Hi,
I wonder how many DBT tests were actually done which are documented well enough to draw conclusions from.
Just for the record, I know far more people that can't for the life of them tell the difference between a Carlsberg and a Tuborg let alone wine....
I am sure you know people like that as well but when it comes to audio you all of a sudden need proof.
Worse, when valid suggestions are made that not every L, C and R have the same influence on the endresult, some people just prefer to ignore the issue.
There are literally thousands of caps out there that have the same measured LCR value but still don't sound the same nor measure the same.
Yet when that C shows up in cable what it's made of all of a sudden is of no consequence.
So, when it comes to cables dielectric materials don't matter, conductivity doesn't matter, nor do time delays? Microphony?
Sorry to say so but copper, silver, gold, carbon, you name it all sound different.
While this may be partly due to differences in conductivity causing different time delay distortions I very much doubt that by just comparing identical cables (i.e. with identical L, C and R values) yet constructed with different materials would all sound the same.
What you're saying is that if two cooks would use the same ingredients, cooking time and temperatures their meals should have the exact same flavour.
Do they?
Will you ask for proof again?
BTW, when wine is said to taste like this and that (using the most ludicrous descriptions you'll ever hear), those conclusions are arrived by general consensus I take it.
I mean, I doubt there isn't a chemist at work to actually analyse the amount of saponines and what have you to see if the tasters are on the money?
One could say making wine is just chemistry and it is. The same can be said about cooking.
One could also say audio is a science and it is.
Yet, at the end of the day there's no telling that what I hear is what you hear....
Such is audio. Such is human nature.
One day we'll measure it.
Cheers, 😉
SY said:
I wonder how many DBT tests were actually done which are documented well enough to draw conclusions from.
Just for the record, I know far more people that can't for the life of them tell the difference between a Carlsberg and a Tuborg let alone wine....
I am sure you know people like that as well but when it comes to audio you all of a sudden need proof.
Worse, when valid suggestions are made that not every L, C and R have the same influence on the endresult, some people just prefer to ignore the issue.
There are literally thousands of caps out there that have the same measured LCR value but still don't sound the same nor measure the same.
Yet when that C shows up in cable what it's made of all of a sudden is of no consequence.
So, when it comes to cables dielectric materials don't matter, conductivity doesn't matter, nor do time delays? Microphony?
Sorry to say so but copper, silver, gold, carbon, you name it all sound different.
While this may be partly due to differences in conductivity causing different time delay distortions I very much doubt that by just comparing identical cables (i.e. with identical L, C and R values) yet constructed with different materials would all sound the same.
What you're saying is that if two cooks would use the same ingredients, cooking time and temperatures their meals should have the exact same flavour.
Do they?
Will you ask for proof again?
BTW, when wine is said to taste like this and that (using the most ludicrous descriptions you'll ever hear), those conclusions are arrived by general consensus I take it.
I mean, I doubt there isn't a chemist at work to actually analyse the amount of saponines and what have you to see if the tasters are on the money?
One could say making wine is just chemistry and it is. The same can be said about cooking.
One could also say audio is a science and it is.
Yet, at the end of the day there's no telling that what I hear is what you hear....
Such is audio. Such is human nature.
One day we'll measure it.
Cheers, 😉
fredex said:
I hate to bring you bad news, but yes 😀
But don't worry, that's what the others are doing as well, with or without knowing it.
Magura 🙂
Hi,
Spotting differences between A and B doesn't necessarilly require
hearing capabilities in the +20Khz range.
Cheers, 😉
Magura said:
Spotting differences between A and B doesn't necessarilly require
hearing capabilities in the +20Khz range.
Cheers, 😉
fdegrove said:
No, but if you do the math, you'll be hard pressed to find any significant difference below 18KHz, and you'll be equally hard pressed to find anybody over the age of 30, whom has any significant ability to hear anything above 18KHz.
Magura 🙂
I know that there are parameters which you have not yet considered....cast a bit further by thinking about boundaries.😉
brianco said:
Which parameters are you referring to, that can have any significant influence below 18KHz?
Magura 🙂
My last comment was addressed to most participents, not you alone Magura.
We are all to0 tied up with the usual concerns of LCR parameters. Think for a while of the effect of other influences - external influences - which may act in a parasitic manner and alter the property of the signal in cables and thereby to a greater or lesser extent the eventual sound as heard. THere is a Scandanavian who continues to work in this field, but he is not the first by a long chalk. I cannot remember his name but, amongst other things, he uses copper finings in leather bags to damp cables and also natural fibers to cover cables. Snakeoil?....Don't think so from first hand reports of the work which he has done. I'll try and find the man's name.
I also have other information which is strictly copyright and I can go no further in sharing it with the forum. Because of that, I can say no more than that the Swedish researcher/cable designer is on the same, or at least parallel, track; time will tell if the findings converge.
We are all to0 tied up with the usual concerns of LCR parameters. Think for a while of the effect of other influences - external influences - which may act in a parasitic manner and alter the property of the signal in cables and thereby to a greater or lesser extent the eventual sound as heard. THere is a Scandanavian who continues to work in this field, but he is not the first by a long chalk. I cannot remember his name but, amongst other things, he uses copper finings in leather bags to damp cables and also natural fibers to cover cables. Snakeoil?....Don't think so from first hand reports of the work which he has done. I'll try and find the man's name.
I also have other information which is strictly copyright and I can go no further in sharing it with the forum. Because of that, I can say no more than that the Swedish researcher/cable designer is on the same, or at least parallel, track; time will tell if the findings converge.
Magura said:
Music is way below hearing tressshold, so I dont see thats any issue
What the heck
Just changed my speaker cables
Found some old braided wire
YES, they are different
First I tried my favourite left-right test
Only changed cable in left channel
Soundstage collapsed completely
Almost as if right speaker wasnt playing
Obviously one is better than the other
"New" cable mounted on both channels
I admit, its really hard to say whats different
Well, it is different, no doubt
Now I have done e few hours of listening
And Im able to tell whats better now
But I would use a whole side, and would only be boring
And doesnt matter either
Im quite sure I cant go back now
I have DIY foil cables that are real good, but they are way too long
Seems I have been lacy or content for too long
Time to do shorter foil speaker cables 🙂
Attachments
brianco said:
I just still find it hard to imagine such an effect, that could have any significant influence.
Which effect did you have in mind?
Magura 🙂
tinitus said:
Using a questionable claim as evidence, to prove a just as questionable claim, is not gonna fly.
Adding anecdotal evidence, is also not gonna bring this discussion any further.
Magura 🙂
Yes. As with any extraordinary claim. If someone claims that changing the color of a wine's capsule (as opposed to the cork!) changes the flavor, then yes, he/she had better back that up with some controlled sensory data or they'll be laughed out of any serious wine circles. That world has a lot of BS and superstition but not nearly the level of high end audio.
You've made the claim that conventional engineering (L,C, and R) are insufficient to describe audible effects in cables. You further claimed (though you've mercifully been shuffling away from it) that it's easy to prove. When asked for proof, you've huffed, puffed, sidestepped, pointed in other directions, obfuscated, drawn inapt analogies... everything but actually presenting data.
Hmmmm. What distinguishes this claim from astrology, fairies, Satan Claus, homeopathy, or telekinesis?
tinitus said:
Wrong. I can cue up complex songs in my memory and control them with very little time listening to them - one maybe two listens. And I am talking about complex improvised jazz and even music where there seem to be no patterns - atonal and arythmic.
fredex said:
Hi fedex, thanks for the kind words.
I think if designers and engineers would just stop futzing with the sound I would be happy. Why make a speaker, toil and struggle with making it sound musical and flat and then at the last minute just mess it all up with "voicing tricks" or lifts in the high end. This seems to be the standard practice in every step of the chain. The luthier puts a hype in the instrument to fool the musician into buying his over the competition. The mic maker lifts up the high end to fool the engineer into buying his mic over the competition. The Engineer puts a lift in his mixes so they sound better than the next guy etc... etc... When does anyone ever just try to do things normally without magic or hype?
At this point I would be happy with a little less mediocrity . I'm not even that perfectionist. I would be happy if we went back to the days of subtle hype in the frequency response and use of analog compressors tastefully instead of smiley face eqing and squashing with a maximizer.
Andre Visser said:
🙄
Key said:
Then you might be accused of listening to "Audiophile" recordings. It's hard to win.... (or just beak even).
Key said:
When the listener learns at last that brightness is not detail/clarity,real bass is not boominess forward mids are not "excellent projection" and when all realize that music is not frequency response exercise.When they listen to some old recordings with nothing above 10K and get shocked by their musicality.
Magura said:
Tonal differences can be detected right through the audio spectrum, depending on what cables are used, then there are still things like detail and focus that have little or no relevance whether you can hear to 15kHz or to 20Khz.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.