| johnferrier |
I like to build stuff up, but lack the type of test equipment necessary to measure these effects. I've used pspice just a little bit. But it seems like simulation really isn't the right tool for such subtle effects. I don't think that there are good enough models for cable microdiodes and DA/DH.
JF |
|
|
| Christer |
John,
For the record, yes, I have done some simulations of the type
you suggested. As expected and predicted by theory one does
get a non-null differential signal since we basically have two
different filters before the subtractor. I agree, however, that
the simulation helps to visualize the signals especially in the
case of assymetrical signals -- my brain is not good at doing
Fourier transforms.
So, before doing the simulation I wondered what we were
supposed to learn from it, and I still wonder. It shows that
a cap with DA behaves as a filter, which we already know
from the DA model. The model is linear so no new frequency
components enter and thus this cannot explain your cable
measurements.
BTW, I have not kept records of my simulations so I won't post
any graphs, but in my case all difference signals were more
than 120dB below the signal. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by john curl
Folks, what is being discussed here? All that I see here is general badmouthing and half baked understanding of measured effects.
I point out at one point that you can simulate the effects of DA with a differential subtraction between two caps, using a variety of input sources, including music. Did anyone here actually TRY a simulation? If no, why not? Are you too non-technical? Do you lack the program to do it? Most likely, the most argumentative of you, just didn't bother. |
Because, John, it doesn't take a Ph.D. to look at the DA model and figure out that those RC networks in parallel with the idealized capacitance aren't going to have any appreciable effect on frequency and phase response.
| quote: | | And you accuse me of not following the scientific method? I know the results, as I did plots of various inputs in a differential test more than 15 years ago. I had interaction about the same results with Dr. Lipshitz and other scoffers of component differences. Even Dr. Lipshitz could find nothing wrong with my math or measurements. Today, even you 10th grade dropouts feel free to attack my measurements, yet you can't even bother to do a computer simulation, much less a real measurement. |
Your measurements are fine as far as they go. The "problem" is that they don't really quantify DA in terms that are relevant to audio signals.
As I've said before, seeing as DA is modeled using linear elements, then you need to look at the time domain. So the effects of DA will manifest themselves as changes in frequency and phase response.
You keep saying that sinusoidal measurements hide the efffects of DA.
No, they don't.
What they do is illustrate that the effects of DA under AC conditions are, for all intents and purposes as it relates to audio cables, non-existent.
se |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Christer
For the record, yes, I have done some simulations of the type
you suggested. As expected and predicted by theory one does
get a non-null differential signal since we basically have two
different filters before the subtractor. I agree, however, that
the simulation helps to visualize the signals especially in the
case of assymetrical signals -- my brain is not good at doing
Fourier transforms.
So, before doing the simulation I wondered what we were
supposed to learn from it, and I still wonder. It shows that
a cap with DA behaves as a filter, which we already know
from the DA model. The model is linear so no new frequency
components enter and thus this cannot explain your cable
measurements.
BTW, I have not kept records of my simulations so I won't post
any graphs, but in my case all difference signals were more
than 120dB below the signal. |
If you want to get a more relevant picture of the effects of DA, instead of using John's subtractor circuit, just do a simple frequency and phase response plot using an idealized capacitor and one with the DA model components added.
se |
|
|
| Christer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
If you want to get a more relevant picture of the effects of DA, instead of using John's subtractor circuit, just do a simple frequency and phase response plot using an idealized capacitor and one with the DA model components added.
se |
Sure, and I have done such simulations earlier when DA has
been discussed elsewhere. I decided to
do what John suggested just so he couldn't complain
that nobody did it "his way". |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Christer
Sure, and I have done such simulations earlier when DA has
been discussed elsewhere. I decided to
do what John suggested just so he couldn't complain
that nobody did it "his way". |
Ah, gotcha. Thanks. :)
I think Bob Pease pretty much summed it up when he said:
Steve, lets' say a 100 ft stretch of speaker cable has 1000 pf. The soakage of a mylar cap of that size would be about 10 pF in series with 1 meg.
You drive this from an amplifer whose output impedance is lower than 1 ohm. In concept if you put this in a precision measuremnt system, you could measure perhaps as low as 0.01 dB of attenuation.
(YOU MUST AGREE - you certainly can't HEAR that kind of attenuation shift, 0.01 dB...)
But the soakage of 1 megohm, is below the 0.01dB by about a factor of 1000. If you want to wast your time by arguing with audio nuts about things that are 1000: 1 below the limits of MEASURABILITY - not to mention 100,000:1 below the limits of audibility --
-- BE MY GUEST, but don't waste MY time, OK?
Yeah, if you ran speaker cables not just 100 ft, but 10,000 ft. - and if you ran a rubber line cord that is perhaps 10 x worse than mylar - you might be able to measure it.
WHO CARES!
se |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | The model is linear so no new frequency components enter and thus this cannot explain your cable measurements.
|
In all frankness I wouldn't even expect it to measure the same anyway.
Cables are more than just DA and their capacitance is in shunt not in series as I assume you simulated it.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| john curl |
Christer, et al, perhaps now we can discuss something. First: It is the TIME DISTORTION that happens bigtime with DA in caps. That is WHY you should use an asymmetrical pulse and VIEW the difference between the two caps with an oscilloscope or time domain print-out. Only the asymmetry will give you interesting results. The ratio can be perhaps 10,000 : 1.
If you do an AC analysis, rather than a transient analysis in your simulation, you will see only tiny phase differences, BUT when you do a transient analysis in the time domain, you can see up to 10% deviation in the waveform, and this is just from 1 cap! Think about 10 caps in the audio chain !!!
Does this matter? We think so.
We have known about the seeming limited effect of DA as implied by the model. This is why I ignored DA for almost 10 years. Almost 30 years ago, a fellow engineer did his masters thesis at UCB on DA. He sent me the relevant papers and his writeup on the effect, so I could have been on top of this back in 1974, when I was working with Mark Levinson and in 1977 when I designed the Symmetry 'Transient-Perfect' electronic crossover, but I thought then that mylar caps were just great! They were cheap, small, reliable, and they had no non-linear distortion that I could measure at the time, down to 0.001% IM.
Still, people did hear them, and we traced it to DA in the following years. This brought out, in our newer designs, direct coupling and servos to control offset about 20 years ago.
The person who did the first computer simulation that I know about was Scott Wurcer of Analog Devices. He had access to a good simulation program and I still have his printout. Unfortunately, I have never been successful in directly attaching anything to this website or any others, in general, so I will decline to do so at this time. |
|
|
| Christer |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
In all frankness I wouldn't even expect it to measure the same anyway.
|
Measure the same as the simulations you mean? No, most
certainly not, since we don't have ideal components in real
life, not even ideal capacitors with DA.
| quote: |
Cables are more than just DA and their capacitance is in shunt not in series as I assume you simulated it.
|
I just did what John suggested. It is his job to explain what
it has to do with his cable measurements. I didn't understand
that before simulating, and I don't understand it after.
Since John seems to agree with the usual model for DA (he
suggested using it for the simulation), it is obvious that DA
couldn't explain his measurements, but that was obvious
already without the simulations. |
|
|
| Christer |
John,
First, you suddenly used the term time distorsion. Do you
use this a synonym to linear distorsion as you used before,
or else, how do you define it? I ask this just to avoid further
confusion.
I suppose you suggested the subtractor model for simulation
since it has some relevance to feedback loops around an
amp stage. However, don't forget that typically we will not
have two caps with the same value on the two inputs, especially
where one of them is ideal and the other one has DA. Different
value caps or no cap at all on one input is likely to swamp the
effect of DA, I would guess. It does
hint us, though, that it might make sense to do some thinking
about trying to "match" capacitors. Perhaps it may even be
sensible to introduce a cap on an otherwise DC coupled input
just to get a better cancelling effect. Although I am not so
sure any real music will have signals assymetric enough to
cause any errors of the magnitude you suggested (I may be
wrong there, of course), I admit there may be some relevance
to what you say about cumulative effects from many amp
stages. I would have to think about, or simulate, how they
add up, though. Can't quite figure that out in my head, not
right now at least.
Finally, I presume, this simulation experiment was meant to
illustrate the effects of DA, rather than explain your cable
measurements, which AFAICS must be due to some other
phenomenon (assuming they are not just some kind of
measurement error, which is still an open question until they
can be repeated by others). |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Measure the same as the simulations you mean? |
No, not quite. I meant don't expect cable sims and caps to measure the same.
Which is why I distinguished between measurements od a cap in series and a cap in shunt, which is how a cable's capicitance is modeled.
| quote: | First, you suddenly used the term time distorsion. Do you
use this a synonym to linear distorsion as you used before,
or else, how do you define it? |
It's not the first time John mentions this, I think.
Linear distortion, as some call is still a distortion whether it's in the time domain or elsewhere. Frequency changes are called linear distortions too.
Try to keep them way outside of the audioband and if you can you'll hear the difference, I'm sure of it.
| quote: | | It is his job to explain what it has to do with his cable measurements. I didn't understand that before simulating, and I don't understand it after. |
Why not drop this silly SE assumption about having to prove everything that is claimed by the claimant and do some research on your own?
That's the best way to find out and convince yourself IMHO.
Assuming you need convincing that is...
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| Christer |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
No, not quite. I meant don't expect cable sims and caps to measure the same.
Which is why I distinguished between measurements od a cap in series and a cap in shunt, which is how a cable's capicitance is modeled.
|
Quite agree, bu I didn't understand quite what John
wanted use to learn from the simulation and whether it
was supposed to be relevant to capacitors or cables or both.
| quote: |
It's not the first time John mentions this, I think.
Linear distortion, as some call is still a distortion whether it's in the time domain or elsewhere. Frequency changes are called linear distortions too.
Try to keep them way outside of the audioband and if you can you'll hear the difference, I'm sure of it.
|
My question was if he used time distorsion as synonumous
with linear distorsion, or if it was a new term he threw in.
Since linear distorsion, as I understand is, is deviations from
flat/desired frequency and phase response we obviously
want it well outside the audio band.
| quote: |
Why not drop this silly SE assumption about having to prove everything that is claimed by the claimant and do some research on your own?
That's the best way to find out and convince yourself IMHO.
Assuming you need convincing that is...
|
So you are claiming the whole interantional research community
in basically all disciplines is silly? Really Frank, I know you
better than to expect such a stupid comment from you.
It is not something Steve
cooked up, it is standard and reasonable practice. That does
not exclude one might still do some thinking and research on
other peoples claims. I have often done that when reading
seemingly unsubstantiated claims by other reasearchers. I
have even published scientific journal and conference articles
proving claims in other peoples publication to be wrong. That
might take months or even years of work and it sure would
be simpler to ask them to prove the claims themselves. They
wouldn't usually try to prove themselves wrong, of course,
and even less publish such proofs.
I don't mind doing some more thinking myself about these things, but then
I need to know what John's point is and what we are supposed to find out.
Now, time to go to bed and read Coetzee. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | Since linear distorsion, as I understand is, is deviations from flat/desired frequency and phase response we obviously
want it well outside the audio band. |
Ideally, we don't want any of it. When it does occur, and it will, we want it way outside audibility.
Now what's audible or not is open for debate.
Me, I want it way out into the hundreds of thousands of Hertz because these distortions have repercussions that can show up into the audio band proper due to phase rotations for instance.
| quote: | | Really Frank, I know you better than to expect such a stupid comment from you.It is not something Steve cooked up, it is standard and reasonable practice. |
Well, this is not a university, neither is it a scientific forum, is it?
So, I reckon that it's worthwhile for someone with a vested interest in the audio bizz such as SE to sit up and listen, do his homework and than talk and report back not the other way around.
That would be stupid indeed.
What say you, Christer?
Is that common sense? Or is the jury still out?
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
There was an EW/WW article years ago entitled "Gain From Passives".
Anybody have a copy ?.
Eric. |
|
|
| john curl |
JF, you did good! Thanks for the references about voltage variable resistors. That is worth serious consideration when it comes to micro-diodes. It is really the same thing, at least in principle.
Christer, if you want to doubt things, so be it. I measure what I measure. However, for some of you, just think about how we improve audio quality.
Do we just think it through, from the knowledge we have gained by taking a course or reading a book? Or do we try things, try to put aside our initial opinion, and if we find that something that we try works for us, we might find out how it works for others, then if it also seems to work for others of like mind and interest in improving things, we might also try to find a physical reason for why something works. At least we might make a hypothesis as to why, and change it, if we find another direction that fits the situation better. This is how I learn new concepts. It makes me a successful audio designer.
Now what about 'education'. I have been accused as an 'education snob'. Let's get real, I come from a working class background, and I only first attended college to become a TV repair technician. Once in college, a whole new world was opened up to me. I went from tech ed., to engineering, to physics, and in real employment, back to electronics engineering. It took me years of after-hours classes to catch up and formally become a senior electronics engineer. I am not an academic, but I both learn from and teach academics. If I need a Ph.D., I hire one. Sometimes they hire me. This is the pursuit of understanding, without self limiting. Works for me. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | That is worth serious consideration when it comes to micro-diodes. It is really the same thing, at least in principle. |
Yes, John...Their behaviour is anologous to microdiodes but I doubt they are in real life.
I've given hints already.
More than I intended to really.
A suggestion stemming from our local university: repeat the same for an enamelled solid core wire and compare the results.
Remember what I told you Steve? Hint #1?
| quote: | | This is the pursuit of understanding, without self limiting. Works for me. |
Admiration all over from me, John...some of us pushed that even further and I'm sure you'd be the last to say stop.
Cheers and with the utmost respect to all of you,;) |
|
|
| johnferrier |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
I've given hints already.
More than I intended to really.
|
Is it characteristic of copper conductors but not with silver?
JF |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Is it characteristic of copper conductors but not with silver? |
No. It's more to do with the conductor/insulator interface.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| johnferrier |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Hi,
No. It's more to do with the conductor/insulator interface.
Cheers,;) |
Okay, but it could have been how copper versus silver react to the insulator. That seems ruled out.
Thanks for the reply.
JF |
|
|
| johnferrier |
| quote: | Originally posted by john curl
Thanks for the references about voltage variable resistors. That is worth serious consideration when it comes to micro-diodes. It is really the same thing, at least in principle.
|
Well, I'm having a really good day today. I'll have to look more carefully at information on intergranular boundaries. (Intergranular boundaries have not been discussed much at diyAudio. Unless, there is yet another term for it.)
And there is a better article on Varistors here:
http://www.littelfuse.com/PDFs/AppNotes/an9767.pdf
Thanks!
JF |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Thanks for the references about voltage variable resistors. That is worth serious consideration when it comes to micro-diodes. It is really the same thing, at least in principle. |
Back to hint #1...
Can these microdiode effects be observed with solid core enamelled wire?
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| johnferrier |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Can these microdiode effects be observed with solid core enamelled wire? |
My guess, is that microdiodes would be more likely to occur with enamelled wire than with an insulator like Tefzel. This is because I read: "The enamel is a synthetic compound of cellulose acetate (wood pulp and magnesium)." And in order for there to be any type diode junction (between wire and insulator), the insulator needs to be somewhat conductive (though of course an insulator). Magnesium is more conductive than Tefzel and PVC. Otherwise, I got the impression for one of your previous posts that the oxide on silver may be less conducive (than copper oxide) to the microdiode effect.
Quotation from (enamel reference about half way down):
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/montecar...trical/Ch12.htm
JF |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by john curl
JF, you did good! Thanks for the references about voltage variable resistors. That is worth serious consideration when it comes to micro-diodes. It is really the same thing, at least in principle. |
Great. Now let's see even a scrap of evidence that the same or similar processes are occurring in copper wire.
We know how varistors work, but I haven't seen any evidence that that the varistor effect has ever been observed in copper wire.
se |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Remember what I told you Steve? Hint #1? |
I've had my fill of your guessing game contrivance, Frank. Wake me up when you actually have something to say instead of just trying to fool people into thinking you actually have a clue what you're talking about.
se |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by johnferrier
My guess, is that microdiodes would be more likely to occur with enamelled wire than with an insulator like Tefzel. This is because I read: "The enamel is a synthetic compound of cellulose acetate (wood pulp and magnesium)." And in order for there to be any type diode junction (between wire and insulator), the insulator needs to be somewhat conductive (though of course an insulator). Magnesium is more conductive than Tefzel and PVC. Otherwise, I got the impression for one of your previous posts that the oxide on silver may be less conducive (than copper oxide) to the microdiode effect.
Quotation from (enamel reference about half way down):
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/montecar...trical/Ch12.htm |
That reference must be pretty old. About the only people using the old "plain enamel" magnet wire these days are those who make reproduction guitar pickups.
The most common insulations used on magnet wire these days is polyurethane and polyester.
The magnet wire from Vampire that we're using for the directionality listening tests uses polyurethane.
se |
|
|
| SY |
| Insulating enamel doesn't contain enough magnesium as a metal to achieve much conductivity- the magnesium is present in catalytic amounts, like the tin or platinum in silicone insulating resins. Its conductivity varies a lot, but IIRC, it's not too different than PVC (which also has something of a range of conductivities). Tefzel is a whole lot less conductive than either of them, but we're talking about viruses versus bacteria in a realm where we're weighing walruses. |
|
|
| johnferrier |
Thanks for the additional information guys.
Frank, how sure are you about this?
JF |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by johnferrier
Frank, how sure are you about this? |
Sure about what? We don't even know what the hell "this" is thanks to the silly guessing games Frank keeps playing.
se |
|
|
| john curl |
JF, I think that the microdiode model fits well within a modified varistor model. Think about ceramic grain boundaries, not with zinc, but with copper, or other metal impurities. Frank, I suspect you are referring to oxidization of strand surfaces which is greater in stranded wire, because of the greater surface area exposed to air, either during processing or over time.
The reason I suspect this, is the close relationship to diode-like behavior, and the possibility of steep slopes that would easily give higher order distortion. It fits the measurements.
This is an example of how we learn new things. Not just by reading a book, or technical journal, although I have perhaps a thousand of them lying around my apartment, not just by taking a course, although I have taken more technical courses than my average critic, or just guessing.
First, you note a phemonena, maybe a difference in the sound of different wires. This is confirmed by your associates, who even may have heard it first. Then you try to measure differences in wires. Perhaps you find differences, even some that you are surprised to be there. You attempt to hypothesize the mechanism. You attempt to find the direct mechanism in the literature, if possible, and you try to fit any found mechanism into your measurement data. This might NOT be the scientific method, but it works well enough for me. |
|
|
| john curl |
JF, I think that the microdiode model fits well within a modified varistor model. Think about ceramic grain boundaries, not with zinc, but with copper, or other metal impurities. Frank, I first suspected that you were referring to oxidization of strand surfaces which is greater in stranded wire, because of the greater surface area exposed to air, either during processing or over time. Now you hint at the wire/insulator interface. Interesting.
The reason I suspect this, is the close relationship to diode-like behavior, and the possibility of steep slopes that would easily give higher order distortion. It fits the measurements.
This is an example of how we learn new things. Not just by reading a book, or technical journal, although I have perhaps a thousand of them lying around my apartment, not just by taking a course, although I have taken more technical courses than my average critic, or just guessing.
First, you note a phemonena, maybe a difference in the sound of different wires. This is confirmed by your associates, who even may have heard it first. Then you try to measure differences in wires. Perhaps you find differences, even some that you are surprised to be there. You attempt to hypothesize the mechanism. You attempt to find the direct mechanism in the literature, if possible, and you try to fit any found mechanism into your measurement data. This might NOT be the scientific method, but it works well enough for me. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Frank, I suspect you are referring to oxidization of strand surfaces which is greater in stranded wire, because of the greater surface area exposed to air, either during processing or over time. |
Indeed, John. A process that's not so likely to happen with enamel, polyurethane, polyester types of coating on a single strand provided the bare, uncoated wire is processed quickly enough as it leaves the die.
A method of doing away with intercrystal boundaries altogether is used nowadays on some high-end cable and is called fusion.
I think the process is explained on A..J. van den Hul's site and it's done by Phelps-Dodge in New Jersey U.S of A.
The idea is to add a metal to the basis metal that actually fills the gaps at the crystal boundaries. It's a bit more complicated than that but it seems to be effective.
A month ago I had the chance to listen to the Deskadel silver and gold alloy wires and I was impressed by their neutral balance.
| quote: | | Now you hint at the wire/insulator interface. Interesting. |
Air pockets captured inbetween the insulating polymers and the wire proper.
That was hint #2.
I must have some pages with references on my hard drive, I'll try to post some links later.
These microdiodes are nothing new and neither are barrier micro discharges for that matter, both phenomena are studied and applied in nanoelectronics.
It is some kind of static build up on the barrier between insulator and conductor (not DA release) causing microdischarges into the conductor(s).
Much to my surprise these are all things we heard empirically in wires and science seems to confirm it 10 to 15 years later.
Unfortunately I don't have the equipment to measure all of this but I'm sure it can be done once you know what to look for.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| john curl |
| Makes sense to me, thanks for the info, Frank! |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
A method of doing away with intercrystal boundaries altogether is used nowadays on some high-end cable and is called fusion.
I think the process is explained on A..J. van den Hul's site and it's done by Phelps-Dodge in New Jersey U.S of A.
The idea is to add a metal to the basis metal that actually fills the gaps at the crystal boundaries. It's a bit more complicated than that but it seems to be effective. |
Are you referring to their (Phelps-Dodge's) process where they add manganese to the copper?
And please no more guessing games.
se |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Are you referring to their (Phelps-Dodge's) process where they add manganese to the copper? |
No....You won't even have to add manganese to copper anyway, it contains some in its natural raw state already.
It may result into something similar but adding a metal just creates an alloy, you want the wire in an amorphous state which requires a forced cooling process as is used to create....ta da...amorphous cores for your cherished OPTs amongst other applications.
Phelps-Dodge has always been kind enough to do special OEM requests but as you may realise they don't exactly do that kind of thing for free either. Let's just say some of us are glad they are willing to do it anyways.
| quote: | | And please no more guessing games. |
Funny how some people can read me correctly if they want to...I don't hear John Curl screaming: "Prove it!"
So, use those grey cells, I know you can if you want to.
Now you can look up "dielectric barrier discharges" for academic research if you'd like.
I know I did so I don't have to second guess anyone....
A forum is an exchange of information, Steve, not a taskforce for you to deploy.:smash:
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
No....You won't even have to add manganese to copper anyway, it contains some in its natural raw state already.
Cheers,;) |
another way is to make ionic oxygen atoms or neutrons and trap them in copper, again, in ionic forms. As the oxygen neutrons jump from crystal to crystal, it will create atomic discrete energy states and randomly releases or absorbs energy from the crystals. As the ionic particles have their own state of spinning (usually 1 left, half left and 1 right), they force copper electrons out of their own 'resident" state in copper crystals. This may create instantaneous charge of discharge of the ionic copper wire - otherwise known as ionic semiconducting.
the key, is you can see, is to generate and trap enough of those oxygen neutrons in copper crystals and excite them with enough energy so that they will transformer their spins to copper electrons.
The same works with metal hydrogen but that's some explosive stuff for home audio. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
No....You won't even have to add manganese to copper anyway, it contains some in its natural raw state already. |
But they add more in order to improve crystal formation.
| quote: | | It may result into something similar but adding a metal just creates an alloy, you want the wire in an amorphous state which requires a forced cooling process as is used to create....ta da...amorphous cores for your cherished OPTs amongst other applications. |
Wasn't able to find anything on the net regarding amorphous copper-silver-zinc alloys.
| quote: | | Phelps-Dodge has always been kind enough to do special OEM requests but as you may realise they don't exactly do that kind of thing for free either. Let's just say some of us are glad they are willing to do it anyways. |
I'll give 'em a call tomorrow and ask them about this amorphous copper-silver-zinc alloy.
| quote: | | Now you can look up "dielectric barrier discharges" for academic research if you'd like. |
Ok.
Seems that "dielectric barrier discharges" are a phenomenon of plasma systems.
Wasn't aware that audio interconnects and speaker cables were plasma systems. At least I my interconnects and speaker cables aren't producing any ionized gasses.
se |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | But they add more in order to improve crystal formation. |
Guessing or knowing?
| quote: | | Wasn't able to find anything on the net regarding amorphous copper-silver-zinc alloys. |
Did you really expect any different? Do you actually expect people with a vested interest to go public on this?
Obviously you haven't looked too hard as I have at least two returns from the search engine.
| quote: | | 'll give 'em a call tomorrow and ask them about this amorphous copper-silver-zinc alloy. |
Obviously you don't know what OEM work implies, do you? Expect a blank stare on this one unless you can convince Paul...Which I doubt.
See, now you have the first name but not the last...
Doesn't it surprise you at least one bit that I know these folks by their first name, Steve?
Do you want to pay through the nose when most of the info I'm throwing your way is not a phone call away but right there on the net and is just common sense?
| quote: | | Seems that "dielectric barrier discharges" are a phenomenon of plasma systems. |
Yes, you'd have to understand how these discharges can take place in I/Cs and L/S cable in the first place but it can be done as it is real but conditional.
IOW words it won't happen in all wires.
Time for you to reread the thread and piece it together in an intelligent manner.
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
Goodbye, Frank.
se |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
Hello, Steve.
Can I help?
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Goodbye, Frank.
se |
And just when things are getting interesting !!!.
Eric. |
|
|
| Christer |
This thread is just getting more and more confused and maybe
it is time to just say Merry Christmas and forget about it? Anyway,
instead of quoting and commenting directly on other recent
postings, let me just try to briefly sum up my "view".
First, I have not posted in the thread with any intention of
deliberately annoying anyone, but rather with an honest
intention of trying to help structure the discussion (it is not
for me to judge if I have had any success or just failed miserably).
Second, I am not running anybody elses errands and I am not
deliberately supporting or attacking anybody. The thread is
much too confused for me to even know if I share the same
view as someone else.
Third, why did I participate in the discussion? Well, John Curl
belongs to those who perceives an audible difference between
certain cables (let's not get into the dicsussion of whether
these differences are real or not, we have discussed that
endlessly in other threads). However, John also started to
measure his cables. Obviously, he was not satisfied with
the "I hear, therefore it is" attitude, but also wanted to
try finding a reason for this perceived difference. I applaud
him for doing so. I assume he did this for an honest and genuine
interest in trying to find a reason for the difference, whatever
it happens to be. I thus also assume that he is not interested
in fooling himself with erroneous measurements or wrong
conclusions, just to fit in with how he wants things to be.
I am not assuming he tries or wants to do academic research, just
that he honestly tries to do his best to study the phenomenon.
I have tried to help him by pointing out certain weak points in
the studies and arguments that need further consideration.
Johns findings may be considered controversial since they
are not directly or easily explained by the usual theory and we
have only a failed attempt at repeating the experiment (or
a similar one, rather). This does not mean his measurements
are wrong, but it certainly raises a warning flag that further
studies must be done to conclude anything. The first step
might be that someone else can repeat the experiment and
get similar results, either with the same cables or with others.
Also remember that a measurement is just a measurement,
it cannot tell us the cause of the data we get.
So, I am not claiming that Johns measurements are wrong,
just that they could be, and we need more studies to be done,
before we can possibly know anything.
Of course, if my assumptions are wrong and John is only
interested in getting the data he wants, rather than the truth,
then the whole discussion is pointless.However I prefer to believe
in my assumptions that John honestly is trying to find, or at
least get closer to, the truth, even if it turns out not be what
he had expected. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
There are further effects in cables not covered here.
I cannot give details but suffice it to say that I can walk up to any system cables and instantly change the sonic nature of any system.
And repeatedly and reliably.......
And showing up in ultimate blind testing, and favourably so......
And under knowing conditions, there is universal preference for treated cables in any system........
Insulation and wire materials sonic effects become less important.........
This seems weird sure, but it is perfectly real......
And addictive too (no going back) are some user reports.
Cable conductors and insulations add/subtract tones and dynamic behaviours in a manner sort of like the way jitter in digital systems adds junk.
Digital jitter magnitude is important, but of more sonic importance is the spectral/dynamic behaviour of the system jitter.
Cables add/subtract spectral and dynamic behaviours that may or may not be universally agreeable, and this can be changed in an instant.
Inductance, capacitance, DA, DH, micro-diodes etc are only part of the story.
Just some food for thought............
Eric. |
|
|
| johnferrier |
From my understanding, the position of your ears within the room will probably have as large of effect on the sonics as your interaction with the cable. You turning your head has an effect. But you know this sort of stuff. Even someone else's change in position within the room (walking over to the cable) and your ears unmoved will have effects. Also, it seems, for such subtle changes, thermal and air currents within the room will be as influential as interaction with shielded I/Cs.
JF |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
I can walk up to any system cables and instantly change the sonic nature of any system.
Eric. |
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for anyoen of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc. |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by johnferrier
Also, it seems, for such subtle changes, thermal and air currents within the room will be as influential as interaction with shielded I/Cs.
JF |
you are so right on. For every reason why cables make a sonic difference, I can write equally convincing reasons why thermal nuclear fusion two galaxies away make a sonic difference here in your living room.
the moral of the story? the fact it makes a difference is irrelevant. We need to show that such difference can be heard. If it is not audible, it might as well don't exist. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
Just some food for thought............ |
If you "cannot give details" then it's nothing more than threadjacking marketing drivel. Take it to Trading Post. This is intended to be a TECHNICAL DISCUSSION, not a one-way forum for marketing commercial products.
se |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Originally posted by millwood
that's may be true. But that is not sufficient for a discussion as there is no way for any of us to confirm - otherwise not "bankable" in my profession.
Sure, but there are three professional live sound guys who could (very) happily confirm this if they were DIY members.
A couple of well heeled audiophiles too.
My local FM community radio station listeners are hearing such cables too, but they don't know about them - comments from several station connected personnel is that the recieved audio is better/nicer since I became technical support for the station.
The whole effort is to 1) confirm there sonic differences exist, and 2) find out why.
I have completely confirmed the sonic effects on a multitude of systems in a multitude of situations, but alas, I am still working on determining the actual mechanism. :xeye:
You can repeat million times that you can do this or you can do that. Until and unless that is confirmed, it does not help advance the discussion.
When I bother to say things like this it is only after vigourous and very much repeated A/B testing.
My comments are intended as very real food for thought (confirmation) that there are a bunch of mechanisms/parameters interacting in cables.
so why don't we just lay that aside and concentrate on things that can be confirmed? Like if you passed a dbx cable test at what date, etc.
More than ten years ago, my flat-mate and I used to practice blind testing with 5 different CDP-power amp interconnects.
After only a few days we were both able to get 100% scores reliably - it is not that difficult on a high-res system.
Audio systems are full of materials sounds and the trick is to get a combination that sounds detailed AND pleasing.
I have heard plenty of very expensive, very clean, very nice systems and cables that just leave me cold, fatigued or even irritated.
The effects that John and Frank have been discussing are real enough, but are not the only effects.
Eric. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by johnferrier
From my understanding, the position of your ears within the room will probably have as large of effect on the sonics as your interaction with the cable. You turning your head has an effect. But you know this sort of stuff. Even someone else's change in position within the room (walking over to the cable) and your ears unmoved will have effects. Also, it seems, for such subtle changes, thermal and air currents within the room will be as influential as interaction with shielded I/Cs.
JF |
Shielded cables are not so nearly shielded as you might think.
Eric. |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
Originally posted by millwood
Re: ya Just Gunna have To Take My Word on This (Sorry No Proofs Yet.......)[B]
Eric. |
that's a confirmation that I failed miserably in my last effort, :) |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
If you "cannot give details" then it's nothing more than threadjacking marketing drivel. Take it to Trading Post. This is intended to be a TECHNICAL DISCUSSION, not a one-way forum for marketing commercial products.
se |
Nobody said anything about selling anything, so back off thanks Steve.
It is intended as food for thought for those who can think - insulation materials can cause local field effects.
Eric. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
Nobody said anything about selling anything, so back off thanks Steve.
It is intended as food for thought for those who can think - insulation materials can cause local field effects. |
You're marketing, Eric. Your "cannot give details" is for the purpose of protecting your own commercial interests. And your empty claims are nothing more than marketing tools for those commercial interests.
Again, take it to Trading Post.
se |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
You're marketing, Eric. Your "cannot give details" is for the purpose of protecting your own commercial interests. And your empty claims are nothing more than marketing tools for those commercial interests.
se |
I am just curious. Exactly what Mr. Feedback is selling? Some miracle cables? |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by millwood
I am just curious. Exactly what Mr. Feedback is selling? Some miracle cables? |
Yeah. Or rather "leads."
se |
|
|
| johnferrier |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
Shielded cables are not so nearly shielded as you might think.
Eric. |
Of course, it's hard to "compare apples to oranges", but I'm somewhat familiar with testing to meet the EMC requirements for CE (European Directives). Equipment is subjected to radiated fields of 10V per meter and the frequency is swept from 80Mhz to 1Ghz. Shielded cables a pretty good at blocking that type of interference. And a person will generate a field, but nothing on the order of 10V per meter. Again, this is not the same test setup as you are using.
Beyond EMC testing, there are people involved with the design of interconnects (vias) for cutting edge ICs that I would think would have a hard times comprehending some of these "effects".
I may be playing this both ways, but I'm trying to understand (and offer some information to the discussion).
JF |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by johnferrier
Beyond EMC testing, there are people involved with the design of interconnects (vias) for cutting edge ICs that I would think would have a hard times comprehending some of these "effects".
JF |
But this is NOT a discussion about science. It is a discussion of pulling things out of air and "voodoo" science, :)
happy holidays everyone. |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Yeah. Or rather "leads."
se |
Orh, that explains Mr. Feedback's eagerness in defending the cables.
talk about fair view, :)
What brand of cables does Mr. Feedback make and market? |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by millwood
Orh, that explains Mr. Feedback's eagerness in defending the cables.
talk about fair view, :)
What brand of cables does Mr. Feedback make and market? |
Whatever the things are that he's plugging into the sound reinformcement systems in bars and nightclubs that he takes every opportunity to brag about how people from the crowd and the club owners come up to him telling him how great the sound was.
se |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | What brand of cables does Mr. Feedback make and market? |
In defense of Eric, last time I checked he's not selling any cables under any brandname.
From what I gathered from telephone conversation and reading his postings it's more a service rather than a product.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Eric.
It's easy to mock what one doesn't understand, isn't it?
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
By the way, getting back to the original topic, I've sent John a complete set of cables. An old Radio Shack Gold, a brand new, unused Radio Shack Gold, some bog standard giveaway A/V cable from my DishNetwork boxes, and a length of RG 174/U which has a copper clad steel core which I thought would be interesting seeing as there's no arguing that ferromagnetic materials produce distortion.
I've sent Bruno the same cables except for the brand new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U. I thought the new Radio Shack Golds that I bought were a left/right pair but they were a mono cable and I still haven't got 'round to getting another one. I'd already had the other cables ready to ship to Bruno when I decided to add the RG 174/U so I'll be sending Bruno the new Radio Shack Gold and the RG 174/U in a separate shipment which I should be able to get out by the end of the week.
So hopefully sometime around the first of the year we should have a more directly comparable set of measurements made using John's setup and the System Two Cascade and put to rest any objections that the two were not measuring the same cables.
se |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
In defense of Eric, last time I checked he's not selling any cables under any brandname.
From what I gathered from telephone conversation and reading his postings it's more a service rather than a product. |
Whether you want to call it a "service" or a "product" it has a commercial interest behind it and he "cannot give details" in order to protect that commercial interest.
It's marketing just the same.
Bottom line is that this is supposed to be a technical discussion. And techincal discussions involve details. If you're going to make a bunch of empty, hand-waving technical claims and then when it comes to details run and hide behind commercial interests (which you're doing as well, Frank), then you're just wasting everyone's time.
Once again, take it to Trading Post.
se |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Whatever the things are that he's plugging into the sound reinformcement systems in bars and nightclubs that he takes every opportunity to brag about how people from the crowd and the club owners come up to him telling him how great the sound was.
se |
"bars and night clubs", :)
Had Eric known what systems those places use (I did a diligence on a leading global pro audio company in the last three months), he might elect to change that, :).
Hint: it is like saying you can hear cables over a pair of $1 a pair RadioShack speakers, ;)
But Eric may indeed have godly ears so who knows. |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
hide behind commercial interests (which you're doing as well, Frank),
se |
Wow, I didn't know that. What does Frank sell?
I think this place is kind of interesting in that you got a guy selling gainclones priasing how great those amps are, you got a guy (or two) selling cables praising how big of an audible difference he can hear with cable.
Yet, on the other spectrum you got Pass and Curl who have real interest in promoting audio and helping folks out (and separating their vested interests in audio from their pariticipation in this forum).
I guess from that point of view, it is a great public service to remind people, especially new comers, that some of us may have a vested interest guiding the discussions in certain directions.
I would have been banned and fined and prosecuted if I did anything that remotely resembles such kind of "conflict of interest". |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | What does Frank sell? |
Not a single thing.
As a former designer and consultant for companies still alive I don't feel an urge to reveal whatever makes their product unique.
That doesn't stop me from helping people out as I am sure many can testify.
You just have to draw the line somewhere.
BTW, Millwood, in case you haven't noticed yet, SE does sell audio stuff as a brief visit to his website will tell you.
Did it ever occur to you someone may just be on a cheap fishing trip here? Emphasis on MAY.
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
BTW, Millwood, in case you haven't noticed yet, SE does sell audio stuff as a brief visit to his website will tell you.Cheers, ;) |
no. I didn't know that. What does se sell? where is his website?
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Did it ever occur to you someone may just be on a cheap fishing trip here? Emphasis on MAY.
Cheers, ;) |
I am less concerned about the fishing trip but more so on the conflict of interest. there should be full disclosure. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | I didn't know that. What does se sell? where is his website? |
And voila, some free publicity:
[URL=I didn't know that. What does se sell? where is his website?]QAUDIO[/URL]
Mind you, pushing the www button as shown on his post would have accomplished the same.
Eric has one too but that just refers to his repair shop.
I don't mind any of this but you do understand I'll respond differently, don't you?
Let me add to this that I'd also respond differently to Peter Daniel or Nelson Pass who seem totally transparent on this, I am sure anyone can spot the difference.
I hope you see John Curls' and my responses in a different light now.
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by millwood
Wow, I didn't know that. What does Frank sell? |
I didn't say Frank sold anything. What Frank does is make empty technical claims and then when questioned, hides behind commercial interests. Namely van den Hul's.
| quote: | | I think this place is kind of interesting in that you got a guy selling gainclones priasing how great those amps are, you got a guy (or two) selling cables praising how big of an audible difference he can hear with cable. |
If you're referring to Peter in that first part, I don't recall his ever making technical claims and then when questioned refusing to substantiate them by hiding behind commercial interests.
| quote: | | I guess from that point of view, it is a great public service to remind people, especially new comers, that some of us may have a vested interest guiding the discussions in certain directions. |
I don't have a problem with people who have a commercial involvement in this industry discussing technical issues which may relate to their commercial involvement. As long as they're willing to discuss these technical issues openly, everyone can benefit.
What I have a problem with are those who enter into technical discussions who make technical claims and then when those technical claims are questioned, they run and hide behind silly guessing games or flat out say they won't give you any details.
In this situation, you no longer have a technical discussion but what amounts to nothing more than marketing.
se |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
I hope you see John Curls' and my responses in a different light now. |
I have always thought John is fair and upfront about his commercial involvement and did a superb job separating that from his involvement here. He and Pass are two role models for some people here.
No, I didn't change my view on you the least bit.
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy
What I have a problem with are those who enter into technical discussions who make technical claims and then when those technical claims are questioned, they run and hide behind silly guessing games or flat out say they won't give you any details.
In this situation, you no longer have a technical discussion but what amounts to nothing more than marketing.
se |
I would agree with se on this. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | What Frank does is make empty technical claims and then when questioned, hides behind commercial interests. |
Empty for you perhaps...
| quote: | | Namely van den Hul's. |
You just don't get it, do you?
| quote: | | I don't have a problem with people who have a commercial involvement in this industry discussing technical issues which may relate to their commercial involvement. As long as they're willing to discuss these technical issues openly, everyone can benefit. |
Of course you don't...You're one of them anyway.
I, for one have a major problem with people having a company active in audio asking, even demanding about things they don't even have a clue about to the potential benefit of their own company.
| quote: | | I don't recall his ever making technical claims and then when questioned refusing to substantiate them by hiding behind commercial interests |
I don't recall Peter making much technical claims in the first place.
Nice try, Steve but I won't bite...When something smells fishy it usually is fishy.
So, that's goodbye to you I reckon?
| quote: | | I would agree with se on this. |
I'd expected that. Nothing "bankable" for you here either, huh?
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| NEAR_SOTA |
Cables and Wires!
Seems the best thing a company can do today is just say"Hey,it works.try it and see how well it works in your system". I think that might be the most honest statement a cable Co. could make these days, but I see so many claim they do this and that without any substantial evidence which supports their claims. And there are some wild *** claims out there.
The best thing an audio enthusiast can do is Experiment to see what works best for them instead of going by the claims that others make. Then there are those who claim that everything sounds the same. I do not know weather to feel sorry for those people or have empathy for them. They seem to dismiss any findings or opinions without even consideration or experimentation . A real shame ,but then again it’s their right. Ignorance is bliss after all.
As for myself I studied different designs ,then build them and choose which designs worked best for me. Now I wish someone would take measurements to see why they worked for me and others I have asked to try them.
If I were to buy commercial wires I would look for designs that worked best based on my home experiments. Does not cost as much as what the commercial variations cost to find out what might work best in particular systems. How many people spend 1000’s mixing and matching to see what works when it only takes a few 100.
Just thinking! |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by NEAR_SOTA
Seems the best thing a company can do today is just say"Hey,it works.try it and see how well it works in your system". I think that might be the most honest statement a cable Co. could make these days, but I see so many claim they do this and that without any substantial evidence which supports their claims. And there are some wild *** claims out there. |
Agreed. Though when it comes to marketing, honesty isn't always the best policy. Gotta have some sort of "hook" to differentiate from the crowd. Gotta have a "problem" which you're offering a solution for. I think this is what tends to drive some cable makers into making wilder and wilder claims.
se |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by NEAR_SOTA
The best thing an audio enthusiast can do is Experiment to see what works best for them instead of going by the claims that others make.
Just thinking! |
that's precisely why audio is in such a sorry state as people keep emphasizing the unexplainable in an elitest approach. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
Hi,
In defense of Eric, last time I checked he's not selling any cables under any brandname.
From what I gathered from telephone conversation and reading his postings it's more a service rather than a product.
Correct me if I'm wrong, Eric.
It's easy to mock what one doesn't understand, isn't it?
Cheers,;) |
Hi Frank,
Yes you are correct in that I am not selling any cables.
At this point in time I have mostly spent time fine tuning the on stage and PA sound of a seriously good band that I know (I also repair their backline gear).
The FOH sound guys who have been involved are very thankfull and supportive (they have open minds and good ears).
None of these guys have mocked what they have heard.
Before hearing they were looking at me real strange, but afterwood are full of praise.
Experienced prosound guys know what they hear and are much better qualified audiophiles than the average member around here.
When was the last time that you did a live mix Steve ?. |
|
|
| mefinnis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Steve Eddy What I have a problem with are those who enter into technical discussions who make technical claims and then when those technical claims are questioned, they run and hide behind silly guessing games or flat out say they won't give you any details.
In this situation, you no longer have a technical discussion but what amounts to nothing more than marketing. |
I think "marketing" might be viewed as very polite and restrained ..... :xeye:
There was a great episode in Australian politics, of which this thread reminds me ..... "Secret Women's Business".
In short, a commercial venture was stalled at the Federal Govt. level due to claims that the land in question held secret importance for the women of an aboriginal tribe ..... they had submitted this to the govt., however, as the Minister in question was male he was not allowed at actually read the submission, he was asked to simply accept that the contents of the document were worthy ....... and behold, he did ;)
Hereafter, I would suggest that this thread be renamed "Secret Cable Business" ..... |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Originally posted by millwood
"bars and night clubs", :)
Live sound systems and live sound engineering is a whole different thing to a DJ system operated by idiot DJ's.
Had Eric known what systems those places use (I did a diligence on a leading global pro audio company in the last three months), he might elect to change that, :).
Don't understand what you mean by a 'diligence' ?.
Hint: it is like saying you can hear cables over a pair of $1 a pair RadioShack speakers, ;)
EAW speakers actually - you ought to know what that means.[/b]
But Eric may indeed have godly ears so who knows.
And a whole bunch of other people too, all hearing and saying the same things !.
Eric. |
|
|
| john curl |
| Eric, I think that I understand your situation. 33 years ago, I started working with the Grateful Dead. I learned what worked and what didn't work by testing them in live music performance. I tried all kinds of things, transformers, open loop circuits, quality IC's, all kinds of stuff. I learned how to make successful audio designs, that stand up today, sonically, before I ever worked with Mark Levinson. Mark was a good craftsman, but I had to show him the direction to go, which I had previously tested with live music. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
The FOH sound guys who have been involved are very thankfull and supportive (they have open minds and good ears).
None of these guys have mocked what they have heard.
Before hearing they were looking at me real strange, but afterwood are full of praise.
Experienced prosound guys know what they hear and are much better qualified audiophiles than the average member around here. |
You don't get it, Eric.
This is supposed to be a technical discussion, not a share-your-amusing-anecdotes discussion. And such anecdotes as these do absolutely nothing to further any techincal discussion. Peter Belt with his frozen photographs and other "tweaks" can share similar amusing anecdotes of people thinking he's crazy but afterward being full of praise of him and the stuff that he sells.
Here, go read some for yourself:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB/
Here's an interesting one:
Time to Belt the car (winterize)
Useful informative articles (spring newsletter 2003) and few
postings are available on the subject of treating the automobile.
I tried the Richard Grahams suggestion of adding a drop or two of the sol electret oil to the engine oil. It works. I also added a drop of Sol electret to the transmission fluid.
Cleaning the glass (interior) with mophic fluid is also impressive.
Part of the benefits related to audio improvements, but there are
other instant gratifications. .
Treating the alphanumeric stickers such as vehicle registration,
parking permits, license plates, VIN code is also worthwhile with
cream electret.
Winter also takes care of freezing and thawing cycle of the automobile
V.R. Sola
So tell me, what makes your amusing anecdotes any different from these?
Amusing anecdotes are a dime a dozen. And literally anything can produce positive responses from people.
So what?
se |
|
|
| john curl |
| Hang in there Eric, SE attempts to 'nullify' anyone who is actually contributing something in audio. Your input reminded me of how I first learned what actually worked in audio. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | You don't get it, Eric. |
No, YOU don't get it.
When scientific references are given you resort to handwaving, when suggestions are made you do the same....
What is it you want?
A handguide on how to make your proper line of "leads" perhaps?
You should have your "Guide Michelin" on the topic by now....
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by mefinnis
There was a great episode in Australian politics, of which this thread reminds me ..... "Secret Women's Business".
|
great story!
Some of us do sound a lot like those women, :)
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
Originally posted by millwood
[B]Don't understand what you mean by a 'diligence' ?.
Eric. |
what is this? "Internet University of Free Knowledge"? as some wise-*** here used to say, :) |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by john curl
Eric, I think that I understand your situation. 33 years ago, I started working with the Grateful Dead. I learned what worked and what didn't work by testing them in live music performance. I tried all kinds of things, transformers, open loop circuits, quality IC's, all kinds of stuff. I learned how to make successful audio designs, that stand up today, sonically, before I ever worked with Mark Levinson. Mark was a good craftsman, but I had to show him the direction to go, which I had previously tested with live music. |
Hi John,
Thanks for your words of encouragement.
Yes I find that world class musicians, stage instruments and a quite decent (3kW+monitors) PA in a good sounding room makes for a very decent (the ultimate really) test-bed, as has been your experience.
At any rate, infinitely better than whatever kind of speakers Steve has hanging off a couple of Apex-16 power op-amps replaying recordings (nickel core audio line transformers driving a ceramic substrate 40W amp - my ears are oozing blood at just the thought).
Eric. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
| quote: | Originally posted by john curl
Hang in there Eric, SE attempts to 'nullify' anyone who is actually contributing something in audio. Your input reminded me of how I first learned what actually worked in audio. |
John, hi again,
Thanks for your further encouraging words, though I clearly know both of your points already. ;)
A live PA/stage system can actually be a very good instrument for showing up differences at line/mic levels.
Of course a live system is a multiple recursive system (FOH sound gets into the mics, then back out of the monitors and back into the FOH PA, monitor sounds getting into other mics etc.............), so relatively small tonal changes at source/preamp levels are magnified immensely - no golden ears needed to distinguish differences in this situation.
I dare say that it is a gold-clad bet that SE has sadly no useful experience at this kind of level, ....... and never will.
Eric. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
"I did a diligence on a leading global pro audio company in the last three months"
Please translate what this means.
Eric. |
|
|
| SY |
| "Due diligence" is a standard term used in finance and business. If a company is looking for investment, a loan, merger & acquisition, or the like, the due diligence process is the investigation of the company's claims by the folks who are going to lay out the cash. As an example, the company claims that they booked $5MM in orders last year. Did they really? Let's see the paid invoices. They claim to be selling $500K a month of wadgets to Harmon on a long-term basis; OK, call Harmon and verify that. They claim to have 62 patents; fine, get copies of all of them. |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by mrfeedback
"I did a diligence on a leading global pro audio company in the last three months"
Please translate what this means.
Eric. |
thanks SY for the excellent explanation. I thought it shouldn't be such a big deal but I was wrong.
maybe an example in Eric's world would help more. Say a pro audio sales rep comes to your bar / nightclub, wanting to sell you their top of the line mixing console, AudioGizmo.
The rep started like this: "Hi, Eric, our AudioGizmo is great. Not only it mixes music, it also makes a cow sound like Britney Spears while making StarDust coffee for you at the same time. Plus, when I was mixing live concert for Britney Spears last week, all those musicisns raved about how good it sounded. Those pros definitely know high-end whe | | | |
