I dont think my beautiful lady who tries to live with me will stand for it. Makes her crazy.
-Richard
You are a kind soul Richard.
You’ll have to hope that the aesthetics of M2 will calm her (although the female soul in me strongly objects
)Oh oh Jacco!
Fast and effective.
And I was about to order a pair for my new yacht
George
Attachments
I suspect, as do a lot of people in Bangkok, the aircon will run for 8 months of the year. Most people in the cities in Asia run de-humidifiers as well for a good part of the year.
OK - not good for the environment, but that's what they do (while we burn oil or coal to keep warm in the northern latitudes).
Thus, no shrinkage or flubber . . . (nice word Jacco!)
OK - not good for the environment, but that's what they do (while we burn oil or coal to keep warm in the northern latitudes).
Thus, no shrinkage or flubber . . . (nice word Jacco!)
You cited hams, I merely responded about that subject.
Still have not found a SS BNC, although no doubt they do exist.
Not a terribly significant point.
_-_-bear
debating over fast (or relatively fast) ABX switching is fruitless.
we do not listen this way at all.
I've more or less posted and said this in some detail years back.
we do not listen to short segments.
one illustration is probably something that you have experienced yourself.
sitting in a car, tuning stations, stop on a music station in the middle of a song that you "know" very well and NOT recognize the song at all, until a certain passage of time/bars of music? Yes?
this in a nutshell is one (of several) reasons why ABX doesn't reveal what it purports to be testing. It has value, but it is not dispositive.
another factor is how the brain literally assembles sound into both speech and especially into recognizable musical patterns. it's simply not an instantaneous real-time process. it's not exactly a consistent process even for the same individual, certainly not over any length of time, especially for different sessions.
The idea that you could fast switch and overcome either of these two issues, I don't think is valid beyond a certain degree of (what for a lack of a better term) "resolution".
Feel free to believe otherwise.
And, as much as I wish it never happened to me or anyone for that matter, if your HF hearing is compromised, you probably can't actually discern a whole range of things.
_-_-
we do not listen this way at all.
I've more or less posted and said this in some detail years back.
we do not listen to short segments.
one illustration is probably something that you have experienced yourself.
sitting in a car, tuning stations, stop on a music station in the middle of a song that you "know" very well and NOT recognize the song at all, until a certain passage of time/bars of music? Yes?
this in a nutshell is one (of several) reasons why ABX doesn't reveal what it purports to be testing. It has value, but it is not dispositive.
another factor is how the brain literally assembles sound into both speech and especially into recognizable musical patterns. it's simply not an instantaneous real-time process. it's not exactly a consistent process even for the same individual, certainly not over any length of time, especially for different sessions.
The idea that you could fast switch and overcome either of these two issues, I don't think is valid beyond a certain degree of (what for a lack of a better term) "resolution".
Feel free to believe otherwise.
And, as much as I wish it never happened to me or anyone for that matter, if your HF hearing is compromised, you probably can't actually discern a whole range of things.
_-_-
I would like to point out that a sometime member of this website, Charles Hansen, has an interesting (to me) interview about audio design in the latest (AUGUST) Stereophile. Charles Hansen first brought me to DIYaudio back in the early 2000's, but he left because he did not like the insults thrown his way by the people on this thread, mostly. He is a formidable competitor, and he is really successful competing against Nelson Pass and me in the audio marketplace. He tries 'everything' and compromises 'nothing'. He can even do more than I can do with my best Parasound designs, and subjectively he often wins design contests that the audio reviewers do in the magazines.
He isn't much for double blind tests, either.
I recommend that everyone read that interview, if you want to understand how successful audio designers think about audio design.
He isn't much for double blind tests, either.
I recommend that everyone read that interview, if you want to understand how successful audio designers think about audio design.
There are SS N type connectors, though, and TNC types also. Pretty common actually, though probably not with hams. SS is good for when you have to unscrew and rescrew a connector often, minimizes the threads binding and messing up the connector and cable or equipment it's on.
There are situations where uV and tens of Volts are both in play on a common RF connector. The military tries to avoid 'antenna farms', so will use devices called "multicouplers" to share an antenna between multiple transceivers, some transmitting, some receiving. I used to work developing these beasts - this is where intermod distortion has to be take very seriously. We had some IMD bench test setups where we could easily see the difference between silver-plated connectors and brass, SS, or nickel (nickel was particularly bad). Gets even more fun if you try to make these things frequency-hopping! But the intermod distortion in question was odd-order (third and fifth primarily), not the even order distortions you'd mostly get if a diode was in on the act. But then, 3rd order IMD was the worst operationally since it can throw distortion products near the same frequencies where you are trying to receive a signal and too close for the receiver's front end filter to keep it out.
There are situations where uV and tens of Volts are both in play on a common RF connector. The military tries to avoid 'antenna farms', so will use devices called "multicouplers" to share an antenna between multiple transceivers, some transmitting, some receiving. I used to work developing these beasts - this is where intermod distortion has to be take very seriously. We had some IMD bench test setups where we could easily see the difference between silver-plated connectors and brass, SS, or nickel (nickel was particularly bad). Gets even more fun if you try to make these things frequency-hopping! But the intermod distortion in question was odd-order (third and fifth primarily), not the even order distortions you'd mostly get if a diode was in on the act. But then, 3rd order IMD was the worst operationally since it can throw distortion products near the same frequencies where you are trying to receive a signal and too close for the receiver's front end filter to keep it out.
Speaking to one of these points...
...I have an especially nice, excellent performance of one of Rachmaninoff's piano concertos, by George Bolet (a fabulous pianist, one of the best, imo) with Dutoit. Imo, Ashkenazy by comparison doesn't understand how to play these pieces, or have the vital subtle techniques. But that's not the story here.
In the piece there is a quiet passage, where someone wacks a music stand.
I'd guarantee that even playing that same passage +/- 3mins of the wack that most of the time no one in the room will hear or notice the wack. It is there.
The speaker reproduces it the same each time.
So, answer me this WHY do people, including myself who knows more or less where it is, NOT HEAR IT RELIABLY??
Magique?
Listener bias?
Sighted bias?
Atmospheric pressure?
Outside noise?
Bad breakfast?
...what?
_-_-
...I have an especially nice, excellent performance of one of Rachmaninoff's piano concertos, by George Bolet (a fabulous pianist, one of the best, imo) with Dutoit. Imo, Ashkenazy by comparison doesn't understand how to play these pieces, or have the vital subtle techniques. But that's not the story here.
In the piece there is a quiet passage, where someone wacks a music stand.
I'd guarantee that even playing that same passage +/- 3mins of the wack that most of the time no one in the room will hear or notice the wack. It is there.
The speaker reproduces it the same each time.
So, answer me this WHY do people, including myself who knows more or less where it is, NOT HEAR IT RELIABLY??
Magique?
Listener bias?
Sighted bias?
Atmospheric pressure?
Outside noise?
Bad breakfast?
...what?
_-_-
Tell us more?
What is the mechanism suggested that is behind the increase in IMD with the different metals on these connectors? Very interested. What sort of signal levels? Is it linear with level?
_-_-bear
Fine.
Run some tests. Will look forward to the results.
We can discuss the "switching rate" assuming you can meet the following:
Do proper measurements of the system used in the testing.
Post them. (never seen that yet)
Use source material that actually doesn't mask differences.
(that's tricky to figure out)
(FWIW the prime advocate for ABX sent out CDs with source material that would never, ever, reveal many differences as "proof" of his findings)
Show the specifics of the gear, the room (measurements again) and
the subjects.
Do a control test or tests.
Show what the discernible level of "difference" detectable in your test system is.
Make it so the test can be replicated (you know "scientific").
There are some other finer points, but this is a good start...
Publish the paper, I'll be happy to read it and revise any and all ideas on the subject, as warranted.
_-_-bear
This kind of thing has been researched and studied. It turns out System 1 brain processing is not good at sorting out the unexpected in this case and then forwarding it to System 2. If System 1 had triggered on the unexpected event as at threat, then it would have been quite obvious to System 2. But System 1 was operating in pattern recognition mode where it filters out noise when extracting a signal of a type it understands. It may help to recall that ears pick up only vibrations in the air. Turning those into words, musical pitches, and other learned patterns or familiar patterns involves a lot of intermediate processing that is not observable by System 2. Not hearing the noise is kind of similar to being able to understand words spoken with slightly different accents. System 1 extracts the meaning and you hear words, not jiberish, at least if you know the language. If you never heard music before, you would be much more likely to pay attention to non-musical information as much as musical. However, you might be overwhelmed by all the unfamiliar data coming in and not be able to make much of anything out of it, since System 1 would be doing very little automatic processing to help you out.
Unfortunately, I don't think I have equipment at my disposal that you would require to hear the most subtle differences. If someone does have such equipment and can find somebody who claims to hear cable directivity with any reliability, I would be happy to help out however I can.
Or just peek and tell everyone how exquisite your senses are, why using ears only isn't valid for determining what you hear, and by the way, here's some stuff to buy if you're sufficiently worthy.
Or just peek and tell everyone how exquisite your senses are, why using ears only isn't valid for determining what you hear, and by the way, here's some stuff to buy if you're sufficiently worthy.
SY, you're a bright guy.
You probably know more about many things than I will ever hope to know.
You are also a moderator.
Your comments are tantamount to cow excrement frankly.
I am SELLING NOTHING. Zip, nil, nada.
I NEVER said that my senses are better than yours or anyone else's.
Your post gives the appearance of being one from a individual of significant personal insecurity, btw.
What you just said is an unwarranted personal attack, you ought to apologize and realize this.
_-_-bear
I believe I recommended this interview be read some posts back.
I think CH must be a courageous glutton for punishment as he recounts for a second time the huge difference he heard before and after elevating one short section of a power cord in a Ayre tradeshow room, where otherwise all of the cables were elevated thus. Even my most-tweako of friends, one who now categorically refuses any intrusion of "sand-state" devices into his audio chains, and talks of tube "magic", questioned this account a few years ago the first time he read it.
I think this sort of thing puts claims of cable directionality, microdiodes, tunnelling, alleged quantum effects, and the sound of different metals into a relatively more plausible light. It's positively spooky, but I suspect strongly idiosyncratic. Invocation of elementals and the practice of Feng Shui come to mind, radionics, etc.
I was impressed about his purchase of Toshiba JFETs to the extent of a 50 year supply when he heard that they were being discontinued. I probably have with 900 or so pieces at least a 50 year supply, since I wouldn't use a discontinued part in anything other than an experimental device.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.