I know engineers might buy stuff based on data, always assumed they did it via listening. As a matter of fact. One store in Taiwan offered a customer two pairs of cables to bring home and listen or test, one was mine, and another was a product twice the price. The customer returned the one twice the price. This particular customer was looking for cables because the ones he had were 10 times the price of mine, and the sound was getting on his nerves. He called me up and asked whether my design would work on all systems, my answer was no, and explained why. I have had one return which the customer said it sounded too fatiguing in his system.
Hi DPH.
Yes, I am talking about the 'Feynman' level of understanding.
I do understand Maxwells equations and Ohms law scattering well enough to know that they include 'fudge' factors and/or ignore 'insignificant' factors.
IOW they do not explain all there is to know about electrical energy transfer in conductors.
2.1.2 Ohms Law and Classical Physics and associated links is useful reading (Goole Chrome translate may be needed).
Dan.
I might totally misunderstand what you are saying.
For my measurement of directionality of a RG58 BNC with the help of a signal generator and scope you say that it has no value because a stereo has a delayed response which masks "much audibility of changes". My signal generator is flat to 1 MHz, the scope used is a 400 MHz baby. Does that gear have too little bandwidth to overcome delayed release?
Later you wrote that energy was stored "Almost anywhere in the playback system" and that you can hear directionality in your stereo.
So what I don't get: at the one hand my listening test on my stereo didn't count because it's not good enough. Measuring, which led to the same result, also doesn't count, because delays of stored energy need to be considered. For me there is a conflict in the two statements.
What corner points would a system need (bandwidth, slew rate, distortion) to show cable directionality?
Wrong guy. Anyhow, I will politely remind you of a 'Feynman' quote:
(Although I wouldn't be surprised if the quote precedes him)
Also, please read the document you link to its full extent rather than trying to play with cute out of context quotes. Explain how you plan on having a directional cable that isn't showing some sort of band shift from one end to the other. Or how that works with AC...
Recently was playing around here with a GPS Disciplined 10 Mhz standard, a distribution amp, and a scope.
I was playing with various lengths of coax to see the real time effects of delay with cable length.
it was interesting to actually See the effects at RF, but at audio it would take very long lines to see.
None of the cables I have ever used show any form of directional difference.
(and I have used cables thinner than a pencil lead up to nearly 2" pressurized hard line)
At RF it would be great if wires were actually directional; Think of all the money that could be saved.
Instead we spend a lot of effort (and money) trying to make the signal go in the direction that we want it to go.
I was playing with various lengths of coax to see the real time effects of delay with cable length.
it was interesting to actually See the effects at RF, but at audio it would take very long lines to see.
None of the cables I have ever used show any form of directional difference.
(and I have used cables thinner than a pencil lead up to nearly 2" pressurized hard line)
At RF it would be great if wires were actually directional; Think of all the money that could be saved.
Instead we spend a lot of effort (and money) trying to make the signal go in the direction that we want it to go.
I used to run some hard line in my Amateur radio station.
I have some nice Silver Teflon cable I use now as interconnects in my Amateur Radio station.
It's way overkill but I wanted the flexibility and power handling in a thin cable.
Though it can be lossy at UHF and UP so I only use it for short runs and mostly for HF.
Side Note:
I was tempted to hook up a scope and feed a audio signal down
a section of parallel barbed wire and then down a section of
Silver Teflon coax and see if people could see or here the difference.
I have some nice Silver Teflon cable I use now as interconnects in my Amateur Radio station.
It's way overkill but I wanted the flexibility and power handling in a thin cable.
Though it can be lossy at UHF and UP so I only use it for short runs and mostly for HF.
Side Note:
I was tempted to hook up a scope and feed a audio signal down
a section of parallel barbed wire and then down a section of
Silver Teflon coax and see if people could see or here the difference.
A stereo store salesman told me he attended an MIT Cables demonstration at a CES show in Las Vegas.
They had a full roll of interconnect cable unwound, terminated, and rewound onto its bulk cable spool. Then plugged it into a very expensive system. He said the P.R.A.T. sounded as great as the other channel, connected with a 1 metre cable, proving their networks will fix even a 100 foot long interconnect.
I said, or it proved a near lightspeed signal isn't affected by a 97 foot difference in wire length.
Even a deep bass signal wavelength is only 50 or 60 feet long, almost a point at near lightspeed.
He accused me of not "getting it".
I said, yeah? Get this: and told awaiting customers to ask him to tap his feet to the beat, even when less expensive non Linn systems are being auditioned.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.