I Am Still Asking Politely.
In my view and experience, first off, knowing what one prefers or not is the first step to achieving a system sound that is more enjoyable.
Nobody around here can be bothered with DBT - if I can hear a difference, that is proof enough for me - I do not spend any real money on my system, so this is not any consideration.
I go with what pleases me too, and physics knowledge is pertinent IMO in order to predictably gain a pleasing system sound.
What is in your system setup ?.
Eric.
Ok, what makes a change more pleasurable to your ear ?.Steve Eddy said:
In my view and experience, first off, knowing what one prefers or not is the first step to achieving a system sound that is more enjoyable.
Nobody around here can be bothered with DBT - if I can hear a difference, that is proof enough for me - I do not spend any real money on my system, so this is not any consideration.
I go with what pleases me too, and physics knowledge is pertinent IMO in order to predictably gain a pleasing system sound.
What is in your system setup ?.
Eric.
Re: I Am Still Asking Politely.
Ummm, one that's more pleasurable.
Sorry, no idea what you're asking here.
That would be rather self-evident, no? Can't say I recall ever seeing someone say that the system they most enjoy is the one they least prefer.
That's fine for you. But that doesn't establish any sort of universal objective reality as would be the case if actual audibility were proved.
I recognize the fact that I'm simply a human being subject to the same sorts of faults and weaknesses as other human beings and because of this my subjective perceptions alone do not constitute objective proof of any sort of actual audibility. Which is why I never attempt to pass off my subjective perceptions as anything but that. Subjective perceptions.
And I really don't care that it doesn't because my only interest is in my own enjoyment of music and I ultimately don't care how that enjoyment comes about. For all I know, any or all of that which I prefer may not have anything at all to do with anything actually being audible. And if someone were to somehow prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was indeed the case, I wouldn't do anything different than I've been doing.
I used to think that way too and would always strive for the more objectively perfect as the physics dictated. But after some years I began to question that and changed my outlook on things. After a while I found that my preferences didn't always key in to objective specs and physics. And looking back some years later, I think my obsession with the goal of objective perfection was little more than a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Since then I've tried and many times ultimately preferred many things that I simply would have rejected and dismissed out of hand in my objectivist days. I actually found it quite liberating, not worrying all the time about how I can manage to get just a wee bit closer to objective perfection.
For me, being a hedonist subjectivist is just a hell of a lot more fun.
As I believe I stated before, things are rather up in the air at the moment. I'm moving from high power/low efficiency to low power/high efficiency and battery power. The only thing that I expect will remain constant at least for the time being are my quad braid, 30 gauge magnet wire cables, Redel connectors and my Apex PA-02 based power amp.
I'm something of a procrastinator so progress is rather slow and for music I've been using my little JVC FS-2000 "executive" system for nearly a year now. It's actually quite nice listening to those little 3" fullrange cherry wood speakers in the nearfield. When I want to listen for pleasure (as opposed to just background music) I bring in a pair of short stands, set the speakers up on them, plop a big pillow on the floor and just sit and listen for hours.
se
mrfeedback said:
Ummm, one that's more pleasurable.
Sorry, no idea what you're asking here.
That would be rather self-evident, no? Can't say I recall ever seeing someone say that the system they most enjoy is the one they least prefer.
That's fine for you. But that doesn't establish any sort of universal objective reality as would be the case if actual audibility were proved.
I recognize the fact that I'm simply a human being subject to the same sorts of faults and weaknesses as other human beings and because of this my subjective perceptions alone do not constitute objective proof of any sort of actual audibility. Which is why I never attempt to pass off my subjective perceptions as anything but that. Subjective perceptions.
And I really don't care that it doesn't because my only interest is in my own enjoyment of music and I ultimately don't care how that enjoyment comes about. For all I know, any or all of that which I prefer may not have anything at all to do with anything actually being audible. And if someone were to somehow prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that this was indeed the case, I wouldn't do anything different than I've been doing.
I used to think that way too and would always strive for the more objectively perfect as the physics dictated. But after some years I began to question that and changed my outlook on things. After a while I found that my preferences didn't always key in to objective specs and physics. And looking back some years later, I think my obsession with the goal of objective perfection was little more than a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Since then I've tried and many times ultimately preferred many things that I simply would have rejected and dismissed out of hand in my objectivist days. I actually found it quite liberating, not worrying all the time about how I can manage to get just a wee bit closer to objective perfection.
For me, being a hedonist subjectivist is just a hell of a lot more fun.
As I believe I stated before, things are rather up in the air at the moment. I'm moving from high power/low efficiency to low power/high efficiency and battery power. The only thing that I expect will remain constant at least for the time being are my quad braid, 30 gauge magnet wire cables, Redel connectors and my Apex PA-02 based power amp.
I'm something of a procrastinator so progress is rather slow and for music I've been using my little JVC FS-2000 "executive" system for nearly a year now. It's actually quite nice listening to those little 3" fullrange cherry wood speakers in the nearfield. When I want to listen for pleasure (as opposed to just background music) I bring in a pair of short stands, set the speakers up on them, plop a big pillow on the floor and just sit and listen for hours.
se
Only 3 Inches ?.
My 'more pleasurable' equates to less sonic faults.
Sonic faults include all sorts of resonances and consequent distortions.
On very clear systems these can be heard individually, as can sonic characters of components and wires.
With these speakers you are only hearing part of the music.
A much better judge is to sit back on the sofa, or wander around the house - this reveals much more than close nearfield listening.
I repair such systems, and yes they can sound quite good, but are not in the race when compared to bigger systems with bigger balls.
Steve, sorry a little shelf system is not a proper yardstick in this company.
Eric.
My 'more pleasurable' equates to less sonic faults.
Sonic faults include all sorts of resonances and consequent distortions.
On very clear systems these can be heard individually, as can sonic characters of components and wires.
3" speakers ? - just about any speaker sounds good in nearfield.
With these speakers you are only hearing part of the music.
A much better judge is to sit back on the sofa, or wander around the house - this reveals much more than close nearfield listening.
I repair such systems, and yes they can sound quite good, but are not in the race when compared to bigger systems with bigger balls.
Steve, sorry a little shelf system is not a proper yardstick in this company.
Eric.
Re: Only 3 Inches ?.
And one person's sonic faults are another person's sonic mana.
And I can't stand when people judge others based on their own personal preferences.
I haven't found that to be the case. Non-point source speakers don't sound too good to me in the nearfield.
Sure. They lack a bit at the extremes, but what I do get I quite like. And this is just tiding me over until I work out the rest of my main system. So what's the big deal?
When I listen seriously, I listen in the nearfield so I judge them in the nearfield. Why on earth would I judge them in any manner other than how I listen to them? When I'm wandering around the house, I'm not listening seriously.
WHAT!? When did I say it was any sort of a yardstick? It's just getting me by until I work out my main system (I gave my old speakers to my sister's boyfriend so my main system is sans speakers). I was simply saying that it sounds quite good for what it is.
se
mrfeedback said:
And one person's sonic faults are another person's sonic mana.
And I can't stand when people judge others based on their own personal preferences.
I haven't found that to be the case. Non-point source speakers don't sound too good to me in the nearfield.
Sure. They lack a bit at the extremes, but what I do get I quite like. And this is just tiding me over until I work out the rest of my main system. So what's the big deal?
When I listen seriously, I listen in the nearfield so I judge them in the nearfield. Why on earth would I judge them in any manner other than how I listen to them? When I'm wandering around the house, I'm not listening seriously.
WHAT!? When did I say it was any sort of a yardstick? It's just getting me by until I work out my main system (I gave my old speakers to my sister's boyfriend so my main system is sans speakers). I was simply saying that it sounds quite good for what it is.
se
Kuei Yang Wang said:
Koinichiwa,
This thread goes too fast! Anyway, KYW, I readily accept that long wires as in telephone systems (we're talking many many miles here) have an audible effect. I also accept that a thin speaker cable gives resistive losses of a fraction of a dB (which can be corected with the volume control, if it would be audible, which it isn't). But how would that make a difference in the sound QUALITY? Similar with interconnects. If you have a high capacitance interconnect, with a preamp that has a (too) large output impedance, surely you may lose a fraction of a dB in the treble range. But a good quality preamp should have a low enough output impedance and high enough current drive capability to cope with some extra capacitance. If not, maybe the manufacturer should replace the designer?
Sayonara,
Jan Didden
Still Only 3 Inches ?.
Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Wrong sound is wrong sound.
I agree that this can be quite pleasant enough, especially for near-field usage.
No big deal about it, Steve - it is mostly a question of what your points of reference are.
I find a listen from another room, or the back yard to hear what goes over the fence is educational - if it is good inside it will sound good from outside where natural sound references abound.
So those speakers weren't that good huh ?.
That Apex PA-02 is a power op-amp isn't it ?.
Is that really your big system ?.
Guess we now confirm what we thought of your experience all along.
Eric.
Originally posted by Steve Eddy
Nah, just glaring faults that need to be fixed.
I am just judging reproduced sounds to live sounds.
Wrong sound is wrong sound.
It depends what sort - some are very fine indeed.
A FR can sound good because of what it leaves out.
I agree that this can be quite pleasant enough, especially for near-field usage.
No big deal about it, Steve - it is mostly a question of what your points of reference are.
I listen joyfully near or far.
I find a listen from another room, or the back yard to hear what goes over the fence is educational - if it is good inside it will sound good from outside where natural sound references abound.
because you seem to be some kind of authority on audio systems.
So those speakers weren't that good huh ?.
That Apex PA-02 is a power op-amp isn't it ?.
Is that really your big system ?.
Guess we now confirm what we thought of your experience all along.
Eric.
Just Some Of The Variables
Series resistance changes damping and resonance (electrical and mechanical) of a speaker, and this is clearly audible.
Try putting a 0.5 ohm resistor in series with your speaker - you should be able to hear a change in sound character, aside from any level difference.
Excessive capacitive loading of a power amp or preamp can provoke transient instabilities that can cause audible artifacts.
Rember that a CDP does not only put out 20-20k - there is still plenty of RF junk too, and this can be part of the problem.
Yes, many output stages are inadequate.
Eric.
janneman said:
Series resistance changes damping and resonance (electrical and mechanical) of a speaker, and this is clearly audible.
Try putting a 0.5 ohm resistor in series with your speaker - you should be able to hear a change in sound character, aside from any level difference.
Excessive capacitive loading of a power amp or preamp can provoke transient instabilities that can cause audible artifacts.
Rember that a CDP does not only put out 20-20k - there is still plenty of RF junk too, and this can be part of the problem.
Yes, many output stages are inadequate.
Eric.
Re: Just Some Of The Variables
Hi Eric, nice to hear from you again!
You are right, but a speaker cable with 0.5Ohms resistance? That's grossly inadequate. IIRC I said in my post, "reasonable low resistance, say < .1Ohms". I don't think that would be audible. And even if it is, using a fatter cable will solve it. No need to shell out multi-k$$s.
Excessive cap loading, sure, but we are talking about an interconnect between a preamp and a power amp. Which fool would deliberately put in an interconnect with excessive cap loading? You can f&$u@*c%#k up everything if you try hard enough, but lets try to be reasonable.
Jan Didden
mrfeedback said:
Hi Eric, nice to hear from you again!
You are right, but a speaker cable with 0.5Ohms resistance? That's grossly inadequate. IIRC I said in my post, "reasonable low resistance, say < .1Ohms". I don't think that would be audible. And even if it is, using a fatter cable will solve it. No need to shell out multi-k$$s.
Excessive cap loading, sure, but we are talking about an interconnect between a preamp and a power amp. Which fool would deliberately put in an interconnect with excessive cap loading? You can f&$u@*c%#k up everything if you try hard enough, but lets try to be reasonable.
Jan Didden
Hi LOL.
I mean RF junk, marginal stability amplifiers (power or line level) and the wrong cables can show up sonic problems.
0.5 ohms was a suggestion for you to try - try it and then you know the sound, even if it is not a realistic value.
Eric.
I mean RF junk, marginal stability amplifiers (power or line level) and the wrong cables can show up sonic problems.
0.5 ohms was a suggestion for you to try - try it and then you know the sound, even if it is not a realistic value.
Eric.
Koinichiwa,
Okay. So you admit that in a system operating to minimise cable effects by using a current signal, not voltage and which has only one dacde bandwidh and maybe 40 - 50db dynamic range miles of cables may make audible changes.
But you DISAGREE that in a system with three or more decades bandwidth and 100db+ dynamic range and which uses the "voltage" interface which is much more sensitive to cable effects a short lenght of cable must not have audible effects.
I am sure that there is some logic behind this, but actually non I can comprehend.
Actually, the higher resistance will lead to potentially audible changes in electrical damping (though slight) and general frequency response. However, I often find that even electically pretty identical cables sound different. For example the same interconnect or speakercable made with copper wire (solid) or silverwire (solid too) of the same diameter sounds different and by far more different than the slight difference in resistance suggests.
I genuinely wish I KNEW FOR SURE and could PROOVE the source of these differences (a Nobel price should be in it at least and having one is ever so handy), but sadly I can only use educated guesses and trying to find which theories advanced so far show the greatest congruence with observed reality (note observed reality is not identical with "absolute reality", see Bishop Berkly, Hume and Kant).
Well, I don't know.
Let's turn this upsidedown. The source impedance of the preamp is one milliohm (for arguments sake) and the input impedance of the Poweramplifier is 100 Megaohm (for arguments sake).
What in the end is being sensed by the Poweramplifier as input signal is usually the voltage between the top of our input resistor and the designated reference point of the Input stage. Agreed so far?
Now our cable will at 0.1V RMS only carry a very weak electron field and few electrons will be moved along the wire. Now if the wire has small sections where the conductor is not pure, but where an alloy, oxide or the like is present, what happens to this weak signal represented by a few electrons?
Now I doubt that the effect will show itself with a single tone sinewafe, as the effect (due to the natuere of particle physics) is subject to a degree of uncertainty. So the "distortion" induced may show as short blip any random number of cycles. And of course there may be many such problem areas in the wire. I CAN "see" this making a difference.
It was shown in HFN (no idea about the issue - I threw away most of my Audio Pornos when my GF moved in) that cables are subject to some form of noisefloor modulation when tested via compensated comperator and using wideband noise. The exact mechanics are not clear, as I said.
NOW, just for fun, lets turn this whole thing around again. We make our Preamp Output to be a 100MOhm currentsource delivering 70mA peak for "full scale" and use a resistor in the Amplifier input to convert (sense) the 70mA peak as 1.4V RMS, which would be a 20 Ohm resistor. Now lets again look at the effects of the cable, potential metal impurity etc....
Sayonara
janneman said:
Okay. So you admit that in a system operating to minimise cable effects by using a current signal, not voltage and which has only one dacde bandwidh and maybe 40 - 50db dynamic range miles of cables may make audible changes.
But you DISAGREE that in a system with three or more decades bandwidth and 100db+ dynamic range and which uses the "voltage" interface which is much more sensitive to cable effects a short lenght of cable must not have audible effects.
I am sure that there is some logic behind this, but actually non I can comprehend.
janneman said:
Actually, the higher resistance will lead to potentially audible changes in electrical damping (though slight) and general frequency response. However, I often find that even electically pretty identical cables sound different. For example the same interconnect or speakercable made with copper wire (solid) or silverwire (solid too) of the same diameter sounds different and by far more different than the slight difference in resistance suggests.
I genuinely wish I KNEW FOR SURE and could PROOVE the source of these differences (a Nobel price should be in it at least and having one is ever so handy), but sadly I can only use educated guesses and trying to find which theories advanced so far show the greatest congruence with observed reality (note observed reality is not identical with "absolute reality", see Bishop Berkly, Hume and Kant).
janneman said:
Well, I don't know.
Let's turn this upsidedown. The source impedance of the preamp is one milliohm (for arguments sake) and the input impedance of the Poweramplifier is 100 Megaohm (for arguments sake).
What in the end is being sensed by the Poweramplifier as input signal is usually the voltage between the top of our input resistor and the designated reference point of the Input stage. Agreed so far?
Now our cable will at 0.1V RMS only carry a very weak electron field and few electrons will be moved along the wire. Now if the wire has small sections where the conductor is not pure, but where an alloy, oxide or the like is present, what happens to this weak signal represented by a few electrons?
Now I doubt that the effect will show itself with a single tone sinewafe, as the effect (due to the natuere of particle physics) is subject to a degree of uncertainty. So the "distortion" induced may show as short blip any random number of cycles. And of course there may be many such problem areas in the wire. I CAN "see" this making a difference.
It was shown in HFN (no idea about the issue - I threw away most of my Audio Pornos when my GF moved in) that cables are subject to some form of noisefloor modulation when tested via compensated comperator and using wideband noise. The exact mechanics are not clear, as I said.
NOW, just for fun, lets turn this whole thing around again. We make our Preamp Output to be a 100MOhm currentsource delivering 70mA peak for "full scale" and use a resistor in the Amplifier input to convert (sense) the 70mA peak as 1.4V RMS, which would be a 20 Ohm resistor. Now lets again look at the effects of the cable, potential metal impurity etc....
Sayonara
Hey, I don't want to start a yes/no war here, but let me comment on your statements
Sayonara to you too.
Jan Didden
Kuei Yang Wang said:
Sayonara to you too.
Jan Didden
Hmm - interesting that Eric & Steve's argument quickly got onto the subject of loudspeakers, listening positions (and so room acoustics).
If there's anybody out there whose system performance isn't ultimately determined by their speakers, could you let me know your secret?
Cheers
IH
If there's anybody out there whose system performance isn't ultimately determined by their speakers, could you let me know your secret?
Cheers
IH
Koinichiwa,
Not bad a try for not wanting to. I will need to pull out some salient points...
> Janneman: I'm with you here, I don't comprehend either.
> In fact, I fail to see any connection between the two
> statements above. The voltage interface to be more
> sensitive to cable effects? I don't get it. Sorry.
Actually, are you at all familiar with industrial electronics?
There you find a lot of defined analogue interfaces, but the most common is 4-20mA (what actually is represented by those 4-20mA is another story and depends upon the application) as using this type of signal transmission such effects as cable resistance and most external interferences are eliminated from the equation.
At the same time you also have a "voltage" interface defined, namely 0-10V. Now this voltage interface is used rarely, as it is quite susceptible to cable problems, be it resistance/impedance, external interference or the dielectric absorbtion (which in a few 100m Cable can even cause problems with slow changing DC), all factors that are eliminated by the current interface.
Now given that Audio has quite a bit a wider bandwidth and dynamic range than industrial control circuits, though cables are of course much shorter, which helps.
> Maybe it is time to let the word out: I don't believe I can
> reliably and repeatable (like DBT) hear the differences you
> describe. But maybe you can. But I don't believe that either.
You say "like DBT". Of the DBT's I have seen published the vast majority used flawd statistical methodes in the analysis and often the implementation leave a lot to be desired. I for one would certainly NOT form my opinion based on this. I have blind tested cables myself and find them sufficiently audible for my satisfaction (though not to cinfidence level).
> Janneman: Well, if you talk about perceived realities, hey, stop > searching.
Actually, the philosophers I quoted pointed out that that there is no "objective" observation. So there is to anyone of us ONLY percieved reality. Psychology does not come into it at this level.
> Janneman: Don't know. You tell me. BTW, if you say "a few
> electrons" you mean just 10^12 electrons, or what?
How many electrons are 1E-9 Amperere current (peak)?
> Janneman: You start to talk about an effect, but you haven't
> told me what the effect is? What the hell are you talking about?
Nonlinear distortion.
> Janneman: You don't expect me to give serious consideration
> to this in the framework of audible differences between cables
> used in actual hi-fi systems, now do you?
Well, in some cases the levels for cables where -70db (0.03%). I would not vernture to claim that this "must be audible", but I'd venture taht it COULD be audible.
The problem with cables that there are several variables and effects, first and second order and it is difficult relating these physical issues to moderate (but cumulative) changes in sound.
> Janneman: I still don't know which "effect" you are talking
> about. So far, you have demonstrated that you are close to
> understanding Ohms law (70mA peak over 20 Ohms is about
> 1VRMS, not 1.4VRMS). And?
Sorry, meant to write 1.4 Peak, not RMS.
Please evaluate the effect various cable parameters have on the voltage driving the Amplifier.
Sayonara
janneman said:
Not bad a try for not wanting to. I will need to pull out some salient points...
> Janneman: I'm with you here, I don't comprehend either.
> In fact, I fail to see any connection between the two
> statements above. The voltage interface to be more
> sensitive to cable effects? I don't get it. Sorry.
Actually, are you at all familiar with industrial electronics?
There you find a lot of defined analogue interfaces, but the most common is 4-20mA (what actually is represented by those 4-20mA is another story and depends upon the application) as using this type of signal transmission such effects as cable resistance and most external interferences are eliminated from the equation.
At the same time you also have a "voltage" interface defined, namely 0-10V. Now this voltage interface is used rarely, as it is quite susceptible to cable problems, be it resistance/impedance, external interference or the dielectric absorbtion (which in a few 100m Cable can even cause problems with slow changing DC), all factors that are eliminated by the current interface.
Now given that Audio has quite a bit a wider bandwidth and dynamic range than industrial control circuits, though cables are of course much shorter, which helps.
> Maybe it is time to let the word out: I don't believe I can
> reliably and repeatable (like DBT) hear the differences you
> describe. But maybe you can. But I don't believe that either.
You say "like DBT". Of the DBT's I have seen published the vast majority used flawd statistical methodes in the analysis and often the implementation leave a lot to be desired. I for one would certainly NOT form my opinion based on this. I have blind tested cables myself and find them sufficiently audible for my satisfaction (though not to cinfidence level).
> Janneman: Well, if you talk about perceived realities, hey, stop > searching.
Actually, the philosophers I quoted pointed out that that there is no "objective" observation. So there is to anyone of us ONLY percieved reality. Psychology does not come into it at this level.
> Janneman: Don't know. You tell me. BTW, if you say "a few
> electrons" you mean just 10^12 electrons, or what?
How many electrons are 1E-9 Amperere current (peak)?
> Janneman: You start to talk about an effect, but you haven't
> told me what the effect is? What the hell are you talking about?
Nonlinear distortion.
> Janneman: You don't expect me to give serious consideration
> to this in the framework of audible differences between cables
> used in actual hi-fi systems, now do you?
Well, in some cases the levels for cables where -70db (0.03%). I would not vernture to claim that this "must be audible", but I'd venture taht it COULD be audible.
The problem with cables that there are several variables and effects, first and second order and it is difficult relating these physical issues to moderate (but cumulative) changes in sound.
> Janneman: I still don't know which "effect" you are talking
> about. So far, you have demonstrated that you are close to
> understanding Ohms law (70mA peak over 20 Ohms is about
> 1VRMS, not 1.4VRMS). And?
Sorry, meant to write 1.4 Peak, not RMS.
Please evaluate the effect various cable parameters have on the voltage driving the Amplifier.
Sayonara
Re: Just Some Of The Variables
No, series resistance only changes electrical damping and resonance. The mechanical elements of the speaker are responsible for mechanical damping and resonance and those elements are not changed by the electrical portion of the system.
se
mrfeedback said:
No, series resistance only changes electrical damping and resonance. The mechanical elements of the speaker are responsible for mechanical damping and resonance and those elements are not changed by the electrical portion of the system.
se
Re: Re: Just Some Of The Variables
I suppose i should have made that read - When connected to a driving amplifier, Series resistance changes damping and resonance (electrical and mechanical) of a speaker, and this is clearly audible..
Cable series resistance will change damping factor will it not ? - ie dynamic braking of the driver cone.
Eric.
I suppose i should have made that read - When connected to a driving amplifier, Series resistance changes damping and resonance (electrical and mechanical) of a speaker, and this is clearly audible..
Cable series resistance will change damping factor will it not ? - ie dynamic braking of the driver cone.
Eric.
Re: Re: Re: Just Some Of The Variables
You're still incorrect. Series resistance does NOT change MECHANICAL damping and resonance. MECHANICAL damping and resonance are a function of the MECHANICAL elements of the speaker. And electrical resistance is NOT a MECHANICAL element.
The total resonance and damping will change due to increasing series resistance but only inasmuch as series resistance changes the ELECTRICAL damping and resonance.
Keeping things simple and looking only at the driver, its total damping and resonance behavior is quantified by Q<sub>TS</sub>. This is derived from its electrical and mechanical damping and resonance behavior which are quantified by Q<sub>ES</sub> and Q<sub>MS</sub> respectively, by way of:
Q<sub>TS</sub> = (Q<sub>ES</sub> x Q<sub>MS</sub>) / (Q<sub>ES</sub> + Q<sub>MS</sub>).
Series resistance only changes Q<sub>ES</sub> as it adds to the voice coil DC resistance, R<sub>E</sub>, by way of:
Q<sub>ES</sub>' = Q<sub>ES</sub> x ((R<sub>E</sub> + R<sub>S</sub>) / R<sub>E</sub>)
Where R<sub>S</sub> is the series source resistance.
se
mrfeedback said:
You're still incorrect. Series resistance does NOT change MECHANICAL damping and resonance. MECHANICAL damping and resonance are a function of the MECHANICAL elements of the speaker. And electrical resistance is NOT a MECHANICAL element.
The total resonance and damping will change due to increasing series resistance but only inasmuch as series resistance changes the ELECTRICAL damping and resonance.
Keeping things simple and looking only at the driver, its total damping and resonance behavior is quantified by Q<sub>TS</sub>. This is derived from its electrical and mechanical damping and resonance behavior which are quantified by Q<sub>ES</sub> and Q<sub>MS</sub> respectively, by way of:
Q<sub>TS</sub> = (Q<sub>ES</sub> x Q<sub>MS</sub>) / (Q<sub>ES</sub> + Q<sub>MS</sub>).
Series resistance only changes Q<sub>ES</sub> as it adds to the voice coil DC resistance, R<sub>E</sub>, by way of:
Q<sub>ES</sub>' = Q<sub>ES</sub> x ((R<sub>E</sub> + R<sub>S</sub>) / R<sub>E</sub>)
Where R<sub>S</sub> is the series source resistance.
se
Kuei Yang Wang said:
KYW, Koinichiwa,
All of the issues you mention (industrial electronics etc) are, as far as I can tell, valid issues. I know you are not stupid. The problem I have is how this relates to audible sound differences. Every time I address something, you shift the goal posts. First you say ...just a few electrons... implying (but not saying, so you can conveniently back out if required) that because there are " a few" electrons, there must be some effect (which you, again conveniently, do not specify). Then I ask: you mean 10^12 as " a few" ? You reply: how much electrons are there in 1E-9 Amps? How should I know? YOU started about "a few" electrons!
Everytime you are pressed to come clear, you move to another square. This is no fun, I quit.
But you would make a hell of a politician, I grant you that.
Cheers,
Jan Didden
Kuei Yang Wang said:
What do you think would happen beyond increasing the wire's resistance by reducing the mean free path of the electrons participating in the transport current?
What would cause any distortion? If all you're doing is changing the mean free path of the conduction electrons, how do you end up with anything more than a change of resistance? If you're not changing the current/voltage relationship in the wire in some non-linear fashion, where does the distortion come from?
Now, if you have ferromagnetic materials involved, or material dielectrics, these can change the current/voltage relationships in a non-linear fashion. But beyond that I don't see any other mechanisms for signal distortion.
And without being able to read or quote from the actual article in question, this is all pretty sketchy.
When did we look at the effects in the first place? Until you can identify the means by which any nonlinearity is introduces, what's to look at?
And how would a current source cause any non-linear elements which may be in the wire to suddenly behave in a linear fashion? The wire still carries the same amount of current for a given input voltage and still has the same voltage across it.
se
janneman said:
Been there, done that. This sort of tactic just makes any sort of meaningful dialogue impossible. But I try to retain some optimism in spite of it all.
se
OK, so what's the interim verdict???
So what's the verdict at this stage?
Do wires make a difference or not??
Purist Dominus @ EUR: 5k/m sounded different in my system (better).
47 labs' modded (different coating) Nippon Telephone cable made a difference.
OK, we have manipulated some electrical parametres. And how would we modulate the amp's inherent input res? My main amp's imp is at 9,8kOhm at its nascent state...
Back to the pre (the real one -- not the virtual one): 47ohm. Do I intervene at pre-amp stage or power amp??
This is getting complicated.
I hate wires.
So what's the verdict at this stage?
Do wires make a difference or not??
Purist Dominus @ EUR: 5k/m sounded different in my system (better).
47 labs' modded (different coating) Nippon Telephone cable made a difference.
OK, we have manipulated some electrical parametres. And how would we modulate the amp's inherent input res? My main amp's imp is at 9,8kOhm at its nascent state...
Back to the pre (the real one -- not the virtual one): 47ohm. Do I intervene at pre-amp stage or power amp??
This is getting complicated.
I hate wires.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.