George - I've measured this myself, on my own speakers, and heard the difference. Its from a high output impedance and yes it does change the sound. But this is not a mystery, not some unexplainable phenomina and most of all its not "good sound quality". Its different, less flat, but people always think different is better and convince themselves that it "sounds better". Some tube amps are high in distortion to the point where this too is audible and, same thing, different is better. But its not "better". And when all of this is controlled for, it all goes away.
The explanation for all the unexplained, from CAM to Cables:
Just make up new physics/science as you need it and everything falls into place.
Mindblowing, truly.
Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. - The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine - 16(3):327
Just make up new physics/science as you need it and everything falls into place.
Mindblowing, truly.
Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. - The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine - 16(3):327
While I get what you are saying about euphonics I think you also have to consider that what we are accustomed to in all likely hood (in terms of stereo imaging and reproduction) is a distortion itself already. To me I always thought of the tube thing as a case for "same is better" and basically anything that is different is a distortion from what the listener is acclimated to. Similar to film grain. But it can be both especially considering I use a tube amp for guitar and I was born after the proliferation of solid state. But yeah in terms of cables, tubes, euphonics and perceived differences in a playback system I would agree 100%.
Posted by audio-kraut -
"Mindblowing, truly."
How about homeopathic cables? We feed them a very dilute distortion. So dilute it is no longer audible. And that'll make the signal all better.
Then when someone says the result is in-audible, you can say, "No, they're homeopathic cables!"
Although, I am pretty sure that " The second level of physical reality" is the reality where my stereo and ears are better than eveyone elses anyway. At least that's what my horoscope says.
"Mindblowing, truly."
How about homeopathic cables? We feed them a very dilute distortion. So dilute it is no longer audible. And that'll make the signal all better.
Then when someone says the result is in-audible, you can say, "No, they're homeopathic cables!"
Although, I am pretty sure that " The second level of physical reality" is the reality where my stereo and ears are better than eveyone elses anyway. At least that's what my horoscope says.
Sad, what was a lively debate on the nature, requirements and limitations of auditory testing has morphed into a series of self-congratulatory back pats resting on logical fallacies masquerading as scientific righteousness. If you truly believe audiokraut's straw man has validity, turn in your magic decoder rings kids. This is not 'for science'.
Ohh no, that's not the problem. THIS is the problem:
Why People Act That Way (The Intelligent Reader's Guide to Modern Freudian Psychology, the ID, Ego, and Superego ...) (Hardcover)
~ Lucy Freeman (Author)
jd
Posted by RDF-
Your constant defense of any nebulous theory which casts doubt on proven precepts notwithstanding, exactly what part of the quoted article doesn't scream made up ** to you?
Seriously, after 12000+ posts, mostly by people trashing any attempt to settle the issue, once and for all (at least on this forum), a bit of off topic (not too off topic, BTW) banter about such silliness is expected. Is it not?
Your constant defense of any nebulous theory which casts doubt on proven precepts notwithstanding, exactly what part of the quoted article doesn't scream made up ** to you?
Seriously, after 12000+ posts, mostly by people trashing any attempt to settle the issue, once and for all (at least on this forum), a bit of off topic (not too off topic, BTW) banter about such silliness is expected. Is it not?
How is asking if you have done the test a straw man arguement?
You are aware that the objective side is not the side of the strawman? We have mountains of data showing very little if any audiable differences (then none of it shows that its better SQ with different cables) and 100s of DBTs that confirm our opinon.
Subjective side has well, no data and just beliefs backed by in properly controlled listening experiences.
I will stand on the side of proof all day. You can call me a strawman all you want. You have nothing else. Do you have $$$ to go up against someone like me on this?
Just do the test and get back to us.
I'll settle for two. Provide two peer reviewed, published papers of scientific worth.
Fair enough. I'm not seeing any proof either way.
Some folks say they hear a difference and some say they don't. That's about all there is to it so far.
Similarly; I don't believe my keyboard's made of cheese but I can't prove it (and I certainly wouldn't waste a thousand pages arguing about it
)No, there aren't any peer reviewed paper that stand up to scrutiny (not even jacobs famous olaf sturm reference is undisputed, there were pages of substantive criticism levelled against it ) that refute the null hypothesis.
You are right, not one paper refutes the null hypothesis. Congratulations for your insight.
From a paper (UNDERSTANDING, FINDING, & ELIMINATING AV GROUND LOOPS http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/generic seminar.pdf ) from Bill Whitlock, of Jensen Transformers. A man who has been researching designing and contributing to pro audio (not sitting at a keyboard spouting off on a website) for 40 years. Among other things, this is what he says about cables:
"NO OTHER PRODUCT IS AS SHROUDED IN HYPE AND MYSTERY AS THE AUDIO CABLE! The audio industry, especially the "high-end" segment, abounds with misinformation, myth, and mysticism. Scientific double-blind tests have shown that there is nothing unexplainable about audible differences among cables — when the differences can be demonstrated to truly exist. For example, the physical design of a cable is known to affect its coupling of ultrasonic power line noise. Even very low levels of this noise can cause audible “spectral contamination” in downstream amplifiers. [11] The real solution to this problem is to prevent the coupling in the first place, rather than agonize over which “designer cable” makes the most pleasing improvement. Expensive and exotic cables, even if double or triple shielded, made of 100% pure unobtainium, and hand-made by a team of virgins, will have NO significant effect on hum and buzz problems! In engineering terms, a high-performance cable for unbalanced audio should have low capacitance and very low shield resistance. A good example of such a cable is Belden #8241F. Its 17 pF per foot capacitance allows driving a 200 foot run from a typical 1 kS consumer output while maintaining a !3 dB bandwidth of 50 kHz. Its low 2.6 mS per foot shield resistance is equivalent to #14 gauge wire, which can significantly reduce common-impedance coupling. It’s also quite flexible and available in many colors. 2.10 - A CHECKLIST Keep cables as short as possible. Longer cables increase the common-impedance coupling. Coiling excess cable length invites magnetic pickup. Use cables with heavy gauge shields. This is especially important when cables must be long. The only property of cable that has any significant effect on audio noise coupling is shield resistance. Bundle signal cables. All signal cables between any two boxes should be bundled. For example, if the L and R cables of a stereo pair are separated, nearby ac magnetic fields will induce a current in the loop area inside the two shields — coupling hum into both signals. Bundling all ac power cords separately helps to average their magnetic and electrostatic fields, which reduces their net radiation. Of course, keep signal bundles and power bundles as far apart as possible. Remember that cables or bundles that run parallel will couple the most, while those that cross at 90° angles will couple the least. Maintain good connections. Connectors left undisturbed for long periods can oxidize and develop high (and often distortion-producing non-linear) contact resistance. Hum or other noise that changes when the connector is wiggled indicates a poor contact. Use a good commercial contact fluid and/or gold plated connectors to help prevent such problems. DO NOT ADD unnecessary grounds. Additional grounding of equipment tends to increase system ground noise current rather than reducing it. Of course, NEVER disconnect a safety ground or lightning protection ground to solve a problem. Use ground isolators at problem interfaces. Isolators are a “silver bullet” solution for commonimpedance coupling, which is the major weakness of unbalanced interfaces."
"NO OTHER PRODUCT IS AS SHROUDED IN HYPE AND MYSTERY AS THE AUDIO CABLE! The audio industry, especially the "high-end" segment, abounds with misinformation, myth, and mysticism. Scientific double-blind tests have shown that there is nothing unexplainable about audible differences among cables — when the differences can be demonstrated to truly exist. For example, the physical design of a cable is known to affect its coupling of ultrasonic power line noise. Even very low levels of this noise can cause audible “spectral contamination” in downstream amplifiers. [11] The real solution to this problem is to prevent the coupling in the first place, rather than agonize over which “designer cable” makes the most pleasing improvement. Expensive and exotic cables, even if double or triple shielded, made of 100% pure unobtainium, and hand-made by a team of virgins, will have NO significant effect on hum and buzz problems! In engineering terms, a high-performance cable for unbalanced audio should have low capacitance and very low shield resistance. A good example of such a cable is Belden #8241F. Its 17 pF per foot capacitance allows driving a 200 foot run from a typical 1 kS consumer output while maintaining a !3 dB bandwidth of 50 kHz. Its low 2.6 mS per foot shield resistance is equivalent to #14 gauge wire, which can significantly reduce common-impedance coupling. It’s also quite flexible and available in many colors. 2.10 - A CHECKLIST Keep cables as short as possible. Longer cables increase the common-impedance coupling. Coiling excess cable length invites magnetic pickup. Use cables with heavy gauge shields. This is especially important when cables must be long. The only property of cable that has any significant effect on audio noise coupling is shield resistance. Bundle signal cables. All signal cables between any two boxes should be bundled. For example, if the L and R cables of a stereo pair are separated, nearby ac magnetic fields will induce a current in the loop area inside the two shields — coupling hum into both signals. Bundling all ac power cords separately helps to average their magnetic and electrostatic fields, which reduces their net radiation. Of course, keep signal bundles and power bundles as far apart as possible. Remember that cables or bundles that run parallel will couple the most, while those that cross at 90° angles will couple the least. Maintain good connections. Connectors left undisturbed for long periods can oxidize and develop high (and often distortion-producing non-linear) contact resistance. Hum or other noise that changes when the connector is wiggled indicates a poor contact. Use a good commercial contact fluid and/or gold plated connectors to help prevent such problems. DO NOT ADD unnecessary grounds. Additional grounding of equipment tends to increase system ground noise current rather than reducing it. Of course, NEVER disconnect a safety ground or lightning protection ground to solve a problem. Use ground isolators at problem interfaces. Isolators are a “silver bullet” solution for commonimpedance coupling, which is the major weakness of unbalanced interfaces."
- Status
- Not open for further replies.