Ooh, scary scary. OMG, I wouldn't want to be lumped into that bad group of people, guess I should just give up, no?
Seriously, that's how you're going to play it? Like a child?
I detailed this stuff in my archive on this site what, 10 years ago? Don't be so lazy, search my diagrams, point out to them what they are missing.
If you actually understood it, you already would have detailed it to them.
Maybe I should send you a pdf.
I mean, really, you have to bring such animosity to the thread?
John
I must admit your style of discussion really lacks emotional intelligence. I'm not here to teach you that.
A decade ago I detailed how power cables can affect the audio signal.
Recall the schematic and equations showing how the LF content does not travel back to source via the input shield (unbalanced), but rather through the ground conductors via the duplex outlet? And there are two break frequencies, one from line cord loop inductance/resistance, one with two shielded cables, and the final is the cable characteristic impedance where all the hf content runs. It's in the archives.
I really would have thought that someone of your vast knowledge would have remembered it.
John
ps. Since you haven't taken the hint, I'll spell it out. Tone it down, you'll get farther.
pps.. funny, I'm writing a chapter on ground loop problems and how to design them out for big machines. Every single jpg I created a decade ago I copied into the chapter directory, and every single one has the same date of april 25, 2023. When did windows stop using the creation date when you copy and paste, but now uses the copy date?
Last edited:
I didn't bring it. I am the victim of it. Some people attack me for saying power cables can affect sound. They gang up. They create the atmosphere of animosity. Bohrok2610 is the lead troll. They are wrong. They don't understand much, but they don't lack confidence.
JN, I have read a lot of your old posts and learned things from them. I appreciate when you are helpful. When you come here and cheer on the people who think wires are nothing more than resistors you aren't doing anyone a favor. You are cheering on people who are going to be misinformed forever because all their online buddies agree with them.
Its understood if I don't stand up to them then they won't attack. But where does that leave us? With a bunch of people who are misinformed. And its not just me, and not just this forum. There is a general societal trend: https://phys.org/news/2022-05-people-distrust-experts-critical-issues.html Moreover, you know the whole path of how EMI/RFI is produced and how it can affect audio is complicated. Lots of differential equations because every situation is different. There are no simple explanations of all the physics of each step along the way. Yet people demand simple, intuitive explanations, and if they get that, then next demand proof of audibility. Its looking rather hopeless.
EDIT: Regarding you old posts, do you mean something like this: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...orch-preamplifier-part-ii.146693/post-2644747 If so, it doesn't explain effects Bill Whitlock did not describe as hum or buzz. I am talking about what he described as "veiled" and or "grainy" sound. Also talking about unexplained problems in digital equipment. I don't think those things are necessarily a function of AC line harmonics. Again, I would sincerely like to know if you have posted about the physics behind such audible effects as Whitlock described?
Last edited:
First, calling others trolls is not floating my boat.
Second, your use of "perhaps", "it's possible", "if this then that", also doesn't float my boat.
Third, saying that I don't believe in Lorentz forces (imaginary) was just plain stupid.
You trying to educate others with anecdotal stuff just isn't going to work. Then falling back into the animosity schtick just derails conversation.
If you really learned and understood my ground loop content, you should have used it to counter their claims. The explanations are simple and intuitive.
As are the methods to prevent them. I used them to run unbalanced audio 100 feet with zero noise, hum, or distortion. It really comes in handy at work as well.
At work, the most difficult thing I deal with is the highly educated (world leaders in fact) people who cannot properly explain their science at the level most humans can understand. I do not suffer that problem, having been trained by the best (my dearly departed wife).
Me, I enjoy teaching the public, the engineers, the physicists what I do, but alas... my flaps are at 2, gear is down, and I see the (career) landing lights ahead of me.
Oh, my biggest work gripe? Some people think reading the text of a powerpoint slide to the audience is teaching. It is not.
John
ps...to your edit: I posted perhaps 20 or 30 (?) page numbers with the errata on each page, and I recall it all dealt with E/M physics type stuff. I do not recall the word "veiled" and would not comment on it anyway.
Second, your use of "perhaps", "it's possible", "if this then that", also doesn't float my boat.
Third, saying that I don't believe in Lorentz forces (imaginary) was just plain stupid.
You trying to educate others with anecdotal stuff just isn't going to work. Then falling back into the animosity schtick just derails conversation.
If you really learned and understood my ground loop content, you should have used it to counter their claims. The explanations are simple and intuitive.
As are the methods to prevent them. I used them to run unbalanced audio 100 feet with zero noise, hum, or distortion. It really comes in handy at work as well.
At work, the most difficult thing I deal with is the highly educated (world leaders in fact) people who cannot properly explain their science at the level most humans can understand. I do not suffer that problem, having been trained by the best (my dearly departed wife).
Me, I enjoy teaching the public, the engineers, the physicists what I do, but alas... my flaps are at 2, gear is down, and I see the (career) landing lights ahead of me.
Oh, my biggest work gripe? Some people think reading the text of a powerpoint slide to the audience is teaching. It is not.
John
ps...to your edit: I posted perhaps 20 or 30 (?) page numbers with the errata on each page, and I recall it all dealt with E/M physics type stuff. I do not recall the word "veiled" and would not comment on it anyway.
Last edited:
Did I say that? I'm quite sure you believe in them. What I meant was that people claiming to hear effects of Lorentz forces are not necessarily imagining things. And here I have to say that I qualify my statement with "not necessarily" because in some cases people probably will imagine things. Most likely not in all cases though. If qualifying the statement doesn't "float your boat," I'm sorry. However, i think its necessary to qualify the statement in the interests of accuracy.
In Germany we have the funny word "Dampf Plauder" which roughly translates into "vapor confabulator"
Disagreeing with you is not trolling nor attacking. And I would be very cautious in claiming anything about what other members understand. You seem to believe reading powerpoints and pdfs makes you an expert on anything. So much so that you even come up with issues that are purely imaginary. How about "intermittent packing flooding"?
Regarding power cables nobody in this thread has claimed they cannot affect sound. However there is little evidence that supports your claim that "in many households one meter could potentially make a substantial difference". And when asked for real evidence there is no need for you to educate others with hypothetical theories you have synthesized from powerpoints and pdfs. Just admit you don't have any real evidence and be done with it.
Yes, point of dispute is claim that one meter of power cord can make a substantial difference.
Without arguments, Markw4 resorts to accusing others to “understand little but have (in their ignorance) mere confidence” and asserting that we consider power cords as ideal resistors. 10 x facepalm. 🤦♂️
I don’t get it why is Markw4 still trying to understand what could be an underlaying physics of power cords affecting sound in some limited cases. Explanation was offered often enough in many cable bickering threads, where Markw4 is always present. In example:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/power-conditioners-and-cords.391921/post-7206618
Signal between audio components is always partially traveling through power cord earth conductors. On systems where power earth and signal earth are directly connected, some audible effects are possible. That’s why all my audio components have 100 – 200 Ω resistor between PE and signal ground in parallel with 1 KA peak diode bridge, so safety is not compromised. Measurements and listening confirm that there is no change even using 20 m long power cords on a such designed system. Later, I tested real “audiophile” power cords (silver plated thick wires, braided shield, rhodium plated connectors). No change whatsoever. 🤣
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/power-conditioners-and-cords.391921/post-7195293
Without arguments, Markw4 resorts to accusing others to “understand little but have (in their ignorance) mere confidence” and asserting that we consider power cords as ideal resistors. 10 x facepalm. 🤦♂️
I don’t get it why is Markw4 still trying to understand what could be an underlaying physics of power cords affecting sound in some limited cases. Explanation was offered often enough in many cable bickering threads, where Markw4 is always present. In example:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/power-conditioners-and-cords.391921/post-7206618
Signal between audio components is always partially traveling through power cord earth conductors. On systems where power earth and signal earth are directly connected, some audible effects are possible. That’s why all my audio components have 100 – 200 Ω resistor between PE and signal ground in parallel with 1 KA peak diode bridge, so safety is not compromised. Measurements and listening confirm that there is no change even using 20 m long power cords on a such designed system. Later, I tested real “audiophile” power cords (silver plated thick wires, braided shield, rhodium plated connectors). No change whatsoever. 🤣
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/power-conditioners-and-cords.391921/post-7195293
In short, because this discussion is very long and everyone will never agree, any cable used to make certain connections, internal in a device, or external between devices or accessories (including power supply and connecting speakers) CAN , and this is the correct term, can influence the sound. Usually this influence is very small and can only be perceived through measurements with specialized equipment, sometimes it can be heard but it is difficult to highlight through measurements, or it can be significant and measurable and audible, but many times are so low that not measurables or audibles.
The problem is not whether or not there is this influence of the cables, but how we treat/correct it. I don't think I need to go into detail about voltage stabilizers, but many times they wouldn't be necessary if we didn't have cables from the generator to the consumer.
A well-designed scheme compensates for these cable influences through dedicated adaptation and filtering circuits so that no matter what cable (within certain limits) you use, no sound changes occur.
It often appears in the discussion that the setup is not detailed enough to highlight the influence of the cables, that the amplifier or speakers are not high-end enough.
BUT actually it is exactly the other way around in the sense that the equipment where no sound changes can be perceived are well designed and made in such a way that they eliminate the influences generated by the cables and the equipment that highlights the differences between the cables are superficially designed equipment or that have not implemented filters and the necessary adaptations, for economic reasons, ignorance or, most often encountered, misinterpreted audiophile reasons.
Much more briefly, if you hear differences between different types of power cables, then that device is poorly designed, does not have the necessary filters implemented correctly (sometimes it doesn't even exist at all) and, with all that, it is also significantly more expensive.
To make an analogy, it's like making a perfectly straight and clean road like glass only on the driveway in front of the house so that it doesn't feel like you're driving around with perfectly straight and shiny wheels made of metal or glass, ignoring the road from the office or supermarket when in fact the obvious solution and applied by everyone is to use wheels equipped with tires to ensure the "filtering" of small bumps in the road, to ensure movement with a high degree of comfort.
The problem is not whether or not there is this influence of the cables, but how we treat/correct it. I don't think I need to go into detail about voltage stabilizers, but many times they wouldn't be necessary if we didn't have cables from the generator to the consumer.
A well-designed scheme compensates for these cable influences through dedicated adaptation and filtering circuits so that no matter what cable (within certain limits) you use, no sound changes occur.
It often appears in the discussion that the setup is not detailed enough to highlight the influence of the cables, that the amplifier or speakers are not high-end enough.
BUT actually it is exactly the other way around in the sense that the equipment where no sound changes can be perceived are well designed and made in such a way that they eliminate the influences generated by the cables and the equipment that highlights the differences between the cables are superficially designed equipment or that have not implemented filters and the necessary adaptations, for economic reasons, ignorance or, most often encountered, misinterpreted audiophile reasons.
Much more briefly, if you hear differences between different types of power cables, then that device is poorly designed, does not have the necessary filters implemented correctly (sometimes it doesn't even exist at all) and, with all that, it is also significantly more expensive.
To make an analogy, it's like making a perfectly straight and clean road like glass only on the driveway in front of the house so that it doesn't feel like you're driving around with perfectly straight and shiny wheels made of metal or glass, ignoring the road from the office or supermarket when in fact the obvious solution and applied by everyone is to use wheels equipped with tires to ensure the "filtering" of small bumps in the road, to ensure movement with a high degree of comfort.
Last edited:
Power cords! A long-ago solved problem.
You like to play word games. That is why I rarely post on forums.
At work, I play with stuff most normal humans do not understand. (honestly, me too!).
At leisure, I cannot be bothered with those who believe they understand E/M physics. Pdf's don't alone cut it.
Your "everybody is out to get me" thing doesn't cut it.
I stay out of the fray because it has no benefit to me, intellectually or emotionally. Should real questions or E/M stuff be asked, I most certainly will answer.
Anecdotes and supposition, well, I try to avoid.
It is telling that the site I frequent the most is ASR general, the humor thread. I've decided the stuff of this thread is not worth my engagement.
John
Correct me if i am wrong and im sure you will.people forget how amplifiers draw current from the mains. No it is not sinusiodal current but a high current pulse every half wave,so 100 charging current pulses for 50hz. This is due to the so called linear power supplies switching on and off abruptly to convert ac to dc. This influences the noise going back into the mains and into other equipment connected.the power cable does not function in isolation.it delvers power to your equipment.so there is a lot of dynamic interaction.its all science folks.
You are absolutely correct, the pulsed current waveform is referred to as a haversine, previously mentioned.
It is primarily line frequency with lots of odd order harmonics and a little bit of even. It is caused by rectification of the input power into a large capacitor, recharging it as power is used.
In the past, many PA systems were sensitive to this recharging of the caps, I suspect mainly within the amp chassis, but line draw in the power cords can certainly couple to the input signal when some of the LF audio is travelling through the safety bond. The old PA system at work actually does it when someone makes an announcement.
At 2:36 in this video, they simulated the effect (at least I think they simulated it)
John
ps. While the sound is clearly heard after the last note played, it is obviously happening all the time the amp is pushing power into the speaker, but it is masked by the signal. So even though your system may be hum free with no music playing, there is a possibility that haversine ingress at a low level could be contaminating the music you hear.
Most IEC input filters do not try to eliminate ground loop currents. It's actually against code to put an impedance in line with the safety bonding.
I do recall someone makes an inductor that is high impedance when very little current is flowing through, but when fault currents hit it, it immediately saturates and drops its impedance drastically to allow current interrupters such as fuses or breakers to operate quickly. But I do not think code allows them.
It is primarily line frequency with lots of odd order harmonics and a little bit of even. It is caused by rectification of the input power into a large capacitor, recharging it as power is used.
In the past, many PA systems were sensitive to this recharging of the caps, I suspect mainly within the amp chassis, but line draw in the power cords can certainly couple to the input signal when some of the LF audio is travelling through the safety bond. The old PA system at work actually does it when someone makes an announcement.
At 2:36 in this video, they simulated the effect (at least I think they simulated it)
John
ps. While the sound is clearly heard after the last note played, it is obviously happening all the time the amp is pushing power into the speaker, but it is masked by the signal. So even though your system may be hum free with no music playing, there is a possibility that haversine ingress at a low level could be contaminating the music you hear.
Most IEC input filters do not try to eliminate ground loop currents. It's actually against code to put an impedance in line with the safety bonding.
I do recall someone makes an inductor that is high impedance when very little current is flowing through, but when fault currents hit it, it immediately saturates and drops its impedance drastically to allow current interrupters such as fuses or breakers to operate quickly. But I do not think code allows them.
Last edited:
Ha-ha, "Blue Heaven" that`s a bit from the top. I said Valhalla and that a simple 12awg solid firealarm cable will outperform it. You`re loss if you won`t try
It will allways be the conductor that`s closest to the powersupply that matters most, that`s why
If you want to be taken seriously you should present concrete evidence for your claims. But you could start by explaining what you believe this claimed outperforming is based on.
sensebe:
"A well-designed scheme compensates for these cable influences through dedicated adaptation and filtering circuits so that no matter what cable (within certain limits) you use, no sound changes occur."
This gave me a god laugh. Man, how many years have you been involved in this game? And you still haven`t seen through this?
"A well-designed scheme compensates for these cable influences through dedicated adaptation and filtering circuits so that no matter what cable (within certain limits) you use, no sound changes occur."
This gave me a god laugh. Man, how many years have you been involved in this game? And you still haven`t seen through this?
Taken seriously? I don`t mind, I`ve known this for decades and do not need anyones accept. But for anyone who might be interested I`m telling you how to diy a cheap & simple pc that will blow your head off