L,C and R that's all folks
While all this talk of solder alloys, microphony and DA may be interesting stuff as far as what may or may not make an audible difference, I think that, like it or not, we are all actually in agreement regarding L,C and R. The proof is in the pudding. Here's why. Let's take a theoretically perfect conductor as an example, it has 0 ohms R, 0 farads C, and 0 henrys L. You can make it as long or short as you like, you can make it blue if you like, but those are it's L,C, and R properties. Now we have a current running through it, and a voltage impressed upon that current. We'll make them steady state for the example. Now is there anyone who would like to step up to the mic and say that you can change that current in any way without increasing either L,C, or R? Or, would someone like to explain another property that must be defined before the above can be defined as an ideal conductor? In all of these examples of what there is that is more than my holy trinity, you have all explained your effects in terms of L,C, and R. Really.
Carlos, shame on you! The physics community gave you your audio in the first place and this is how you repay them? As Jorge said earlier, audio is engineering. Plain and simple. There are no effects that can be defined beyond the L,C and R of a conductor.
Z is simply a function of the L,C,and R with frequency added in. Frequency is not a property of the conductor.
I didn't go to Uni, I have to think for myself.
Chris.
While all this talk of solder alloys, microphony and DA may be interesting stuff as far as what may or may not make an audible difference, I think that, like it or not, we are all actually in agreement regarding L,C and R. The proof is in the pudding. Here's why. Let's take a theoretically perfect conductor as an example, it has 0 ohms R, 0 farads C, and 0 henrys L. You can make it as long or short as you like, you can make it blue if you like, but those are it's L,C, and R properties. Now we have a current running through it, and a voltage impressed upon that current. We'll make them steady state for the example. Now is there anyone who would like to step up to the mic and say that you can change that current in any way without increasing either L,C, or R? Or, would someone like to explain another property that must be defined before the above can be defined as an ideal conductor? In all of these examples of what there is that is more than my holy trinity, you have all explained your effects in terms of L,C, and R. Really.
Carlos, shame on you! The physics community gave you your audio in the first place and this is how you repay them? As Jorge said earlier, audio is engineering. Plain and simple. There are no effects that can be defined beyond the L,C and R of a conductor.
Z is simply a function of the L,C,and R with frequency added in. Frequency is not a property of the conductor.
I didn't go to Uni, I have to think for myself.
Chris.
Hi,
Good to know for I haven't got the foggiest idea what it was you were on about.
Naturally that will inevitably turn me into a blind Shaolin priest again.
Still, better be blind than deaf, I reckon.
Is there actually ANY point in your arguments, by any chance?
Or are you just teaching the assumedly unwashed your ex cathedra assumptions?
Can we get this back on track?
Good to know for I haven't got the foggiest idea what it was you were on about.
Naturally that will inevitably turn me into a blind Shaolin priest again.
Still, better be blind than deaf, I reckon.
Is there actually ANY point in your arguments, by any chance?
Or are you just teaching the assumedly unwashed your ex cathedra assumptions?
Can we get this back on track?
fdegrove said:
What I was on about can be summed up with "Frank, what the hell are you talking about?"
I asked a question regarding the specific mechanism in wire (i.e. the conductor material itself) would produce a non-linearity of the signal which would result in different conductor materials having different signatures of their own.
So I wasn't making an argument so much as asking a question. Your replies seemed to have nothing to do with the question itself and included a number of rather criptic statements which could have come out of an old episode of Kung Fu.
How does asking a question constitute teaching any sort of assumption?
Can we get this back on track?
What, is this the Chattanooga Choo-Choo or something?
se
Re: L,C and R that's all folks
Um, R would be the only inherent property of the conductor. L and C are a function of geometry. So what is the "ideal" geometry that you would use with an "ideal" conductor which gives you an L and C of 0, keeping in mind that current requires a closed loop to flow through?
I'm still wondering how you're getting ANY current to flow.
How 'bout instead you define an ideal conductor as simply one with zero resistance, and that for a given geometry, the loop formed with such an ideal conductor will exhibit a given inductance and capacitance?
In your Holy Trinity of L, C and R, are you assuming that voltage and current always maintain linear relationships?
se
Christopher said:
Um, R would be the only inherent property of the conductor. L and C are a function of geometry. So what is the "ideal" geometry that you would use with an "ideal" conductor which gives you an L and C of 0, keeping in mind that current requires a closed loop to flow through?
I'm still wondering how you're getting ANY current to flow.
How 'bout instead you define an ideal conductor as simply one with zero resistance, and that for a given geometry, the loop formed with such an ideal conductor will exhibit a given inductance and capacitance?
In your Holy Trinity of L, C and R, are you assuming that voltage and current always maintain linear relationships?
se
Hi,
Steve,
I suppose you refer to my post #1286.
When you look at the inserted quote, you'll notice that it wasn't addressed at you but at Christoper.
Chris ans Steve,
The assumption of an ideal conductor in an ideal world will never get you anywhere for it simply can not exist.
Even the most ideal piece of bare wire will inevitably show R and L.
Cheers,
P.S. I hope it's just cryptic enough for all to understand.
Steve,
I suppose you refer to my post #1286.
When you look at the inserted quote, you'll notice that it wasn't addressed at you but at Christoper.
Chris ans Steve,
The assumption of an ideal conductor in an ideal world will never get you anywhere for it simply can not exist.
Even the most ideal piece of bare wire will inevitably show R and L.
Cheers,
P.S. I hope it's just cryptic enough for all to understand.
Re: L,C and R that's all folks
Take two cables:
200m long, 100pF/m, 100mH/m, 100nH/m
100m long, 200pF/m, 200mH/m, 200nH/m
Apply a voltage pulse to one end of each cable, and observe the other ends - chances are it will come out of the 100m cable first, even though both measure identically in terms of end-to-end L, C and R.
There are other properties like this - it's not quite as simple as L, C and R numbers.
Cheers
IH
Christopher said:
Take two cables:
200m long, 100pF/m, 100mH/m, 100nH/m
100m long, 200pF/m, 200mH/m, 200nH/m
Apply a voltage pulse to one end of each cable, and observe the other ends - chances are it will come out of the 100m cable first, even though both measure identically in terms of end-to-end L, C and R.
There are other properties like this - it's not quite as simple as L, C and R numbers.
Cheers
IH
Re: Re: L,C and R that's all folks
Of course distance plays a part! But the velocity factor, of which you hint at above, is solely the result of the distributed LCR characteristic of the cable. The dominant factor affecting the delay time in coaxial cable, besides length, is the dielectric. Higher k dielectrics lead to longer delay times.
Some fascinating applications come about because of this, but they are all definitely off topic for this site
IanHarvey said:
Of course distance plays a part! But the velocity factor, of which you hint at above, is solely the result of the distributed LCR characteristic of the cable. The dominant factor affecting the delay time in coaxial cable, besides length, is the dielectric. Higher k dielectrics lead to longer delay times.
Some fascinating applications come about because of this, but they are all definitely off topic for this site
Re: L,C and R that's all folks
Wasn't it the nuclear bomb?
IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I SAID OR YOU JUST DON'T WHANT TO?
When you put the osciloscope probes at the end of the cable you're not only measuring the cable's properties.
You're measuring the final result of that cable with THAT AMP!
Only the ideal cable, as you say, would have the right properties for any amp.
That's all.
So simple...
Christopher said:
Wasn't it the nuclear bomb?
IS IT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I SAID OR YOU JUST DON'T WHANT TO?
When you put the osciloscope probes at the end of the cable you're not only measuring the cable's properties.
You're measuring the final result of that cable with THAT AMP!
Only the ideal cable, as you say, would have the right properties for any amp.
That's all.
So simple...
The sound of cables...
I'm sorry to say that i must agree with Chris...you missed the point again!!
Reread the test...it's done with the osciloscope connected between the + (or-) connector of the amp...and the + (or -) of the loudspeaker connector...
If the test is done as you say at the end of the cable...then you are right in:
Yes...More the result of that amp with this particular load (speaker) connected...
Right...and we can consider near ideal 10 cm of wire...connect this 10 cm between amp and speaker...of corse puting the loudspeaker back to back with the amp...measure...and the cable that come close to this, is the "near " ideal cable...
I hope that finally you will think so!!!
carlosfm said:
I'm sorry to say that i must agree with Chris...you missed the point again!!
Reread the test...it's done with the osciloscope connected between the + (or-) connector of the amp...and the + (or -) of the loudspeaker connector...
If the test is done as you say at the end of the cable...then you are right in:
Yes...More the result of that amp with this particular load (speaker) connected...
Right...and we can consider near ideal 10 cm of wire...connect this 10 cm between amp and speaker...of corse puting the loudspeaker back to back with the amp...measure...and the cable that come close to this, is the "near " ideal cable...
I hope that finally you will think so!!!
Ok let me put this another way [b]Arrrrrrrrgh![/b]
It's an
ABSTRACT
THOUGHT
EXPERIMENT
No Frank, this condutor does not exist, it cannot exist. Theory is based on ideals. There is no such thing as 0, much less -1 (get it? that's a good one, he he). But where would math be without them? Most of you guys have more education than I do, did you never come accross terms like infinately small, or infinately long or what ever?
How am I getting current to flow? What? For crying out loud you guys are making this way more complex than it needs to be.
Steve almost got there,
No, it's an ideal. And it doesn't have to form a loop at all. Mind you I do see your point, if it has no resistance then it cannot have inductance, and capacitance is a funtion of 2 conductors so that's a given.
Perhaps this will help. Imagine a voltage divider, connecting the 2 resistors is a conductor, it doesn't matter whether it's a wire, or the grill off a '57 Biscane, it has ideal properties no L,C,R. I can measure any property of the current going through my grill either at the top or the bottom and it will be exactly the same. OK? Now if I want to see any difference of any kind, there are only 3 parameters I can change in my grill, L,C,R. That's it.
As for length, if it's an ideal conductor, yes the pulse will be measured at different times along the conductor, but the properties of the pulse will not change. And length is another thing people get hung up on that doesn't matter. The return line needs to be the same length as the signal line right? Wrong, doesn't matter. (theoretically speaking of course) Granted 2 condutors both carying signal to the same place should be the same length, but at audio frequencies, it'll have to be a pretty big difference before it's audible.
What I said in the first place way back was if you can hear a difference between two cables, you will be able to measure a difference in L,C, or R between those 2 cables. Nothing more. Really Z is the only parameter that matters, and it has only LCR and f to consider. We already know what effects these parameters in normal configurations, and it's no big deal. Especially in speaker cable, I mean look at the reactance that it hits when it hits the speaker, it dwarfs any characteristics you can measure in a speaker cable. The only thing you should be trying to improve with cables is noise rejection. And some very high end cables stink at this.
I swear though, if my Ideal concductor did exist, and I made cables out of it, some of you guys would be trying to change colours to get it to sound better.
Sheesh!
And now I think I'll go over here and quietly go insane.
Chris
It's an
ABSTRACT
THOUGHT
EXPERIMENT
No Frank, this condutor does not exist, it cannot exist. Theory is based on ideals. There is no such thing as 0, much less -1 (get it? that's a good one, he he). But where would math be without them? Most of you guys have more education than I do, did you never come accross terms like infinately small, or infinately long or what ever?
How am I getting current to flow? What? For crying out loud you guys are making this way more complex than it needs to be.
Steve almost got there,
No, it's an ideal. And it doesn't have to form a loop at all. Mind you I do see your point, if it has no resistance then it cannot have inductance, and capacitance is a funtion of 2 conductors so that's a given.
Perhaps this will help. Imagine a voltage divider, connecting the 2 resistors is a conductor, it doesn't matter whether it's a wire, or the grill off a '57 Biscane, it has ideal properties no L,C,R. I can measure any property of the current going through my grill either at the top or the bottom and it will be exactly the same. OK? Now if I want to see any difference of any kind, there are only 3 parameters I can change in my grill, L,C,R. That's it.
As for length, if it's an ideal conductor, yes the pulse will be measured at different times along the conductor, but the properties of the pulse will not change. And length is another thing people get hung up on that doesn't matter. The return line needs to be the same length as the signal line right? Wrong, doesn't matter. (theoretically speaking of course) Granted 2 condutors both carying signal to the same place should be the same length, but at audio frequencies, it'll have to be a pretty big difference before it's audible.
What I said in the first place way back was if you can hear a difference between two cables, you will be able to measure a difference in L,C, or R between those 2 cables. Nothing more. Really Z is the only parameter that matters, and it has only LCR and f to consider. We already know what effects these parameters in normal configurations, and it's no big deal. Especially in speaker cable, I mean look at the reactance that it hits when it hits the speaker, it dwarfs any characteristics you can measure in a speaker cable. The only thing you should be trying to improve with cables is noise rejection. And some very high end cables stink at this.
I swear though, if my Ideal concductor did exist, and I made cables out of it, some of you guys would be trying to change colours to get it to sound better.
Sheesh!
And now I think I'll go over here and quietly go insane.
Chris
Hi,
If ever you succeed I want mine in Benetton.
Chris,
As you point out yourself, we don't live in an ideal world with neither ideal cables, amps or speakers.
Therefore it comes as no surprise that different cable will act/sound different in different systems...
That, I am afraid, is reality...the rest is pure theory.
Cheers,
If ever you succeed I want mine in Benetton.
Chris,
As you point out yourself, we don't live in an ideal world with neither ideal cables, amps or speakers.
Therefore it comes as no surprise that different cable will act/sound different in different systems...
That, I am afraid, is reality...the rest is pure theory.
Cheers,
Re: The sound of cables...
Yes, I'm missing the point, because I don't understand how either way you take the amp completely out of the question.
Anyway, if having a different oppinion is missing the point, then I missed several times.
10 cm is still a wire, and some speakers have plenty if internal wire.
And you don't specify thickness, layout...
You may solder the chip (a power op-amp) to the woofer terminals.
And another for the tweeter.
And make that speaker active.
Jorge, I understand what you mean, but I think that by measuring a bunch of cables you could get some conclusions, of course.
But would you pick the best cable for your system just by measuring and without listening?
I don't think so.
It could happen once, but it would be pure luck.
As a simple example, if your system tends to be bright, and you don't whant to spend money on gear, you can try Supra speaker cables.
Would that be the best cable for your system?
Of course not (it is, but only for you).
It's just a compromise, but you may get a sound you like better.
I don't talk about "black magic", that thing doesn't exist.
I'm talking about personal taste.
And that's why audio is subjective.
Trying to measure cables and get reliable conclusions is impossible, at least for me.
You simply can't explain everything by numbers.
As I said, cables are weird animals.
Oh, and welcome back, man.
Tube_Dude said:
Yes, I'm missing the point, because I don't understand how either way you take the amp completely out of the question.
Anyway, if having a different oppinion is missing the point, then I missed several times.
Tube_Dude said:
10 cm is still a wire, and some speakers have plenty if internal wire.
And you don't specify thickness, layout...
You may solder the chip (a power op-amp) to the woofer terminals.
And another for the tweeter.
And make that speaker active.
Jorge, I understand what you mean, but I think that by measuring a bunch of cables you could get some conclusions, of course.
But would you pick the best cable for your system just by measuring and without listening?
I don't think so.
It could happen once, but it would be pure luck.
As a simple example, if your system tends to be bright, and you don't whant to spend money on gear, you can try Supra speaker cables.
Would that be the best cable for your system?
Of course not (it is, but only for you).
It's just a compromise, but you may get a sound you like better.
I don't talk about "black magic", that thing doesn't exist.
I'm talking about personal taste.
And that's why audio is subjective.
Trying to measure cables and get reliable conclusions is impossible, at least for me.
You simply can't explain everything by numbers.
As I said, cables are weird animals.
Oh, and welcome back, man.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.