Re: Re: Power cord replacement
So you've tried out those quoted below in true double blind tests?
cheap-Jack said:
So you've tried out those quoted below in true double blind tests?
cheap-Jack said:
I don't think so.
Hi.
(1) So you take from yr wife's random listening than yr own ears?
I won't want anybody to decide for my music even it is a musician.
(2) A TT does not take more power to start up the motor to move the inertia of the heavy platter. It will draw constant current from the mains after the speed is developed to the rated level with the tone arm & LP on it.
(2) A cord get very very little DC resistance, but relatively substantial capacitance due to shielding & inductance due to 2 conductors running parallel. Nite & day from a resistor, bud.
May I suggest you to read more about wire & cable theories before you comment.
c-J
PS: my elder son is a verteran classical pianist whom I seek his music enlighenment. I decide it sounds good or not.
Brett said:
Hi.
(1) So you take from yr wife's random listening than yr own ears?
I won't want anybody to decide for my music even it is a musician.
(2) A TT does not take more power to start up the motor to move the inertia of the heavy platter. It will draw constant current from the mains after the speed is developed to the rated level with the tone arm & LP on it.
(2) A cord get very very little DC resistance, but relatively substantial capacitance due to shielding & inductance due to 2 conductors running parallel. Nite & day from a resistor, bud.
May I suggest you to read more about wire & cable theories before you comment.
c-J
PS: my elder son is a verteran classical pianist whom I seek his music enlighenment. I decide it sounds good or not.
lol! I'm with John P and Brett
I cannot see how a power cord can substantively affect the sound of a turntable. The ONLY powered component of the TT is the motor. HTF is a change of cord going to affect the sound generated by the cartridge (short of the cord being such crap that it introduces variations into the speed of the motor)?
If ever there was proof that the results are psycho-acoustic, thats it.
Having said that, big ups to Panicos for putting it out there. Even if i think his results are invalid, he has at least advanced the cause.
I cannot see how a power cord can substantively affect the sound of a turntable. The ONLY powered component of the TT is the motor. HTF is a change of cord going to affect the sound generated by the cartridge (short of the cord being such crap that it introduces variations into the speed of the motor)?
If ever there was proof that the results are psycho-acoustic, thats it.
Having said that, big ups to Panicos for putting it out there. Even if i think his results are invalid, he has at least advanced the cause.
Re: Re: Re: Power cord replacement
Hi.
You belive in DBTs? I don't due to such tests being practically impossible to carry out right.
There is my insight about DBTs. Let's talk about this latter.
May I suggest you to go to Cable Asylum & Propeller Head Plaza of the Audio Asylum where DBTs are heated topics there. You'll learn about it. Also make a search on under same user's name for my posts there.
c-J
Evenharmonics said:
Hi.
You belive in DBTs? I don't due to such tests being practically impossible to carry out right.
There is my insight about DBTs. Let's talk about this latter.
May I suggest you to go to Cable Asylum & Propeller Head Plaza of the Audio Asylum where DBTs are heated topics there. You'll learn about it. Also make a search on under same user's name for my posts there.
c-J
The motor and speed controller of the turntable are in the sound path? next you'll be telling us the food processor in your kitchen is also in the sound path since it is connected to the same power system as the turntable. Yup, completely hilarious.
annnnny hooo
I vote panicos' trial invalid since he failed to carry out the obligitory three-month burn in period on the newly introduced components. I also suspect the cables had not been correctly cryogenically treated.
Both of these very important stages will ensure that surblime and light highs, tremendous and resonant lows and jaw-dropping mid range clarity that faithfully reproduce the crystal tones of (insert name of favoured diva here) are allowed to shine through.
😉
I vote panicos' trial invalid since he failed to carry out the obligitory three-month burn in period on the newly introduced components. I also suspect the cables had not been correctly cryogenically treated.
Both of these very important stages will ensure that surblime and light highs, tremendous and resonant lows and jaw-dropping mid range clarity that faithfully reproduce the crystal tones of (insert name of favoured diva here) are allowed to shine through.
😉
Think again before you comment.
HI.
The phono cartridge tracking the music grooves on the LP spinning on TT driven by the active motor drive is the very delicate source of the signal path.
Like it or not, any misfunctioning of the motor drive can affect the sound.
Let me give another example of how a motor drive can affect sound. Decades ago, when direct dirven TT was first invented & attracted many audiophiles to swap over their belt-driven TTs due to the near perfect wow-&-flutter data vs belt-driven TTs.
But after intensive listening, those audiophiles all complained about the sound from those DD TTs being 'dead & untasty' & the music quality was gone.
Guess why & how?
c-J
PS: I am still enjoying my music big bigtime from my vintage belt-driven Thorens TT. with speed servo control too. No complain at all.
kuroguy said:
HI.
The phono cartridge tracking the music grooves on the LP spinning on TT driven by the active motor drive is the very delicate source of the signal path.
Like it or not, any misfunctioning of the motor drive can affect the sound.
Let me give another example of how a motor drive can affect sound. Decades ago, when direct dirven TT was first invented & attracted many audiophiles to swap over their belt-driven TTs due to the near perfect wow-&-flutter data vs belt-driven TTs.
But after intensive listening, those audiophiles all complained about the sound from those DD TTs being 'dead & untasty' & the music quality was gone.
Guess why & how?
c-J
PS: I am still enjoying my music big bigtime from my vintage belt-driven Thorens TT. with speed servo control too. No complain at all.
Re: annnnny hooo
aardvarkash10 said:I vote panicos' trial invalid since he failed to carry out the obligitory three-month burn in period on the newly introduced components. I also suspect the cables had not been correctly cryogenically treated.
With 38 celcius nothing can benefit from cryogenic treatment here
Re: Think again before you comment.
Any misfunctioning? So exactly what misfunctioning do you anticipate (or can you show) in a standard tt using a standard cable?
as for the DDTT issue, claims of "dead" sound are just that - claims. A bunch of circle jerks making proclaimations of doom is not unusual in the industry. They have as much credence as those who claim that a particular model of playstation is the ultimate digital playback device.
Self delusion and self interest often run hand-in-hand and are evidenced by the presentation of opinion as fact. This explains why noisey, rumbly, inaccurate idler drive tt's still have a faithful following (self included he blushes shamefully).
While there MAY be a sonic difference between two turntables, assuming both have the same verified technical specs, it is more likely to be differences in platter, arm and base componentry introducing resonances and harmonics. At typical running loads around the 10watts, a piece of damp string could act as the conductor path for mains supply to the tt motor and not leave a "sonic footprint"...
cheap-Jack said:
Any misfunctioning? So exactly what misfunctioning do you anticipate (or can you show) in a standard tt using a standard cable?
as for the DDTT issue, claims of "dead" sound are just that - claims. A bunch of circle jerks making proclaimations of doom is not unusual in the industry. They have as much credence as those who claim that a particular model of playstation is the ultimate digital playback device.
Self delusion and self interest often run hand-in-hand and are evidenced by the presentation of opinion as fact. This explains why noisey, rumbly, inaccurate idler drive tt's still have a faithful following (self included he blushes shamefully).
While there MAY be a sonic difference between two turntables, assuming both have the same verified technical specs, it is more likely to be differences in platter, arm and base componentry introducing resonances and harmonics. At typical running loads around the 10watts, a piece of damp string could act as the conductor path for mains supply to the tt motor and not leave a "sonic footprint"...
hiya panacos
the "success" rate alone raises questions. Without impuning your expertise, I find it hard to believe that three audiophiles could agree on what coffee to have, let alone the virtues or otherwise of any particular sound.
It is not good "science" to have three people who know each other set up the experiment, carry out the experiment, and participate in the experiment.
A bunch of other reasons have been advanced by others regarding the methodology and outcome that I tend to agree with as well.
However, I ABSOLUTELY applaud your doing it.
the "success" rate alone raises questions. Without impuning your expertise, I find it hard to believe that three audiophiles could agree on what coffee to have, let alone the virtues or otherwise of any particular sound.
It is not good "science" to have three people who know each other set up the experiment, carry out the experiment, and participate in the experiment.
A bunch of other reasons have been advanced by others regarding the methodology and outcome that I tend to agree with as well.
However, I ABSOLUTELY applaud your doing it.
ahh well
sorry panicos - you asked why I think the results are invalid, I've told you. The fact that you cannot SEE the factors that cause the invalidity is, in part, the problem but for clarity, you have attempted to make a scientific claim of fact (a particular cable performs differently to another and that difference can be identified audibly) based on VERY unscientific methodology...
Again, I applaud your at least attempting to get to an answer. I just do not think your answer can be supported.
sorry panicos - you asked why I think the results are invalid, I've told you. The fact that you cannot SEE the factors that cause the invalidity is, in part, the problem but for clarity, you have attempted to make a scientific claim of fact (a particular cable performs differently to another and that difference can be identified audibly) based on VERY unscientific methodology...
Again, I applaud your at least attempting to get to an answer. I just do not think your answer can be supported.
Two points even at the level that I can understand.First,I have not attempted to make any scientific claim.Second,I do not consider the result as valid or invalid or based on any kind of special methodology.What we did was simple and based only on the usual way we all normally listen to music only this time someone else was doing the switching,just to try ourselves.That is why I don't consider what we did as scientific.IMO there was no psychoacoustic element either in the proceedure.Sorry,but for me it was purely an acoustic test.In my mind the result is not a claim,it is a fact.I did it for myself and I'm enjoying my choices,which by the way were not the most expensive ones🙂
Sorry to edit the post again,but one last thing.Surely I am not hoping or asking for any aproval or support for what we did.But as you said,it was at least something.Let us hope we will see something more scientific soon.
Sorry to edit the post again,but one last thing.Surely I am not hoping or asking for any aproval or support for what we did.But as you said,it was at least something.Let us hope we will see something more scientific soon.
Panicos K said:
And ultimately, music is a personal experience and is about what makes YOU happy. As for the others - let them eat cake!
Cheers!
My post #177 still stands. I am not insisting on special attention, but yes .... there it is: Burden of evidence?
But I would echo the respect for Panicos K on submitting his data, and that I accept it as sincere.
In this respect, please excuse the repetition of an analogeous incident. Where I worked at a research institution we had odd ways of relaxing over lunch-time. (Would swear we were nerds ...) One day about 6 of us decided to test ... the law of averages!
We flipped a coin, and a list of (1) predictions and (2) real results were compiled for each person. After there were about 150 incidents (no! not in one lunch-time - over weeks.) several surprising results rewarded our simplistic efforts (the Director even allowed us a short report at a monthly meeting!).
Outcome: Naturally, results were about even. Especially the real results were 51/49 % - as expected (yah OK! the RSA coins are not perfectly balanced etc.!). The one result I think might be relevant here, was the number of times the same thing recurred. I recall for myself, twice I had the same outcome occur 6 times in succession! These were either 'heads' or 'tails'. And this did not only occur to me.
Point: Say those were the first 6 actions in the experiment. Then, I would have 'proved' that no law of averages exist. I achieved (say) heads 6 out of 6 times! What could be further away from a 50/50 result as was generally expected.... Further point: The above series of results would probably have been proclaimed as unlikely by most people. But that simple experiment proved (as far as it did) that one can neither extrapolate nor intrapolate for a limited number of occurrences according to the larger picture.
There are more examples where (perhaps unexpectedly - which again - is that not also influenced by subjectivism?) the results of a limited number of occurrences, even in blind tests, did not reflect the final situation (in cases where, fortunately, the latter was available). It does not render such tests invalid, but neither does it constitute proof. I would repeat that, especially where a number of proven scientific dogmas are 'wiped off-table' in the process, one needs to excercise care to come to early conclusions.
But that is a matter for statisticians to better explain.
But I would echo the respect for Panicos K on submitting his data, and that I accept it as sincere.
In this respect, please excuse the repetition of an analogeous incident. Where I worked at a research institution we had odd ways of relaxing over lunch-time. (Would swear we were nerds ...) One day about 6 of us decided to test ... the law of averages!
We flipped a coin, and a list of (1) predictions and (2) real results were compiled for each person. After there were about 150 incidents (no! not in one lunch-time - over weeks.) several surprising results rewarded our simplistic efforts (the Director even allowed us a short report at a monthly meeting!).
Outcome: Naturally, results were about even. Especially the real results were 51/49 % - as expected (yah OK! the RSA coins are not perfectly balanced etc.!). The one result I think might be relevant here, was the number of times the same thing recurred. I recall for myself, twice I had the same outcome occur 6 times in succession! These were either 'heads' or 'tails'. And this did not only occur to me.
Point: Say those were the first 6 actions in the experiment. Then, I would have 'proved' that no law of averages exist. I achieved (say) heads 6 out of 6 times! What could be further away from a 50/50 result as was generally expected.... Further point: The above series of results would probably have been proclaimed as unlikely by most people. But that simple experiment proved (as far as it did) that one can neither extrapolate nor intrapolate for a limited number of occurrences according to the larger picture.
There are more examples where (perhaps unexpectedly - which again - is that not also influenced by subjectivism?) the results of a limited number of occurrences, even in blind tests, did not reflect the final situation (in cases where, fortunately, the latter was available). It does not render such tests invalid, but neither does it constitute proof. I would repeat that, especially where a number of proven scientific dogmas are 'wiped off-table' in the process, one needs to excercise care to come to early conclusions.
But that is a matter for statisticians to better explain.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Power cord replacement
So you've never tried it yourself, have you?cheap-Jack said:
DBT is a prohibited subject on Audio Asylum. Look up their rule. It's not an ideal place to learn about it for those who are not familiar.
Re: Re: lol! I'm with John P and Brett
Panicos, try Google search on double blind test protocol.Panicos K said:
Re: I don't think so.
.... and may I respectfully suggest you get into the practical implication and application of the same before you confuse physics with engineering and lash out at others.
I apologise for the above; I do not normally engage in personal rhetoric, but seeing as how you opened the door ....
cheap-Jack said:
.... and may I respectfully suggest you get into the practical implication and application of the same before you confuse physics with engineering and lash out at others.
I apologise for the above; I do not normally engage in personal rhetoric, but seeing as how you opened the door ....
- Status
- Not open for further replies.