Let me put it this way: When we go to bi-wiring speaker cables, why would anyone group the conductors all the way to the speaker? would that not defeat the purpose? Would that not 'damage' the final results? Would the signals not interfere with one another? The answer is yes, they do.
So, when you mirror two conductors in complex field, visualize it. Visualize the fields.
What you get, is a set of imperfect mirrors, interfering with one anther in both the immediate sense (lower frequencies) and then into the higher, they become elastic, non linear, recursive interference. (out of time, as there is a time aspect). We get elastic bounce and drag, all out of time with one another, as the mirrors cannot be perfect.
The blend of the complex fields and the integration can never be perfect, as it relies on the expression of the physical wire and associated dielectrics, and physical layout (as a set) as the lensing (bidirectional flow) and origin point for the complex fields.
Build a set of perforated tubes, twist them together, and then modulate a mirrored set of 10+ octave frequency ranged, and 70-80db leveled/ranged pressure waves (each in all complex parameters, simultaneously, no discrete numbers here...the signal is basically chaos to begin with) down them.... and then expect perfection out the other end of the pair.
Not going to happen. Not in this life, or the next.
One cannot apply engineering simplification/models for ease of calculation, as the answer that comes out of that scenario does not apply to the near chaos (extremely complex) of the signal - in that situation.
Again,this is not about getting the bear to vaguely dance in a way that the ear and the brain may recognize as being a form of dancing, we're talking about the subtleties remaining in exact correctness and in exact correct relation to one another.
The way the brain and ear works, is that we are designed as 'decoding signal from chaos' engines. To pull signal from noise. We 'fill in' and extrapolate.
The trick is to understand that this mechanism is highly engaged and powerfully at work, in the world of high end audio. Refined to near perfection.
And when you are searching for high fidelity, exercising that particular device in your noggin...is only to your detriment, if you are not aware that it exists and is part of your function.
So, when you mirror two conductors in complex field, visualize it. Visualize the fields.
What you get, is a set of imperfect mirrors, interfering with one anther in both the immediate sense (lower frequencies) and then into the higher, they become elastic, non linear, recursive interference. (out of time, as there is a time aspect). We get elastic bounce and drag, all out of time with one another, as the mirrors cannot be perfect.
The blend of the complex fields and the integration can never be perfect, as it relies on the expression of the physical wire and associated dielectrics, and physical layout (as a set) as the lensing (bidirectional flow) and origin point for the complex fields.
Build a set of perforated tubes, twist them together, and then modulate a mirrored set of 10+ octave frequency ranged, and 70-80db leveled/ranged pressure waves (each in all complex parameters, simultaneously, no discrete numbers here...the signal is basically chaos to begin with) down them.... and then expect perfection out the other end of the pair.
Not going to happen. Not in this life, or the next.
One cannot apply engineering simplification/models for ease of calculation, as the answer that comes out of that scenario does not apply to the near chaos (extremely complex) of the signal - in that situation.
Again,this is not about getting the bear to vaguely dance in a way that the ear and the brain may recognize as being a form of dancing, we're talking about the subtleties remaining in exact correctness and in exact correct relation to one another.
The way the brain and ear works, is that we are designed as 'decoding signal from chaos' engines. To pull signal from noise. We 'fill in' and extrapolate.
The trick is to understand that this mechanism is highly engaged and powerfully at work, in the world of high end audio. Refined to near perfection.
And when you are searching for high fidelity, exercising that particular device in your noggin...is only to your detriment, if you are not aware that it exists and is part of your function.
Last edited:
You get differential signalling in both analogue and digital domains, whatever domain it is in you get better noise rejection than single ended. I said balanced signal, referring to audio balanced. As to the second statement, it sounds like a load of rubbish, LVDS is used as choice in digital signalling for a reason so yes the bear dances and dances very well.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.