OK, this should help. It's currently the last post in the thread.
Fancy Interconnects? How about a potato, or even mud?
Most of the materials I used were poor conductors, although the mud wasn't too bad. This meant losses and noise that had to be fixed in post production. I now have a few better ideas on how to get a cleaner signal. I'll try again and post another round.
Probably just decided to spend the silver money on something that makes a difference, marketing.
Rick, we found that silver plated copper cable generally sounded too bright, 40 years ago. Matti Otala looked into it and he was pretty sure that it was the TYPE of silvering that was used. If the silver coating was chemically applied (dipped) then perhaps the impurities in the silver coating was the problem. However if it was silver CLAD, it could be OK.
Still, solid silver cables sounded bright too! I did my own independent test on one, 40 years ago. However, the best silver cables, properly broken in, can be clearer sounding than copper, but not extra bright. This was how we made the CTC Blowtorch preamps. Years later, when I could not get the right silver wire, I got the best copper connecting cable that I could find (VandenHul) and found that a CTC Blowtorch made with copper wire, in direct A-B comparison with a standard CTC Blowtorch with silver wire, sounded softer, but not as clear as the standard CTC Blowtorch. This was OK for most high fi systems, but not the very best. For the record, I use copper connecting cables for my longer runs, for practical reasons.
Still, solid silver cables sounded bright too! I did my own independent test on one, 40 years ago. However, the best silver cables, properly broken in, can be clearer sounding than copper, but not extra bright. This was how we made the CTC Blowtorch preamps. Years later, when I could not get the right silver wire, I got the best copper connecting cable that I could find (VandenHul) and found that a CTC Blowtorch made with copper wire, in direct A-B comparison with a standard CTC Blowtorch with silver wire, sounded softer, but not as clear as the standard CTC Blowtorch. This was OK for most high fi systems, but not the very best. For the record, I use copper connecting cables for my longer runs, for practical reasons.
IME/IMO silver and lead (as in solder) do not go well together, tin and silver is fine.
The opinions of experimenters with silver wire/cable being 'too bright' may be at least partly due to the solder alloy used.
Dan.
The opinions of experimenters with silver wire/cable being 'too bright' may be at least partly due to the solder alloy used.
Dan.
If the claimed sound difference of silver vs. copper even with 100% identical RLCD-parameters (pre-requisite!), same insulator material etc is so easily heard why are there no measurements to show that? With a proper test setup that would be rather easy to do, though not entirely trivial of course.
As usual, I would propose a differential test, preferably with time-domain averaging and interleaving, but maybe a simpler setup like a hardware bridge would suffice (though I tried that years ago to no avail).
It is important that the measurement setup also *is* the listening setup "as is" and a positive result is first found in a proper (blind) listening test so that there is a baseline and there are no uncontrolled variables that would otherwise affect the correlation of listening vs measurements.
As usual, I would propose a differential test, preferably with time-domain averaging and interleaving, but maybe a simpler setup like a hardware bridge would suffice (though I tried that years ago to no avail).
It is important that the measurement setup also *is* the listening setup "as is" and a positive result is first found in a proper (blind) listening test so that there is a baseline and there are no uncontrolled variables that would otherwise affect the correlation of listening vs measurements.
Last edited:
Measurements aren’t showing the differences that some hear. As JC said some have the systems, the hearing, and the interest to identify the diffference, whether you want to pay for it is up you.
What instrument will tell you the difference between a painting of a woman by Picasso, Rubens, Renoir, and Da Vinci? Which one do you prefer? Yet the critics here criticize whatever choice someone else makes that differs from thier own bias set and experience, instead of learning from our differences. If we all shared a similar taste in equipment and music then there be no point in this forum, kind of like eating at Mc Donalds.
What instrument will tell you the difference between a painting of a woman by Picasso, Rubens, Renoir, and Da Vinci? Which one do you prefer? Yet the critics here criticize whatever choice someone else makes that differs from thier own bias set and experience, instead of learning from our differences. If we all shared a similar taste in equipment and music then there be no point in this forum, kind of like eating at Mc Donalds.
Last edited:
Personal expierences are valuable informations, but we should be able to accept that other people have (or might have) diverging personal experiences.
Either that or some of those musician/studio engineers were just listening and base their further belief on these experiences. In fact there are quite a lof of people in the professional production segment that do think differently about your point of view.
Remember the days when Telarc even got their mastering console internally rewired? 😉
"blind" testing has as many pitfalls as "sighted" listening, but these are very often simply neglected in the usual "audio blind tests", so you have to be vary careful drawing conclusions from test results.
I would argue that anecdotal evidence falls under 'balance of probabilities' as does home done blind testing. For each sensible musician there are many who are superstitious sometimes to extremes. And a few are total Prima Donnas . Not a good mix for any valid data to come out. Bit like this thread 🙂
There is something about this on the RSGB website. They too say that 'RF grounds' must be kept separate from mains grounds - or at least must be checked and signed off by a competent electrician. Their advice is to avoid antennas which need a ground!Galu said:
Now where can I find an electrician who understands antennas?
Astonishingly poor analogy. Pictures are like musical performances; largely a matter of taste.ticknpop said:
The analogue of a cable would be a pane of glass between you and the picture. Now some may prefer to have the image slightly distorted or softened, but most would agree that only optically flat glass treated to reduce reflection would enable you to see the picture as the artist saw it.
And, a fairly straightforward AI implementation could identify which was which from those artists.
This is OT (but hey, that's the lounge) but this is kinda crazy and worth watching : The Next Rembrandt
What are some examples of those audibly different sound waves that cannot be measured?
silver effect on bass
I also find silver sounds brighter than copper, but in a good way. Clearer, more detailed and somehow more natural. Most posters who can hear state some similar description and most in some way imply that it is at the expense of bass.
I wonder if bass is attenuated, or is it simply not so bloated. As a result we interpret it as attenuated when it is in fact simply sharper and more true to the original performance. I wonder if anyone has measured and seen a difference in the bass amplitude with silver vs copper? I'd be interested in your thoughts John.
I also find silver sounds brighter than copper, but in a good way. Clearer, more detailed and somehow more natural. Most posters who can hear state some similar description and most in some way imply that it is at the expense of bass.
I wonder if bass is attenuated, or is it simply not so bloated. As a result we interpret it as attenuated when it is in fact simply sharper and more true to the original performance. I wonder if anyone has measured and seen a difference in the bass amplitude with silver vs copper? I'd be interested in your thoughts John.
Your example makes no sense. Show me an instrument that can tell the difference between Beatles and the Stones. On the other hand, a cheap soundcard and free software can tell you very accurately if one sound is brighter than the other. ( 30 years in recording studios I have never heard that term being used for any thing but a boost in high frequencys ( can hardly wait to see an audiophools definition of brightness as something we can't measure). This is not about taste but engineering. Nobody cares what you imagine or how badly you screw up your system. And the critics just ask for some proof of extraordinary claims. And what does one learn when one person says silver is brighter, and the next poster says it's not as bright?
Book
Here is a link to another forum where Bob Crump (RIP) talks about silver wire and break in. Also refers to a book that talks about break in. You can go backwards and forwards in the thread to get all the info, but I wanted to start with this post by Bob. Bob is the person that chose the parts in the Blowtorch preamp based on how they sounded in that product. Has anyone read the book Bob is talking about?
Re: Oven tweaks... - rcrump - Tweakers' Asylum
Here is a link to another forum where Bob Crump (RIP) talks about silver wire and break in. Also refers to a book that talks about break in. You can go backwards and forwards in the thread to get all the info, but I wanted to start with this post by Bob. Bob is the person that chose the parts in the Blowtorch preamp based on how they sounded in that product. Has anyone read the book Bob is talking about?
Re: Oven tweaks... - rcrump - Tweakers' Asylum
- Status
- Not open for further replies.