You're not likely to get an answer from a scope-head. This particular scope-head with a reasonable amount of professional experience manufacturing various sorts of resistive films and components sees no reason whatever why there would be any audible difference or burn-in phenomena- from a physics standpoint- between the sorts of resistors you're talking about. If someone has controlled listening test data, well, then there's a reason to speculate about mechanisms. Without such data, you may not like it, but it's far more likely to be a psychological phenomenon than a physical one. Or, if a physical phenomenon, to have its origins somewhere besides those resistors; Steve named some other variables and no doubt could name a few more.
If you're happy with your results, be happy with your results. You don't need validation from the technical community.
BTW, if you actually have capacitors that change mass over time (other than electron mass from charge and discharge), you're in for a Nobel Prize; you've found an exception to the First Law of Thermodynamics. All of physics collapses.
If you're happy with your results, be happy with your results. You don't need validation from the technical community.
BTW, if you actually have capacitors that change mass over time (other than electron mass from charge and discharge), you're in for a Nobel Prize; you've found an exception to the First Law of Thermodynamics. All of physics collapses.
Fair enough re. the resistors, your argument will make me think twice about spending too much wonga on them.
But I was actually serious about a technical explanation. If there is no obvious one, why can't there be a less obvious one, or many combined 'subtle' factors, that affect the sound? Assuming all resistors sound the same sounds to me a bit like saying all wire sounds the same, and I think I know where most music lovers/hi-fi owners stand on that one nowadays!
(You goit SY, I just wrote a paragraph desputing your comments about capacitors, before I realised the double meaning joke!)
LOL
-Simon
But I was actually serious about a technical explanation. If there is no obvious one, why can't there be a less obvious one, or many combined 'subtle' factors, that affect the sound? Assuming all resistors sound the same sounds to me a bit like saying all wire sounds the same, and I think I know where most music lovers/hi-fi owners stand on that one nowadays!
(You goit SY, I just wrote a paragraph desputing your comments about capacitors, before I realised the double meaning joke!)
LOL
-Simon
SY said:
Hello SY -
Well, maybe it's obvious to you, but not so obvious to me. I am happy to take fmak's observations at face value, simply because I've had so many similar ones myself.
And not ones that can be dismissed so easily as you (and others) would apparently like to.
For example, I participated in what must have been one of the best blind experiments of sonic differences between resistors ever. One particular resistor manufacturer was told by several manufacturers (not me) that their products "sounded" better than other competing resistors. They were skeptical that small differences in resistor construction could have any audible effect whatsoever (not unlike some people on this board). I was discussing a project with them, so they sent me 10 different variations on their basic resistor construction, each marked only with a different color marking stripe. I spent the better part of a week listening to the differences, and reported my findings.
Now to this day (it was nearly 10 years ago that I performed these tests), I still don't know what any of the physical differences were between the resistors. There are dozens, if not hundreds of possible variables -- composition of the core, thickness of the film, tempco of the film, endcap material, endcap termination style, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. The differences still remain a trade secret of the resistor company.
But there was a clear and marked correlation between the physical differences and the sonic differences (OBTAINED IN A BLIND TEST!). It was this correlation that convinced these engineers that these are real phenomena, to the point that they made a new model of "audio" grade resistor to provide optimized sonic performance.
Now, I know there are those skeptics out there that will dismiss this with a litany of (surprise!) skeptical reasoning. I am sure they will claim that the company only did this to take advantage of the "audiophile suckers" that would pay extra for an "audio" grade resistor. Well, that is simply untrue. This company (that I will not identify) actually does *not* promote their special "audio" grade resistor. In fact they are somewhat embarrassed by it and don't promote it at all. Frankly, they are afraid of the negative publicity such a resistor would create for their "legitimate" customers.
This is just one example of *scores* of carefully controlled listening tests I have conducted. If you can't hear the differences yourself, that's too bad, but don't go around thinking that you have the "truth" about what is audible and what isn't. You may have the "truth" about what is audible to *you*, but certainly not what is audible to me (and thousands of other careful listeners around the world).
Best regards,
Charles Hansen
fmak said:
I can't speak for any others, but with respect to myself, I saw a thread which asked "Resistor Sound - How is this possible???" and in the original post asked again "How can the sound of a resistor change so much over 9 hours???"
I replied offering just a handful of possibilities to be considered in addition to any particular behavior on the part of the resistor itself.
These other possibilities were simply dismissed out of hand and then you went on about the closed-mindedness of others.
And all I'll say is that you're free to accept whatever you want. But just because someone else's threshold isn't as low as yours doesn't mean their mind is more closed than your own.
se
SY said:
Um, why would a capacitor's mass change from charge and discharge? A capacitor stores and releases energy by way of charge displacement. It contains the same amount of charge when it's "charged" as when it's "discharged" and therefore would have the same mass in either state.
se
I didn't see anyone say that resistors can't sound different in this thread. I HAVE seen people accuse people of closed mindedness or deafness when they chose not to take an invalid test at face value. Several variables were given for possible reasons for the "difference". But persons with such high evalutions of their own hearing memory choose not to listen to other possible explanations.
http://www.audiomedia.com/archive/features/uk-0400/uk-0400-listeningtest/uk-0400-listeningtest.htm
http://www.audiomedia.com/archive/features/uk-0400/uk-0400-listeningtest/uk-0400-listeningtest.htm
Yes, it will have greater mass, so weigh more. Not greater rest mass, but greater mass. I trust you know the formula 😉
Hi,
I'm still sitting on the fence here knowing very well that NO, read again NO company gives a damn about how their resistors sound...with the possible exception of one or two Japanese companies, if we're lucky.
It seems blatantly obvious that very few people understand that there are only a few major players in the industry left...none of which give a hoot about audio.
Other than that, yes their subdivisions will manufacture differently from other subdivisions, as far as resistors go; different body material, sputtering techniques and what have you will all guarantee that sonic results will be different...
Same goes for caps, wire and such...
Maybe you would be a lot better of looking at the original expression which is very close to the French one?
Or are we just making a mockery of fellow members?
You know, if scientists would grow a pair of decent ears we wouldn't have to waste time on the mighty brainwashed, overly educated " I stopped thinking when I entered university" types.
Instead of saying, I've been taught it can't make a difference and therefore it can't why not try it out for yourself...?
Cheers,😉
I'm still sitting on the fence here knowing very well that NO, read again NO company gives a damn about how their resistors sound...with the possible exception of one or two Japanese companies, if we're lucky.
It seems blatantly obvious that very few people understand that there are only a few major players in the industry left...none of which give a hoot about audio.
Other than that, yes their subdivisions will manufacture differently from other subdivisions, as far as resistors go; different body material, sputtering techniques and what have you will all guarantee that sonic results will be different...
Same goes for caps, wire and such...
Maybe you would be a lot better of looking at the original expression which is very close to the French one?
Or are we just making a mockery of fellow members?
You know, if scientists would grow a pair of decent ears we wouldn't have to waste time on the mighty brainwashed, overly educated " I stopped thinking when I entered university" types.
Instead of saying, I've been taught it can't make a difference and therefore it can't why not try it out for yourself...?
Cheers,😉
Charles Hansen said:
Not sure I follow here.
You were sent 10 different variations of a particular resistor and each variation was marked with its own color band? So in other words, one variation had say a red color band, the next variation had a green color band, the next variation had a blue color band, etc.?
If so, I don't quite see how it's any sort of blind test at least with regard to establishing whether or not there are any actual audible differences between them. If you always know the resistor your listening to is in fact different from the others, how are you blind to anything other than what the actual formulation of the resistor?
Have I missed someting with regard to how the resistors were marked?
se
Somebody should make a divider using two resistors of same value but different types, and swap the locations.
This should show up sonic differences clearly.
Eric.
This should show up sonic differences clearly.
Eric.
SY said:
Sure, E=MC2. But that would presuppose that the velocity of the electrons in the charged capacitor is greater than in the discharged capacitor, yes?
se
HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?
Hi,
Smart ***** that's what you are...blatantly obvious!
Never heard about idiomatic expressions,right?
Right.🙄
Hi,
Smart ***** that's what you are...blatantly obvious!
Never heard about idiomatic expressions,right?
Right.🙄
Velocities are irrelevant- it's total energy that determines mass. The averaged velocities in both cases (charged and discharged) are zero. But the energy sure isn't, as you'll find when you grab both leads.
Yes, but Simon didn't. If I grant for the sake of discussion that you were able, for the resistors and test conditions you used, to distinguish one from the other, it doesn't follow that this is what Simon is dealing with. He hasn't done the experiment yet to eliminate other more likely variables.
Have you surveyed the hearing acuity of scientists? I haven't, but from empirical experience of hanging out and playing music with quite a few scientists ranging from callow grad stuents to Nobel Laureates, I have found that they hear (and care about what they hear) about as well or as poorly as the rest of the population.
SY said:
But the energy stored in a charged capacitor is potential energy, not kinetic energy. The only kinetic energy in a charged capacitor is essentially thermal energy. The only way to increase the mass of a charged capacitor is if you increase the velocity of the electrons.
se
fdegrove said:
What's this have to do with what I said?
This is what you quoted:
Um, why would a capacitor's mass change from charge and discharge? A capacitor stores and releases energy by way of charge displacement. It contains the same amount of charge when it's "charged" as when it's "discharged" and therefore would have the same mass in either state.
Did you accidentally quote me when you meant to quote something from SY instead?
se
relatively OT, sorry
OK, imagine a Universe with an uncharged capacitor in it as its only object. The capacitor has some value of parasitic resistance in series with it. It has a rest mass mo and an energy mc2, where m takes into account thermal kinetic energy as well as rest mass.
Now, imagine another bizzaro Universe where the same capacitor has a charge Q, and thus a potential energy Q/C. Same rest mass as before. Same parasitic series resistance as before. Same starting temperature, same kinetic energy as before, so by your view the same mass. Now, discharge the cap through the parasitic resistance. Following discharge, the capacitor still has a rest mass m, but there's an increase in thermal energy equivalent to Q/C, the potential converted to kinetic (thus mass). So again by your view, the mass-energy has increased without the cap absorbing anything from the outside (it IS the only object in this Universe). Conservation is violated.
OK, imagine a Universe with an uncharged capacitor in it as its only object. The capacitor has some value of parasitic resistance in series with it. It has a rest mass mo and an energy mc2, where m takes into account thermal kinetic energy as well as rest mass.
Now, imagine another bizzaro Universe where the same capacitor has a charge Q, and thus a potential energy Q/C. Same rest mass as before. Same parasitic series resistance as before. Same starting temperature, same kinetic energy as before, so by your view the same mass. Now, discharge the cap through the parasitic resistance. Following discharge, the capacitor still has a rest mass m, but there's an increase in thermal energy equivalent to Q/C, the potential converted to kinetic (thus mass). So again by your view, the mass-energy has increased without the cap absorbing anything from the outside (it IS the only object in this Universe). Conservation is violated.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.