Re: Power Cord Break-In
I must confess..I am responsible for that slight change in direction..
It was, however, a logical progression..
The premise that a power cord can burn in, thereby altering the sound, requires, quite logically, that a power cord be able to change the sound. I recommend attacking that premise first, as it is a necessary precursor to any "burn in " discussion.
To describe pc effects requires a mechanism where different cords are able to alter sound..hence, my tie in..The power loop I have described is capable of introducing unwanted sounds, such as transients, into the chain.. It is not a far stretch to imagine that the pc loop is capable of coupling amplifier current haversines into that loop, thereby providing the mechanism for sound change.
It is very simple to reconfigure that loop in order to look for this effect..
1..connect source/amp as normal, with the ic between.
2. Disconnect the ic at the amp.
3. Connect the ground of the ic to the amp, directly at the input. connect a 10K resistor between amp ground and ic hot.
4. Connect a battery operated source to the amp input. A cd walkman with a test tone cd comes to mind(only because I have one).
5..Connect a differential scope probe between the signal hot and signal ground of the IC.
6..turn on the source to present a low impedance to the IC source end.
7. Play the test cd.
Any voltage that results at the amp end of the ic would be a direct response to the loop formed by the amp/source/ic. If I am correct, it should be haversine shaped, and envelope modulated by the signal forcing the amp to draw current from the line..
If it is there, this test setup will be able to watch as changes are made to that loop. Positive results would go a long ways towards explaining most of that power cord hype...
And if it is there, it provides a very logical path towards removing the effect different pc's could have..
Again..a hypothesis that is testable..anybody game for trying it? I unfortunately loaned one of my mobile systems to my 17 yr old (an aspiring DJ), and the other three are in storage during my move..
Cheers, John
EE_Mark said:
I must confess..I am responsible for that slight change in direction..
It was, however, a logical progression..
The premise that a power cord can burn in, thereby altering the sound, requires, quite logically, that a power cord be able to change the sound. I recommend attacking that premise first, as it is a necessary precursor to any "burn in " discussion.
To describe pc effects requires a mechanism where different cords are able to alter sound..hence, my tie in..The power loop I have described is capable of introducing unwanted sounds, such as transients, into the chain.. It is not a far stretch to imagine that the pc loop is capable of coupling amplifier current haversines into that loop, thereby providing the mechanism for sound change.
It is very simple to reconfigure that loop in order to look for this effect..
1..connect source/amp as normal, with the ic between.
2. Disconnect the ic at the amp.
3. Connect the ground of the ic to the amp, directly at the input. connect a 10K resistor between amp ground and ic hot.
4. Connect a battery operated source to the amp input. A cd walkman with a test tone cd comes to mind(only because I have one).
5..Connect a differential scope probe between the signal hot and signal ground of the IC.
6..turn on the source to present a low impedance to the IC source end.
7. Play the test cd.
Any voltage that results at the amp end of the ic would be a direct response to the loop formed by the amp/source/ic. If I am correct, it should be haversine shaped, and envelope modulated by the signal forcing the amp to draw current from the line..
If it is there, this test setup will be able to watch as changes are made to that loop. Positive results would go a long ways towards explaining most of that power cord hype...
And if it is there, it provides a very logical path towards removing the effect different pc's could have..
Again..a hypothesis that is testable..anybody game for trying it? I unfortunately loaned one of my mobile systems to my 17 yr old (an aspiring DJ), and the other three are in storage during my move..
Cheers, John
Hi,
And did I say it needed any?
Does it matter? Not one bit.
I've read the most ridiculous things on this topic, none came up with an answer even remotely acceptable.
So, to answer the threadstarter's question; I don't give a damn as far as breaking in powercords are concerned..
Which begs other questions, I know...
Cheers,
And did I say it needed any?
Does it matter? Not one bit.
I've read the most ridiculous things on this topic, none came up with an answer even remotely acceptable.
So, to answer the threadstarter's question; I don't give a damn as far as breaking in powercords are concerned..
Which begs other questions, I know...
Cheers,
- can`t hear any difference? well, take the time to make up a set of solid-core powercables, put them straight into the wall-outlets, and then tell what you hear(after some wondering..
)
It`s as simple as that. And yes, powercables does come alive after burn-in, but since there`s talk about high current it doesn`t take long.
)It`s as simple as that. And yes, powercables does come alive after burn-in, but since there`s talk about high current it doesn`t take long.
johnferrier said:
First, of course, such remarks as mine regarging a certain
record company or a certain artist are subjective. Also
it has nothing to do with DG being a german company.
I would say that generally classical recordings had a golden
era from say 1955 -1965 and perhaps even up to 1975
regarding sound quality. After that, most of them started to
use multi-microphone techniques and multi-track tape recorders
and tried to manufacture a coherent sound image afterwards.
DG seems to have been among the first to apply this technique,
which almost never seems to achieve a satisfactory result IMHO.
I am surprised at how often a good old mono recording can
give a more realistic acoustic impression than many of these
modern recordings with "manufactured" sound.
However, for me it is "prima la musica" and I buy CDs primarily
for their musical content rather than the technical quality. That
is, I may buy a modern recording, even a DG, if I think the musical
merits are strong enough. On the other hand, in my case the
search for musical merits usually make me go further back in
time than look for modern recordings. Hence I am not so well
acquainted with the very modern recordings, say the past
10-15 years, but it seems some companies have sobered
up and produce at least decent recordings. I have heard some
quite good recent Harmonia Mundi recordings, for instance, but
that is a label representing many companies, so that is not a
safe recommendation.
If you have never tried any early stereo recordings, you may
be in for a surprise. Although you will most certainly be able
to spot a bit of noise and maybe some distorsion, many of these
recordings were done using only two microhpones and give
a more natural image than any modern multi-microphone
recording do. Try, for instance, early Decca, RCA or EMI from
the late 50's. One favourite of mine, also musically, is Faurés
Requiem with Ansermet from 1955, one of Deccas very first
stereo recordings. Or you might try Leinsdorfs Tosca on RCA,
recorded in 1957 (unless they have destroyed the sound in
the most recent reissue, which I haven't heard).
Getting back off topic.
Didn't the White Stripes choose to record Elephant in an all vintage studio (Toerag) because they thought that old recordings often sounded better?
Regarding Audiophile releases. There is an article in Sound on Sound on how Naim record classical and jazz. "A typical Christianson recording setup for anything up to a small acoustic jazz or classical group consists only of a venerable matched pair of AKG 414EBs and an ageing Nagra 4S stereo reel-to-reel recorder running at 7.5 inches-per-second (ips)."
So no mixer is used..
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun01/articles/naimlabel.asp
Didn't the White Stripes choose to record Elephant in an all vintage studio (Toerag) because they thought that old recordings often sounded better?
Regarding Audiophile releases. There is an article in Sound on Sound on how Naim record classical and jazz. "A typical Christianson recording setup for anything up to a small acoustic jazz or classical group consists only of a venerable matched pair of AKG 414EBs and an ageing Nagra 4S stereo reel-to-reel recorder running at 7.5 inches-per-second (ips)."
So no mixer is used..
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun01/articles/naimlabel.asp
BTDT, got the T-shirt
What we have here is the General-Purpose Subjectivist Thread. Somebody pops up and says "Changing X makes a big difference to the sound" (or possibly "makes a BIG difference to the SOUND"). Half a dozen others will agree.
When questioned, none of the proponents admit having conducted blind tests of the effect. Blind tests are dismissed as either "unnecessary" or "flawed". Nobody suggests any physically measurable quantity which demonstrates the effect of changing X. Explanations invoking quantum physics and much hand-waving are offered.
Somebody suggests the effect is purely psychological. Somebody else suggests that the first poster is deaf, or listens to the wrong sort of music.
Full scale flamewar breaks out. The moderators step in. The thread is closed. Somebody post a troll in another topic...
Cheers
IH
joan2 said:
What we have here is the General-Purpose Subjectivist Thread. Somebody pops up and says "Changing X makes a big difference to the sound" (or possibly "makes a BIG difference to the SOUND"). Half a dozen others will agree.
When questioned, none of the proponents admit having conducted blind tests of the effect. Blind tests are dismissed as either "unnecessary" or "flawed". Nobody suggests any physically measurable quantity which demonstrates the effect of changing X. Explanations invoking quantum physics and much hand-waving are offered.
Somebody suggests the effect is purely psychological. Somebody else suggests that the first poster is deaf, or listens to the wrong sort of music.
Full scale flamewar breaks out. The moderators step in. The thread is closed. Somebody post a troll in another topic...
Cheers
IH
SY's Fifth Law: The first person to mention quantum mechanics probably doesn't know what he's talking about. The first person to mention Heisenberg confirms that he doesn't know what he's talking about. And the first person to bring up Tesla as anything but a unit or a coil generally has aluminum foil tacked to the inside of his hat and has to periodically wipe flecks of spittle from the screen.
john curl said:
October 26, 2003, in the magazine section. Unfortunately the free-viewing period has passed, so if you want to read it on line you'll need to pay them $3.00. But, I found another copy of it that still seems to be available:
http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/neuro/neuromarketing_nyt.html
The main point of the article is that blind tests are very unnatural, and that people make their buying decisions based on everything they know about a product. So, if you want to sell cola, it's better to market your product so people feel good about drinking it (Coke) than it is to improve its flavor (Pepsi).
To be honest, I'm not really sure what the consequences would be for audio. I guess you might take this to mean that you think your quantum defibrillator improves the sound of your system, then it does, whether or not that improvement comes in the form of audible difference in sound.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.