No disrespect, but your conclusions don’t carry much weight if you haven’t actually sat down and listened to the product.
This ain’t my first rodeo. But thanks for playing. I know full well the capabilities of the Renesas D2-74083. No reproduction can exceed the dynamic limitations of the SoC. Sorry… But it is nice he used WIMA’s in the signal path.
When you make statements like this about your product, “fully programmable signal flow makes Maria a living product” only shows some folks actually think configurable means “living” however, it is nothing more than verbal marketing mishmash. The electronics aren’t “alive”…
1 Like
I think your point has been made at this juncture
Drop the mic.
3 Likes
C-Wave is nothing new. Yamaha has been doing it since the early 1980’s with the DSP-1. This says it all…
Applications
• Audio Video Receiver (AVR)
• Multi-channel surround soundbar
• Home Theater in a Box (HTiB)
• Multi-channel Multi-Media (MM) systems
• Installed steerable audio arrays
• Bluetooth/WiFi voice-enabled speaker systems
• Automotive trunk/amplified solutions
If it’s nothing new how did Mark get a patent?
I am not enjoying the sniping or the cheerleading.
C’mon folks. “We” are usually better than this.
[Stepping off of my soap box]
2 Likes
I don’t anyone has gotten out of hand or disrespectful here. Just having a discussion. Ease enough to avoid.
I have a CD that cost me $1.00 and it reduces my stress.
1 Like
@Audioholic just because a bigger company like Yamaha used c-wave doesn’t necessarily mean they patented it, a lot of the largest companies in the world don’t always get a patent, their labels usually say patent pending which doesn’t mean anything.
Mark Levinson got the patent on the C-wave for the physiological effects of this processing as evidenced by the patent claims; not because it produced a better aural music reproduction experience. Whether the Maria sounds like a top-class audio component is a function of the hardware and firmware design independent of the patent. Obviously, Daniel Hertz does not have the deep pockets to create its own SoC ala Apple, Qualcomm, etc. If in fact they are using a Renesas SoC, then its their DSP firmware and audio interfaces and power supply that are where their value is added.
Note that their literature talks about adjusting the configuration to match a component chain. What is not described are the details of those changes and their basis. My problem is not with the sound but with the technical explanation of this “breakthrough” as I have previously stated.
Patent Pending can not not be used unless the inventor has actually filed a patent application. There is a penalty for a false claim of patent pending. 35 U.S.C. § 292.
Mark Levinson spent years and millions of dollars developing the Mighty Cat chip. Not aware of too many other small companies that have developed their own chip.
Levinson never developed the SoC’s at Intersil (now known as Renesas) as the D2-74083 (which is now considered obsolete in their line) was part of the numerous SoC offerings in a class of offerings called the D2-6 family of SoC’s used in the public market for nearly a decade now. What Levinson’s patent attempts to do, is to capitalize on his work of the EQ mods used in the reverb portions of his delay/decay algorithms.
Patent pending just means you applied, doesn’t mean you hold a patent or even intend to.
Which, as I note above, is incorrect. It has meaning.
It means what it says, the inventor has applied for a patent, a costly process. It places would be infringers on notice. Stating “patent pending” when this is untrue is a Federal criminal offense.
2 Likes
Absolutely right. There is no jump in logic here as many have pointed out. It could be (probably is) an amazing sounding system. Mark knows great sound, that’s for sure. I would never question the end result. Just some of his marketing claims like better health (oh please) or whatever. But hey, that’s ok.
2 Likes
You could easily do the same study using the DSD mkII. Would be interesting. Mark left DSD out his experiment/study.
Applying for a provisional patent application doesn’t cost very much money.
At least you have given up on your claim “patent pending which doesn’t mean anything.”
Progress. 
Yes, you can prepare a provisional patent application by yourself and pay only the filing fee. You then take the risk of inadequate disclosure and losing the patentability of your invention. Or you can do it right and hire a competent patent lawyer to do the work.
Back to your scheduled programming.
3 Likes