Hi,
Mikes do have good ears now, don't they?
Hmmm...whom are you challenging here anyway?
From the mayo comment I assume it's me, nevermind the fact that I hardly eat fries at all...I'm still at a loss as to why anyone's HF hearing's got anything to do with it, though?
All that hoping you've not taken on some SE identity,
Mikes do have good ears now, don't they?
Hmmm...whom are you challenging here anyway?
From the mayo comment I assume it's me, nevermind the fact that I hardly eat fries at all...I'm still at a loss as to why anyone's HF hearing's got anything to do with it, though?
All that hoping you've not taken on some SE identity,
A mon ami Frank
No, not at all, my humor has not deserted me. I was merely pointing out that measurable difference and perceptible difference are two, uh, different things. I can cob up a legitimate measurement showing there's a difference between silver plated copper and copper, with all other parameters held constant. Does that mean that I can audibly distinguish one form the other? That's a totally different kind of question which needs to be answered by a totally different kind of test.
No, not at all, my humor has not deserted me. I was merely pointing out that measurable difference and perceptible difference are two, uh, different things. I can cob up a legitimate measurement showing there's a difference between silver plated copper and copper, with all other parameters held constant. Does that mean that I can audibly distinguish one form the other? That's a totally different kind of question which needs to be answered by a totally different kind of test.
A MON PETIT POTDEVIN...
Hi,
Mais, bien entendu.
Ah, metalurgy... must be Thorstens' M in the Alphabet of the mystery/misery of perceived differences...
Now, it may become interesting at long last,😉
Hi,
Mais, bien entendu.
Ah, metalurgy... must be Thorstens' M in the Alphabet of the mystery/misery of perceived differences...
Now, it may become interesting at long last,😉
PUCK said:
I've read your post with great interest. I agree that 10 out of 10 _does_ represent statistically relevant result. Impressively so. But I also know from my experiences that having a true controlled environment can be a lot trickier that it seems at first.
I know what you are going to say, but no I'm not nitpicking on the test you have done. All I am saying is without knowing that absolutely ALL variables were taken from the equasion except for cables, test cannot be described as controlled environment.
For example, did dealer use same preamp outputs ? Did you ensure using DVM and a test signal that there was no difference in voltage level ? Can you be positive that you did not use any other (visial, psychological etc - it could be at subconscientious level) clues as to which cable was in place ? Dealers have very obvious vested interest even if they know that you are not going to buy on the spot. I have heard of examples of series resistors being soldered inside connectors. 1dB attenuation is all it takes.
There's lot of examples where people influenced the outcome of an experiment even if they tried really hard to be objective. Early years of elementary particle physics have some great examples. The great debacle of homeopathy and Dr Jacques Benveniste is definitely worth a read too.
Do I disbelieve all the examples given in this thread (and elsewhere) ? Put it this way : I always doubt myself FIRST, as I know all too well how easy it to fool oneself with even simple things, let alone something so complex and at the very limit of our detection threshold (at best!) as differences in sound resulting from changing a cable. I do try to keep an open mind, but I will always remain skeptic first.
I can't hear differences (yes, I admit I could be deaf).
My wife can' (yes, she could be deaf too).
None of my friends (even ones who were convinced that they could).
Now the law of probablity tells us that at least SOME of all those people cannot be deaf, especially considering that they have all spent rather large sums of money in sound reproduction systems, and continue to spend more on live concerts and good records. Is it possible that there are only few people on this worls who can hear cable differences ? Of course it is. But considering the proportion of people in this forum who lay the same claim, I'd wager that there should be at least ONE such case among the people who know. So far I only met believers. They all failed to become a Chosen One.
All this aside, one question remains - why would anyone be obsessed with a particular audio link that is known and WELL documented to be by far the strongest and most perfect in the chain ? I mean 400$ invested in a good rug on the floor will improve sound infinitely more than any cable ever will. Extra 400 in speakers will undoubtely, most definitely, give you an audible improvement that ANYONE will hear, not just a select golden eared few. 400$ will buy a lot of filter capacitors or output devices - that is a most welcome improvemet. Even a better listening chair (or a bottle of preferred -but aged!- liquid) will improve listening pleasure - I can confirm that from my presonal experience. Not to mention better (or different) performances or recordings of your favourite music. All those are undoubtely hearable, even by a lesser individual like yours truly.
Of course, believing that sound improves is just as effective as if sound did improve. So why all the fuss ?
? All yours.Bratislav
fdegrove said:Hi,
Mikes do have good ears now, don't they?
Hmmm...whom are you challenging here anyway?
From the mayo comment I assume it's me, nevermind the fact that I hardly eat fries at all...I'm still at a loss as to why anyone's HF hearing's got anything to do with it, though?
All that hoping you've not taken on some SE identity,
Hi Frank,
I like to play a game now and then as well, but don't you think you're going overboard? After all, I would hope the majority of the audience would want to learn something about audio related things (and no, I can't prove that).
Jan Didden
Now, now...
Objection your Honor! Relevence?
Interestingly that amp was highly lauded by the golden eared community, (2 years as Stereophile Class A, Absolute Sound 'Golden Ear' award) until they discovered he wasn't buying ad space, and he was claiming in his book that cables made no audible difference. But you don't have to touch it, nobody asked you to. Since you brought it up, (obviously you have nothing relevent to contribute to the topic currently being discussed), I find it interesting that two contributors adament that listening is the only true way to judge a product have taken shots at BR's design based on theory. When it comes to cables, you must listen, not theorize, when it comes to amps, regardless of how it sounds, if the slew rate is too slow for radar transmission, or it uses a pp output stage, apparently you know without listening that it'll be crap. Especially if you don't like the designer's point of view on hotly debated topics.
Don't flatter yourself. You'll have to do a lot more than point out my lack of understanding of filters to hurt my ego. No, my reaction was sparked by your total lack of respect. I absolutely hate being condescended to. I thought after the Tube Failure thread we were going to treat each other with respect, but instead of raising any kind of counter argument to points I've raised, you attack my credibility by accusing me of taking all my ideas from BR, and inferring I don't know how a compensation network works. Can you not see how I might be just a little bit miffed? Did I miss any 'hints'?
Actually M was for magnetostriction, still haven't heard back on that one. Do you design your cables taking that into account?
Since however, you think metalurgy is an interseting direction to take this discussion, why don't you start off and offer some theory of how it is relevent in speaker cable composition.
You can answer 6 ways:
1) Change the subject; we'll interpret this as "I haven't the foggiest"
2) Launch a personal attack on whomever you choose; we'll interpret this as "I haven't the foggiest"
3) Pretend you could answer the question if you cared to, but given the tone in which it was asked, you won't; we'll interpret that as "I haven't the foggiest"
4) Ignore the question altogether; you guessed it, "I haven't the foggiest"
5) Propose a preposterous theory that can only be affirmed by non-blind listening tests; at least it shows your trying
6) Show actual relevence; that would be cool!
BTW I'm 40 years old, but I'm flattered that you consider me a 'youngster'. Many people take me for much younger when they meet me. I've never had it happen sight unseen before though.
Chris
Objection your Honor! Relevence?
Interestingly that amp was highly lauded by the golden eared community, (2 years as Stereophile Class A, Absolute Sound 'Golden Ear' award) until they discovered he wasn't buying ad space, and he was claiming in his book that cables made no audible difference. But you don't have to touch it, nobody asked you to. Since you brought it up, (obviously you have nothing relevent to contribute to the topic currently being discussed), I find it interesting that two contributors adament that listening is the only true way to judge a product have taken shots at BR's design based on theory. When it comes to cables, you must listen, not theorize, when it comes to amps, regardless of how it sounds, if the slew rate is too slow for radar transmission, or it uses a pp output stage, apparently you know without listening that it'll be crap. Especially if you don't like the designer's point of view on hotly debated topics.
Don't flatter yourself. You'll have to do a lot more than point out my lack of understanding of filters to hurt my ego. No, my reaction was sparked by your total lack of respect. I absolutely hate being condescended to. I thought after the Tube Failure thread we were going to treat each other with respect, but instead of raising any kind of counter argument to points I've raised, you attack my credibility by accusing me of taking all my ideas from BR, and inferring I don't know how a compensation network works. Can you not see how I might be just a little bit miffed? Did I miss any 'hints'?
Actually M was for magnetostriction, still haven't heard back on that one. Do you design your cables taking that into account?
Since however, you think metalurgy is an interseting direction to take this discussion, why don't you start off and offer some theory of how it is relevent in speaker cable composition.
You can answer 6 ways:
1) Change the subject; we'll interpret this as "I haven't the foggiest"
2) Launch a personal attack on whomever you choose; we'll interpret this as "I haven't the foggiest"
3) Pretend you could answer the question if you cared to, but given the tone in which it was asked, you won't; we'll interpret that as "I haven't the foggiest"
4) Ignore the question altogether; you guessed it, "I haven't the foggiest"
5) Propose a preposterous theory that can only be affirmed by non-blind listening tests; at least it shows your trying
6) Show actual relevence; that would be cool!
BTW I'm 40 years old, but I'm flattered that you consider me a 'youngster'. Many people take me for much younger when they meet me. I've never had it happen sight unseen before though.
Chris
Re: Now, now...
Konnichiwa,
Actually I heard the Trancendent OTL too. However, I have yet to like the sound of ANY OTL Amp.
So I limited myself to the fundamental failures common not only to that specific design BTW, but to many other OTL's (and indeed Transformer coupled) Valve Amplifiers using high imepdance, low current and high Mu Valves in their Driver/VAS stages and tons of long loop feddback.
BTW, the use of the low current, High Mu valves in several stages is needed to allow enough loop feedack to linearise the output stage which is hard put upon to drive the low impedance load and to reduce the output impedance, so it is in effect an inherent but hidden design "feature". BR is in good (or bad, depending upon your view) company.
In most valve Amplifiers the Output transformer is the limiting element due to narrow bandwidth, limiting the amount of feedback applicable without oscillation. In OTL's this is not the issue, so Ottalas good old TIM (and PIM) raises it's ugly head (again). It sounds like it too. I have yet to hear an OTL that does not remind of the high feedback, low THD transistor Amp's designers where so fond of in the old days. Well, what goes around comes around....
Past that I would appreciate if you limited yourself to what I have actually written, not what you wish I had written to give you more amunition.
I have very little in opinions on the subject of cables. I have over many years done many an experiement, the key ones generally involving blind listening and I know that of which I write, though I may not know the ultimate reason or how to measure (eg what to look for in measurements) the effects.
Lastly, in this thread several contributors have made comments upon the actual abilities of the ear which so fundamentally miss the mark that they illustrate profound ignorance of what the ear actually does, what the brain does and how the combination of the two is able (among other things) to resolve pattern burried 20db and more below the ambient noise, a feat hearing humans routinely do and which gives engineers still loads of problems apprently without solutions. Or how about residium-hearing (the ability of the ear/brain system to reconstruct something approaching the whole tone (so that it is possible to identif instrument and note played with ease) from a spectrum with several harmonics and the fundamental removed?
I found most amusing the comment about "microphones that have resolution and accuracy far beyond human hearing". Get a grip. If the Microphone was the problem all we needed would one such and suddenly speech recognition would just work fine without any hitches, in very noisy envoironments and with all sorts of accents, colds etc....
I rest my case here. If you want to remain ignorant, suit yourself. Ignorance is bliss after all, or so they say.
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Christopher said:
Actually I heard the Trancendent OTL too. However, I have yet to like the sound of ANY OTL Amp.
So I limited myself to the fundamental failures common not only to that specific design BTW, but to many other OTL's (and indeed Transformer coupled) Valve Amplifiers using high imepdance, low current and high Mu Valves in their Driver/VAS stages and tons of long loop feddback.
BTW, the use of the low current, High Mu valves in several stages is needed to allow enough loop feedack to linearise the output stage which is hard put upon to drive the low impedance load and to reduce the output impedance, so it is in effect an inherent but hidden design "feature". BR is in good (or bad, depending upon your view) company.
In most valve Amplifiers the Output transformer is the limiting element due to narrow bandwidth, limiting the amount of feedback applicable without oscillation. In OTL's this is not the issue, so Ottalas good old TIM (and PIM) raises it's ugly head (again). It sounds like it too. I have yet to hear an OTL that does not remind of the high feedback, low THD transistor Amp's designers where so fond of in the old days. Well, what goes around comes around....
Past that I would appreciate if you limited yourself to what I have actually written, not what you wish I had written to give you more amunition.
I have very little in opinions on the subject of cables. I have over many years done many an experiement, the key ones generally involving blind listening and I know that of which I write, though I may not know the ultimate reason or how to measure (eg what to look for in measurements) the effects.
Lastly, in this thread several contributors have made comments upon the actual abilities of the ear which so fundamentally miss the mark that they illustrate profound ignorance of what the ear actually does, what the brain does and how the combination of the two is able (among other things) to resolve pattern burried 20db and more below the ambient noise, a feat hearing humans routinely do and which gives engineers still loads of problems apprently without solutions. Or how about residium-hearing (the ability of the ear/brain system to reconstruct something approaching the whole tone (so that it is possible to identif instrument and note played with ease) from a spectrum with several harmonics and the fundamental removed?
I found most amusing the comment about "microphones that have resolution and accuracy far beyond human hearing". Get a grip. If the Microphone was the problem all we needed would one such and suddenly speech recognition would just work fine without any hitches, in very noisy envoironments and with all sorts of accents, colds etc....
I rest my case here. If you want to remain ignorant, suit yourself. Ignorance is bliss after all, or so they say.
Sayonara
So anechoic measurements are important here how?
Sorry, but I've been following this thread for some reason and that one really seemed to come out of left field.
Sorry, but I've been following this thread for some reason and that one really seemed to come out of left field.
Controlled double blind? Or "I hate OTL's they remind me of old SS" sighted. But I'm sure phsycoacoustics had nothing to do with it.
Disco fever
There's a big difference between being able to measure a difference, and being able to interpret that measurement. I thought we were talking about audible differences. So you don't accuse me of putting words in your mouth, please say what you mean here. I'm trying to get a grip, but you keep moving the handle.
Chris
Christopher said:
If that is not blindingly obvious you should perhaps go back to 8th grade or so.
If current flows through a conductor the conductor is surrounded by a magnetic field. If two conductors are next to each other they will attract or repell each other depending upon the magnetic field.
In speaker-cables the insulation is most often soft and the currents high. If we then pass current pulses through the cable the cables conductors will change their position to each other, not very strongly, but in many cases measurably so. This in turn will modulate the L/C value of the cable with signal.
I mean can you PLEASE make sure you know at least basic physics before arguing cables (or other stuff) with me? I assume at least the amount of physics that you get taught in primary school as given (and hence without need to explain) when discussing technical issues.
Sayonara
Sure, why not
Hi Tiroth,
Welcome to the discussion.
I'm not sure why you would think anechoic measurements would be out of left field, since we are talking about audible differences.
The point I was trying to make, was that if there were audible differences in cables, then surely they would be easily apparent in the controled environment of an anechoic chamber, yet none of the companies making cables seem to have used this tool as have speaker companies. It would seem to me that when you are developing something as controversial as a speaker cable, you would want to quantify differences between various designs, and where better to do that than an anechoic chamber. I think personally it's overkill, as any difference could be analyzed at the speaker terminals, but some seem to maintain that differences continue to exist that cannot be measured there.
How's that?
Chris
Hi Tiroth,
Welcome to the discussion.
I'm not sure why you would think anechoic measurements would be out of left field, since we are talking about audible differences.
The point I was trying to make, was that if there were audible differences in cables, then surely they would be easily apparent in the controled environment of an anechoic chamber, yet none of the companies making cables seem to have used this tool as have speaker companies. It would seem to me that when you are developing something as controversial as a speaker cable, you would want to quantify differences between various designs, and where better to do that than an anechoic chamber. I think personally it's overkill, as any difference could be analyzed at the speaker terminals, but some seem to maintain that differences continue to exist that cannot be measured there.
How's that?
Chris
Well, Chris, the first question I would ask is if an anechoic environment has been shown to give listeners the greatest acuity to sensing differences. If that's established, then I see your point. If not...
Well at least you didn't call me a youngster
Well that's a start.
But seriously, you're having this poor uneducated moron on aren't you. I thought it was generous to concede that a reasonable difference in Z could perhaps be audible. But to extrapolate that into the change in Z due to magnetostriction? Yikes!
But for intellectual entertainment, let's examine the nature of these magnetic fields. In a cable with equal signal and return lines, any field generated in one conductor will be opposite in the other, thus an overall null effect.
Do I have a grip yet?
Chris
Well that's a start.
But seriously, you're having this poor uneducated moron on aren't you. I thought it was generous to concede that a reasonable difference in Z could perhaps be audible. But to extrapolate that into the change in Z due to magnetostriction? Yikes!
But for intellectual entertainment, let's examine the nature of these magnetic fields. In a cable with equal signal and return lines, any field generated in one conductor will be opposite in the other, thus an overall null effect.
Do I have a grip yet?
Chris
Re: Well at least you didn't call me a youngster
Konnichiwa,
Thank you for clearing that up. Of course, it will require the whole theory of magnetics and electromagnetics to be re-written, boy is Nicola Tesla going to be pissed off. So far everyone always understood that two magnetic fields with opposite polarity attract each other (and those with the same polarity repell), but thank's to you we now know that actually nothing happens, as the result is null. Probably you double blind tested this too, in order to arrive at the null result?
I completely give up. When you are ready to take High School physics we talk again, until then I will leave educating you to sould more patient than I am.
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
Christopher said:
Thank you for clearing that up. Of course, it will require the whole theory of magnetics and electromagnetics to be re-written, boy is Nicola Tesla going to be pissed off. So far everyone always understood that two magnetic fields with opposite polarity attract each other (and those with the same polarity repell), but thank's to you we now know that actually nothing happens, as the result is null. Probably you double blind tested this too, in order to arrive at the null result?
I completely give up. When you are ready to take High School physics we talk again, until then I will leave educating you to sould more patient than I am.
Sayonara
Not exactly SY. I think you misinterpret me, or I misunderstand the conditions of the a.c. (anechoic chamber). (could be, me no know)
I'm saying that the ideal place for acoustic measurment (microphone style) is the a.c. If any difference is audible between cable A and cable B, that difference would be apparent in sample comparisons taken in an a.c.
What say you?
Chris
I'm saying that the ideal place for acoustic measurment (microphone style) is the a.c. If any difference is audible between cable A and cable B, that difference would be apparent in sample comparisons taken in an a.c.
What say you?
Chris
The speaker companies have good reason to use anechoic measurements; these are at least an objective analysis of things like frequency and impulse response, etc.
As far as cables go, though, I fail to see the merits of an anechoic test when the cables' "performance" is entirely system-dependent. A manufacturer would clearly be able to demonstrate lots of differences depending on the combination of amp, wire, and loudspeaker, from subtle ones, to phase changes, to oscillating amplifiers.
What does that accomplish unless the test is shown for your particular amp and loudspeaker? It certainly doesn't prove or disprove something other than LCR being in effect, and it doesn't help at all to lay to rest the controversy being discussed here.
As far as cables go, though, I fail to see the merits of an anechoic test when the cables' "performance" is entirely system-dependent. A manufacturer would clearly be able to demonstrate lots of differences depending on the combination of amp, wire, and loudspeaker, from subtle ones, to phase changes, to oscillating amplifiers.
What does that accomplish unless the test is shown for your particular amp and loudspeaker? It certainly doesn't prove or disprove something other than LCR being in effect, and it doesn't help at all to lay to rest the controversy being discussed here.
I think you're still conflating measurable versus audible (perceptible) differences. If one wants to assert that magnetostriction effects are perceptible to a skilled listener, the mike measurement in an a.c. doesn't establish that one way or another. Nor does any other measurement. Nor does bald assertion. Only a listening test can confirm the hypothesis, and I honestly don't know if an a.c. would be the best place to do that.
Oops!
Well ya got me there, I didn't think it out before I posted, but you are correct.
That's what ya get for trying to be a smart ***.
So what kind of magnatude are we talking? Do you think you could measure a change in Z due to magnetostriction? And if you could do you think that could effect that big 'ol driver at the end of the chain?
I don't.
Chris
Well ya got me there, I didn't think it out before I posted, but you are correct.
That's what ya get for trying to be a smart ***.
So what kind of magnatude are we talking? Do you think you could measure a change in Z due to magnetostriction? And if you could do you think that could effect that big 'ol driver at the end of the chain?
I don't.
Chris
Bratislav said:
Under an ohm of series resistance will give 1dB attenuation (even assuming your speaker is a constant 8ohms). By your own arguments, then, a perfectly plausible amount of simple electrical resistance could produce an audible effect.
I don't think, for instance, Puck was claiming any unusual explanation for his test results. I can well believe $40 inexpertly spent on speaker cables gets you some pretty scruffy wire.
Cheers
IH
PS. Just a thought: perhaps cable salesmen go on about the magic materials and construction involved to deflect attention from the fact that spending half the money on half the amount of cable will give you half the L, C and R....
- Status
- Not open for further replies.