| mrfeedback |
The UPS van came past today with the test cables.
Thanks Steve and Stuart, I now have 3 twisted pairs each with a heatshrunk sleeve at one end.
Which of these is pair 1, 2 and 3 ????.
Eric. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Steve, what is the configuration of these twisted pairs ? - ie are both legs of each twisted pair in the same direction, or opposed.
What is the identifier so that we can report findings ?.
Eric. |
|
|
| SY |
| If Steve doesn't respond because you're on his "ignore" list (a feature I selfishly wish people wuld use more often), I'll email him and ask. Then again, he may see this (if I'm not on his "ignore" list;) ) and respond here. |
|
|
| Steve Eddy |
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
If Steve doesn't respond because you're on his "ignore" list (a feature I selfishly wish people wuld use more often), I'll email him and ask. Then again, he may see this (if I'm not on his "ignore" list;) ) and respond here. |
:)
| quote: | Steve, what is the configuration of these twisted pairs ? - ie are both legs of each twisted pair in the same direction, or opposed.
What is the identifier so that we can report findings ?. |
Both legs of each pair is in the same direction. The only identifier is the heatshrink which identifies the common ends of each pair (in this case, the ends were the ends closest to the spool).
There's no need to give each pair its own identity as these were meant simply so you can try them out and determine whether they were sufficiently directional that you'd feel confident identifying directionality in the blind trials.
Identifying the common end will allow you to wire one pair in one channel in one direction and another pair in the other channel in the opposite direction, which is what you said produced the most significant differences (i.e. image shifting) with respect to directionality.
Unless you have any more questions about the wires I made up, my involvement in this is over except for sending SY the remainder of the wire.
se |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
IOW all three cables are exactly the same ?.
It will take me a few days to get half a dozen RCA plugs so that I can do this testing easily, and I'll get back to you with what I find.
Steve, you proposed this test and have gone to the trouble and expense of starting this, so why not stay along for the ride, and the second stage (assuming that Frank and I find directional differences in this wire) ?.
Even if this wire is not particularly directional, I can send you audio coaxial cable that is strongly directional.
Regards, Eric. |
|
|
| SY |
| No need for Steve to get too much into the mechanics. I'm happy to do that, and I suspect he'll be keeping an eye on the results. Let us know if you feel confident about hearing the directionality of the sample wires in an open (sighted) comparison. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Fine by me, except I am failing to see the point of going to the trouble of all of this if Steve is unwilling to participate, or communicate.
Frank and I have satisfied wire directionality effects to our own individual satisfaction in past experiments, so this is just more of the same to us.
Does this experimentation have any future, or is it that now we have now risen to Steve's challenge that he is backing down ?.
Eric. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
Lutefisk?
Anyway, it doesn't really matter to me....
It will tell us a few things about this particular wire:
1/ Directional or not.
2/ I've probably lost my touch when it comes to directionality.
3/??? Who knows.
It's an afternoon of work, I think we owe Steve at least that much.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| SY |
From what I understand, Steve will provide me with the cables, cut from the same reel of wire as the samples you have. I'll mark them, code them, record a score sheet, give a copy to someone else, then send the wires on to you and Frank. All this presupposes that you believe that you hear a difference in the open (sighted) comparison.
Steve's just not comfortable with dealing with you guys directly. I certainly am, you guys trust me and vice versa. All praise to Steve, you, and Frank for doing the hard part- I'm just trying to help things along. |
|
|
| RHosch |
I believe it is simply a matter of there being no need for Steve to be actively involved in your listening tests. He has made the trial cables, and if you are satisfied that the effect you expect is present, the test cables will be sent to you. SY can handle the gathering, sorting, and posting of results. I think it is very practical that Steve's involvement at this point be minimal, if only to reduce the chance of accidentally communicating clues which would invalidate any results gathered.
If you and Frank successfully identify the directionality of the test cables, then I assume Steve will be very interested - and actively participating in - future discussions about what mechanism(s) might be responsible and what steps are appropriate to take next.
From my perspective, it simply seems that there isn't much of anything for Steve to do until you and Frank return results to SY. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Originally posted by RHosch
I believe it is simply a matter of there being no need for Steve to be actively involved in your listening tests. He has made the trial cables, and if you are satisfied that the effect you expect is present, the test cables will be sent to you. SY can handle the gathering, sorting, and posting of results. I think it is very practical that Steve's involvement at this point be minimal, if only to reduce the chance of accidentally communicating clues which would invalidate any results gathered.
I am thankful for and perfectly comfortable with Stuarts involvement and help.
The cables are sufficiently visually indistingishable to satisfy the testing requirements, and I doubt that anything he says in reference to these cables would spoil the experiment.
If you and Frank successfully identify the directionality of the test cables, then I assume Steve will be very interested - and actively participating in - future discussions about what mechanism(s) might be responsible and what steps are appropriate to take next.
Based on past experience, I expect that we should be able to differentiate direction.
I now have three cables (supposedly) exactly the same to determine if the effect is strong enough to reliably discern.
Two wires the same and marked the same, and one marked as the unknown would have been better perhaps, and this will be the subject of the next experiment.
I encourage positive participation from Steve provided that I never hear mention of photographs in freezers or derisive comment like 'amusing anecdotes' when he is presented with facts.
From my perspective, it simply seems that there isn't much of anything for Steve to do until you and Frank return results to SY.
I encourage Steve to try some of this testing for himself.
Eric. |
|
|
| RHosch |
From a psychological/psychoacoustic viewpoint, it is much more useful for a person like yourself who is condident that they hear the effect in question to be the subject of the test. This adversarial testing condition (and I use the term adversarial in the most benign, scientific and objective way possible) is crucial to increasing the chances of (1) a valid experiment (i.e., no experimental errors or mistakes), and (2) positive results (due to the subject's bias towards a belief in the effect in question).
In short, since SE may not believe that the directionality of cables is audible, this could easily bias him during a blind trial to "hear" no differences, even if they were in fact present in the signal. For example, it is well known that test subject have a proclivity for choosing "different" in a same/different testing configuration in the absence of other clues on which to base a decision. Similarly, a person who already feels that all of the cables he has constructed for a test should sound the same would be strongly compelled to simply declare that they all sound the same. That bias can be so powerful as to mask any real differences that may be present.
Hence, the ages old argument that only tests involving "golden ears" are useful for getting to the bottom of what is and is not audible (where "golden ear" refers to someone who is confident in their ability to hear X effect).
In the end, a null result returned by your or Frank is no more scientifically useful in the grand scheme of things than a null result returned by SE, it is however less expected and perhaps more useful to you and Frank (should that be the actual result of the test) on a personal level than the same result returned by SE. And, in some ways, more useful to other members of this forum. |
|
|
| SY |
RH, that's exactly correct and exactly why I am not participating as a test subject. I just can't hear or measure any differences in cable "direction" (however you want to define that).
Now, if these guys return positive results, that would bias me to expect to hear differences. If I can, great. If I can't, I'll just shrug and chalk it up to not having as good of an ear. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Now, if these guys return positive results, that would bias me to expect to hear differences. If I can, great. If I can't, I'll just shrug and chalk it up to not having as good of an ear. |
And who is going to verify whatever we claim unless there's someone else who claims the same results ?
Meaning being able to hear a difference and consistently so with this wire....?
Again, keep in mind that cable as in interconnect is often directional by geometry of construction, a single length of wire is, or isn't by nature.
Eric says it causes a shift in imagery, from that I immediately think of a difference in resistance...
However, I've never been able to show a difference with my humble equipment. Nonetheless, I hear the same effect too.
Not easy to prove is it?;) |
|
|
| SY |
| Sorry, Frank, I'm not following what you're saying. |
|
|
| RHosch |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
And who is going to verify whatever we claim unless there's someone else who claims the same results ?
Meaning being able to hear a difference and consistently so with this wire....? |
No one needs to verify what you claim other than the comparison of your directionality assingments with the known directionality. There are enough cables being tested that there is plenty of room for you to return a performance that is highly unlikely using simple guessing. This statistical evidence is all that is required to verify your claim.
Sometimes it seems a bit counterintuitive, but that's the way statistics works. A thousand test subjects returning a null result doesn't "prove" anything other than the percentage of people that can hear such an effect is small (hardly earth shattering news ;) ). However, just a single person returning a positive result in a statistically significant way is enough to prove that the effect is actually audible. Therefore, no one needs to confirm your claims. You need only to perform as you expect to, and the numbers will speak for themselves. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Sorry, Frank, I'm not following what you're saying. |
So, imagine I'd say this seems the preferred direction and naturally I claim hearing a difference...
I subsequently return the wire with a note and marker saying so to person X.
Person X listens to it but doesn't hear one iote of difference...
Back to square one?
With interconnects it's different as you don't only have the wire but the geometry as a variable, especially the grounding scheme.
Mind you, no matter how much I try to type or write 99% stays in my mind and never sees the paper...
I'm sure there's some acronym for that...
Anyways, hope the 'splanation helps, ;) |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | No one needs to verify what you claim other than the comparison of your directionality assingments with the known directionality. |
My point exactly...Nobody knows the directionality for a fact or Steve's test wouldn't be necessary in the first place.
From memory, at this stage the only criterium is; do any of you (two) notice a difference one way or the other and if so report if not report that too.
IOW, do you think the wire is directional, yes or no?
Is my assumption correct?
Cheers, ;) |
|
|
| SY |
You're still mystifying me, Frank. If you are able to (say) score 9/10 correct identifications in a controlled test, and Eric does the same, well, I have one of two conclusions:
A) My own blind prejudice has prevented me from having been able to hear wire directionality. And now that someone has demonstrated audibility, I ought to try again with this unreasonable prejudice lifted from my shoulders.
or
B) Given that I have a reasonably good sound system, my ears just aren't up to snuff. So I need to spend my time coming up with a measurement regime that correlates with what you have, at that point, proved regarding cable audibility instead of wasting my time trying to hear something beyond my capabilities.
What am I missing? |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | A) My own blind prejudice has prevented me from having been able to hear wire directionality. And now that someone has demonstrated audibility, I ought to try again with this unreasonable prejudice lifted from my shoulders. |
But demonstrated how?
I received a one meter length of Vampire enamelled wire (at my request)...I listen or I don't and I tell whomever I prefer it this way or another.
Now you listen to it either way, ignoring my preference or not. You never observed directionality of wire within your system and now you will? Based on what I tell you?
Hmmm...Not a scientifc test if you ask me.
If you do notice a difference, you'll be doing no more or less the same listening test I did already...
What does this prove?
Nothing? I think so.
| quote: | | So I need to spend my time coming up with a measurement regime that correlates with what you have, at that point, proved regarding cable audibility instead of wasting my time trying to hear something beyond my capabilities. |
Which brings us back to lab tests, doesn't it?
This remainds me...I need to get in touch with Ward ( the professor)...Tempus fugit.
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| SY |
| quote: | received a one meter length of Vampire enamelled wire (at my request)...I listen or I don't and I tell whomever I prefer it this way or another.
Now you listen to it either way, ignoring my preference or not. You never observed directionality of wire within your system and now you will? Based on what I tell you?
|
No, based on my hypothetical posted above, that you hear a difference in the directionality of the wire you were sent, and then do correct identification of the coded set of the same wire that you'll get. You get the coded set after, of course, you confirm that you DO hear a difference in the test wire's directionality. Steve's not sending off wire to someone who doesn't hear the difference; that's why I'm not participating in that rôle.
It's not perfectly scientific, but it's a lot closer than open-loop sighted tests. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
Originally posted by fdegrove
Again, keep in mind that cable as in interconnect is often directional by geometry of construction, a single length of wire is, or isn't by nature.
The coaxial interconnects that I mentioned are strongly directional, and when demonstrated, non-audiophiles hear it clearly.
The other week I returned and installed a friend's speaker that I had repaired.
When I fired up the system, the two speakers were so different as to bring me to think that one of them was still faulty.
Closer investigation revealled that one speakewr cable was installed in the opposite direction to the other.
When shown, the owner clearly heard the difference also, and even preferred a particular direction for both cables.
This system was nothing flash - a Pioneer amplifier and Wharfedale Diamond mini-monitors.
Eric says it causes a shift in imagery, from that I immediately think of a difference in resistance...
However, I've never been able to show a difference with my humble equipment. Nonetheless, I hear the same effect too.
Not so much a resistance difference perhaps as a dynamics/decay difference, sort of along the lines of reversing the polarity of both speakers making a difference, except in one channel only.
With both speakers in correct acoustic phase, reversing direction of both cables makes a depth imaging and dynamics/decay difference.[/b]
Not easy to prove is it?;)
Not yet perhaps, but once heard is never forgotten.
Maybe these descriptions can give you at present non-hearers clues on what to listen out for.
I also find it difficult to believe that you guys are not hearing these differences if you have properly tested for yourselves - preconcieved notions that this is not possible are a likely barrier here.
I had the same notions myself until the effect was demonstrated to me, and since then I have always been able to hear it when testing for it.
I have also encountered systems that were sonically not sitting quite right, and swapping interconnect and/or speaker cables improved the sense of correct dynamics and depth imaging.
Eric. |
|
|
| mrfeedback |
I clearly understand that these initial tests are to allow Frank and I to verify whether we reliably hear directional effect in these particular wires, or not.
If we do then I look forward to a more formal test with multiple cables uniquely identified and see how we go.
I don't believe that I have 'golden ears', but I do know that I have educated and experience ears.
Absolute hearing range is not especially required, but discrimination of polarity/phase and dynamics/decay characteristics is, and this is a learned skill.
Speakers and electronics that are well matched channel to channel and phase coherent are the first tools in this kind of testing.
Multiway speakers with multiple crossver points and phase rotations are likely to mask this wire directional effect, and may be a partial explanation for some listeners not hearing the effect.
Eric. |
|
|
| RHosch |
You guys mystify me as well.
Frank, after a couple of dozen pages of discussion on the subject of this directionality test, has it really escaped you as to the actual mechanics of the test and how the results are valid? Hmm... I'll be nice here and just give you a quickie summary:
(1) You receive marked cable "samples" with which you confirm that using this particular type/configuration of cabling, you can hear a difference when the cable is turned one way or the other (doesn't matter if you can tell which direction the wire was pulled in, only that you are confident that you can hear and identify a difference between).
(2) Steve makes a batch of cables, and randomly reverses one cable of some pairs (if following my suggestions previously, the same channel in each case). He numbers the pairs, marks the ends in a consistent manner but with no clue as to how direction corresponds to the wire pull direction. He records the numbering/direction scheme, and then sends the cables to SY.
(3) SY randomly renumbers the cables, keeping a record of how his numbering corresponds to Steve's original numbering.
(4) You receive the cable pairs, listen to each one, and make a determination as to whether or not one channel is reversed in direction wrt the other channel of that pair. You record your determinations for each numbered pair.
(5) You report your determinations. Steve reports his original numbering scheme. At that point, the nuetral party, SY, reports how Steve's numbering corresponds to the numbering you received. Very little chance at deception here, unless you don't trust SY to be honest. I think someone suggested previously a way to make even that step secure if need be.
(6) Based on your determination vs. Steve's documentation of the "true" direction of the cables (based on his having actually constructed them keeping track of the original wire pull direction), we can calculate the statistical probability that you produced your results by random guessing. If it is statistically significant (i.e., some 97%+ probability), then you pass the test.
There is no need for anyone else to listen to the cables. Whether one channel of each pair is swapped will already be documented. You need only be able to tell if it is or if it isn't. |
|
|
| SY |
RH, I further offered to have another person hold a copy of the key as a fail-safe to keep me honest, preferably someone whose expectations might be different than mine. Mr. Pass and Mr. Curl come to mind, if either is willing to do it.
If Eric and Frank are content with me alone holding the key, this isn't needed. |
|
|
| SY |
| OK, that's no problem. I'll cut and code the wires, then let someone else hold the key. Don't send me any wire until Eric and Frank confirm that the cables' directionality can be heard. |
|
|
| fdegrove |
Hi,
| quote: | | Frank, after a couple of dozen pages of discussion on the subject of this directionality test, has it really escaped you as to the actual mechanics of the test and how the results are valid? Hmm... I'll be nice here and just give you a quickie summary: |
RH...Has it escaped you that at this point it isn't NOT scientific at all?
How can it be?
But that not the point ad rem nor ad hoc anyway,
What does it take?
As SY said, it doesn't really matter...
You don't have to be nice to me but I'm lucid enough to see were this is going...
Cheers,;) |
|
|
| SY |
| So, Frank, have you listened to the sample wires you received? |
|
|
| millwood |
| quote: | Originally posted by fdegrove
RH...Has it escaped you that at this point it isn't NOT scientific at all?
How can it be? |
I fail to see how this is NOT scientific after RH's excellent and extremely detailed explanation.
Now bring the horse to the barn, :)
| quote: | Originally posted by SY
So, Frank, have you listened to the sample wires you received? |
I haven't been able to find the actual results / scores. but since SY mentioned that one test subject couldn't hear the directionality and the other has dropped off the surface of the earth, I assume that fdegrove and mrfeedback didn't exactly invalid any known science in those tests?
With all the earth-shattering claims we here on this forum, I wonder how many of them can actually stand in objective tests like this one.
My thanks to SE, SY, fdegrove and mrfeedback for setting up and participating in such a test, and I am thoroughly disappointed that new scientific findings couldn't have come from such a heavy investment of time, efforts, cables and postage of all parties involved. |
|
|
| SY |
| Well, Eric had reported stronger effects, so don't discount the possibility of him popping back up and actually getting results. If I guess correctly, this disappearance is girl-related. |
|
|
|
