If the threshold of audibility is different between brass bands verses for quantizing distortion, then isn't your question about the possibility of hearing -80dB distortion already answered? Of course it might be possible to hear -80dB distortion depending on the threshold of audibility for that particular type of distortion.
Of course, the above is said bearing in mind that any 'threshold of audibility' is an estimate of an average value for a population, not a hard limit.
From:
Distortion | Definition of Distortion by Merriam-Webster
Might be useful for those who believe themselves illuminated enough to change Physics or even English Language
Distortion | Definition of Distortion by Merriam-Webster
Might be useful for those who believe themselves illuminated enough to change Physics or even English Language
If is the keyword, as usual.
Another example, 0.05% of the humans can see the Mars satellites with the naked eyes, when Mars is the closest to Earth.
The claim "nobody can hear -80dB of distortions" was not made, so individuals able of such a performance may exist. But then when an alleged member of these exceptional individuals group makes the claim, then he has to provide proof. In particular when he attempts to use his claim to promote an agenda that otherwise comes against the well established body of knowledge. At least if he wants to be taken seriously, of course.
Last edited:
Good point however, he and the likes are counting on people believing whatever they read on audio forums and plenty of people do.
Cocktail effect has nothing to so with this, it is a psychological issue that allows the brain to ignore some sounds and interpret others.
It has noting to do with masking or level of audibility.
Jan
Your failure to grasp the essence of the technique described does not invalidate it. Denigrating someone of whom you have no prior knowledge of their background and experience is a weak base from which to claim superiority, BTW.
I have posted previously that in the late 1980s I constructed and presented a comprehensive double blind loudspeaker evaluation in accordance with AES recommendations to a Section meeting of the AES where the audience where the subjects and recorded there own observations for subsequent analysis. The purpose of the evaluation was to rank the perceived sound quality of five professional proprietary processed public address loudspeaker systems (Apogee, Tannoy, Meyer, Electrovoice and Nexo). Representatives of most of the manufacturers were there because obviously they had a vested interest that the comparison was fair and unbiased. Out of approximately 50 participants, no AES member or professional audio engineer or audio distributor at that presentation found fault with my understanding of double blind, or challenged the results. There were quite a few red faces that evening.
The gizmo I subsequently devised for 'self administered' blind testing is a simplified version of A/B/X testing which produces consistently repeatable results, whether positive or negative. With my device a subject cannot be influenced by anyone else in the room because there is no means by which anyone can know during the test whether DUT A is X or Y, or DUT B is Y or X. In some circumstances it facilitates valid rapid evaluations. This is because it overcomes some of the documented perceptual constraints of subjects in a conventional double blind test, whether AES or A/B/X. This is achieved by giving the subject control the the frequency and timing of switching between X and Y, and allowing them to take as long as they need to determine if they can or can't hear a difference between X and Y.
Go back and read the thread; there are plenty of posts referring to documented physical mechanisms that alter the signal in a cable, and/or alter the transfer function between two devices connected by said cable, without the need to resort to voodoo or UFO conspiracy theories.It's like UFOs, except it's UCDs (unidentified cable distortions) - in both cases no evidence of existence...
I provided numbers and references, you are returning lip service. Like this statement:
which qualifies as weapons grade bull chips. Show hard data and it’s interpretation and you may find an audience. Myself, I’m not holding my breath waiting.
As of background and experience, here’s a quote from a true audio guru, written by his own hand.
I’ll let you guess who’s this high end audio expert.
Last edited:
Ok, thanks. I thought they might be related and could be some crossover since they're all related to perception. Is the cocktail effect not a psychoacoustic phenomena because there's more conscious focusing involved?
Random guessing 6 out of 6 means you will have at least 1 guy out of 46656 to "prove" your wild assertions.johnmath said:
Given US population is around 333537783 as of today, you can count on having 7149 people backing your assertions, even if only by sheer chance.
Not bad for a fake result
Now for 20 out of 20, which you call "more than likely", you will need a population of:
104857600000000000000000000 , that´s 27 digits.
Given Covid restrictions , it will be hard to get them together. Pity because it would provide an easy win for you.
I´ll leave it to you to calculate your "more than likely" probability of 100 out of 100 , my Notebook processor started spitting smoke when trying but since you have "MATH" in your name , shouldn´t be difficult to achieve.
That's been known to many people for many decades. Since this is audio, the bottom line is the audibility. Just because the altered signal is measurable doesn't mean it's audible.
If you read my posting again you may discover that the conditions for hearing noise were quite different from a sousa band behind some other piece of music. Being uncorrelated in both cases does not mean these can be compared.
So speaker cables don't matter. Would you use 100m of bell wire? Obviously not. Would you use 20m of 22AWG? maybe not. Why? Because you expect it to matter! What about 10m of 16AWG? Would 5m of 14AWG be better?
So you have a cable that makes absolutely no degradation to the signal. What if you double it, or double it again, or again? Most people think that at some point the cable will be significant. But of course it always was - there is no magic threshold over which the cable suddenly behaves differently and starts introducing distortion into the signal, or causing a 'change in the wave form' as per Fahey's dictionary definition.
Even if a loudspeaker cable was a simple linear resistance (which it isn't) what determines the point at which the resistance of cable doesn't matter? And is that for someone's 8Ω bookshelf loudspeakers on a 20 watt amplifier, or a 2Ω 1000W PA loudspeaker on a stage. The cable recommendations given in old manuals and posted earlier in this thread are just pure arbitrary values, based on a notion of, say, less than 1% power loss, or 5%, or some other factor.
These examples are merely points on a line of continuum. Yet some people think they have the authority to know where that continuum ends. Hint: it doesn't, it just becomes less and less significant to the point of inaudibility in one direction as the interconnecting cable approaches ideal behaviour. That point (inaudibility) is different for every listener and every system.
So you have a cable that makes absolutely no degradation to the signal. What if you double it, or double it again, or again? Most people think that at some point the cable will be significant. But of course it always was - there is no magic threshold over which the cable suddenly behaves differently and starts introducing distortion into the signal, or causing a 'change in the wave form' as per Fahey's dictionary definition.
Even if a loudspeaker cable was a simple linear resistance (which it isn't) what determines the point at which the resistance of cable doesn't matter? And is that for someone's 8Ω bookshelf loudspeakers on a 20 watt amplifier, or a 2Ω 1000W PA loudspeaker on a stage. The cable recommendations given in old manuals and posted earlier in this thread are just pure arbitrary values, based on a notion of, say, less than 1% power loss, or 5%, or some other factor.
These examples are merely points on a line of continuum. Yet some people think they have the authority to know where that continuum ends. Hint: it doesn't, it just becomes less and less significant to the point of inaudibility in one direction as the interconnecting cable approaches ideal behaviour. That point (inaudibility) is different for every listener and every system.
Last edited:
Sorry, it wears a bit thin after several attacks on personal integrity (I should say, not from you!)
The thread the OP opened asks if it makes sense to measure the distortion of the cable. Beyond the fact that some consider that it is and others that it does not, and beyond that each one proposes different methods to measure distortion - hypothetical and irrelevant if any - that could be introduced by the cable when it is connected to an electronic device, it is It goes without saying that we are talking about an amplifier and speakers connected with the cable.
So NO, my opinion is that it does not make sense, and all the variables discussed here are present in the link that I attached from Wikipedia, (which of course nobody read because they cannot refute any of the points and yet they go on and on the spiel ).
The measurement implies that it is connected to an electronic device, because an unconnected cable at its ends can only yield a very small resistance and capacitance value with a multimeter, and there will be no impedance, because for it to appear an oscilloscope is needed, and something more importantly, an alternating current that passes through the conductor. Measuring the R and C of a conductor can only be useful in the case of a connection cable of a TT equipped with a magnetic cartridge, but for the connection of loudspeakers they have no meaning or important technical significance.
It serves nothing more than to enrich the pockets of the manufacturers and the ego of the buyers.
And if I comment on this it is because I have respect for those who are just beginning in electronics and read these threads full of high theory concepts that do not apply to the thread and confuse them and move them away from the forum. So I think the lock is coming, and it will be in good time.
Many forums have decided to eliminate the new wires of cables by remandos and ineffective.
The mods. they can directly refer to what was previously published when a new cable thread appears.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.