PS Audio Noise Harvester AC Cleaner Review

[Justin Ayers]

Uh oh - HiFi sounds better in Europe than in the states. I KNEW it!

The higher voltage standard is more efficient for computer power supplies (at least for the typical switching type). I've read a lot of in-depth reviews of those and their efficiency numbers are always worse with the low voltage standard. It's not a dramatic difference but it is significant.

Some years back I participated in a discussion concerning the Noise Harvester at PS Audio with Paul McGowan participating. I'm not certain, it may have been an email discussion while I was thinking about buying one. It was promoted as being obviously beneficial to any audio hardware plugged into it. So I asked Paul if it cost so little and everything benefited from its use why he didn't put the circuit behind the power input of all their equipment so everything they made would have an obvious performance edge. He didn't reply to the question. I didn't buy one.

Well, aside from the expectation that they don't work there is also the answer: "to make as much money as possible". That sort of thing is unfortunately considered valorous in the capitalist mode. The goal of any business is to sell the customer as little as possible for as much as possible without losing that person's business to a competitor. One thing that taking pot shots (no matter how seemingly well-deserved) at specific businesspeople doesn't take into account is the bad faith inherent in that aspect of the accepted business model.

This also helps to explain why many otherwise decent people feel entitled enough to scam others that they do it in more than the accepted ways (such as by selling dreams instead of realities). Ask someone considered a shyster by many if he/she feels she/he is a bad person and most of them probably will say they are decent, just misunderstood/under-appreciated. People like Madoff are, in part, made examples of as a pressure release value to keep the bad faith model going.

The selling of dreams is also considered legitimate business by many. Lotteries, for instance, are characterized either as a regressive bad faith tax on poor people or as a great thing for society (e.g. school funding — a stupidity tax enables smart kids to excel more). So, if one rationalizes enough, there is no possibility of bad faith in business. (Foucault extended this to apply to all guilt. Contemporary fatalists believe that choice is an illusion — since a person is a mechanism in an environment and will always function according to its design in that environment making it impossible to be actually guilty of anything.) "Foolish" people will be parted with their money one way or another and savvy ones will benefit. It's either misfortune or privilege. Those can be characterized as being due to accident (such as genetics and environment out of one's control completely), due to social architecture, or a combination. But, regardless of how much emphasis one puts on the chance factor, the result is the same: inequality is the foundation of what is considered to be the best economic programme. Inequality is increased by asymmetric information dispensation. So, the capitalist model wants that and ordinary people don't. We want to know the real cost of what we're paying in life for (as money is an abstraction of one's life). It's in the interest of those looking to profit from us to give us as little useful information as possible and as much distraction as possible (including unhelpful information, aka hype).

Going back to the issue of designing equipment to maximize profit. I just read the review of the Monoprice headphone amp. It lacks a DAC. People are wondering what DAC should be purchased to go with it. My inclination is to ask why there isn't a DAC and a remote. The remote is arguable, I suppose (it's a critical feature to me to have the ability to use a remote with an headphone amp unless it's highly portable), but the DAC not being included strikes me as "product spew". McGowan's site refers to "the stack" of audio equipment, as if having more boxes means more pleasure. While I don't want to overpay by paying for features I don't need, a DAC in a headphone amp seems like it makes too much sense to not include. It makes it possible for the amp to be able to be an all-inclusive music provider for the use of headphones. I would personally argue for the inclusion of a USB port in any headphone amp, along with a DAC, so the remote can be used to play music without any other devices being required. The added cost seems insignificant when compared with the added convenience. Put your music onto a USB flash drive, plug it into the amp/DAC, and you have everything you need. Stand-alone DACs seem silly to me — an example of pure product spew (extra boxes to increase margin for sellers). So, unlike a lot of commenters in that topic, I was not impressed enough by the Monoprice and Drop units to consider them end-game devices.

 

[Killingbeans]

Joking aside, I have actually thought about starting a business that sells "tube" equipment where the tubes are purely aesthetic, having nothing but LEDs in them and not interacting with the equipment in any manner other than visual.

I think I've seen some headphone amps that does that already. Could be remembering wrongly though.

I have a lot of good business ideas and no money so that's that.

I know the feeling... I've been planing to start with some simple products with low failure rates and low requirements for start-up capital, but then my car broke down and what have you, and the pipe dream has become more evident

 

[mhardy6647]

Joking aside, I have actually thought about starting a business that sells "tube" equipment where the tubes are purely aesthetic, having nothing but LEDs in them and not interacting with the equipment in any manner other than visual. The benefits are considerable. Not only do you have the lovely aesthetics, you have a much longer lifespan — and you don't have the issues of heat, noise, and expense. You can also focus on aesthetics first in their design, rather than electrical performance characteristics. What would be particularly neat is if the arcing of thyratrons could be simulated with LEDs, in a cost-effective long-lasting way.

I think I've seen some headphone amps that does that already. Could be remembering wrongly though.

Well...

There's a whole freakin' cottage industry of little boxes that "run" tubes at operating points so far from where their designers meant them to be used that they are either cosmetic or are purpose-built euphonic distortion generators. They are typically sold as headphone amplifiers, preamplifiers, or (my personal favorite), tube buffers. I am guessing that the folks that buy the latter gizmos (if not the folks that make and sell them) have no idea that a well-designed and well constructed tube buffer should have virtually no sonic impact other than any that results from good impedance matching of source output to load input.

And then there was/is the infamous "hybrid" tube amp, sold under myriad brand names (including "Monoprice" in the US) that has the tubes in circuit, doing something (i.e., they cannot be removed without losing the audio output) but probably nothing like what they're supposed to be doing. It may (????) use the filaments as resistors, or... well... who knows? I've never been bored enough to actually trace out the circuitry.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170709221956/http://members.iinet.net.au/~cool386/jaycar/jaycar.html (sorry, the original link is now kaput)
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/nobsound-tube-amp-impression.741905/
https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=13194

But...

in full disclosure, I actually do have one. It was (ultimately) given to me -- or sent to me on long-term loan, or something along those lines.

https://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/181379/karma-monoprice-fabulousness/p1

 

[mhardy6647]

oh. and then there's this...

https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/fx-audio-6j1-tube-preamp-a-31-wonder.848535/

all 145 pages of it.

 

[Justin Ayers]

Truth does not come in shades of gray.

True, but shades of grey come without truth sometimes.

That is, from a practical standpoint.

When I took social psych a long time back the consensus of the time is that roughly 90% of the stimuli that reach the brain are discarded by the brain automatically and/or mostly ignored via heuristics. That means we don't truly observe about 90% of what we are "observing" (what we're in the position to potentially observe). The remaining 20–30% is then subjected to heuristics before the brain allows us to expend precious energy consciously processing the information (only roughly 10% of the total is consciously processed). It's been a really long time so I don't remember the portion that is finally fully-consciously processed and may be off with the specific numbers for the three levels (discard, then heuristic "discard", then possibly heuristic/bias reduced cognitive load, then full conscious/cognitive processing). It may be that as little as 5–6% is the most strongly thought about (consciously processed). The point is that the overwhelming bulk of information our brains see is pre-screened. It is totally out of our control because we never think about it. The overwhelming bulk is discarded. The remainder is first subjected to heuristics (to further reduce how much attention we need to pay to the information that made it past and to determine how much of it needs strong/conscious processing). Our brains are "cognitive misers". We try to think as little as possible, by design — because the fuel needed for cognitive effort is a very limited resource and comes with drawbacks like free radical damage (a consequence of cellular work). However, we are also curious because curiosity in animals is also necessary for survival.

In terms of my quip about shades of grey I am mainly referring to the subjective experience — the artistic experience in particular. Unlike simple facts, like the melting point of gold, the artistic experience is impossible to fully quantify. Even if we are able to do it it would only hold for that instant. Perhaps with far-future AI that will change. But, for now... the artistic experience is highly mysterious — highly subjective. Why did men in China in the past find bound feet so beautiful? Why was aluminum "prettier" than gold? Why was having a waist cinched so tight it would compress the organs, causing "the vapors" considered the standard of good social conduct? Why is Van Gogh's art "universally" beloved and yet he only was able to sell one painting in his lifetime, and for a low price, too? One explanation for that is scarcity defining value and another is abnormality (the exotic) being chic. Another is social taste (conformity). But, those are only a few potential factors in the artistic experience. They're also easier questions to answer than those pertaining to artistic experience from an individual's point of view, as individual taste and experience is less easy to generalize about (e.g. "Van Gogh's art is widely valued because wealthy people, those in the position to be taste-makers, changed their taste over time due to exposure to impressionism and expressionism. That valuation trickled down to the masses"). There are also some semi-paradoxical aspects, like "ugly beauty". An example of that is "sloth Jesus" (the 'restoration' effort that led to arguably the more impactful of the two pieces of art, at least judging by mass interest). Although the 'restoration' was uglier, due to its crudeness, the impact was higher. How much of that is "artistic experience" versus other factors... I can't say. A less extreme example that is related is the 'restoration' of the Sistine Chapel, which replaced the gentle colors of the original with very florid colors, particularly pinks (mainly via quinacridone pigments that were not available in Michelangelo's time). Those in favor of that think the impact is greater but others, like me, think quality has been reduced. The "impact" may be stronger but is that artistic experience completely or something else (like being a bit sickened)?

I agree, though, with your assertion that a business should be taken in its totality. If one product is intentional snake oil then people should take their business elsewhere. 'Ethical business' (even though that's a self-contradictory concept due to profit-seeking) can, at least, be defined by enough 'good faith' to provide consumers with products that work beyond the placebo effect. The main reason isn't actually goodwill and altruism on the part of businesses. It's not really good faith at all. The main reason is to not be caught and lose business to competitors. By holding businesses to account, customers ensure better product quality. Mindshare matters and it deteriorates when people catch you scamming them. Business, therefore, wants assymetric information dispensation (they know it and you don't), to keep people from catching them. And, things like monopoly/duopoly/triopoly power (lack of adequate competition) make it harder for consumers to hold businesses to account. There can be a massive power asymmetry from that.

Fortunately for audio enthusiasts, there is quite a bit of competition in the audio business (particularly when compared with most areas of tech). Also, it is fortunate that the Internet and inexpensive computing makes it possible for less elite members of the economy to fight against the selective facts of reckless profiteering. This review is an example of that. We're no longer as dominated by magazines (compromised by ad-seeking, hype driving interest, etc.), dealers, fliers and press releases, and subjective word of mouth. All have some usefulness but so do objective tests.

I am a strong opponent of using placebos on people. The medical industry, for instance, has made "better than placebo" the standard for phase 1 clinical trials for things like new NSAIDs (designed to make money for pharma businesses by replacing superior opioids, superior in terms of theraputic index in the context of things like IV delivery during major surgeries, etc.) — instead of "at least as good as the existing solutions". That extremely low bar ("at least it does more than absolutely nothing") is typical for the profit-seeking model (which is inherently one of bad faith).

 

[GXAlan]

Interesting. I got a Ting AC monitor which was provided by my Homeowner’s Insurance. It is supposed to predict house fires from electrical anomaesides voltage, it does measure the high frequency noise. The Noise Harvester does work to decrease the noise.



the bottom is with the noise harvester and removal of the noise harvester.


this is what happens when you turn on and off an LED light several rooms AWAY from where the Ting sensor and noise harvester exists. Peaks at 4 turning on. No effect turning off.


this is what happens when you don’t have the noise harvester and turn on and off a light. The second peak happens when you turn off the light.


Interesting that the effect of a noise harvester is seen several rooms away from the outlet.

 

[Mihalis]

Your review is incomplete. I used to have a couple hooked to my hifi system. When the washing machine was on, they would blink but also produce an annoying high pitch noise which changed if you squeezed the cheap plastic casing. That noise made me want to use my system less and thus saved me on electricity. Your review gave no credit to such economic benefits.

 

[MediumRare]

Can someone point me to a link or explanation of what EMI on a line will actually do to one's audio equipment? What level is so extreme it will become audible?

 

[amirm]

Can someone point me to a link or explanation of what EMI on a line will actually do to one's audio equipment? What level is so extreme it will become audible?

Vast amount of such noise is above hearing range so by themselves they are not inaudible. However, the noise can be demodulated internally in your audio gear and that can be in audible range. This is why some equipment picks up AM stations for example although I have not heard of such in years. AM carrier is well above audible range but the transistor junctions can rectify and serve to demodulate the carrier and bring out the AM modulated audio signal.

 

[SIY]

in full disclosure, I actually do have one. It was (ultimately) given to me -- or sent to me on long-term loan, or something along those lines.

https://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/181379/karma-monoprice-fabulousness/p1


View attachment 95890

Amir sent me one of those to see if I could improve it. I figured out quickly why it kept thermaling out and fixed that, but the goofy pulse way they ran the heaters and created piles of extraneous noise was not fixable other than replacing the power supply entirely.

 

[MDAguy]

Furtech appears to be getting in on this racket...

http://www.furutech.com/2020/08/18/19957/

 

[mhardy6647]

but the goofy pulse way they ran the heaters and created piles of extraneous noise was not fixable other than replacing the power supply entirely.

Interesting.
Do the tubes actually do anything active in the circuit? I have seen speculation on the internet that the filaments may simply be employed for their resistance (i.e., as resistors). I tried to trace out the circuit from photos of the PC board in the "50 watt" morph, but didn't get too far.

I am still perplexed by the power pentodes being in there, given that they are emphatically not used for output.

 

[mansr]

Can someone point me to a link or explanation of what EMI on a line will actually do to one's audio equipment? What level is so extreme it will become audible?

Here's a measurement taken from a power socket by my desk:

 

[dc655321]

Here's a measurement taken from a power socket by my desk:

An SFDR of less than 40dB?
Bah, that's not even remotely hi-fi!

 

[SIY]

I am still perplexed by the power pentodes being in there, given that they are emphatically not used for output.

Many people believe that a large power pentode (usually an EL84) makes the sound bigger and beefier.

Of course, many people are stupid, so there's that.

 

[egellings]

EL84? That's a little peanut pentode.

 

[KingArthur98]

Vast amount of such noise is above hearing range so by themselves they are not inaudible. However, the noise can be demodulated internally in your audio gear and that can be in audible range. This is why some equipment picks up AM stations for example although I have not heard of such in years. AM carrier is well above audible range but the transistor junctions can rectify and serve to demodulate the carrier and bring out the AM modulated audio signal.

Interesting, I hear atleast 1 AM radio station on my stereo per week. Doesn't really matter what gear is on, Marantz pm82, rotel 980bx. I live in a village where illegal radio stations are pretty popular (aka 5-20 stations depending on police) on 4700 residents. Although its always pretty weak I can hear it clearly when I put my ear up to the speaker.

 

[SIY]

EL84? That's a little peanut pentode.

Compared to a 4-400A, sure. Compared to an EF86 (a very suitable small signal pentode), it's enormous.

 

[solderdude]

Here's a measurement taken from a power socket by my desk:

Your sinewave is flattened a bit (a few V) given the amount of odd harmonics.
That can't sound good. It's probably the reason you can't get true audiophile sound and makes everything sound the same. Compression of your mains ... go figure.
And that 70kHz ... about 25mV of it ... You should use Isolda cables for mains and you could increase that slightly. Get better reception of the 70kHz transmission on your mains.

 

[egellings]

That is true, SIY. I have an amplifier using two EL84s in push-pull per channel and am getting nearly 17 watts out of it, way more than I need. I like the sort of creamy sound they have. Adorable little peanuts.