Return current will travel based on the impedance of the path.
If there are two paths of equal impedance, the current will split 50-50.
If one path has an order of magnitude lower impedance, the current will split accordingly. For example, if one has 10 milliohms and one has 100, the lower impedance will carry ten times the current of the higher.
This is bog standard stuff.
jn
Max, you aren't meaning polarity (like swapping, say, read and green wires inside a tonearm) when you say "direction" are you? Otherwise, do you really rewire your tonearm, pulling cables out and then pulling the other end through to find out which "direction" is right for each cable?
Just wondering...
Just wondering...
Agreed, however it takes all available paths, not just the lowest resistance path.
missing some pretty fundamental basics here.
One second there's a discussion about inductance the next impedance... I'm not seeing a demonstration of basic understanding in the above quotes.
Something ironic about the direction this thread has taken.
No, I mean direction.
You missed an earlier post by me.
I hardwired RCA cables to the TT mech termination block.
I started with 2m of shielded cable, stripped both ends, soldered these ends to the TT, cut the cable at the midpoint and fitted RCA plugs.
This is how I caused one channel to be reverse direction wrt the other channel.
This was my error, and caused the center shift.
Removing one cable, reversing direction and refitting cured the fault.
I learned a big lesson from that.
Dan.
No, unless I'm taking him the wrong way, I think he's spot on. JN said return current will take "the path of lowest impedance." Taking that literally, one might conclude that it means return current will take the lowest impedance path to the exclusion of all other possible paths that are of a higher impedance. Seems to me that Brian was just providing a bit of clarification is all.
se
So, it could be useful to fit an inductance in series with the safety earth in order to keep audio return currents on the audio cable shields ?.
Dan.
Dan, with your clip on experiment, did you try 2 separate clip ons, one on each channel, in the same relative positions? IOW, was there an equivalent, or different effect to just using one?
Also, with the central mono behaviour, do you have that central image follow you when you move side to side in front of the speakers?
Also, with the central mono behaviour, do you have that central image follow you when you move side to side in front of the speakers?
When did I say I reduced FR and dynamic range? Subjectively, the complete opposite occurs - the recording has more sparkle and life because the upper frequencies, poor that they may be, come through cleaner - and the perceived impact of dynamic swings is much greater, in part because you can, and in fact want to, run the replay at much higher levels.
The real reason that this works, which people keep wanting to ignore, is that when the ear/brain gets enough clean material to deal with, the key information about the actual musical performance - then the signal processing ability of the brain kicks in at a much higher performance level and does the separating of the wheat from the chaff, quite unconsciously ...
Last edited:
Would I be right in saying that that the lower the level of the signals being transferred the more noticeable the effect?
Ok, so now here is your chance to explain what you are doing to achieve this, specifically. If not, then you are just solidifying troll status.
Someone light a match, please?
Really?
Source for this? Any research whatsoever that corroborates this claim?
Which part of the signal processing ability shows improved performance?
How does the brain separate "wheat from chaff"? How does it know, for example, that the sound of a cymbal (wheat) is not more (or less) sibilant because of recording "chaff"? Especially in a previously unheard recording?
The short, sharp, pithy answer is: isolate, work out where all the weaknesses in the setup are, and fix 'em.
There you go, no-one had to pass out, from too much inhalation, 🙂 ...
Interestingly, I only realised this over the last couple of years, while reading people's comments, experiences and ideas in forums and such. Before this, I knew subjectively what happened, but hadn't understood what and why it was happening - in a process known as "reading between the lines", 😉, what several people said was known about human hearing suddenly switched on the lightbulb, and it all made sense - and everything I read following only served to confirm the idea.
Using the example of a cymbal, the key aspect is that the brain "wants" to make sense of what it listens to, it has an innate desire to hear "well". And this it can do if the sounds it hears can be separated, mentally. Think of a poor recording of cymbals as the pure, uncontaminated tones of the instrument mixed with a parallel track of 'mush'; if the playback is insufficient, then the mental separation can't take place - in real life, listening to a real cymbal, with severe, messy background noise, the tones of the cymbal cuts through the 'interference' without effort, you won't mistake the sound for a "poor recording", 🙂. And that's how the replay comes across when the system is working well enough.
I knew I was onto something when I first put on, years ago, what had been before a very ordinary, busy pop recording with strong cymbal content, and the cymbals came to life!! Powerful, intense, they had the impact of the real thing - I fell off my proverbial chair ... and never looked back ... 😉
Last edited:
A couple of articles with some pretty pictures of return current paths...what is missing to an extent if references to the path of least capacitance (maybe a better term would be capacitive coupling) that comes into play when trying to protect against air borne and conducted rf pollution.
http://www.emcs.org/acstrial/newsletters/fall08/tips.pdf
http://www.oocities.org/timfoo6143/Path_of_least_L_Singapore.pdf
An here it is in a more practical example with some op-amps...
http://www.analog.com/static/import...14948960492698455131755584673020828AN_345.pdf
http://www.emcs.org/acstrial/newsletters/fall08/tips.pdf
http://www.oocities.org/timfoo6143/Path_of_least_L_Singapore.pdf
An here it is in a more practical example with some op-amps...
http://www.analog.com/static/import...14948960492698455131755584673020828AN_345.pdf
Two works well, a single one on both cables further improves the center imaging and overall imaging.
Imagine the central source as a thin vertically oriented sheet extending backwards from between the two loudspeakers (and forward also actually according to programme content, mic techniques and recording space..3D is well possible, but another subject for now.).
Turning a balance control will shift this sheet sideways but still remaining at 90*.
A reversed cable slightly sort of rotates the sheet about the vertical axis.
Difficult to explain, but once heard you won't forget it.
If you have an old tape deck, try tweaking the PB head azimuth adjustment screw.
Ignoring any rec/pb channel/channel level differences, listen for image shifting L and R as you adjust the azimuth screw...at optimal azimuth the central image sits right, and the whole stereo image snaps into place.
Find the optimal point, and then tweak slightly either side of optimal and you should hear what I am describing.
Dan.
I was refering to thinking of impedance as a flat resistance rather than a reactance, the discussion previous to that seemed to be taking both resistance and reaxtance into acount, while these didn't
Surely you're not saying three dimensional imaging is possible with a mono source? Even stereo is only 2 dimensions
- Status
- Not open for further replies.