Time for Santa to take over?
This thread is just getting more and more confused and maybe
it is time to just say Merry Christmas and forget about it? Anyway,
instead of quoting and commenting directly on other recent
postings, let me just try to briefly sum up my "view".
First, I have not posted in the thread with any intention of
deliberately annoying anyone, but rather with an honest
intention of trying to help structure the discussion (it is not
for me to judge if I have had any success or just failed miserably).
Second, I am not running anybody elses errands and I am not
deliberately supporting or attacking anybody. The thread is
much too confused for me to even know if I share the same
view as someone else.
Third, why did I participate in the discussion? Well, John Curl
belongs to those who perceives an audible difference between
certain cables (let's not get into the dicsussion of whether
these differences are real or not, we have discussed that
endlessly in other threads). However, John also started to
measure his cables. Obviously, he was not satisfied with
the "I hear, therefore it is" attitude, but also wanted to
try finding a reason for this perceived difference. I applaud
him for doing so. I assume he did this for an honest and genuine
interest in trying to find a reason for the difference, whatever
it happens to be. I thus also assume that he is not interested
in fooling himself with erroneous measurements or wrong
conclusions, just to fit in with how he wants things to be.
I am not assuming he tries or wants to do academic research, just
that he honestly tries to do his best to study the phenomenon.
I have tried to help him by pointing out certain weak points in
the studies and arguments that need further consideration.
Johns findings may be considered controversial since they
are not directly or easily explained by the usual theory and we
have only a failed attempt at repeating the experiment (or
a similar one, rather). This does not mean his measurements
are wrong, but it certainly raises a warning flag that further
studies must be done to conclude anything. The first step
might be that someone else can repeat the experiment and
get similar results, either with the same cables or with others.
Also remember that a measurement is just a measurement,
it cannot tell us the cause of the data we get.
So, I am not claiming that Johns measurements are wrong,
just that they could be, and we need more studies to be done,
before we can possibly know anything.
Of course, if my assumptions are wrong and John is only
interested in getting the data he wants, rather than the truth,
then the whole discussion is pointless.However I prefer to believe
in my assumptions that John honestly is trying to find, or at
least get closer to, the truth, even if it turns out not be what
he had expected.
This thread is just getting more and more confused and maybe
it is time to just say Merry Christmas and forget about it? Anyway,
instead of quoting and commenting directly on other recent
postings, let me just try to briefly sum up my "view".
First, I have not posted in the thread with any intention of
deliberately annoying anyone, but rather with an honest
intention of trying to help structure the discussion (it is not
for me to judge if I have had any success or just failed miserably).
Second, I am not running anybody elses errands and I am not
deliberately supporting or attacking anybody. The thread is
much too confused for me to even know if I share the same
view as someone else.
Third, why did I participate in the discussion? Well, John Curl
belongs to those who perceives an audible difference between
certain cables (let's not get into the dicsussion of whether
these differences are real or not, we have discussed that
endlessly in other threads). However, John also started to
measure his cables. Obviously, he was not satisfied with
the "I hear, therefore it is" attitude, but also wanted to
try finding a reason for this perceived difference. I applaud
him for doing so. I assume he did this for an honest and genuine
interest in trying to find a reason for the difference, whatever
it happens to be. I thus also assume that he is not interested
in fooling himself with erroneous measurements or wrong
conclusions, just to fit in with how he wants things to be.
I am not assuming he tries or wants to do academic research, just
that he honestly tries to do his best to study the phenomenon.
I have tried to help him by pointing out certain weak points in
the studies and arguments that need further consideration.
Johns findings may be considered controversial since they
are not directly or easily explained by the usual theory and we
have only a failed attempt at repeating the experiment (or
a similar one, rather). This does not mean his measurements
are wrong, but it certainly raises a warning flag that further
studies must be done to conclude anything. The first step
might be that someone else can repeat the experiment and
get similar results, either with the same cables or with others.
Also remember that a measurement is just a measurement,
it cannot tell us the cause of the data we get.
So, I am not claiming that Johns measurements are wrong,
just that they could be, and we need more studies to be done,
before we can possibly know anything.
Of course, if my assumptions are wrong and John is only
interested in getting the data he wants, rather than the truth,
then the whole discussion is pointless.However I prefer to believe
in my assumptions that John honestly is trying to find, or at
least get closer to, the truth, even if it turns out not be what
he had expected.
Spooky Action At A Distance...........
There are further effects in cables not covered here.
I cannot give details but suffice it to say that I can walk up to any system cables and instantly change the sonic nature of any system.
And repeatedly and reliably.......
And showing up in ultimate blind testing, and favourably so......
And under knowing conditions, there is universal preference for treated cables in any system........
Insulation and wire materials sonic effects become less important.........
This seems weird sure, but it is perfectly real......
And addictive too (no going back) are some user reports.
Cable conductors and insulations add/subtract tones and dynamic behaviours in a manner sort of like the way jitter in digital systems adds junk.
Digital jitter magnitude is important, but of more sonic importance is the spectral/dynamic behaviour of the system jitter.
Cables add/subtract spectral and dynamic behaviours that may or may not be universally agreeable, and this can be changed in an instant.
Inductance, capacitance, DA, DH, micro-diodes etc are only part of the story.
Just some food for thought............
Eric.
There are further effects in cables not covered here.
I cannot give details but suffice it to say that I can walk up to any system cables and instantly change the sonic nature of any system.
And repeatedly and reliably.......
And showing up in ultimate blind testing, and favourably so......
And under knowing conditions, there is universal preference for treated cables in any system........
Insulation and wire materials sonic effects become less important.........
This seems weird sure, but it is perfectly real......
And addictive too (no going back) are some user reports.
Cable conductors and insulations add/subtract tones and dynamic behaviours in a manner sort of like the way jitter in digital systems adds junk.
Digital jitter magnitude is important, but of more sonic importance is the spectral/dynamic behaviour of the system jitter.
Cables add/subtract spectral and dynamic behaviours that may or may not be universally agreeable, and this can be changed in an instant.
Inductance, capacitance, DA, DH, micro-diodes etc are only part of the story.
Just some food for thought............
Eric.
From my understanding, the position of your ears within the room will probably have as large of effect on the sonics as your interaction with the cable. You turning your head has an effect. But you know this sort of stuff. Even someone else's change in position within the room (walking over to the cable) and your ears unmoved will have effects. Also, it seems, for such subtle changes, thermal and air currents within the room will be as influential as interaction with shielded I/Cs.
JF
JF
Re: Spooky Action At A Distance...........
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for anyoen of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc.
mrfeedback said:
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for anyoen of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc.
johnferrier said:
you are so right on. For every reason why cables make a sonic difference, I can write equally convincing reasons why thermal nuclear fusion two galaxies away make a sonic difference here in your living room.
the moral of the story? the fact it makes a difference is irrelevant. We need to show that such difference can be heard. If it is not audible, it might as well don't exist.
ya Just Gunna have To Take My Word on This (Sorry No Proofs Yet.......)
Originally posted by millwood
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for any of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
Sure, but there are three professional live sound guys who could (very) happily confirm this if they were DIY members.
A couple of well heeled audiophiles too.
My local FM community radio station listeners are hearing such cables too, but they don't know about them - comments from several station connected personnel is that the recieved audio is better/nicer since I became technical support for the station.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
I have completely confirmed the sonic effects on a multitude of systems in a multitude of situations, but alas, I am still working on determining the actual mechanism.
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
When I bother to say things like this it is only after vigourous and very much repeated A/B testing.
My comments are intended as very real food for thought (confirmation) that there are a bunch of mechanisms/parameters interacting in cables.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc.
More than ten years ago, my flat-mate and I used to practice blind testing with 5 different CDP-power amp interconnects.
After only a few days we were both able to get 100% scores reliably - it is not that difficult on a high-res system.
Audio systems are full of materials sounds and the trick is to get a combination that sounds detailed AND pleasing.
I have heard plenty of very expensive, very clean, very nice systems and cables that just leave me cold, fatigued or even irritated.
The effects that John and Frank have been discussing are real enough, but are not the only effects.
Eric.
Originally posted by millwood
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for any of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
Sure, but there are three professional live sound guys who could (very) happily confirm this if they were DIY members.
A couple of well heeled audiophiles too.
My local FM community radio station listeners are hearing such cables too, but they don't know about them - comments from several station connected personnel is that the recieved audio is better/nicer since I became technical support for the station.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
I have completely confirmed the sonic effects on a multitude of systems in a multitude of situations, but alas, I am still working on determining the actual mechanism.
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
When I bother to say things like this it is only after vigourous and very much repeated A/B testing.
My comments are intended as very real food for thought (confirmation) that there are a bunch of mechanisms/parameters interacting in cables.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc.
More than ten years ago, my flat-mate and I used to practice blind testing with 5 different CDP-power amp interconnects.
After only a few days we were both able to get 100% scores reliably - it is not that difficult on a high-res system.
Audio systems are full of materials sounds and the trick is to get a combination that sounds detailed AND pleasing.
I have heard plenty of very expensive, very clean, very nice systems and cables that just leave me cold, fatigued or even irritated.
The effects that John and Frank have been discussing are real enough, but are not the only effects.
Eric.
Re: I Should Change My name To Frank.........
You're marketing, Eric. Your "cannot give details" is for the purpose of protecting your own commercial interests. And your empty claims are nothing more than marketing tools for those commercial interests.
Again, take it to Trading Post.
se
mrfeedback said:
You're marketing, Eric. Your "cannot give details" is for the purpose of protecting your own commercial interests. And your empty claims are nothing more than marketing tools for those commercial interests.
Again, take it to Trading Post.
se
Re: Nothing Subtle About It.........
Of course, it's hard to "compare apples to oranges", but I'm somewhat familiar with testing to meet the EMC requirements for CE (European Directives). Equipment is subjected to radiated fields of 10V per meter and the frequency is swept from 80Mhz to 1Ghz. Shielded cables a pretty good at blocking that type of interference. And a person will generate a field, but nothing on the order of 10V per meter. Again, this is not the same test setup as you are using.
Beyond EMC testing, there are people involved with the design of interconnects (vias) for cutting edge ICs that I would think would have a hard times comprehending some of these "effects".
I may be playing this both ways, but I'm trying to understand (and offer some information to the discussion).
JF
mrfeedback said:
Of course, it's hard to "compare apples to oranges", but I'm somewhat familiar with testing to meet the EMC requirements for CE (European Directives). Equipment is subjected to radiated fields of 10V per meter and the frequency is swept from 80Mhz to 1Ghz. Shielded cables a pretty good at blocking that type of interference. And a person will generate a field, but nothing on the order of 10V per meter. Again, this is not the same test setup as you are using.
Beyond EMC testing, there are people involved with the design of interconnects (vias) for cutting edge ICs that I would think would have a hard times comprehending some of these "effects".
I may be playing this both ways, but I'm trying to understand (and offer some information to the discussion).
JF
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I Should Change My name To Frank.........
Whatever the things are that he's plugging into the sound reinformcement systems in bars and nightclubs that he takes every opportunity to brag about how people from the crowd and the club owners come up to him telling him how great the sound was.
se
millwood said:Orh, that explains Mr. Feedback's eagerness in defending the cables.
talk about fair view,
What brand of cables does Mr. Feedback make and market?
Whatever the things are that he's plugging into the sound reinformcement systems in bars and nightclubs that he takes every opportunity to brag about how people from the crowd and the club owners come up to him telling him how great the sound was.
se
Hi,
In defense of Eric, last time I checked he's not selling any cables under any brandname.
From what I gathered from telephone conversation and reading his postings it's more a service rather than a product.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Eric.
It's easy to mock what one doesn't understand, isn't it?
Cheers,
In defense of Eric, last time I checked he's not selling any cables under any brandname.
From what I gathered from telephone conversation and reading his postings it's more a service rather than a product.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Eric.
It's easy to mock what one doesn't understand, isn't it?
Cheers,
By the way, getting back to the original topic, I've sent John a complete set of cables. An old Radio Shack Gold, a brand new, unused Radio Shack Gold, some bog standard giveaway A/V cable from my DishNetwork boxes, and a length of RG 174/U which has a copper clad steel core which I thought would be interesting seeing as there's no arguing that ferromagnetic materials produce distortion.
I've sent Bruno the same cables except for the brand new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U. I thought the new Radio Shack Golds that I bought were a left/right pair but they were a mono cable and I still haven't got 'round to getting another one. I'd already had the other cables ready to ship to Bruno when I decided to add the RG 174/U so I'll be sending Bruno the new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U in a separate shipment which I should be able to get out by the end of the week.
So hopefully sometime around the first of the year we should have a more directly comparable set of measurements made using John's setup and the System Two Cascade and put to rest any objections that the two were not measuring the same cables.
se
I've sent Bruno the same cables except for the brand new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U. I thought the new Radio Shack Golds that I bought were a left/right pair but they were a mono cable and I still haven't got 'round to getting another one. I'd already had the other cables ready to ship to Bruno when I decided to add the RG 174/U so I'll be sending Bruno the new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U in a separate shipment which I should be able to get out by the end of the week.
So hopefully sometime around the first of the year we should have a more directly comparable set of measurements made using John's setup and the System Two Cascade and put to rest any objections that the two were not measuring the same cables.
se
fdegrove said:
Whether you want to call it a "service" or a "product" it has a commercial interest behind it and he "cannot give details" in order to protect that commercial interest.
It's marketing just the same.
Bottom line is that this is supposed to be a technical discussion. And techincal discussions involve details. If you're going to make a bunch of empty, hand-waving technical claims and then when it comes to details run and hide behind commercial interests (which you're doing as well, Frank), then you're just wasting everyone's time.
Once again, take it to Trading Post.
se
- Status
- Not open for further replies.