Not sure what kind of scientist you are, hopefully not an amplifier scientist. The concept that a 2db loss in acoustic pressure can be directly linked to a 2db loss in the AC voltage is wrong on so many levels... Not that it surprises me. Not at all. What surprises me more is that none of the technically proficient participants in this discussion corrected your obvious wrongness. Now, why would that be?
What am I wrong about?
I merely pointed out that for a 2 dB loss to be inserted by a length of wire, that that wire would have to be profoundly wrong for the application. And I was referring to loss in a speaker cable. No way can a power chord affect the gain of an amplifier.
In other words, I file the claim that changing power cables make a 2 dB difference in the perceived sound where it belongs - under bull hockey.
Last edited:
And there seems to be a lot of confusion about power supplies. They work by sending current pulses to the cap. The transformer is only connected to the PS caps during these pulses. A power cords resistance only changes the duration of these pulses, not the voltage of the rails. ( unless extreme). And the rail voltages don't change the amp gain. So power cords don't make a difference in sound.
I linked to a Stereophile report (including discussion in the comment section) that described nearly what Bwaslo had in mind.
It seems he isn´t interested anymore in the event (also just anecdotical as the other description we are discussing) that happened although it never could happen.
OK I'll bite. The Stereophile report didn't have anyone measuring (however inadequately) a different in level, only a mention of "didn't change the levels". As there's nothing and noone who was there disputing that, I won't either, sounds like someone at least tried for a level playing field. Yet, you DO seem willing to dispute someone who did measure and while the demo people evidently never suggested levels weren't changed. C'mon -- the only evidence there is the blogger's. I'm more than willing to admit the level change situation (assuming it's real, and again the ONLY data there it is indicates it likely was) might not haven been intentional - see some other posts here where I mention how easy and even likely that is to occur.
BTW, if you're "interested", you might've read that some pages back I even provided a way that a power cable can and often does change perceived sound quality -- by altering interference and effective dynamic range by introduction of ground loop noise current through the an unbalanced audio cable shield. I even have a blog here somewhere on the topic. But from that effect, buying a different brand or model of power cable would be a stupid way to correct it, as the result could go either way (better or worse) entirely due to which component in a system is leaking noise into the cable shields.
You could be right, but reading the posts on the first thread page i got the impression that people already accepted the allegedely measured level difference as fact. Therefore my objection.
Might be that Mark Waldrep would be happy if proved wrong but we all know that proving something didn´t happen isn´t that easy.
I briefly mentioned already that Mark Waldrep imo should have contacted his (reportedly) good friends before the event to discuss the various problems that might arise (uncontrolled for level adjustments for example
) .As said before, only the music samples were recorded but not the talk of the "cable guy" , the information about the level differences is a bit dubious (from "2.5 dB more level" to "substantially louder" isn´t the kind of information i´d expect in such cases).
I mean the accusation is fraud - which i think is ultimately based on intentional wrongdoing (for the purpose of fraud) - and such strong accusation should/must be based on clear/hard evidence.
The only "point" you have advanced so far is to demonstrate what Scott said early on in the thread.
Some people have no limits, it seems. Also in grand display in the BTII thread.
If there's a kooky idea, there will be those who rise to its immediate defense, not matter how silly. Must be an interesting hobby.
The only "point" you have advanced so far is to demonstrate what Scott said early on in the thread.
Some people have no limits, it seems. Also in grand display in the BTII thread.
If there's a kooky idea, there will be those who rise to its immediate defense, not matter how silly. Must be an interesting hobby.
Exactly!
Pano, if you are referring to Jakob2, I would not interpret his comments as a defense. So far as I can tell Jakob2 is a solid scientist who wants to see more objectivity all the way around, nothing more. We could use more people like that around here not fewer. Ridicule would not be helpful to that end.
Jakob: You must have missed my comment on the stereophile report. I will look up where on here we discussed it as we analysed Fremer's recordings that 'PROOVE' cables make a difference and found a level shift. So we have two seperate occasions, two recordings (one openly available) that show a level shift. Not proof, but certainly not letting AQ off the hook. Add to the fact that AQ go out of their way to tell you what you WILL hear when they change a cable and you have a company that (like many others) uses mind tricks to get sales.
Balance of probabilities is not in their favour at this point. Now Dr Waldrup is a recording professional. those on here who are recording professionals tend to be able to very easily hear small level changes/distortion changes. Therefore we might also surmise that he was able to detect that without recording.
Balance of probabilities is not in their favour at this point. Now Dr Waldrup is a recording professional. those on here who are recording professionals tend to be able to very easily hear small level changes/distortion changes. Therefore we might also surmise that he was able to detect that without recording.
Moderation has determined that this thread has run its useful course and will be closed.- Status
- Not open for further replies.