I don't believe cables make a difference, any input?

[Andre Visser]

Originally Posted by Passion

Differences among most electronic components (DACs, preamps, etc.) are of the same order of magnitude of what I'm measuring here.
Ricardo

Thanks Passion, that is quite an interesting statement, I believe few here will claim that there are no audible differences between DACs and pre-amps.

[Passion]

Originally Posted by cliff

Passion,

Do you really think your measurements represent reality?? They are plain wrong and very misleading!

It is like using a rangefinder to take two measurements, one gives 1.001Km and the other 1.002Km and then confidently stating that the two measurements are a meter apart!

Surely as an "audio engineer" you have a feel for what a 20dB difference is? This aint it

Cliff

Cliff,

Based on your "meter apart" example I'm sure you didn't understand my measurements at all (either that, or yours is not a good example). I'll repeat what I said a few times: Losses in some interconnect cables can be ten times larger than those in other cables (very small losses, but still, quite different from cable to cable). These measurements represent reality in an accurate way, even if they are difficult to understand or to accept to a few people. Up to you to decide whether this is audible.

I know what 20dB is, thank you. Among other things, is the difference in the magnitude of losses you can find when measuring two different cables. Please read carefully.

Cheers,

R

[Key]

I'm sorry Passion but I don't believe your tests stand up to rigorous retesting. It seems like the impedance isn't being bridged properly in your test or something is exaggerating it that really shouldn't in the real world.

[cliff]

Originally Posted by Passion

Cliff,


I know what 20dB is, thank you. Among other things, is the difference in the magnitude of losses you can find when measuring two different cables. Please read carefully.

Cheers,

R

OK, clear.

But I would maintain that this is meaningless:

There is no 20dB loss at any time in the "system", which would be meaningful, IMO and very audible.

Your measurements show that there are very very tiny differences between the cables you measured, but you have expressed that in a way that makes them appear enormous but which have no meaning to someone listening to them in the same system environment.

You are obviously convinced that it means something. I am not. But there is nothing more to add, so I'll shut up!

Thanks for the explanation.

Cliff

[jlsem]

R,

You don't have to apologize to anyone. One poster here (from the "pure engineering" camp) stated once that the receiver he used was superior to others due to slight differences he measured in the the noise floor at -130dB or thereabouts. Nary a har-har from anyone. These debates are nearly 100% political in nature. There is a great deal of data presented on this forum (from both sides) that falls squarely in the category of thesis-driven research.

John

[SY]

Key, his measurements are probably correct (they look correct to me), it's his manner of defining frequency response and level changes that is misleading. Again, if you look at actual level changes as measured at the load (which is what one actually cares about), the differences are less than a thousandth of a dB. The huge dB number come from the odd definition used here.

Here's another way to look at it. Suppose you have a 0R1 interconnect resistance with that 10k load. Now add a 1R series resistor. You change the level at the receiving end by a totally negligible 0.0008dB. Using Passion's definition, you've changed the error by a horrible-looking 20dB. That's the tricky thing about dB measures- you always have to ask, "dB with respect to what?"

All that's being done here is measuring series resistance, which is not particularly relevant at these levels. Taking the next step and suggesting that these <<0.001dB frequency response changes are audible is, IMO, astonishing.

[Passion]

Originally Posted by Andre Visser

Thanks Passion, that is quite an interesting statement, I believe few here will claim that there are no audible differences between DACs and pre-amps.

Thanks for your words, Andre. As we know, some people will never accept some facts, no matter how we present them. What can we do...? (rhetorical question )

Thanks again,

R

[Andre Visser]

Originally Posted by SY

All that's being done here is measuring series resistance, which is not particularly relevant at these levels. Taking the next step and suggesting that these <<0.001dB frequency response changes are audible is, IMO, astonishing.

Surely it seems to be too small to make a difference but remember we are mainly talking about changes in detail and soundstage, I would not expect to see large differences with 'normal' measurements.

I also belief that the way our brain perceive sound and the way we measure doesn't represent a true comparison, we can measure anything we want but if it doesn't correspond with our perception of sound it is of little value.

[SY]

What Passion has presented is data relating to level and frequency response. If there's data regarding "detail" and "soundstage," it hasn't yet been presented, so it's premature to discuss that.

[Passion]

Originally Posted by SY

Key, his measurements are probably correct (they look correct to me), it's his manner of defining frequency response and level changes that is misleading. Again, if you look at actual level changes as measured at the load (which is what one actually cares about), the differences are less than a thousandth of a dB. The huge dB number come from the odd definition used here.

Here's another way to look at it. Suppose you have a 0R1 interconnect resistance with that 10k load. Now add a 1R series resistor. You change the level at the receiving end by a totally negligible 0.0008dB. Using Passion's definition, you've changed the error by a horrible-looking 20dB. That's the tricky thing about dB measures- you always have to ask, "dB with respect to what?"

All that's being done here is measuring series resistance, which is not particularly relevant at these levels. Taking the next step and suggesting that these <<0.001dB frequency response changes are audible is, IMO, astonishing.

SY,

Please accept the fact that, not knowing it, many people on Earth prefer interconnects with very low losses when they listen to their favorite music. We don't know for sure whether the low losses make cables sound better to their ears, or there are other unknown factors that affect their perceived quality, but I know quite a few smart, open-minded, honest, sane people who can hear an obvious difference. My measurements are showing a common characteristic of "preferred" interconnects: low losses (again, maybe there is more).

I'm perfectly fine if you don't agree, but as I said, life is short, so I'm not interest in a futile argument about your "astonishing" statements.

R