Feedback was known before Black. It was Black who got the concept of the importance of phase or "Negative" feedback. A very important difference.
The problem getting the patent was that the examiners "Knew" feedback was always a problem not a solution!
To talk about measurements, my god, the response curve of cones when they fractionate, and how we listen to the resonnances of the material they are made of.
Just try with a very slow sweeping frequency!(I have made thousand of measurements on a lot of loudspeakers in anechoic chamber, i know *for real* what i'm talking about.)
For the open baffles, if people like acoustic short circuits, adding out of phase random reflexions, why not ? I never said it will not work nicely in YOUR particular environment. Nothing you can deal with a commercial product, giving good results in the most various situations as possible.
For all your other poetic agues , i would like you to listen, to my "sound muddled, indistinct and sorely lacking in ANY fidelity"system.
It use a two ways bass reflex enclosure, very mat and rigid, with *24db/oct* butterwoth filters. In order to minimize the recovering area between speakers. 100db/w/m efficiency, 200w watts power admittance, circular horn with a JBL1" driver (can be a TAD or any one else with few differences).Of course, geometry phase aligned on square waves.
The exact contrary of all you believe in. (Or try to make believe ?)
What can i says: it was always very difficult in studios to make the difference between a jazz band recorded with a couple of electrosatatic mikes and their reproduction on my system. Vey difficult to make a difference in my home between my mother's Steinway and the same reproduced with my system.
If i was able to do the same with any "one way with help in bass and treble" loudspeaker,i would had prefer-it. So easy!
If it was so simple, i had not spend 3 years on my filters, working on 0.1db of level differences between the two ways in various environments. Just for the beatyof the thing: i do not sell anything.
I'm not an audiophile. Not good ears enough to make a difference between cables, or any cryogenic magical mystery tour. Just a stupid electronic engineer, manager of the electro-acoustic department of a hifi company in the70's, sound engineer for more than30 years, sun of a pianist. Born in music.
You have a good knowledge of the "sound" history equipments, but, did you had worked with most of them ? Did you have studied electronic and acoustic, first, in order to understand what you talk about ?
Did you have spend years of researches, build hundreds of enclosures, filters, tried to get the best of all sort of loudspeakers ? Worked in hundred of different studios with different equipments ? if yes, you would have understood most of my generalizations.
Or did you manage, as all those high-end gourous, some very high end hifi show room, selling some cryogenic 'state of the art' treated cables, all along with some magical 10" mono speaker enclosure ?
[Edit]Will not continue this OOT about loudspeakers, sorry.
Last edited:
The aftermarket tweaks OTOH are less than impressive. My guess is that some aerodynamic properties go as powers of v so 200mph vehicles show more effect.
Fastskinz Test Drive: Can a Golf Ball Covering Improve MPGs? - Popular Mechanics
Hi,
Actually, the system you describe is pretty much what the Yankees call "ultra-fi". Funnily enough, the result you are getting is pretty much exactly what you would have if you had Tannoy Monitor Red 15", except for the 4th order filter... 😉
Personally, if the drivers allow it I use first order crossovers, if I need to deal driver interactions 4th order is too low, I prefer NTM style crossovers (I do them passive though). But 4th order can work, it is just rather limiting on the possible listening axis choices and creates too many lobes for my taste, if the drivers are not coaxial or coincidental.
Well, I worked as sound engineer (live & recording) in the 80's and early 90's, designed modules for mixing desks used by then east german state radio, worked at the same time with the acoustic systems installed in the same studios (mainly service, replacements, setup), designed and build amplifiers and speaker systems for stage use "cottage industry" style and yes, I happen to have a degree in electronics and wide ranging practical experinece from military/industrial control systems to audio.
I am not sure if I rate hunderts of studio's, there where not that many in est germany and the general production values in commercial music production in the germany of the 1990's turned me off and I went into (dance) club related work instead.
I understand your generalisations, but as it so happen, I also know they are wrong.
No, I never did any of this. I did work for a while (while doing my 2nd degree in Business Information Systems in London) in a 2nd Hand HiFi store that had a lot of "High End" stuff as engineer (fix the stuff), as my english was not very good for better work at the time. Later I worked in Tin Pan Alley for a Musical Instruments and Pro Audio Distribution Company that carried a lot of (then) ultra-modern computer based recording gear and suitable accoutrements.
Actually, in the late 90's the HiFi club I was in at the time in London investigated cryogenics for cables. Our conclusions where not to use cryogenics, as they disrupt the crystal structure of te metal in our experiments (we did use a university's electron microscope), our listening tests also did not favour cryogenically treated cables.
However, non of this has much relevance. Please just try to get your facts right, instead of voicing prejudices or nonsense, then I will not need to correct you.
Ciao T
Actually, the system you describe is pretty much what the Yankees call "ultra-fi". Funnily enough, the result you are getting is pretty much exactly what you would have if you had Tannoy Monitor Red 15", except for the 4th order filter... 😉
Personally, if the drivers allow it I use first order crossovers, if I need to deal driver interactions 4th order is too low, I prefer NTM style crossovers (I do them passive though). But 4th order can work, it is just rather limiting on the possible listening axis choices and creates too many lobes for my taste, if the drivers are not coaxial or coincidental.
Well, I worked as sound engineer (live & recording) in the 80's and early 90's, designed modules for mixing desks used by then east german state radio, worked at the same time with the acoustic systems installed in the same studios (mainly service, replacements, setup), designed and build amplifiers and speaker systems for stage use "cottage industry" style and yes, I happen to have a degree in electronics and wide ranging practical experinece from military/industrial control systems to audio.
I am not sure if I rate hunderts of studio's, there where not that many in est germany and the general production values in commercial music production in the germany of the 1990's turned me off and I went into (dance) club related work instead.
I understand your generalisations, but as it so happen, I also know they are wrong.
No, I never did any of this. I did work for a while (while doing my 2nd degree in Business Information Systems in London) in a 2nd Hand HiFi store that had a lot of "High End" stuff as engineer (fix the stuff), as my english was not very good for better work at the time. Later I worked in Tin Pan Alley for a Musical Instruments and Pro Audio Distribution Company that carried a lot of (then) ultra-modern computer based recording gear and suitable accoutrements.
Actually, in the late 90's the HiFi club I was in at the time in London investigated cryogenics for cables. Our conclusions where not to use cryogenics, as they disrupt the crystal structure of te metal in our experiments (we did use a university's electron microscope), our listening tests also did not favour cryogenically treated cables.
However, non of this has much relevance. Please just try to get your facts right, instead of voicing prejudices or nonsense, then I will not need to correct you.
Ciao T
Cool link.
Go to mythbusters for the 40 minute video. The effect depends on the scale of the dimples. The mythbuster guys used dimples that look to be 4 to 6 inches in diameter, maybe an inch deep. That Pop-mech skin has very small dimples.
jn
I remember the episode. It was about a 12-13% improvement, IIRC. But still, that's significant - about 1 dB.
Hum, as long as you are talking about steel/carbon aliases, i can understand "crystal structure". With pure coper ?
And you listen reproducibles and objective differences in listening before/after "cryogenically treated cables" ?
That adds a lot to your credibility.
LOL, and thanks for your usefull 'corrections'.
PS:just this interview of Max Townshend of Townshend Audio :
So what's the deal with cryogenics?
Cryogenically treated components sound much better than non treated components and the difference is NOT subtle. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either ignorant or has a vested interest to say otherwise.
...
Can any of this measured?
No, not with a DVM or oscilloscope, but a resounding yes with the most sensitive measuring instrument of all: your ears!
I guess i have to let my amplifier stay in liquid helium for a while...
Last edited:
Hi,
Define "pure copper".
If we are talking Oxygen Free High Conductivity Copper, yes... See:
Copper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I was one of these involved in the experiment, neither the initiator nor the primary experimenter. The statistics did speak for themselves though.
The way you write this makes me think you mean the opposite, but that is your call, no skin off my nose. ;-)
More like Frédérik Mey "Ma feuille de laurier huitième"... (my french is very bad)
Ciao T
Define "pure copper".
If we are talking Oxygen Free High Conductivity Copper, yes... See:
Copper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I was one of these involved in the experiment, neither the initiator nor the primary experimenter. The statistics did speak for themselves though.
The way you write this makes me think you mean the opposite, but that is your call, no skin off my nose. ;-)
More like Frédérik Mey "Ma feuille de laurier huitième"... (my french is very bad)
Ciao T
Last edited:
Perhaps you could provide detail on your experiment, the setup, participants, controls, and statistical data?
Or happens to be a metalurgist who says that any value you may have received by cryo treating wire is lost when you remove it from the vessel and proceed to straighten it.
Hi,
I pointed out that I did not arrange the test, I merely participated. However, I (as all others who where involved) where privy to the results. AFAIK the results remain unpublished otherwise.
Setup was a straight preference test between outwardly identical cables, speaker cables as it so happens. Method was by awarding points out of ten in a range of areas of sonic perception. The system was well known to those that participated.
Ciao T
I pointed out that I did not arrange the test, I merely participated. However, I (as all others who where involved) where privy to the results. AFAIK the results remain unpublished otherwise.
Setup was a straight preference test between outwardly identical cables, speaker cables as it so happens. Method was by awarding points out of ten in a range of areas of sonic perception. The system was well known to those that participated.
Ciao T
Well, if the statistics "speak for themselves," the experiment and the statistics need to be known. Otherwise, you're just making an unsupported assertion. That's OK, if labeled as such, but if you're claiming experimental support, you need to describe the experiment and results in sufficient detail that it can be analyzed by others and, if desired, replicated.
Or you can just say, "In my opinion, cryo-ing makes a difference, but I have no evidence to present."
Or you can just say, "In my opinion, cryo-ing makes a difference, but I have no evidence to present."
Edit -I see Sy beat me to it. Out of idle curiosity, why unpublished? Without any form of data, let alone independent verification, it's not much use.
On the subject of cryogenic treatment of wire, here's John Escallier discussing it over on Audioholics.
"When a pure metal is subjected to a cryogenic environment, the electron mean free path increases as a result of a drop in lattice collisions. Pure copper, in fact, will see it's mean free path extend to about 10 cm, and it's conductivity will increase three orders of magnitude. But, it is, to the best of my knowledge (and that of my co-workers) a process that follows a reversible path. We are unable to determine, by any tests that we are aware of, that a copper specimen has been subjected to a cryogenic environment. This does provide any parametric shifts which are capable of explaining a cryo change of any type. So I am unable to understand what parameters you would measure and use in a transmission line model. Only for alloys such as steel, where the lattice changes from FCC to BCC below the martensite start temperature, can we find evidence of a cryogenic induced transformation. Granted, I only work with liquid nitrogen, at 77K, liquid helium at 4.5K, and superfluid helium at 1.88K, and have no experience with the really cold temperatures."
On the subject of cryogenic treatment of wire, here's John Escallier discussing it over on Audioholics.
"When a pure metal is subjected to a cryogenic environment, the electron mean free path increases as a result of a drop in lattice collisions. Pure copper, in fact, will see it's mean free path extend to about 10 cm, and it's conductivity will increase three orders of magnitude. But, it is, to the best of my knowledge (and that of my co-workers) a process that follows a reversible path. We are unable to determine, by any tests that we are aware of, that a copper specimen has been subjected to a cryogenic environment. This does provide any parametric shifts which are capable of explaining a cryo change of any type. So I am unable to understand what parameters you would measure and use in a transmission line model. Only for alloys such as steel, where the lattice changes from FCC to BCC below the martensite start temperature, can we find evidence of a cryogenic induced transformation. Granted, I only work with liquid nitrogen, at 77K, liquid helium at 4.5K, and superfluid helium at 1.88K, and have no experience with the really cold temperatures."
Last edited:
That was amusing-me a lot was the "Sound better"!
All along with "cannot measure any difference".
If (i want to see that) any temperature treatment is able to change the conductivity of your cable, or the capacitance of the isolator, it will change some 0.1db or so in your system response curve ? Well. "sound better" means it will always correct the curve of all speakers in the right direction ?
Magical indeed!
Better to play with some 0.1$ capacitor in your preamp, or any analog or digital equalizer, if you like to change the response curve of your system, and in the frequencies and direction you want, don't you think ?
Liquid helium cryogenic treatment is hard to add in your Ohms law calculations. I mean as long you will use your cable at the ambient temperature. And, at the end, i feel more secure to play with my wires diameters when i'm in concern with R. ;-)
Of course, if you keep your wires at absolute 0 all the time, trying to build a supra conductor with 0 ohms of resistance you will add some 0.1db more changes, here or there in your "listening experience". And a slightly better damping factor ;-)
Scottmoose , thanks for your citation. That's what i was referring to with "streel cristals".
Last edited:
We can see all the middle age magics in those audiophiles stupidities.
Burn-in, because people had noticed their cars run smoother afer a burn-in period. What the correlation between polishing mechanic and electricity ?
Oxygen free because people dreams of purity and absolute ? My oxygen free cable looks like a little oxyded after a while -)
Teflon because this very 'magical' plastic was, a long time, a big secret of American army ?
(Fakes still carry on with his "cancer " dangerousness for your cooking equipments.)
Cryogenic treatments because people has read, here or there, some vulgarization papers about hyper conductivity ?
What else ?
All the hf conductivity characteristics of wires, witch does not apply at our frequencies tensions and currents,
Litz cables, skin effects, dielectric factors, electron migration from a wire to an other, variation of R with heat, nothing we are in concern with, everything good for those snake oil sellers fake arguments.
But the most stupid of all, is to consider electronic components to have a "sound", like if it was any part of an *acoustic* musical instrument. Here comes all the magic !!!
Any way, what does this "absolute perfection" some are looking for, with far from perfect various records, various environments, bad (they are all) loudspeakers, far to be perfect amplifiers. What the hell with any wires, witch are far away the very best part in all our systems ?
Burn-in, because people had noticed their cars run smoother afer a burn-in period. What the correlation between polishing mechanic and electricity ?
Oxygen free because people dreams of purity and absolute ? My oxygen free cable looks like a little oxyded after a while -)
Teflon because this very 'magical' plastic was, a long time, a big secret of American army ?
(Fakes still carry on with his "cancer " dangerousness for your cooking equipments.)
Cryogenic treatments because people has read, here or there, some vulgarization papers about hyper conductivity ?
What else ?
All the hf conductivity characteristics of wires, witch does not apply at our frequencies tensions and currents,
Litz cables, skin effects, dielectric factors, electron migration from a wire to an other, variation of R with heat, nothing we are in concern with, everything good for those snake oil sellers fake arguments.
But the most stupid of all, is to consider electronic components to have a "sound", like if it was any part of an *acoustic* musical instrument. Here comes all the magic !!!
Any way, what does this "absolute perfection" some are looking for, with far from perfect various records, various environments, bad (they are all) loudspeakers, far to be perfect amplifiers. What the hell with any wires, witch are far away the very best part in all our systems ?
Last edited:
Folks,
Just a reminder.
My point is, that based on our listening tests Cryo treatment does not make the sound better, but worse.
Of course, to the "everything must sound the same" brigade this is as bad as if it had sounded better.
I do not have the data etc. to share, which I was EXTREMELY CLEAR about. So you have to take my word for it or not, as you please.
Ciao T
Just a reminder.
My point is, that based on our listening tests Cryo treatment does not make the sound better, but worse.
Of course, to the "everything must sound the same" brigade this is as bad as if it had sounded better.
I do not have the data etc. to share, which I was EXTREMELY CLEAR about. So you have to take my word for it or not, as you please.
Ciao T
So the statistics don't "speak for themselves," in fact, they are not accessible, the experimental design may or may not be good, the "results" may or may not be applicable to anything, we need to just take your word for it. OK, then.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.