I think the Nobel is pretty meaningless after a recent recipient's award.
Anyway, all things being equal, shielding/drain connections etc.... it's my experience that wire/cable directionality is part voodoo and part marketing hype.
How has your luck been with the Nobel
Don't know. I haven't though tried to tear down 100 years of solid state physics in one picture
Don't know. I haven't though tried to tear down 100 years of solid state physics in one picture
How were thiings 100 years ago?
Simon7000, good to see that graph again. It would NOT matter what you showed here. I have shown similiar comparative measurements to SY. It doesn't ever faze him, or the other hardcore types.
I, however, am glad to see something substantial.
At the CES we listened to 3 speaker connectors, one brass, one copper, one silver. We could hear difference in all 3, and had different opinions which we liked best.
The silver was more transparent on the high end, but sounded a little thin at the low end. I asked if these connectors had any break-in time on them. They didn't, except for maybe 24 hours. Over and out.
I, however, am glad to see something substantial.
At the CES we listened to 3 speaker connectors, one brass, one copper, one silver. We could hear difference in all 3, and had different opinions which we liked best.
The silver was more transparent on the high end, but sounded a little thin at the low end. I asked if these connectors had any break-in time on them. They didn't, except for maybe 24 hours. Over and out.
Hello Terry!
My friend after all my talk about integrity, saying what you mean & meaning what you say, do you really believe I'd back out now? So far as I know SY and I have come up with a controlled DBT that's acceptable to both of us. The ONLY reason I "might" even consider backing down is if SY started a last minute modification of what or how the controlled DBT we agreed on would be done.
I have a problem with naysayers like Janneman. They have no problem dropping terms like "properly" or "reasonably" designed wire as if there's a standard and a deviation scale against which these terms can be "properly"
gaged. Didn't anyone else notice that Janneman's response didn't answer a single one of my questions about what constitutes a "properly" or "reasonably" designed wire and how the standard was deteremined? I wonder why that is??? Maybe because he doesn't know what a "properly" or "reasonably" designed wire is? Hmmm?To me comments about "properly" or "reasonably" designed wire is more intellectual dishonesty from wire naysayers that follows in the same vein as their "expectation bias" arguement! They want to use these ideas/terms as a weapon against proponents of wires but, when they're used as a weapon against them, they ignore the questions asked and respond vaguely or want to modify the what the ideas or terms originally meant!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Hey Tubeguy
I don't see people using expectation bias as a moving argument and I really don't think you have shown this. You simply had a limited definition of what the concept encompasses.
As far as properly or reasonably designed wires go I think that a lack of standards and the fact that it's not as easy to find poorly designed cables anymore comes into play. Someone more qualified can get into the electrical properties but I can say that I have come across some really cheap ICs that had a really small conductor and seemed to have plastics or rubber mixed in with the strands and these are what I would call improperly designed ICs - they measured badly in terms of FR and did not necessarily match from IC to IC even though they were bought in a bunch and probably made at the same time.
I don't see people using expectation bias as a moving argument and I really don't think you have shown this. You simply had a limited definition of what the concept encompasses.
As far as properly or reasonably designed wires go I think that a lack of standards and the fact that it's not as easy to find poorly designed cables anymore comes into play. Someone more qualified can get into the electrical properties but I can say that I have come across some really cheap ICs that had a really small conductor and seemed to have plastics or rubber mixed in with the strands and these are what I would call improperly designed ICs - they measured badly in terms of FR and did not necessarily match from IC to IC even though they were bought in a bunch and probably made at the same time.
Don't know. I haven't though tried to tear down 100 years of solid state physics in one picture
I have shown method and results in detail. The demonstration has been viewed by others. It is a nice repeatable example. You are welcome to try the measurements yourself. That is the scientific method.
If you want to be glib and claim it is a violation of your ken, perhaps that is your limitation.
The question is not can one measure differences, it is can these differences be heard? Or at what level are these distortions of concern. As an engineer hard data is useful in systems design.
There are those who claim to hear things that cannot be measured, that should be an interesting experiment in listening. I think the smart money would be against those claims.
Simon you got any idea as to the cause of the difference? Is there any possibility that the mere act of unplugging and plugging in again can cause this difference in contact pressure, contact area etc?
jd
Janneman,
I'll accept your word about your remark about "properly" or "reasonably" designed wire was a bit thoughtless. As I've stated numerous times now, we can all make mistakes ---{Lord knows I've made more than my share}--- I just want to know the people I'm attempting to debate or discuss differing POVs on a topic with, are people of integrity and are doing so in an intellectually honest manner.
All to often people will make comments about "expectation bias" or "properly" and/or "reasonably" designed wire without knowing just exactly what these terms/ideas mean or how they should be used. Others want to use these terms/ideas as a weapon against proponents of wires but, when these same terms are used as a weapon against them, they ignore the questions, respond vaguely or want to modify the what the ideas or terms originally meant!
To the many opponents of wires I suggest if you want to use terms such as "properly" and/or "reasonably" designed wire, I think you should answer the questions I prviously asked Janneman. I don't think it's too much to ask any person using these terms to be able to define them or explain how they should be used properly, nor do I believe you should feel these terms should need to be modified when they're used against you!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Last edited:
It can be anything but the cable
Maybe the fingerprints on the connector barrel can cause changes.Or if you plug and unplug the connectors 50 times then there will be no contact at all because the metals will vanish.Come on janneman,I would expect to hear these views by a believer....like me for example?What would you say if I claimed I can detect a difference in sound when I plug and unplug my interconnect.....without even changing its direction?What about different interconnects using the same or different connectors?Why doesn't any of you hear any difference?Surely to compare two interconnects,you have to plug and unplug them several times.
Last edited:
Hi Key!
I suggest perusing audio forums where opponents and proponents of wires are discussing the idea of the audibility of sonic differences. Now do a search of "expectation bias" and see who uses this term as a weapon most often and how they use it!
I'll bet you "expectation bias" is used by the opponents of the idea of the audibility of sonic differences almost exclusively as a weapon and it used in this manner a) YOU SAW the wires and b)YOU EXPECTED to hear a difference and so you heard one!
Then proponents will respond with "expectation bias" negatively as well so that means a) YOU SAW the wires and b)YOU EXPECTED NOT to hear a difference and so you didn't hear one!
Prove me wrong "if" you can and please provide a link to this proof.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
- Status
- Not open for further replies.