PMA said:
And somehow transformers and preamps are mutually exclusive?
That's funny. I thought the circuit I'd posted previously was a preamp. You put a signal in, you get a bigger signal out before feeding it to the power amplifier. That seems to fit the description of a preamp to me.
Perhaps you'd care to share what your definition of a preamp is.
se
john curl said:
Electromigration is well documented, IBM spent millions on the issue in the 60's. However, these require significant current densities or extremely long periods of time. Googling "electromigration TEM video" should net you some nice video footage of moving dislocations.
I've recommended this text in other threads, but I seriously recommend anyone in audio read Ragnar Holm's "Electric Contacts". I'm still fascinated by the insight in this book, fifty years after it was published. As a bonus, its written well enough that you could skip the math and still understand what he's trying to say.
Edmond Stuart said:
Edmond!!!
You are right. I didn't think far enough.
Maybe there is a big market out there, for me and/or PMA and/or John Curl:
ABX switch test boxes, with directionally correct wires
Of course even if the box is not EVERY Time oriented north-south ( alternatively east-west )
any result can be claimed as False.
( We live within the magnetic field from Earth Poles. Why compass works! )
Lineup, the scientist
---------------
Web References:
ABX Double Blind Comparator Results
http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_data.htm
shallbehealed said:
Yes. John has offered up the same videos several times over the years as a possible explanation for the "break-in" phenomenon of wire and cables.
It's been explained to him that these videos are of thin films with as you say very high current densities and that the same thing is not occurring in bulk materials (i.e. audio cables) at current densities orders of magnitude less.
se
Will those that cannot design and build equipment good enough to hear cable, design and component differences, please stop annoying those who can, perhaps you will learn something.
PMA said:
I offered up the idea of using transformers for providing the voltage gain in a preamp, using active devices only for unity gain buffering. The result being very good sound.
se
Steve Eddy said:
The issues of depletion zones, as is the case in interconnects, is strictly a thin film process due to the presence of a heatsinking substrate. However, the force formula due to the electron wind is still in effect and cannot be discounted in bulk materials. Additionally any Joule heating will cause exponential increase in the diffusion coefficient.
However, in the case of audio cables, there shouldn't be any appreciable DC electron flux, thus there would be no net electron wind.
I really think the next "no holds barred" system will require barium cuprate ICs, on die masking (at which mr. se might have a bit of experience) and LN2. Nothing says over the top like a superconducting audio system. No leads, no solder (high pressure pressed silver contacts will prevent breathing)...
For that I might see someone paying $40,000.
Andre Visser said:
You can easily shut them up by simply demonstrating that you can, based on sound alone.
se
This is quite impossible on internet forum, which is the case. When there is a direct comparison, 5532 lovers shut up very quickly.
BTW, after our Saturday listening session I got a PO from the guy who was the owner of the demonstrational preamp, which was based on 627s.
inventions
In this thread? Not that much, only a few remarks how to measure or simulate PIM in a much more reliable way than you do.
However, in other threads, more than anybody else on this forum. To name a few: TMC, CMCL and EC-OPS variants.
Anyhow, what's the problem? This thread is just a pub, a perfect place for making jokes. 😀
BTW, I don't care if you were rude, I'm living in Amsterdam, you know, not in the US.
PMA said:
In this thread? Not that much, only a few remarks how to measure or simulate PIM in a much more reliable way than you do.
However, in other threads, more than anybody else on this forum. To name a few: TMC, CMCL and EC-OPS variants.
Anyhow, what's the problem? This thread is just a pub, a perfect place for making jokes. 😀
BTW, I don't care if you were rude, I'm living in Amsterdam, you know, not in the US.
PMA said:
Unless I'm misunderstanding what your context is here, I don't see it as being impossible.
Several years ago some of us had worked out a way to do double blind testing of cables for directionality which could be done remotely. The listeners were to be fdegrove and mrfeedback.
Before doing the actual test with the test cables, we'd sent sample wire and cables to them (fdegrove just wanted the wire, and mrfeedback wanted cable) to make sure they were confident they could perceive directionality.
fdegrove said he couldn't perceive any directionality in the wires he was sent and mrfeedback, who was the most boastful in his claims, dropped out of sight right after receiving his cable and hasn't been heard from since.
se
shallbehealed said:
Yes, and the relevant context here is audio cables.
Why go through all that trouble? Just get one of my Audiophile Pricetags
😀
se
For the record, ABX testing doesn't work for audio, and I first pointed this out 29 years ago in print. Why waste our time with this? If it did work, we would do it. Does the ABX company still exist? If not, why not? Could it be that people got tired of NOT hearing anything, so they pulled out the box, and the differences reappeared as if by magic? Please, everyone, get real. We know where the bear sits, even if you don't.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.