OUCH!
OK here's one for y'all. Standard spiral wrapped capacitor, both leads in the center axis (roughly); does this cap exert momentory torgue against its mounting when being charged or discharged?
OK here's one for y'all. Standard spiral wrapped capacitor, both leads in the center axis (roughly); does this cap exert momentory torgue against its mounting when being charged or discharged?
Hi poobah,
Y'know. It just might, but very tiny. Other forces may cause this since the "plates" are attracted to each other. This may cause a tiny motion.
SY's original question:
-Chris
Y'know. It just might, but very tiny. Other forces may cause this since the "plates" are attracted to each other. This may cause a tiny motion.
SY's original question:
I'd say no (in reality - no jokes). The electrons are simply moved from one plate to the other. Theoretically the number of electrons have not changed, there are merely redistributed. Now just watch someone destroy my belief system!
-Chris
I thought protons weighed more than electrons (on earth at sea level) so would it tip the other way ??
Well, let's hope the protons prefer to stay in place. It would mess up the whole theory of electricity if the started moving. 🙂
Yeah... and protons on the loose means there are bored neutrons sitting around... and they into trouble. You will have a lot more glowing than your tubes!
SY
Stereo Equipment Reviewers
What always seems so silly is when the 'equipment' reviewers after checking let say a cable [power or interconnect], a 'hospital' grade outlet or a cone to stick under your amp, they always find improvements in the sound.. Higher highs, tighter bass & so forth, come on we all weren't borne yesterday! I've been reading this 'new improved' drivel for years and it's getting old! The only thing that drives me crazy is when I'm in a fast food joint and they have the radio playing off its frequency and the staff doesn't notice it. On to 2006!
What always seems so silly is when the 'equipment' reviewers after checking let say a cable [power or interconnect], a 'hospital' grade outlet or a cone to stick under your amp, they always find improvements in the sound.. Higher highs, tighter bass & so forth, come on we all weren't borne yesterday! I've been reading this 'new improved' drivel for years and it's getting old! The only thing that drives me crazy is when I'm in a fast food joint and they have the radio playing off its frequency and the staff doesn't notice it. On to 2006!
Any resolution to this? Did jneutron ever do his tests?
My take is that we *know* that perceptual 'noise' exists -- all the various biases that have been identified which 'distort' the real nature of what we perceive -- and therefore we *have* to control for them to achieve a reliable result on a 'subjective' test of difference. It is the reason why controls are mandatory in science and medical research. The only alternative is to take some measurements that show a difference in a range *already* demonstrated to be substantial.
Lacking these, how can people claim to hear *real* differences in cables, using sighted methods? Not just small ones either -- the audiophile rags boast of soundstages opening up, bass getting tighter, etc.
DBT does not *require* short test matter, so if accomodation to some aspect of 'localization' is required, as per jneutron's thesis, then DBT would STILL be the way to prove it. It's still the gold standard for demonstrating real effects.
My take is that we *know* that perceptual 'noise' exists -- all the various biases that have been identified which 'distort' the real nature of what we perceive -- and therefore we *have* to control for them to achieve a reliable result on a 'subjective' test of difference. It is the reason why controls are mandatory in science and medical research. The only alternative is to take some measurements that show a difference in a range *already* demonstrated to be substantial.
Lacking these, how can people claim to hear *real* differences in cables, using sighted methods? Not just small ones either -- the audiophile rags boast of soundstages opening up, bass getting tighter, etc.
DBT does not *require* short test matter, so if accomodation to some aspect of 'localization' is required, as per jneutron's thesis, then DBT would STILL be the way to prove it. It's still the gold standard for demonstrating real effects.
Member
Joined 2002
quasi said:
ID love to know how you are going to get 1600Watts through a 3$ Plug like that LET alone 1600 watts through that plastic plug bar..
Again...and again....
I'm fairly convinced that , like many people keep mentioning again and again , corrosion is VERY high up on the list of causes that make differences in 'cable' sound . Barring really poor cable , corrosion at the connector makes a huge difference to the sound.
I made up an interconnect which appeared to sound MUCH better than the one I had earlier. Better all round. Later I happened to do some comparative tests and went through many plugging and unplugging operations. The differences seems to fade away !
However , having said that , cables can be built in a very complex fashion and can give rise to larger reactance than usual and this can interact differently with different load impedances. So cable 'could' sound different but not necessarily 'better'. But some might like the differences and ' consider it better '!
Additionally a 'good' cable in one system might not sound as good in another system. If there truly was a ' best' cable in the market for all systems , by now we would have had only one brand of cable .
Cheers.
I'm fairly convinced that , like many people keep mentioning again and again , corrosion is VERY high up on the list of causes that make differences in 'cable' sound . Barring really poor cable , corrosion at the connector makes a huge difference to the sound.
I made up an interconnect which appeared to sound MUCH better than the one I had earlier. Better all round. Later I happened to do some comparative tests and went through many plugging and unplugging operations. The differences seems to fade away !
However , having said that , cables can be built in a very complex fashion and can give rise to larger reactance than usual and this can interact differently with different load impedances. So cable 'could' sound different but not necessarily 'better'. But some might like the differences and ' consider it better '!
Additionally a 'good' cable in one system might not sound as good in another system. If there truly was a ' best' cable in the market for all systems , by now we would have had only one brand of cable .
Cheers.
Ashok has hit on something with the comment on corrosion -- although I would call it oxydation -- but no matter.
As best I can recall from the olden days, the very first audiophile cables came on the market to address this. Prior to that all connectors were nickel plated -- good enough for the most part but as they became tarnished (oxydation?) a certain amount of noise became discernable. This was very especially tue with the cable comming from turntables. The common advise from audio magazine experts was to unplug and replug a few times every month to rub the oxydation off. It worked but was a bother.
Then one day I recall seeing an add for cables with gold plated plugs. No magical claims, just this simple practical realization that gold does not oxydize.
When everone had gold platted plugs and jacks, new properties had to be discovered to justify the price and to get customers to buy yours rather than Brand-"X".
As best I can recall from the olden days, the very first audiophile cables came on the market to address this. Prior to that all connectors were nickel plated -- good enough for the most part but as they became tarnished (oxydation?) a certain amount of noise became discernable. This was very especially tue with the cable comming from turntables. The common advise from audio magazine experts was to unplug and replug a few times every month to rub the oxydation off. It worked but was a bother.
Then one day I recall seeing an add for cables with gold plated plugs. No magical claims, just this simple practical realization that gold does not oxydize.
When everone had gold platted plugs and jacks, new properties had to be discovered to justify the price and to get customers to buy yours rather than Brand-"X".
Phew what a long thread, I have only just stumbled onto it so I have only read a few pages, but Id like to throw in my two bobs worth. I am just a hobbiest and franly know very little compared to many on this thread but I have always felt that the audio cable industry is full of snake oil and deceit, still do but....
A couple of months back after reading lots of sites, including Rod Elliots excellent site I decided to home brew a few cables and see for myself, basically I just wanted tp prove to myself that the cable guys were in fact just a bunch of swindlers. My point here is that I think lots of people want to argue the toss and justify their extravagent expenditure on ICs but when its all said and done ICs are pretty cheap to make so why not try it out.
I have a system that has very high resolution and I found the sound somewhat grainy in the highs. First I experiemnted with home brewed cat 5 speaker cables, this made an obvious improvemnet and all of my freinds and family who heard it A/B'd picked the difference, I kid you not! I have to say the results floored me, I fully expected to hear no change at all.
Then I made some cat 5 based ICs and once again all were able to hear the difference (without knowing which was which). Finally I made an interconnect out of two lenghts of winding wire, one with teflon plumbers tape around it and the other just the lacquer, these were then twisted together and wrapped with aluminium foil, then the whole thing wrapped in a single layer of teflon plumbers tape. It should have exhibit all the desirable characteristics (I think) and best of all it is very cheap. Does it sound better, well actaully I think it does, better highs, but it is a much longer cable, to hook up the speakers driven actively so it is hard to compare until I have the whole system converted to active operation.
The bottom line for me (IMHO) is that cables can and do make a difference if the systems resolution is high enough and the original cables in it a crappy enough, but it is foolish to spend big money to line the pockets of snake oil peddlars when great results can be achieved so easily.
There are far better audio bits to spend money that can't be DIYed like better phono carts and drivers, but cables are a great DIY opportunity.
A couple of months back after reading lots of sites, including Rod Elliots excellent site I decided to home brew a few cables and see for myself, basically I just wanted tp prove to myself that the cable guys were in fact just a bunch of swindlers. My point here is that I think lots of people want to argue the toss and justify their extravagent expenditure on ICs but when its all said and done ICs are pretty cheap to make so why not try it out.
I have a system that has very high resolution and I found the sound somewhat grainy in the highs. First I experiemnted with home brewed cat 5 speaker cables, this made an obvious improvemnet and all of my freinds and family who heard it A/B'd picked the difference, I kid you not! I have to say the results floored me, I fully expected to hear no change at all.
Then I made some cat 5 based ICs and once again all were able to hear the difference (without knowing which was which). Finally I made an interconnect out of two lenghts of winding wire, one with teflon plumbers tape around it and the other just the lacquer, these were then twisted together and wrapped with aluminium foil, then the whole thing wrapped in a single layer of teflon plumbers tape. It should have exhibit all the desirable characteristics (I think) and best of all it is very cheap. Does it sound better, well actaully I think it does, better highs, but it is a much longer cable, to hook up the speakers driven actively so it is hard to compare until I have the whole system converted to active operation.
The bottom line for me (IMHO) is that cables can and do make a difference if the systems resolution is high enough and the original cables in it a crappy enough, but it is foolish to spend big money to line the pockets of snake oil peddlars when great results can be achieved so easily.
There are far better audio bits to spend money that can't be DIYed like better phono carts and drivers, but cables are a great DIY opportunity.
Zero, I wonder why you (or anyone) would begin with the assumption that *all* talk of cables having some audible fingerprint must be deceit or self-delusion? That assumption seems a little grandiose, especially if untested?
Cables, as your experience told you, make a difference. Everything makes a difference. Cables come with inductance, capacitance, molecular boundary effects, dielectric effects, who-knows-what-other effects, etc. These all have some effect on the signal, unless one excepts the laws of physics etc.
My favourite ICs thus far are 4/9s 25AWG silver, cotton covered (low DA), braided, no shield. Not expensive as far as ICs go, and very close to high end Nordost (which by the way use good engineering principles) without the price. Chris Venhaus sells this wire if you're interested.
Cables, as your experience told you, make a difference. Everything makes a difference. Cables come with inductance, capacitance, molecular boundary effects, dielectric effects, who-knows-what-other effects, etc. These all have some effect on the signal, unless one excepts the laws of physics etc.
My favourite ICs thus far are 4/9s 25AWG silver, cotton covered (low DA), braided, no shield. Not expensive as far as ICs go, and very close to high end Nordost (which by the way use good engineering principles) without the price. Chris Venhaus sells this wire if you're interested.
Your experience is not uncommon. A friend and I are both longtime telecom design engineers, and were pretty much expecting cables to not make a difference. However, the work on dielectric absorption had been published so it seemed, in the spirit of openminded investigation to be worth looking into. In my case, the cables initially were store boughten. The expectation was that a difference was unlikely, or if any, small. It was pretty big. In my friend's case, it was a Kimber 4TC speaker cable that I lent him to try with a pair of Dahlquists (?). And in each case, the difference was heard easily by other household members as well.
There is a group, that believes that people hear cable differences only because they expect to... but that is often contrary to what actually happens. So, to maintain their belief in the face of such reports, they have to call those who report such experiences as .... well, look at the thread title.
Cables are an excellent DIY project; there are many recipes available, and design theory information can be found. The most expensive items, the connectors, are recyclable. For interconnects, low capacitance, and low dielectric absorption, seem to be common ingredients in successful designs.
There is a group, that believes that people hear cable differences only because they expect to... but that is often contrary to what actually happens. So, to maintain their belief in the face of such reports, they have to call those who report such experiences as .... well, look at the thread title.
Cables are an excellent DIY project; there are many recipes available, and design theory information can be found. The most expensive items, the connectors, are recyclable. For interconnects, low capacitance, and low dielectric absorption, seem to be common ingredients in successful designs.
I thought this had been done to death.
Yes, interconnects make a difference. A semi-balanced interconnect has higher capacitance than a coax-type interconnect. A semi-balanced cable attenuates the high frequencies. The HMS Gran Finale (that's its name) interconnect comes with a box that has a potentiometer so you can attenuate the signal to fit your taste. A paralleled resistor between hot and cold does the same thing. Cover the tweeter on your speakers and hear the difference. Same thing.
In the old days we used bass and treble controls. But since tone controls are a big no-no in high-price audio, modern high-price amps sound like s***. So people buy high-price tone controls in the shape of interconnects instead. With the right interconnects, you can get that $20,000 amp to sound just as good as that $200 NAD. Of course, that $200 NAD will sound just as good as that $20,000 with any cheapo coax-type cable. No need to attenuate the signal.
I have knocked Linn here. But being that I'm never less than fair, I have to give Linn credit in one regard. Since Linn amps come with tone controls, they should not suck like the average high-price amps do. They should be at least as good as NAD. Having that said, I still think Linn is a crocked company that takes advantage of ignorant people. Ivor Tiefenbrun is the P.T. Barnum of audio: "There's a sucker born every minute."
The biggest problem, though, is the audio writers. But I didn’t realize how bad it was until I read
this by Srajan Ebaen at 6moons:
This alleged audio reviewer doesn't even know that audio is AC! 😕 Since I know audio signals are AC, I don't believe in directional cables. But that's beside the point.
Yes, interconnects make a difference. A semi-balanced interconnect has higher capacitance than a coax-type interconnect. A semi-balanced cable attenuates the high frequencies. The HMS Gran Finale (that's its name) interconnect comes with a box that has a potentiometer so you can attenuate the signal to fit your taste. A paralleled resistor between hot and cold does the same thing. Cover the tweeter on your speakers and hear the difference. Same thing.
In the old days we used bass and treble controls. But since tone controls are a big no-no in high-price audio, modern high-price amps sound like s***. So people buy high-price tone controls in the shape of interconnects instead. With the right interconnects, you can get that $20,000 amp to sound just as good as that $200 NAD. Of course, that $200 NAD will sound just as good as that $20,000 with any cheapo coax-type cable. No need to attenuate the signal.
I have knocked Linn here. But being that I'm never less than fair, I have to give Linn credit in one regard. Since Linn amps come with tone controls, they should not suck like the average high-price amps do. They should be at least as good as NAD. Having that said, I still think Linn is a crocked company that takes advantage of ignorant people. Ivor Tiefenbrun is the P.T. Barnum of audio: "There's a sucker born every minute."
The biggest problem, though, is the audio writers. But I didn’t realize how bad it was until I read
this by Srajan Ebaen at 6moons:
This alleged audio reviewer doesn't even know that audio is AC! 😕 Since I know audio signals are AC, I don't believe in directional cables. But that's beside the point.
phn said:
I'd be interested in seeing that demonstrated. Most modern sources (preamp included) have a Zout below 1000 ohms. Are you saying all pseudo balanced cables terminate these sources sufficiently to cause (let's set an arbitrary metric) more than 1/2 dB loss at 20 kHz?
It was quite a long time ago but when I built a passive control unit using 10 kohm wire wounds I tested the HF response with an Audio Precision into 6 feet of Canare quad wind, a 'double balanced' with very high capacitance indeed. The response was down 1 dB in the 60 kHz range with the pot set for maximum Zout, about 2.5 kohms.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.