Several times for cables. If you want to contact me off-line and describe what you're trying to test, I'll be happy to give you a good protocol.
Thanks Jan.
Here is the posting for those of you too lazy to look for it.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...rch-preamplifier-part-ii-230.html#post1970334
Bud
Here is the posting for those of you too lazy to look for it.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/anal...rch-preamplifier-part-ii-230.html#post1970334
Bud
That waht happens often. Posts don't get attention based on contents value. If you want to be noted, you either have to spout nonsense, keep it VERY simple to begin with, or be controversial. Only a very few are interested to get some new knowledge, and only if it fits their believe system.
This forum is just like the Real World 🙄
jd
OK, I'll comment. I saw something very similar once when doing some measurements with John Curl. We changed interconnects repeatedly and got very distinctly different and repeatable spectra (albeit at silly-low levels like -140-150dB). Unfortunately, the repeatable spectra we got were different (and ranked differently) than he had seen with the same test setup and the same interconnects a few days before.
What do you think that means?
Unfortunately it sometimes gets down who can hear what. If every minute change heard was known at the time to be either a step forward or a step backwards, then real progress in sound quality would surely follow.
Ed's article mentions how difficult it was to get repeatable results at the bottom end of the measurement scale. He also mentions how different a pulse test applied to a cable makes before and after results, though he doesn't mention the amplitude of the pulse. Perhaps we can offend him enough in PM's to get him to come and add a few more hundreds of pages....
Bud
Bud
Pointing again at what I think are an extremely neutral and open cable set, the differences I noticed with other cables, both more and much less expensive than the Litz items, were in a general, all pervasive "character"
Everything that passed through them had this slight, overall cast to the sound. None of them had audibly different frequency response, though a couple had rather poor differentiation in cymbals and bells.
This sort of "character" showed up in percussive music, more than in melodious music. Glass chimes were especially susceptible, going from really sick sounding to very sharp and biting. However, it was an internal placement to the constituents of the chime tone, rather than a difference in frequency response that I noticed. Some cables allowed a near perfect construction of the tones involved, others seemed to get the placement in the time train just slightly off. This slight misplacement was enough to color MY response to the cable in question.
Bud
Everything that passed through them had this slight, overall cast to the sound. None of them had audibly different frequency response, though a couple had rather poor differentiation in cymbals and bells.
This sort of "character" showed up in percussive music, more than in melodious music. Glass chimes were especially susceptible, going from really sick sounding to very sharp and biting. However, it was an internal placement to the constituents of the chime tone, rather than a difference in frequency response that I noticed. Some cables allowed a near perfect construction of the tones involved, others seemed to get the placement in the time train just slightly off. This slight misplacement was enough to color MY response to the cable in question.
Bud
Some measurements aren't audible. That’s why there is a body of knowledge in psychoacoustics that attempts to distinguish the stuff that’s audible from the stuff that isn't. And why double blind tests are important: to give guidance to audio enthusiasts on what’s important (where there is a difference) from what can be left alone. Otherwise we are all chasing ghosts (expensive ones at that!).
Most people have a fixed budget to spend on audio. So knowing where to put your money for the greatest impact is very useful. And cables aren’t the place for your hard earned money.
Speakers on the other hand……
Most people have a fixed budget to spend on audio. So knowing where to put your money for the greatest impact is very useful. And cables aren’t the place for your hard earned money.
Speakers on the other hand……
swapping cables needs no knowledge, it just needs money, makes the customer happy and it feeds the hifi dealer too!
What could be more 'customer friendly' and economic?
Regards
And the customer might think about himself as an audio expert, a perfect dose of self esteem 😀
That the connections might not have been exactly the same? Or temperature? Or ....
The other thought, not exactly connected to your post, and very speculative, is what might be audible at -140 - 150 dB? Not necessarily THAT low, but really low. It's unlikely to be non-linear distortion, I would think, because of masking effects. But linear distortion is something we become more sensitive to with increased SPLs.
Kunchur reliably got discrimination of about 5 - 6 microseconds at about 70 dB. He seems to think with better equipment he might be able to lower that.
So my first question would be can some cable, or combination of cable/amp/speaker, actually introduce linear distortion on such a time scale? I haven't a clue.
Thing that interested me was that Ed actually thought he heard a repeatable difference and that it showed up in his tests. He does not wax poetic about what kind of differences, but that he thinks he heard them, with measured results, down at that low a level is interesting.
Bud
Bud
Where the real gold is for sure. Each room demands the right speaker in the right place, flavour with colored electronics if desired. If you can't stop worrying about cables embrace wireless technology. Live long and prosper.
Hi, are you going to reveal which cables did what? That would be interesting, and could be usefull to others.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.