john curl said:
And how exactly is calling people "pitchforking wielding villagers" NOT provokative ?
Please John, if you had a reputation you are doing a fine job of destroying it. These kind of replies do you no favours and look like you are trying to provoke people by being confrontational yourself.
Strange that you are doing exactly what you are condeming others for. Perhaps a step back and look at your own posts, imaginging thay had come from elsewhere, might help you see this.
Joshua_G said:
Frankly yes. You can't separate science and philosophy. If you don't accept another's idea of what knowledge is and how you attain it that's fine.
BTW taking a cable out of the system you can no longer measure its effect in the system.
Let me just make this statement:
Over the years, I have spent thousands of extra dollars on TRYING to measure what my associates and I hear in sound differences between cables. I bought a TDR to measure the characteristic impedance of cables and an fft based analyzer ($27,000 new, $2500 in like new condition) to better process my 'imaginary' wire distortion just for wire measurements. I already had a quality HP3580 spectrum analyzer, and an fft based analyzer on my Apple computer. I purchased hundreds of dollars in textbooks that had specific knowledge of factors concerning wire properties, such as:
'Engineering Electromagnetics', Hayt
'Principles of Electrodynamics', Matveyev
'Principles of Electricity and Electromagnetism', Harnwell
'Theory of Electromagnetic Wave Propagation', Papas
And these are just some of the more obscure references that I bought purposely to better understand 'skin effect', etc, in wires.
In other words, I have put my money where my interest is. That is to find out why some cables sound different from each other.
Have I failed? Not entirely. Have I found the complete answer? Certainly not. However, I still hear differences between some cables and even in different connecting wire. That is MY reality, and I am willing to live with it.
Over the years, I have spent thousands of extra dollars on TRYING to measure what my associates and I hear in sound differences between cables. I bought a TDR to measure the characteristic impedance of cables and an fft based analyzer ($27,000 new, $2500 in like new condition) to better process my 'imaginary' wire distortion just for wire measurements. I already had a quality HP3580 spectrum analyzer, and an fft based analyzer on my Apple computer. I purchased hundreds of dollars in textbooks that had specific knowledge of factors concerning wire properties, such as:
'Engineering Electromagnetics', Hayt
'Principles of Electrodynamics', Matveyev
'Principles of Electricity and Electromagnetism', Harnwell
'Theory of Electromagnetic Wave Propagation', Papas
And these are just some of the more obscure references that I bought purposely to better understand 'skin effect', etc, in wires.
In other words, I have put my money where my interest is. That is to find out why some cables sound different from each other.
Have I failed? Not entirely. Have I found the complete answer? Certainly not. However, I still hear differences between some cables and even in different connecting wire. That is MY reality, and I am willing to live with it.
John: there's a few more that would be extremely helpful, assuming you have an open mind and want to understand the issue beyond a predetermined conclusion.
An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing, 5th Edition,
by Brian Moore
Intelligent Sensory Evaluation: Methodologies and Applications, by Da Ruan and Xianyi Zeng (eds)
Sensory Evaluation Practices, Third Edition, by Herbert Stone and Joel L. Sidel
And of course:
Flim Flam! by James Randi
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, Charles MacKay
An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing, 5th Edition,
by Brian Moore
Intelligent Sensory Evaluation: Methodologies and Applications, by Da Ruan and Xianyi Zeng (eds)
Sensory Evaluation Practices, Third Edition, by Herbert Stone and Joel L. Sidel
And of course:
Flim Flam! by James Randi
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, Charles MacKay
The Flim-flam artist is James Randi. This has been proven more than once. Don't bring his garbage here.
Even the most rigorous proofs used in medical testing and the associated statistical functions are not good enough to pass the bar in Randi's 'testing' procedures. This is a known fact. The man and his association are are a psychotic joke. Even his most ardent supporters began to leave him when these simple truths were exposed.
Even the most rigorous proofs used in medical testing and the associated statistical functions are not good enough to pass the bar in Randi's 'testing' procedures. This is a known fact. The man and his association are are a psychotic joke. Even his most ardent supporters began to leave him when these simple truths were exposed.
Let me say it with a picture...
Here is a quick comparison of one example. I compared my zip cord to 6' of #30 wire (as recommended somewhere). This is not a fastidious test but I was careful to play the same 1 min of white noise from a Sony test CD through one Sequerra MET7 and a good but not B&K mic. I was very careful to keep everything exactly the same except for the wire. I averaged a full min of 1k FFT's for both. The speaker measured 4.8 Ohms DC and the wire 1 Ohm for casual science I would say 1.6dB loss at the low end and who knows elsewhere. This was nearfield so I guess there was a big crossover dip (I'm not a speaker guy).
The picture agrees (red is #30) roughly, so I agree you certainly can hear the difference.
John, I don't know what all that gear is for, if you don't test wire in situ I don't think it is a very productive endeavour.
Here is a quick comparison of one example. I compared my zip cord to 6' of #30 wire (as recommended somewhere). This is not a fastidious test but I was careful to play the same 1 min of white noise from a Sony test CD through one Sequerra MET7 and a good but not B&K mic. I was very careful to keep everything exactly the same except for the wire. I averaged a full min of 1k FFT's for both. The speaker measured 4.8 Ohms DC and the wire 1 Ohm for casual science I would say 1.6dB loss at the low end and who knows elsewhere. This was nearfield so I guess there was a big crossover dip (I'm not a speaker guy).
The picture agrees (red is #30) roughly, so I agree you certainly can hear the difference.
John, I don't know what all that gear is for, if you don't test wire in situ I don't think it is a very productive endeavour.
Attachments
and:
Sagan, Carl:
The Demon-Haunted World / Science As A Candle In The Dark
(aka The Dragon In My Garage)
Sagan, Carl:
The Demon-Haunted World / Science As A Candle In The Dark
(aka The Dragon In My Garage)
... and some insights why some people shy away from the 'scientific method':
The unnatural nature of science
Jan Didden
The unnatural nature of science
Jan Didden
Re: Let me say it with a picture...
Hi Scott,
I did a similar thing here more than a year ago, but in my case it was to demonstrate the sonic differences (or lack there of) between different speaker enclosure building materials. My results were called "inconclusive" as they didn't show the information that may or may not be present 40-50db down. Not having the CSD plots for the measurements was a strike against also.
Moral: In the face of all accurate presented data, there will always be an "out", a way to discredit your findings.
scott wurcer said:
Hi Scott,
I did a similar thing here more than a year ago, but in my case it was to demonstrate the sonic differences (or lack there of) between different speaker enclosure building materials. My results were called "inconclusive" as they didn't show the information that may or may not be present 40-50db down. Not having the CSD plots for the measurements was a strike against also.
Moral: In the face of all accurate presented data, there will always be an "out", a way to discredit your findings.
Re: Re: Let me say it with a picture...
I was really trying to show the obvious, put 1 Ohm of resistance in series with a 4-8 Ohm speaker and you probably get some of that "valve" sound i.e. someone will prefer the #30 wire. We are not 50dB down in effect here. Yes some will say 1.5 dB down over 5 octaves is not the difference they hear. The big question is if the forum software will break at 1,000,000 reads of this thread.
Also I think in general the skin effect stuff and chasing -106dB vs. -130dB 7ths are witchhunts.
MJL21193 said:
I was really trying to show the obvious, put 1 Ohm of resistance in series with a 4-8 Ohm speaker and you probably get some of that "valve" sound i.e. someone will prefer the #30 wire. We are not 50dB down in effect here. Yes some will say 1.5 dB down over 5 octaves is not the difference they hear. The big question is if the forum software will break at 1,000,000 reads of this thread.
Also I think in general the skin effect stuff and chasing -106dB vs. -130dB 7ths are witchhunts.
It is also interesting to note that, under transient load, the micro-stability and level of dielectric constant in a given material will move toward zero. Some are more stable than others, but all materials will exhibit this. The trick is to show it via the right materials and the right loading. But it does happen. Since this is AC analysis combined with DC in the world of audio, and maintaining transient information 'positional' value is critical: This means that across the entire 'audio bandwidth' (which includes the skin effect 'translation/transition' region-in spades) and loading scenarios in given associated materials become a factor that can be heard by the ear - this of course, being the complex level and temporally sensitive harmonic analysis device that it (the ear-brain) is.
What this means is that the voltage field interactive (with materials and proximity) is far more critical than most give it credit for being.
As they say, the correct formulation of a given question will inherently contain the answer. Which is why someone who relies on their knowledge to put food on the table can be reluctant to even help formulate or shape a question. Only common sense.
Since all materials have a complex LCR and we impose complex loading..well.... what do you think? In the end..load variations cause, on their own..load variations. There is a non-linear resonant elastic in the system. More than one of them.
What this means is that the voltage field interactive (with materials and proximity) is far more critical than most give it credit for being.
As they say, the correct formulation of a given question will inherently contain the answer. Which is why someone who relies on their knowledge to put food on the table can be reluctant to even help formulate or shape a question. Only common sense.
Since all materials have a complex LCR and we impose complex loading..well.... what do you think? In the end..load variations cause, on their own..load variations. There is a non-linear resonant elastic in the system. More than one of them.
scott wurcer said:
First, I agree that taking a cable out of the system you can no longer measure its effect in the system.
Second, I'm not ignoring anything, not science, not philosophy and not psychology.
My interest in cables is only how they may impact the overall sound of my system.
I select cable by how they impact the sound of my system. Indeed, my way of selecting cables isn't scientific, however, it serves my aim most effectively.
It may well be that those cables I prefer would measure differently from other cables. I don't know and I don't really care, for my only aim is their impact on sound.
As for the possibility that cables sound the way thy do in my system due to some faults in the setup.
Theoretically, it is possible.
All who saw and heard my setup know that this isn't the case.
If you say that I cannot possibly select cables properly to my system without making scientific measurements of the cables – I don’t agree here.
Re: Re: Re: Let me say it with a picture...
I thought you were showing the obvious similarity, the lack of difference. The 1 ohm resistance increase may not have been responsible for the deviation. When you say near field, how close did you position the mic? Judging by the null, you were far enough out to get some room effect. What was your position in the room?
Run the test again, but don't add the resistor this time and look at the results. Are they exactly the same?
Position the mic closer and run the test again.
scott wurcer said:
I thought you were showing the obvious similarity, the lack of difference. The 1 ohm resistance increase may not have been responsible for the deviation. When you say near field, how close did you position the mic? Judging by the null, you were far enough out to get some room effect. What was your position in the room?
Run the test again, but don't add the resistor this time and look at the results. Are they exactly the same?
Position the mic closer and run the test again.
Joshua_G said:
That would depend on you defining "properly". You may select the cables subjectively, and that may be proper to you. You may prefer their sound even if measurement showed them to be failing to correctly reproduce the original sound and degrade the signal.
That is your choice, but I prefer to take the best measured articles and select from them. This generally helps my hearing system to learn what is better.
The alternative is to take what sounds "best" and try to replicate it. This reminds me of many years ago (circas 1973) when a number of friends told me that AM radio sounded better than FM but what they probably meant was they preferred the pop music played on radio 1 (AM then) to classical radio 3 !!
I do not understand why even very reputable engineers try to use the most primitive reasoning to explain audible differences.
Re: Let me say it with a picture...
Scott, that is quite interesting, I would have liked to see the comparison done with some more serious cable also. That said, you have measured the difference in peak response only, many of the differences is in low level detail and soundstage focus also, not sure how to measure that.
scott wurcer said:
Scott, that is quite interesting, I would have liked to see the comparison done with some more serious cable also. That said, you have measured the difference in peak response only, many of the differences is in low level detail and soundstage focus also, not sure how to measure that.
alansawyer said:
I select cables subjectively – for that all I'm interested in here is the way my system sounds to me.
However, I select cables (and most other components) by blind tests, to avaoid psychological effects.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.