Audio Wisdom: Debunking common myths

[DCPreamp]

I saw this link on James Randi's website and have enjoyed the information greatly. Some of it I've read before, but thought others may find the information eye opening and informative. Of course, some will stick their noses in the air, rub their SHAKTI stones for luck, and go on freezing their $1,000 power cords.

http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/wisdom.html

Enjoy!

[jneutron]

Thanks for the links.

I added the winer articles to my notebook after I circled all the incorrect things he says. One had five, the other, six.

It's a shame, as the bulk of the bulk message is correct.

Davis also, but I had his from previous. His is more technically oriented, nice job. Alas, he also has some foibles.

published in JAES, 1991...it is a shame that the audio engineering community at large has not progressed much in the intervening years.

Cheers, John

[FastEddy]

the link failed for me

[DCPreamp]

Hi John,

What are your gripes about the articles? I've read many of your posts and my asking is out of respect for your opinions, not for argument.

Now that I'm aware of it, I've been enjoying reading The Audio Critic, though it does get a tad repetitive. Had I known about TAC years ago, it could have saved me some equipment changes and experimentation that lead me to the same conclusions they already knew. Of course, I'm better equipped for arguments having had the experiences.

Thanks

[jneutron]

Originally posted by DCPreamp
Hi John,

What are your gripes about the articles? I've read many of your posts and my asking is out of respect for your opinions, not for argument.

I didn't think you were asking to diss me, your disclaimer, while nice, was un-neccessary.

Winer ""The above parameters encompass everything that affects audio fidelity""

The "above" list included FR, Distortion, time based errors, and room acoustics.

I almost bought it, but when I read his time based error explanation, it was incomplete. He refers to pitch and tempo.

What happened to interchannel temporal issues? Very small time errors between the two channels cause the soundstage to change drastically. Interchannel amplitude errors cause the same. And both entities are affected by the wire resistance and storage reactance when driving a two way crossover. His biwiring rant is just plain outright wrong..

He also repeats the erroneous miles and miles of wire fallacy when speaking of power cords. Obviously, a ground loop hum is not considered, nor is a ground loop error component. Guess if the ground loop induced hum is lowered enough, then the loop can be considered gone? No.

Fred davis needs to re-read his e/m theory when it comes to transmission lines. And, he needs to consider a two way speaker load (or even two resistors with a simple crossover) for his entire article, as his test regimen and analysis, while good for 1991, are completely inadequate today. Given his paper for refereeing, I would send it back explaining the large holes in the analysis and the conclusions, but I would not check the "unsuitable for print" box, merely the "change a coupla things" box.

But Fred's overall paper was quite excellent, he is very good. With some direction, his type of work could advance sota significantly.

Cheers, John
edit:spelling..it's always...spelling...

[FastEddy]

The link works now ... musta been the taliban attacks on the North American internet today ...

[FastEddy]

Re: http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/...teractions.pdf
Where do I get this #6 wire?? = " 6) Spectra-Strip 843-138-2601-064 Ribbon Cable. Abbreviated 138-064. Made of 32 twisted pairs of 26 AWG wire (7'34), arranged in a flat ribbon. Intended for high-speed differential digital data transmission. ..."
No mention of whether it is silver or copper or silver plated copper ... ? and no mention of the shething = is it teflon or PVC or what ?? But those graphs sure indicate it is the winner ...
....
Re: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf ... this article has already been de-bugged = a bunch of carpola with no redeeming value, no scientific analisys.
....
Re: http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/urbanLegends.pdf ... several reasonable points about the subjectivity of the reviewer/listener ... but some of this author's points are off the wall and contrary to sound scientific proofs :
"legend #1": "[The] differences between electrolitic capacitors and the same measured value polypropolene dialetric ..." There have been numerous articles written [Electronic Design Magazine, et al] demonstrating significant differences in the audio range of various dialectrics in capacitors. (This is why there are MIL Specs = absolute laboratory results indicate there is significant differences between these two types of dialectrics and others.)
"legend" #2: As for speaker size having to do with speaker response curves, etc. ... bigger = lower, smaller = higher ... a physical reality usually demonstrated in junior highschool science classes.
"legend" #3: Anyone aware of modern frequency dividing technics knows that this is possible. There are some very interesting sounds (tunes, changes of pace & rythum) apparent on the new Sir George Martin's Beatles "Love" album, different effects from the same master tapes, digitally modified with these technics and others to produce a whole new "feel" for this music.
"legend" #4: Very low bass is much less noticable in a tightly enclosed area. Stick this "legend" writer inside a sub woofer box to be sure = no apparent low bass inside, yet outside the sub woofer box we all hear it just fine. If the writer is unavailable for this test, use a couple of microphones, one outside, one inside = again, junior high science.
"legend" #5: Give the writer a couple of coat hangers for his speaker leads and see how much difference he notices ...
"legend" #6: Speakers on "tiptoes" = maybe, maybe not ... but turntables on tiptoes = Yes!, much better rumble removal, etc.
"legend" #7: I believe he has it totally wrong here. Those of us who spend a lot of time exploring 24bit verses 16bit audio know that DVD players can be vastly superior to CD players. Check out the album mentioned above = a 2 disc set, one 16bit CD and one 24bit DVD-A ... and guess which one my mother-in-law prefers to listen to ... there are significant differences, the 24bit DVD-A winning hands down without question.
"legend" #8: LPs sound better than ... well, anything. Anyone who does not believe this has not visited a high end audio store in the last decade. Vinyl rules, dude and it is even better than 24bit DVD-A, although not much ... he, he, he ...
"legend" #9: ... data reduction lowers quality , "yes it doeszzz ... Ooohh yeahaaaa" >> see #3 & #7 above, paa lease ...
"legend" #10: ... well, this is the first time I've ever heard this. I would bet the tube amp guys will have something to say about this one = smaller may be better ...
"legend" #11: EQ = bad ... tell that to Yello .... "Oh, yeahaaaa ...."
"legend: #12: This negative feedback that I am giving these duffuses is not bad ...
"legend" #13: Short signal pathways have been understood since Nikola Tesla invented iron core inductors = its what makes cell phones possible, dummy ... again, a little attention in science class would clear this up right away.
"legend" #14: ... well, so what? Actually this all depends on the content ...
"legend" #15: Auto sound IS bad ... see #4 above a substitute the writer's mini-cooper for the sub woofer box (doors closed, windows up ...). Also I have yet to see a properly implimented DVD-Audio player in a mobile system.
"legend" #16: ... movie/video tracks = bad? except when it is good. Check out the sound tracks of any DVD music video = 24bit/48k usually, sometimes even better = almost always better than the original CD sound tracks.
....
http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/BurnInLegend.pdf ... this guy doesn't have much schoolin' either. Burn in of aviation electronic equipment is SOP and wouldn't pass the FCC or FAA certifications without it ...
....
http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf ... The author does a whole lot of wheel spinning here. There are differences between that kids' boombox and a Mark Levenson amp. There may not be significant differences between two US$10,000 amps of different manufacture ... but that's what makes for horse races.
...

I can't quite understand why these web links are here. One would think the web page author and the authors of his linked articles would at least ask a qualified engineer or even a high school science teacher about some of this stuff before he (they) wrote up these screedes. But why not, whiners usually take this kind of tack when they can't find anything else to write about. One wonders why ... and one wonders whether these guys even have a decent sense of hearing ?? Some folks are actually tone deaf and some are born hard of hearing. I suppose I shouldn't poke so much fun at the handicapped ... (But I especially had a lot of fun debugging the Bruce's "urban legend" link = every one was wrong.)

[SY]

Your debunking needs some serious debunking. But I'm getting too old for that kind of thing...

[audio-kraut]

But why not, whiners usually take this kind of tack when they can't find anything else to write about.

looked in the mirror of this thread lately?

[planet10]

Originally posted by DCPreamp
The Audio Critic

So far over the top it has to be considered satire...

dave