Jakob2 said:
Methodology? Results? Conclusions? Nothing. That's the worse kind of marketing tactics: attempting to wrap the sales message into a pseudo-scientific shell.
And now, eat this, from the same web site:
Finit coronat opus
Jakob, you could do better than quoting these snake oil merchands and science charlatans, apparently ready to "Interconnect Comparator™" their mothers for an extra buck. Claiming extraordinary hearing abilities could be a honest mistake, but this pseudo-scientific swindel has no excuse.
I'll come forth.
Measure the excess noise of a non-inductive wirewound and compare it to that of a carbon resistor. That will certainly make a noticeable difference in low-level stages.
Measure the voltage coefficient of resistance between those same two resistors and put them in a high voltage feedback system (like plate to cathode in a tube output stage). Measurable and audible difference.
Of course, using the right resistor in the right place is basic engineering and has been known for 50 years or more... the idea that this is a recent discovery is not correct.
Now, that whole "brand-name" resistor stuff is absolutely without evidence and highly unlikely, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Measure the excess noise of a non-inductive wirewound and compare it to that of a carbon resistor. That will certainly make a noticeable difference in low-level stages.
Measure the voltage coefficient of resistance between those same two resistors and put them in a high voltage feedback system (like plate to cathode in a tube output stage). Measurable and audible difference.
Of course, using the right resistor in the right place is basic engineering and has been known for 50 years or more... the idea that this is a recent discovery is not correct.
Now, that whole "brand-name" resistor stuff is absolutely without evidence and highly unlikely, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
digital cables
In my usual scattered way I looked at one aspect of spdif cables recently.
I took two pieces of my favorite Litz and made up a half meter cable, with RCA connectors, the cheap polypropylene molded RS ones.
I plugged the cable in and nothing, the CD and Soundstream outboard DAC would not synch up. I put two pieces of woven cotton tube over the wire and still nothing.
So, I started adding one inch pieces of shrink tube with the first placed in the center of the length of cable. Nothing. When I added the fourth piece, now distributed evenly across the cable length, the CD player and DAC synched up and I had music.
However, there was something obviously wrong in the high frequencies, as confirmed by interchanging the original ORANGE cable from RS with the new one. Very obvious digitization of everything above about 7 kHz. Sounded like pixilation looks in video, blocky and jerky in character.
So, I cut a nip into each end of the plastic tubing, one piece at a time. The nips were 1/8 inch in length and when I finished the fourth piece, while the cable was connected and music was playing, the digitization disappeared.
There have been three instances when a buzzing occurred when the digital system was turned on. The buzz did not change in character or amplitude until the units were turned off and on again, causing it to disappear. The RS cable has never had this problem.
The sound quality between the RS cable and the Litz might be slightly in favor of the Litz, or, more likely, I am in favor of the Litz.
Any thoughts upon why capacitance would influence a digital signal in this way?
Bud
In my usual scattered way I looked at one aspect of spdif cables recently.
I took two pieces of my favorite Litz and made up a half meter cable, with RCA connectors, the cheap polypropylene molded RS ones.
I plugged the cable in and nothing, the CD and Soundstream outboard DAC would not synch up. I put two pieces of woven cotton tube over the wire and still nothing.
So, I started adding one inch pieces of shrink tube with the first placed in the center of the length of cable. Nothing. When I added the fourth piece, now distributed evenly across the cable length, the CD player and DAC synched up and I had music.
However, there was something obviously wrong in the high frequencies, as confirmed by interchanging the original ORANGE cable from RS with the new one. Very obvious digitization of everything above about 7 kHz. Sounded like pixilation looks in video, blocky and jerky in character.
So, I cut a nip into each end of the plastic tubing, one piece at a time. The nips were 1/8 inch in length and when I finished the fourth piece, while the cable was connected and music was playing, the digitization disappeared.
There have been three instances when a buzzing occurred when the digital system was turned on. The buzz did not change in character or amplitude until the units were turned off and on again, causing it to disappear. The RS cable has never had this problem.
The sound quality between the RS cable and the Litz might be slightly in favor of the Litz, or, more likely, I am in favor of the Litz.
Any thoughts upon why capacitance would influence a digital signal in this way?
Bud
I did not bother to read all the posts, but I have an opinion about this statement.
I assume the graphical plot for price against added value (sound quality) of a cable looks sort of parabolic with the open end facing right and never reaching "perfection"
You gain a lot by just upgrading from your 3 euro standard twin RCA cable to a 50 euro pair of RCA cables.
Spending 100 euros however will not make "double" change in sound quality.
This first 50 euro upgrade is audible (by me and others I did run semi blind tests with).
any further upgrades become, in my opinion, far more mind induced...
Now we are in the age of digital TV and LCD / plasma screens, a similar thing happens, and this first upgrade of HDMI cables is cleary visible to everybody.
any "more" expensive upgrade do not have a similar impact as the first.
So I did all the "first step" upgrades, and I'm very happy with them.
Jos
IMHO its all about how long the cable is and what AWG. Of course, the longer the length, the larger the awg and vice versa. I supply nordost cable and I guess im a bit of a sucker in a way because I love nordost stuff, its just quite expensive. But in saying that, the build quality of these cables is outstanding.
huh
what is "semi-blind"...?
can someone explain what this means??
Is this a new protocol for statistical testing?
Did you only look with
one eye?... please elaborate
what is "semi-blind"...?
can someone explain what this means??
Is this a new protocol for statistical testing?
Did you only look with
one eye?... please elaborate
No... but I understand that there is a new health plan option being discussed nationally
I think there needs to be another, intermediary term, before this qualifies as pataphysics John.
Bud
It is a well documented fact that different resistor compositions (carbon comp vs metal film vs whatever have different characteristics. The noise spectrum is different for each.
In order of noise spectrum one should choose Wire-wound, metal film, metal oxide, carbon film, and finally, carbon composition last. Higher resistance value equates to higher noise.
Speaker wire. Bigger is better up to the point of diminishing return.
My room mate in college worked at a high end stereo shop (70s). The highest return was on phono-cartridges (400% markup according to him). When CDs replaced vinyl, he said they switched to speaker wire (80s) as their highest markup and big profit margin.
The Rock Man said "Say babe, there ain't nothing pointless about this gig. The thing is you see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear. You dig? You ever see Paris?" "No." "You ever see New Dehli?" That was a no. "Well that's it. You see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear."
- Oblio and Land of Point
In order of noise spectrum one should choose Wire-wound, metal film, metal oxide, carbon film, and finally, carbon composition last. Higher resistance value equates to higher noise.
Speaker wire. Bigger is better up to the point of diminishing return.
My room mate in college worked at a high end stereo shop (70s). The highest return was on phono-cartridges (400% markup according to him). When CDs replaced vinyl, he said they switched to speaker wire (80s) as their highest markup and big profit margin.
The Rock Man said "Say babe, there ain't nothing pointless about this gig. The thing is you see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear. You dig? You ever see Paris?" "No." "You ever see New Dehli?" That was a no. "Well that's it. You see what you want to see, and you hear what you want to hear."
- Oblio and Land of Point
I will. After I have finished with much more promising things on my list. You've got to make a choice 🙂
jd
Bud, this is the strangest empirical experiment I have seen in a while. I thought the spec for SPDIF was 75 OHM coax terminated on both ends, deviate enough and you destroy the signal integrity to the point of loss of connection.
I find the "yellow one" from any cheap video device does fine.
Last edited:
I found it equally strange. I can see no reason why, with proper termination at both ends, the change in cable characteristics should have made ANY difference. I have repeated the experiment three times now and had the same results, although the one cable with extra capacitance out at the tips of the wires, as a covering for the wires entering the RCA jacks, has this odd buzzing more often than either of the other two, which have cotton casing right up to the RCA plugs.
Bud
Bud
It's not just the terminations, the cable is specified as 75 Ohm characteristic impedance you are not free to add capacitive discontinuities and expect to get a good eye diagram.
http://members.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/DAChtml/digcom/digcom.html
Some things overlooked
I suspect part fo the reason some people can hear differences between cables and some can't might have to do with the RF environment. One cable could be "leaky" and allow some RF junk to enter input stages where the crud might be rectified and interfere with the audio signal, and another cable might be faultless on that count. If one tester lives out in the country, far from interference, then all other things being equal they would be hard pressed to detect a difference, whereas a tester living in, say, New York City would hear a "grayer" background with the leaky cable, assuming the gear didn't reject RF interference.
Thus a cable test would depend not only on the components to which it is connected, but also on the content of the ambient spectrum - which also changes with the time of day (broadcast transmitters typically reduce power at night, and cell conversations tend to decrease after most people go to bed).
It's a tough problem, especially as most audio companies barely have the funds for an acoustic anechoic chamber, let alone an RF one.
I suspect part fo the reason some people can hear differences between cables and some can't might have to do with the RF environment. One cable could be "leaky" and allow some RF junk to enter input stages where the crud might be rectified and interfere with the audio signal, and another cable might be faultless on that count. If one tester lives out in the country, far from interference, then all other things being equal they would be hard pressed to detect a difference, whereas a tester living in, say, New York City would hear a "grayer" background with the leaky cable, assuming the gear didn't reject RF interference.
Thus a cable test would depend not only on the components to which it is connected, but also on the content of the ambient spectrum - which also changes with the time of day (broadcast transmitters typically reduce power at night, and cell conversations tend to decrease after most people go to bed).
It's a tough problem, especially as most audio companies barely have the funds for an acoustic anechoic chamber, let alone an RF one.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.