DF96,
Fanboy... I think you might be on to something here. Let's face it, John Curl is a legend and a circuit rock star.
Could jealousy be to blame for the ridicule he gets around here?
Fanboy... I think you might be on to something here. Let's face it, John Curl is a legend and a circuit rock star.
Could jealousy be to blame for the ridicule he gets around here?
Show us where "many around here" have called such people stupid. Evidence? We believe they are mistaken, or perhaps ignorant about electronics, but the "stupid" word seems more often used by those who object to having their beliefs challenged.ridikas said:
Of course, in some cases there are differences, but these are usually due to known engineering principles such as silly DIY cables with no shield or wrong capacitor values.
The people most easily fooled are those who believe themselves to be above such things.Tournesol said:
You may be confusing ridicule with fear.
Hi Tryphon,
Out of band signals (or noise if you'd rather define them that way) can have a huge effect on circuit operation. How the circuit deals with this unwanted energy does affect the inband signals that you want. It's all important if you want to be a successful designer.
Hi Richard,
You know where I have learned a lot about design? Working on test equipment, HP / Agilent / Keysight to be specific. Tektronix also. These designs go to great lengths to control environmental and self-generated noise. Taking the time to examine the build while you ask yourself "why did they do that?" can teach you a lot.
-Chris
Anything but!
Out of band signals (or noise if you'd rather define them that way) can have a huge effect on circuit operation. How the circuit deals with this unwanted energy does affect the inband signals that you want. It's all important if you want to be a successful designer.
Hi Richard,
You won't find me arguing that point with you. It comes down to the overall design of the equipment.
You know where I have learned a lot about design? Working on test equipment, HP / Agilent / Keysight to be specific. Tektronix also. These designs go to great lengths to control environmental and self-generated noise. Taking the time to examine the build while you ask yourself "why did they do that?" can teach you a lot.
-Chris
Show us where the "idiot" word has been used! Why are people so touchy when their beliefs are challenged?ridikas said:
He doesn't get ridiculed. His daft ideas get ridiculed. There is a difference. If you cannot see the difference then internet forums may not be the best pasttime for you.
DF96, it doesn't have to be the actual word stupid, but it's all the same. If someone around here claims to listen (imagine that on an audio forum) and hear a difference that cannot be measured on a $85 Tektronix, they are immediately ridiculed and receive condescending responses.
The problem with cables is that depend a lot of the configuration (impedances and currents)/environnement(RF etc.).
But it is enough to figure out some characteristics that ensure quality. Most of them can be figured by simple observation. Mono or multiple strand, quality of shielding, twisted pairs or not, HF impedance etc.
What surprize-me is that most of the "audiophile" cables, sold in the market at an incredible price do not succeed at this simple examination ;-)
Of course, all the people that can figure out a difference are zanies ?
Are-we all obliged to spend months of studies to justify what we found as working ? We are not writing books on trivial subjects.
I expect from a forum all the tricks that people can share. Their particular experiences. I don't ask for justifications, and i consider myself as clever enough to figure out what interest-me or not.
Last edited:
Hi Ridikas,
In truth, the twisted pair is a balanced line without any reference to ground. Each end is terminated in a transformer in it's proper application. So, to use a twisted pair for reduced noise, you must drive it balanced without any common "ground" connection. I suspect that this revelation isn't even being implemented properly.
Have some respect for everyone else who trained in electronics and physics and then added decades of experience to that knowledge. I don't know what your background is, but it would seem that it doesn't have anything to do with sciences in general or electronics in particular.
-Chris
Oh please! Sending signals down wire has been exhaustively studied, and proper techniques were developed ages ago.
CAT-5 doesn't work anymore? I guess they went to CAT-6 because it is less flexible and even harder to work with. That seems to determine audiophiles level of confidence in anything. If it is difficult to work with, it must be superior!
In truth, the twisted pair is a balanced line without any reference to ground. Each end is terminated in a transformer in it's proper application. So, to use a twisted pair for reduced noise, you must drive it balanced without any common "ground" connection. I suspect that this revelation isn't even being implemented properly.
You're kidding - right? You must be playing an April fools joke on us.
He is good at what he does, as are many others that you are responding to in a dismissive way.
Absolutely not! The messages he puts forward are sometimes debated, but it is the idea and not the man that is usually under scrutiny here. Look more closely at the exchanges along with the previous posts on the subject. In almost every case, an idea that has been pushed has no evidence or proof of any kind and the expectation is that the idea is accepted on blind faith. That doesn't work very well amongst John's contemporaries here. Anything that depends on the suspension of the laws of physics won't fly here. Of course, if you are not well versed in scientific principle and how the universe works, you could easily believe some pretty impossible things. "It could happen" isn't going to wash either.
Have some respect for everyone else who trained in electronics and physics and then added decades of experience to that knowledge. I don't know what your background is, but it would seem that it doesn't have anything to do with sciences in general or electronics in particular.
-Chris
Anatech,
I'm playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here to make certain points and get a conversation goin, but I think that's fair. Obviously I'm not going to share my credentials with you, but I think you would be strongly surprised.
However, your post is a perfect example of a condescending response to someone who doesn't fit your narrative.
I'm playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here to make certain points and get a conversation goin, but I think that's fair. Obviously I'm not going to share my credentials with you, but I think you would be strongly surprised.
However, your post is a perfect example of a condescending response to someone who doesn't fit your narrative.
Last edited:
I feel, since there are question marks, it would be polite of me to respond. If they are serious questions I'm struggling to know exactly what they are. If however they are rhetorical, which is what I suspect, there is no need to elaborate.
You mean "trolling"? As in, making spurious claims and using inflammatory language in order to get a response in a topic area where you lack expertise or credibility.
No, it wasn't, it was a reasonable response to hyperbole.
Cat-5 works ok enough, yes. But where do-you see it is harder to work with cat-6 ? Exactly the same.
It appears that they have a better double screen, with each pair individually shielded, and that rigidity is a benefit (change of capacitance under signal due to vibrating effects). This said, i will not bet I'm able to figure out an audible difference between the two.
And i believe you know how to cable them in answer to your remark about "twisted".
BTW: Some (including-me) can consider "Audiophile" as a kind of soft insult.
I spend my time to listen to music when i'm not in a design process. Not to listen to my "system".
They usually haven't tried or don't care to even try any measurement and when they admit they can only tell by looking what are we to think? In any case a scope is a poor choice of instrument, a good soundcard and software can do much better for audio.
People have looked at cables with $50k VNAs, spectrum analyzers, etc. Stuff good enough for applications far more demanding than audio.
What is an "$85 dollar Tektronix" anyway? They make tons of equipment, only some are oscilloscopes, and none cost 85 dollars. You should educate yourself before you accuse.
ridikas,
One thing I had hoped you would pick up on is that you haven't treated anyone with respect, save John. I was attempting to remind you that you are posting among a group of highly skilled individuals. You really ought to back down a little and recognise the high level of talent around you.
BTW, I've never bought a 'scope for $80 or less since my first one that was $40. A few hundred kilohertz, single trace Stark from the Canadian government in the very early 70's, or maybe that was in '68 or '69. That is probably over the $80 mark in today's dollars. And yes, as Scott said, an oscilloscope isn't the best instrument for audio investigations. A sound card works, but mine was well above $80. I actually have a recent acquisition expressly designed for audio work. That being the RTX 6001 that was featured in a group buy last year. I also have other equipment that is useful in studying audio circuitry, used in combination was powerful in seeing what was there.
Do you know anything about test equipment? Just curious, given your $80 'scope comment. Would you be familiar with what the average avid hobbyist uses?
-Chris 😉
This was only a statement, I have no idea what your background is. It isn't really important to know. As for me, I'm a pretty well known quantity should anyone care to look. I don't have to hide or be secretive.
Okay. Whatever you say. I think you missed the message entirely, which isn't surprising looking at your recent post history in this thread.
One thing I had hoped you would pick up on is that you haven't treated anyone with respect, save John. I was attempting to remind you that you are posting among a group of highly skilled individuals. You really ought to back down a little and recognise the high level of talent around you.
BTW, I've never bought a 'scope for $80 or less since my first one that was $40. A few hundred kilohertz, single trace Stark from the Canadian government in the very early 70's, or maybe that was in '68 or '69. That is probably over the $80 mark in today's dollars. And yes, as Scott said, an oscilloscope isn't the best instrument for audio investigations. A sound card works, but mine was well above $80. I actually have a recent acquisition expressly designed for audio work. That being the RTX 6001 that was featured in a group buy last year. I also have other equipment that is useful in studying audio circuitry, used in combination was powerful in seeing what was there.
Do you know anything about test equipment? Just curious, given your $80 'scope comment. Would you be familiar with what the average avid hobbyist uses?
-Chris 😉
Hi Tryphon,
The insulation used in the CAT-5 and 6 cables has a low "K" value which renders the cable a low-loss type due to the low capacitance. The cables are fine as long as you don't violate the minimum bend radius. The end result is that these cables are fairly easy to use without damaging them. If you look at audio frequencies, I'll bet you could do nasty things with the wire before affecting the performance at those frequencies.
Like you, I'm busy doing things while my system is playing, yet I can still enjoy it along with the rest of the family. When I'm designing or figuring out a problem, I ignore the system.
-Chris
Given that I spent a few years installing and terminating those cables, and CAT-3 as well, I'm in a pretty good position to know. At audio frequencies, the path taken by each of the four twisted pairs isn't nearly as important as gigabit speed ethernet. Anyway, CAT-6 has a stiff plastic form running down the centre of the cable. It's a pain to work with by comparison with CAT-5.
No insult intended. How else should I identify people interested in audio that may not work in the field as their primary occupation?
The insulation used in the CAT-5 and 6 cables has a low "K" value which renders the cable a low-loss type due to the low capacitance. The cables are fine as long as you don't violate the minimum bend radius. The end result is that these cables are fairly easy to use without damaging them. If you look at audio frequencies, I'll bet you could do nasty things with the wire before affecting the performance at those frequencies.
Like you, I'm busy doing things while my system is playing, yet I can still enjoy it along with the rest of the family. When I'm designing or figuring out a problem, I ignore the system.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.