Op conveniently ignored my oft-sited a/b test I posted way way back. I can't even tell the difference and I'm the one who made the edits. Op either needs to own up to being a troll (which I applaud) or be banned for being a lying shill.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
CuteCube² Guitar - Play-in System for String Instruments
- Thread starter bassfunkman
- Start date
Op conveniently ignored my oft-sited a/b test I posted way way back. I can't even tell the difference and I'm the one who made the edits. Op either needs to own up to being a troll (which I applaud) or be banned for being a lying shill.
BurningSkies
CRAZY BALDHEAD
- Feb 20, 2005
- 27,956
- 20,348
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
Honestly, with 5 minutes in my chosen recording software I could subtly 'improve' a number of aspects of recordings...some quick application of a couple plug ins, a bit of multiband compression, a hint of Maxxbass...
With just someone's word that they're not, I certainly don't believe that they're not.
With just someone's word that they're not, I certainly don't believe that they're not.
@bassfunkman
At what point do you think the effect of this device reaches its maximum potential, i.e. how long before a bass can't be "broken in" any more and will no longer be improved by wearing the vibrator?
At what point do you think the effect of this device reaches its maximum potential, i.e. how long before a bass can't be "broken in" any more and will no longer be improved by wearing the vibrator?
I'm guessing the vast majority of us would say that point is at the very beginning.
"I believed from the minute the check left my hand"....
'Wooden Jesus'
-Temple of the Dog
I'm actually amazed this thread isn't closed. The claims for this product remind of a thread about the kickstarter project to fund a space elevator.
So the cube is a small MP3 player that sends vibrations to the wood in your guitar to improve its sound.
No one actually is there to watch him make the recordings.
What's to say he isn't 1. first recording the bass guitar with EQ flat and then 2. recording the bass guitar through a 10-band EQ pedal and then 3. making claims the tone has improved?
So the cube is a small MP3 player that sends vibrations to the wood in your guitar to improve its sound.
No one actually is there to watch him make the recordings.
What's to say he isn't 1. first recording the bass guitar with EQ flat and then 2. recording the bass guitar through a 10-band EQ pedal and then 3. making claims the tone has improved?
Also he was able to lower the strings with no buzz so it played and sounded better. Dead giveaway.
So basically, the CuteCube2 can also be used to fix car engine problems, laptop computer performance issues, improve the flavor and fizziness of Coca-Cola, Nicholas Cage's acting problems, and cancer?
That George Forester store has a bunch of other odd stuff.
Seasoning service. 79 Euros ($85 US) to stick two vibration thingys on your guitar for 12 days. 109 Euros for 20 days.
Invalid Link Removed
Sound deflection item for 279 Euros ($291 US). It's a bent piece of plexiglass.
Invalid Link Removed
or 359 Euros ($388 US) for basically the same thing.
Invalid Link Removed
And of course, what better way to improve your tone but to cryo freeze your entire guitar for 499 Euros. But isn't that the exact opposite of what you want to do if you are using the CuteCube2? I'll slow down molecular vibration by dipping it in nitrogen, and then increase molecular vibration with the CuteCube2? I love spending money!!!
Invalid Link Removed
Seasoning service. 79 Euros ($85 US) to stick two vibration thingys on your guitar for 12 days. 109 Euros for 20 days.
Invalid Link Removed
Sound deflection item for 279 Euros ($291 US). It's a bent piece of plexiglass.
Invalid Link Removed
or 359 Euros ($388 US) for basically the same thing.
Invalid Link Removed
And of course, what better way to improve your tone but to cryo freeze your entire guitar for 499 Euros. But isn't that the exact opposite of what you want to do if you are using the CuteCube2? I'll slow down molecular vibration by dipping it in nitrogen, and then increase molecular vibration with the CuteCube2? I love spending money!!!
Invalid Link Removed
Doesn't change the character of the bass. Just brings it to it's full potential and makes the notes way more defined. I use the Smith mainly for Contemporary (black) Gospel concerts in old European churches. The bass sound in those churches is crazy because it's nothing but a big "boooooooooooooooom". After using the CuteCube on the Smith the tone went from "boooooooooooooooooooom" to "booh-dooh-dooh-dooh" in those places. Priceless
With the oil of aphrodite, and the dust of the grand wazoo
He said you might not believe this, little fella
But it'll cure your asthma too
-FZ "Cozmik Debris" (of course)
All I see in this thread is this:
I haven't read one logical or scientific explanation of why it would not work, just burn the witch for saying or doing things we don't understand.
I mentioned in a post on this thread, vibrations do affect the way materials behave, it is a fact, vibrations can prematurely age materials. So in theory this could work. So, maybe the OP test is flawed, that doesn't mean this thing doesn't work. Don't get me wrong, there is also a good chance it doesn't work but not because it's a bad idea but because it is not well implemented. I'm also not going to run a buy one of these, not a chance, but I just think people is being too defensive and with a "you don't fool me attitude", forget for a second that this is for sale and focus on the technology.
Can somebody explain why it would not work?
I haven't read one logical or scientific explanation of why it would not work, just burn the witch for saying or doing things we don't understand.
I mentioned in a post on this thread, vibrations do affect the way materials behave, it is a fact, vibrations can prematurely age materials. So in theory this could work. So, maybe the OP test is flawed, that doesn't mean this thing doesn't work. Don't get me wrong, there is also a good chance it doesn't work but not because it's a bad idea but because it is not well implemented. I'm also not going to run a buy one of these, not a chance, but I just think people is being too defensive and with a "you don't fool me attitude", forget for a second that this is for sale and focus on the technology.
Can somebody explain why it would not work?
It is impossible to prove a negative premise. Snake oil purveyors take advantage of this to fleece their customers. I never said that I know for a fact that there is nothing to this, only that I don't believe a word of it. Show me the results of a conscientiously applied double blind study that proves that this works, I will immediately change sides of the "argument"; I am an engineer and used to doing that, but the "evidence" presented by the OP does not remotely constitute proof of any sort.
The burden of proof is not on those of us who are skeptical. Prove it works and I'll cease my skepticism. I may even buy one (but probably I won't). Call me old school (because I am), but I do not buy into the idea that everything which cannot be proven false is therefore true. YMMV.
