This is what I propose.
I will get six sets of cable and send them to six different people including Mr.Curl, hopefully Mr.Pass and Mr.Hansen will care to participate and three other people that have suitable test equipment.
Then Mr,Curl and one of these independant testers could come out with the set of test criteria that is agreeable to everyone. The results could be tabulated and shared by everyone. Hopefully we can shed some light on the issue.
Jam
I will get six sets of cable and send them to six different people including Mr.Curl, hopefully Mr.Pass and Mr.Hansen will care to participate and three other people that have suitable test equipment.
Then Mr,Curl and one of these independant testers could come out with the set of test criteria that is agreeable to everyone. The results could be tabulated and shared by everyone. Hopefully we can shed some light on the issue.
Jam
jam said:
One problem with this experiment is that the high-end cables are probably hand-made and may not be perfectly identical. These measurements are like trying to pick fly **** out of pepper. Any miniscule construction differences may produce equally miniscule sonic differences.
Best, Chuck Hansen
Mr.Curl,
So would you care to enlighten us on what you were measuring, what the test criteria was and how we could we repeat these measurements.
Is this not a scientific discussion to quantify and qualify distortion mechanisms in cables? ..........or am I wrong?......then what pray tell is the purpose of this discussion?
You have asked me to back away from this proposal, could you please explain why? This is a scientific discussion and not a witch hunt. Don't you want to prove your results and methodology? Is the goal not to better our understanding of audio and elevating the art?
I like several members here have built our own own cables and would like to know what materials, type of construction and geometry produces the best results............all of which should bear some correrlation to your results.
Best regards,
Jam
So would you care to enlighten us on what you were measuring, what the test criteria was and how we could we repeat these measurements.
Is this not a scientific discussion to quantify and qualify distortion mechanisms in cables? ..........or am I wrong?......then what pray tell is the purpose of this discussion?
You have asked me to back away from this proposal, could you please explain why? This is a scientific discussion and not a witch hunt. Don't you want to prove your results and methodology? Is the goal not to better our understanding of audio and elevating the art?
I like several members here have built our own own cables and would like to know what materials, type of construction and geometry produces the best results............all of which should bear some correrlation to your results.
Best regards,
Jam
Eureka, I just hit gold!
Being forced to address a cable measurement that I happened across about 15 years ago, I again fired up my equipment to see what I could see.
At first, I got a stable output with a 5KHz sine wave at 50mV and did noise averaging (25X) and looked at the 'residual. Well something in my room, with EVERYTHING ELSE off gave me 27.312KHz (I have pretty fancy test equipment) at a level higher than anything else, except for my null which unfortunately isn't nulling so well anymore. Well, I can throw this out, because it is probably those damn light bulbs that we now all use.
Then I tried the nearest Radio Shack cable that I had handy, one well used around here for general work. IT measured the same as the residual for the most part. Oh, oh, more work to get the residual down, but then EUREKA! I plugged in an equal length of Millennimum 5000 cable just sitting around here over the years. All hell broke loose! Just like the good old days.
Is this fair? I don't know. I could measure other cables as I have done so many times in the past, and measure a few differences I am sure.
Now what happened to the RADIOSHACK so mercilessly exposed 10-15 years ago? It broke in, and most of its residual went away. I have seen it on several occasions.
Warning don't try to measure this at home, and we have had bad luck with AP setups, gounding issues I think.
Being forced to address a cable measurement that I happened across about 15 years ago, I again fired up my equipment to see what I could see.
At first, I got a stable output with a 5KHz sine wave at 50mV and did noise averaging (25X) and looked at the 'residual. Well something in my room, with EVERYTHING ELSE off gave me 27.312KHz (I have pretty fancy test equipment) at a level higher than anything else, except for my null which unfortunately isn't nulling so well anymore. Well, I can throw this out, because it is probably those damn light bulbs that we now all use.
Then I tried the nearest Radio Shack cable that I had handy, one well used around here for general work. IT measured the same as the residual for the most part. Oh, oh, more work to get the residual down, but then EUREKA! I plugged in an equal length of Millennimum 5000 cable just sitting around here over the years. All hell broke loose! Just like the good old days.
Is this fair? I don't know. I could measure other cables as I have done so many times in the past, and measure a few differences I am sure.
Now what happened to the RADIOSHACK so mercilessly exposed 10-15 years ago? It broke in, and most of its residual went away. I have seen it on several occasions.
Warning don't try to measure this at home, and we have had bad luck with AP setups, gounding issues I think.
john curl said:
Feynman's lectures is not nearly as readable as people would like you to think it is. I'd suggest Solymar and Walsh. It's a very nice introduction to QM in the first three or four chapters and has a charming British wit to it.
For what it's worth, most students just work to pass the course and couldn't do something unique with the information they just learned. I'll admit that I fall into that category when it comes to some of the solid state stuff. I do quite well with contact mechanics, but I've done some work with electrical contact resistance and I'm forced to resort to work on tunneling through oxide barrier layers that it would take me years to derive. It's the very few that continue to make progress, whether it be in novel applications or the base of knowledge. The rest live in the shadows so to speak.
I think that this frequency is from the new light bulbs. I turned off several and the output reduced, but even with every bulb turned off in my apartment, there is some leakage from the hallway, and other apartments. We are measuring very low levels.
Everything that I really have to say has been said before on pp. 130-139 on the link that Charles put forth here, and is Dimitri's compilation of my previous efforts, including typical measured outputs. Please don't bother me for this info further, as it is already available to you.
Everything that I really have to say has been said before on pp. 130-139 on the link that Charles put forth here, and is Dimitri's compilation of my previous efforts, including typical measured outputs. Please don't bother me for this info further, as it is already available to you.
GRollins said:
Are you kidding?
You can measure more than 20dB difference of RF attenuation of different cables. You have twisted unshielded, twisted shielded but shield at only one end connected, and coaxials of different quality. There are huge differences between these cables, when connected to your (mine) audio chain. You can see it with good scope with high sensitivity. Anyway, I measure also with Rohde Schwarz FSP7 analyzer. I assume it PROVEN that it is the HF content that makes it sound different.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.