Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha..............
What a joke, any proof measurements, any explanation as to how it could happen, what a comedian.
Maybe you should open some textbooks and read them you may learn something regarding digital signal transmission.........
Bage: I'll stick to my question. What difference do you think there could be between the cables?
I.E., but what mechanism would the frozen cable make a difference to the digital signal?
I.E., but what mechanism would the frozen cable make a difference to the digital signal?
(1) Freezing metal objects is sometimes done to change mechanical properties. This can work with certain metals and alloys. Freezing objects in storage can help control undesired hardening in alloys that harden at room temperature (alloys of aluminium for example)
Deep Freezing Steel | Gear Cryogenic Treatments | Midwest Cryo Treating Steel
Cryogenic Aluminum Alloys | Midwest Cryogenic Treating | Deep Freezing Aluminum
(2) Freezing has been tried with musical instruments, and of course the usual "sounds better" claims arose.
CRYOGENICALLY TREATED MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS SOUND BETTER, CLEAN EASIER, AND STAY IN TUNE LONGER - 300 Below, Inc.
(3) Many people are unaware of how digital signals flowing through a cable are affected by cable properties in very different ways than analog signals.
Extron Electronics - Digital Design Best Practices - Signal Integrity
Could well be. But I thought it important to ask.
FWIW, I have been able to easily make bit perfect copies going USB/SPDIF->SPDIF/USB. It doesn't get better than perfect, so I'm curious what someone thinks is happening. Reduced jitter?
Nothing related to cables and how cyroing a cable improves digital signal transfer....
Audiophile Gurus says it works, so it works... we just cant hear it with our normal perception, we have not seen the light, so to speak!🙂
That's the usual song and dance. Discussions on jitter usually end up with enough ambiguity thrown in that anything can be "proved".
That's a problem with being factual and scientific, no support for things that have only imaginary audible benefits.
I was answering the question why poorly informed people believe in snake oil. They are blinded by the irrelevant science.
In my experience normal perception includes the usual illusions including the placebo effect.
Is there a reverse placebo effect that results in people not hearing things that are audible?
I don't know, but sufficiently biased people hear only what they want to hear, read only what they want to read, and often totally miss things that are really there.
That all said, I know of no instances of people hearing the usual kinds of jitter in a reliable listening test. Meaning the ones that are easily measurable, but below known thresholds for audibility in good audio gear.
https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/2i9143/does_the_placebo_effect_work_in_reverse/
"Can the placebo effect negate the efficacy of medications? For example, someone's given a drug that treats headaches but the person doesn't think the drug will work."
We've definitely encountered people who refuse to try DBTs that we already know have positive outcomes on the grounds that the audible difference can't possibly exist.
We also encounter people who take the tests, but significantly underperform the group average. Why? We're not sure but reverse placebo could be the reason why.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.