!
Flavor of the month. So much for intellectual honesty.
beginning to sound like Geoff Kait: any relation?
Surprise, surprise. Another straw man.
se
and yawn again
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
