With even a cursory glance at audiology data, you can see that the output of the majority of audio systems are more than 70% irrelevant in the application for which they were designed on just the basics, and the figure is even worse on harmonics. Any amount of relief from this pervasive problem appears to be quite noticeable.
You can have both technically perfect and pleasing to the ear with motional feedback. Its easily done like this. . . Building a Gainclone chip amp using a Resurrector According to the wiring system, its compatible with a wide variety of amplifiers.
Speaking for myself,my system must be one that sounds the way I like.I'm not using it to judge any sound or mixing engineer,so,I don't need a technical tool/instrument.Especially when so many recordings offered to us are so far away from even basic music standards.What I have concluded over the years is that in most cases "accurate" can easily be translated to bright,super analytical,even harsh sound.On the other hand, "musical" can easily be translated to coloured,soft etc......Some times,a part of the truth can be in one of those so called "accurate" systems,in other cases can be in one of those so called "musical" systems.Even live music-either you like what you hear or not-can be described as accurate only at that time in that place.
Every one has his/her preference,and it is this preference that he/she will follow in the end.Anything else is just a hopeless and somehow useless competition of knowledge,opinions,audio makers,buyers,sellers.This is audio.We have it for fun,so,enjoy your preferences 🙂
Here is the reason why you should not exercise your cables to often.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jSz11lz8MA
This might even explain differences between old and new cables to some degree.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jSz11lz8MA
This might even explain differences between old and new cables to some degree.
Last edited:
I copied this post from another thread... what happens to consideration of skin effects when one has to consider response to 200kHz?
I've started reading. Very interesting.... start with the HiFi Critic summary.
He has shown that humans can detect time differences on the order of 5-6 usec (1/t = 200-167kHz).
As interesting was some of the lengths he had to go to to not have the test gear corrupt the results.
dave
I've started reading. Very interesting.... start with the HiFi Critic summary.
He has shown that humans can detect time differences on the order of 5-6 usec (1/t = 200-167kHz).
As interesting was some of the lengths he had to go to to not have the test gear corrupt the results.
dave
He is also a single individual conducting a single blind test.
And is well known as a "high end" type, and all his test subjects are former students.
If someone can replicate his results in a double blind test, with non of these facts known, and a truly random sample, we can start to say the results have some merit.
Meanwhile of course the I can hear cables and capacitors and the chemical formula of the dialectic fraternity have leapt upon the results with glee declaiming I told yer so, I told yer so, etc.
Sorry chaps, one swallow still don't make a summer.
rcw.
And is well known as a "high end" type, and all his test subjects are former students.
If someone can replicate his results in a double blind test, with non of these facts known, and a truly random sample, we can start to say the results have some merit.
Meanwhile of course the I can hear cables and capacitors and the chemical formula of the dialectic fraternity have leapt upon the results with glee declaiming I told yer so, I told yer so, etc.
Sorry chaps, one swallow still don't make a summer.
rcw.
just been given an 'Electronics Australia' from April 1979, includes an article "Loudspeaker cables and their mythology' (their conclusion - don't waste your money on expensive cable) - 30 years and counting....
Member
Joined 2002
Well, the "What happened to diyaudio?" thread was closed after 272 posts in 5 days - so I guess it's back to arguing about cables...
Well, the "What happened to diyaudio?" thread was closed after 272 posts in 5 days - so I guess it's back to arguing about cables...
Hehe, Thanks for the link!! That was a good and accurate POV!
+1
The problem though is that some people post online their preferences as fact equating their likes to accurate reproduction.
Arguement happens when we ask for Data to back up such exaggerations.
For each action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
Its unlikely for such a large number of reactions to be fake.
Therefore, please upgrade your measuring to where it can resolve the data.
Theory: When a poor choice is replaced with anything else, then all of the manufacturing claims for the replacement part seem plausible. I think that this scenario will account for the majority of magic cables. I think that this works because the manufacturer paid attention to the effects on audio signal, wheras the lamp wire people seek only to cause heat into a light bulb at the lowest possible cost.
There is significant evidence that replacing bad quality wire is beneficial.
The question is really what the replacement should be.
There is significant evidence that replacing bad quality wire is beneficial.
The question is really what the replacement should be.
Sure its likely...its just like debating religion actually. Someone says "They believe" and another person says "Do you have any other proof then just your belief?"...it goes down hill from that point because the person that believes simply has no other answer and takes the question to personal.
Measurements can already resolved the data better then your ears actually.
Im still waiting for people to do the controlled tests, posts results along with measurements and ultimately I want them to win all that money out there that is put on the table.
I find it extremely funny that the science/objective side will put money up behind its position and the subjective side would never do that. The subjective side will never do a properly controlled test either in the end the onus is on the subjective side to step up and just do some tasks requested of them.
Please show me that significant evidence! The Monster makes HUGE margins because of people like yourself 😉
Also define "bad quality".
You know you can win lots of money? Instead of rambling pointlessly online without a single link or actually fact you should focus on winning that money!
In certain areas yes, I also believe it is possible to only chase 'good measurements' far below the levels we can detect and end up with less than optimum SQ. There are certain areas, for example stage focus, that I would like to see how it can be measured without ears and brain.
Do you really still believe that stories? If it is so important that the "science/objective side will put money up behind its position", they are welcome to visit me, I will demonstrate it to them on my system for free, I'm sure there are others that will do the same.
Yes Yes the old supercilious, all the people in the world are fools but me (and the guys who think the same way) approach. We see this approach time and again in audio forums.
I have previously posted of a blind ABX type test carried out on loudspeaker cable at my local audio club many years ago now. I correctly identified whether the cable was the same or different 19 out of 20 times. I know this hasn't been properly scientifically verified or recorded but it certainly was good enough for me to confidently conclude that I could hear the effect of speaker cables in the test system.
Now you should also read the URL I posted of an article by Nelson Pass on measurable effects of different speaker cables on the output of an amplifier with different speaker loads. It may be that what we hear with cables is the result of the effects he discusses and measures rather than the audible effects of cables themselves, but dismissing those who say they hear a difference as deluded is plain closed minded.
Here is an interesting proposal / paper that falls in line with my findings in stacked dielectrics for guitar OPT's. That you can create a reliable time "bend" just through controlling the dielectrics between antenna plates in the coil. Interesting to think that the time factor found here is actually all from the attach and release factors of the dielectric materials during the electrostatic moments, within which the field vector changes occur.
http://www.ultracad.com/mentor/micro...ropagation.pdf
Provided by marce from this forum by the way.
Bud
http://www.ultracad.com/mentor/micro...ropagation.pdf
Provided by marce from this forum by the way.
Bud
Really. How cool!
Like the "Amazing Randi" 😀 I guess he got nervous when the price was a million dollars and decided that he did not really want to know if people could hear the differences or not 😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.