Alan Hope said:
Hi,
If you do get some software then I would (and no doubt others here) be interested in the results. This is a pretty interesting topic in audio circles, I feel. Be aware though that electric moves at the speed of 1.628x10E18 (if I remember correctly) coulombs/sec., so probably taking into account the capacitive/inductive nature of cables then theory states that you would not hear it..
By the way Jock, I am not casting aspersions, I believe in keeping an open mind which is why I would be intereted in the outcome of your experiment(s).
Again, let us know if you reveal anything !
Thanks
Gareth
gareth said:
Dispersions.. you cast dispersions.
BTW a Coulomb is a measurement of electrical work not a measurement of speed.
In a perfect conductor at absolute zero, electricity will travel at 2/3 the speed of light. It would travel at near light speed in a vacuum.
Electricty defined as a wave of energy moves at the speed of light, Electrons have mass and do not flow, they are displaced as the charge is transferred from one Electron to the next.
The oldest analogy I know still works the best, fill a long tube with marbles until it holds no more. Then add one more marble that represents an electrical charge, it instantly pops out the other end of the tube as the energy was pushed down the tube. The energy moved very quickly, the calculation of the displacement of Electrons is expressed in Coloumbs.
Anthony
Anthony
Coulomb said:
Hi,
My sentiments exactly, electricity - light, the coulomb 1Amp/sec, all electricity is negatively charged etc etc
Thanks
Gareth
anesthesia
I believe when anesthetic is administered, lots of little "devices' within the molecular structure of the "sufentanil, for instance" exude small hammers that pound the nerves being subdued into submission, the length of which depends on how long these devices can act b4 they get worn out.
This would explain why I always puke after coming out from "down under" after surgery.
Any thoughts?
John L.
I believe when anesthetic is administered, lots of little "devices' within the molecular structure of the "sufentanil, for instance" exude small hammers that pound the nerves being subdued into submission, the length of which depends on how long these devices can act b4 they get worn out.
This would explain why I always puke after coming out from "down under" after surgery.
Any thoughts?
John L.
critofur said:
Oh yes you do! It's just that you have been psychologically conditioned to believe that if you see no cables there must be no sound! So your brain doesn't register any.
😀
Coulomb said:
BTW, a Coulomb is a measurement of electrical charge, not electrical work.
1 C = 1 A*s
Coulomb said:
Electricity does not move at the speed of light. It moves at sqrt(L/C) for a transmission line. The electrons move at an average speed that is easy to calculate from the density, Faraday's constant, the current, and the cross sectional area. It's actually an interesting calculation that you should do at some realistic ratio or current to area. It's somewhere around a few cm/s if I remember right. It has been years since I did it.
Also, charge is carried by the electron, and does not move from electron to electon.
A lot of people think of electron flow as electrons moving along a wire freely like cars go down a highway. Actually, it works a little differently. Any conductor (thing that electricity can go through) is made of atoms. Each atom has electrons in it. If you put new electrons in a conductor, they will join atoms, and each atom will spit out an electron to the next atom. This next atom takes in the electron and spits out another one on the other side.
Anthony
Anthony
Oh, well you said charge is displaced from one electron to the next. I probably should have caught on to what you intended to say.
some reading... band gap, that sort of thing...
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Solids/band.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/conins.html#c1
1C = 6.241 509 629 152 65×10^18 elementary charges
by definition...
Is it any wonder cable confusion exists... sort of like nipple confusion in infants not breast fed, I guess, eh???😉
John L.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Solids/band.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/electric/conins.html#c1
1C = 6.241 509 629 152 65×10^18 elementary charges
by definition...
Is it any wonder cable confusion exists... sort of like nipple confusion in infants not breast fed, I guess, eh???😉
John L.
A lot of people seem to get confused by the difference between Sound and the transfer of Mechanical energy through an atmosphere.
Sound is percieved, an interpretation by an organic life form.
Without the organic life form there is no sound just a load of vibrating air molecules bouncing around. This of course started the argument that if a tree falls in the woods and nothing is there to hear it, did it actually make a sound, I say no.
What does this all mean, you can prove anything if you can make facts fit you argument.
Even Benjamin Franklin got Negative and Positive wrong, how can a surplus of anything be a Negative and a defecit be a Positive?
Anthony
Sound is percieved, an interpretation by an organic life form.
Without the organic life form there is no sound just a load of vibrating air molecules bouncing around. This of course started the argument that if a tree falls in the woods and nothing is there to hear it, did it actually make a sound, I say no.
What does this all mean, you can prove anything if you can make facts fit you argument.
Even Benjamin Franklin got Negative and Positive wrong, how can a surplus of anything be a Negative and a defecit be a Positive?
Anthony
Hi,
Aahh, so it is 6.24x10E18 and not 1.624x..., it's been a while since I studied electrical theory, getting a little rusty me thinks.
So, if differences do exist between different cable, possibly due to source/load impedance, capacitance and inductance, differing drive voltage and currents.....then what would be the perfect 'un-coloured' cable? Is there even such a thing?
Any suggestions?
Thanks
Gareth
Aahh, so it is 6.24x10E18 and not 1.624x..., it's been a while since I studied electrical theory, getting a little rusty me thinks.
So, if differences do exist between different cable, possibly due to source/load impedance, capacitance and inductance, differing drive voltage and currents.....then what would be the perfect 'un-coloured' cable? Is there even such a thing?
Any suggestions?
Thanks
Gareth
Alan Hope said:
Now this is really naive. I don't argue with the existence of burn-in effects but you don't seriously think that some crude FR measurement (of in room response, no less) will put an end to this argument.
It is a much better idea to make/buy two identical sets of cables, let one burn-in for a few weeks and compare with the new one.
My rule of dealing with burn-in is simple: if within the first couple of hours the sound is horrible i give up, life is just too short.
At the time when i bought an S&B TVC, the great Kuei insisted i gave them a proper burn-in before giving up on them. So i built a break-in device, loaded the secondaries and let them play silently for a week. One week later they sounded just as horrible as brand new.
Tried the same break-in routine on several cables i didn't like with exactly the same outcome.
I don't claim break-in in cables/transformers does not exist or is not audible; it's just that the "improvement", if any, is way below my expectations.
Just curious: how come audio devices always sound better after break-in? Surely it's reasonable to expect that some would sound at their best when new and gradually deteriorate with break-in.
gareth said:
I don't like the term burn-in, I prefer play-in or something similar.
I can't answer your question on what happen inside the cable, I would like to know also.
I agree that your ears / brain also adapt to what you hear over time but only to a certain extent. I will name two experiments that I've done and you can decide for yourself.
1) I've received a new interconnect cable for evaluation (more expensive and theoretically better) than the cable I used at that stage. My existing cable gave me better sound quality (I was smiling) but decided to run the new cable on my test jig and dummy load for a week, just to be fair. After that week I've tried again and the "new" cable was very noticeably better than mine.
2) I've compared identical cables, one played in an one new and could tell which is which repeatedly in a blind test, after running in the new cable, both sounded the same.
Interestingly, I've found that certain types of cables play-in in about three days, while some took 7 to 10 days.
To me this show that there is changes in the cable.
Hi Andre,
Do you think that there maybe some perceptual factors involved on your part? In that because you know the cable is more expensive then it does sound better. This is a minefield when it comes to opinions.
Having said that though, different cables use different design methods i.e twisted pair etc and also different di-electrics, different qualities of conductor and so on.
I find this a really interesting debate and would like to setup some kind of experiment, maybe a group blind test with pre-calibrated equipment (source, amplification etc) and then some kind of questionnaire maybe.
Mmmmm.....interesting
Gareth
Do you think that there maybe some perceptual factors involved on your part? In that because you know the cable is more expensive then it does sound better. This is a minefield when it comes to opinions.
Having said that though, different cables use different design methods i.e twisted pair etc and also different di-electrics, different qualities of conductor and so on.
I find this a really interesting debate and would like to setup some kind of experiment, maybe a group blind test with pre-calibrated equipment (source, amplification etc) and then some kind of questionnaire maybe.
Mmmmm.....interesting
Gareth
- Status
- Not open for further replies.