Speedskater
Audioholic General
In any case with an audio signal, if a conductor is directional that means there will be a distortion every half cycle.
"Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans"
Bucknekked
Audioholic Samurai
here's a problem many of us who aren't heavily invested in the sciences have with expert opinions and dueling expert opinions: we have no idea who is speaking real science and who has it cockeyed. This happens here on the AH when folks drag out their technical dictionaries for an amplifier distortion discussion or some other esoteric argument. I see all the words, but, really can't hear any of the differences.
For the cable magic stuff, I've chosen my viewpoint and it came down to picking a point of view supported by someone I trust. For a wide variety of topics, covering most of what I can hear and purchase, Floyd Toole is an acknowledged authority. He may not be the end-all of experts, but he covers stuff we can all hear. Floyd says copper wire of the correct gauge is all you need. I can point to a wide range of topical experts who say the same thing in authentic test scenarios. You can test and repeat their results.
Having data that a wide body of geeks can test, share, and verify is the basis of good science. Anecdotal evidence and testimonials are not science. Wishing is not a technical strategy. Saying it doesn't make it so.
mtrycrafts
Seriously, I have no life.
Certainly can agree with this. Replication is key.
You were not around when John Escalier/Jneutron was posting herea number of years ago and also at AVS.
His EE knowledge, formulas and calculations were something to behold. He works/worked at an East Coast national lab working on superconducting stuff. Most educational times.
Hawksfor reminds me of Linus Pauling. Linus has/had 2 individual Nobel prizes yet he went off the deep end with vitamin C.
Johnny2Bad
Audioholic Chief
I'm not "betting" on anyone. And his paper, published in one of the British HiFi magazines was widely criticized; I don't need to read forum posts to hear the arguments; they were well presented in the press by people with genuine credentials. The point is, he may be right (the late Alan Wright strongly supported him) or he may be wrong (many critics). But you should read the paper he presented instead of forum comments if you want to critique his words. That's how we learn; by looking at the arguments from the horse's mouth instead of the "twittering classes".
I know of no-one who denies that cable capacitance matters. That was the subject I referred to. If it doesn't matter, then why do even the most ardent objectivists buy cable with foamed PE or teflon dielectrics? Why not use PVC (dc 3.4), it's much cheaper.
And I prefaced my comments with "If" ... you are reading them as if that word didn't exist and I started that sentence with "The". It does exist, it wasn't put there by accident, and it means something.
Last edited:
slipperybidness
Audioholic Warlord
For what it's worth....I tend to try to avoid PVC when possible, due to the Chloride in the material itself. Chloride is very corrosive, it will corrode copper too. Now, good PVC material will also be stabilized with an organo-metallic molecule.
I have personally dealt with PVC problems in industrial applications, that is why I tend to try to avoid it when possible, even though it is likely fine for audio applications. This experience is what led me into investigating PVC material, how it is produced, how it degrades, and how it is stabilized.
Some reference materials:
PVC stabilizers are one of the most important additives used in the manufacturing of PVC (polyvinyl chloride) to avoid the decomposition of PVC during the heating process. During its manufacturing, PVC releases hydrochloride, which further decomposes it and also hampers its structure. Thus, lead, mixed metal, tin, and organic PVC stabilizers are used to stop the chain reaction of decomposition. It is also used to enhance resistance to daylight, weathering, and heat ageing of PVC. It is widely used in major applications of PVC such as pipe & fittings, rigid & semi-rigid films, window profiles, wires & cables, and other applications such as medical and consumer goods.
Just a little info on electrical properties of PVC:
Electrical
PVC is a polymer with good insulation properties, but because of its higher polar nature the electrical insulating property is inferior to non polar polymers such as polyethylene and polypropylene.
Since the dielectric constant, dielectric loss tangent value, and volume resistivity are high, the corona resistance is not very good, and it is generally suitable for medium or low voltage and low frequency insulation materials
Speedskater
Audioholic General
I know of no-one who denies that cable capacitance matters.
It's well down the list. With the exceptions of poorly designed output stages and extremely long interconnects, any reasonable total cable capacitance is OK. (2000 pF total is reasonable)
It's well down the list. With the exceptions of poorly designed output stages and extremely long interconnects, any reasonable total cable capacitance is OK. (2000 pF total is reasonable)
mtrycrafts
Seriously, I have no life.
Well, I have read his paper and rely on well qualified people to take it apart. Too bad you were not around when Jneutron was posting. He is verywell qualified as is Dr. David Rich who was the tech guy at The Audio Critic who commented on his paper as well.
As to speaker cable capacitance mattering, it only applies to poor amp designs that go into oscillation if they don't like the total capacitance presented by the cable. As to affecting the frequency response, really doesn't matter at all; inductance matters a lot more. And is measurable.
Speedskater
Audioholic General
Yes, Jneutron and Dr. David Rich are both very well qualified. Jneutron is an expert when it comes to wire and cable, also in cryo.
Colin Wonfor
Audiophyte
Interesting we have our own opinions but not all of us agree how signals in cable can or can not be heard.
Yet millions of folk buy expensive cable, yes some are taken in by bling others by snob value, but some a few maybe can hear improvements.
So ask yourself why a simple discussion has to become heated ? it's like the purge on religion and saying my God that Blue
one is the only God so you must die because your yellow God is a false God.
No it more basic than that "I say my God is best because I am bully I want control or just I WANT" Come on guys wire is only wire after all.
The combination of material make no effect if you enjoy the music and that what this should be about MUSIC and LIFE not F-------g wire. (excuse me)
Now for some real bull poo
Yet millions of folk buy expensive cable, yes some are taken in by bling others by snob value, but some a few maybe can hear improvements.
So ask yourself why a simple discussion has to become heated ? it's like the purge on religion and saying my God that Blue
one is the only God so you must die because your yellow God is a false God.No it more basic than that "I say my God is best because I am bully I want control or just I WANT" Come on guys wire is only wire after all.
The combination of material make no effect if you enjoy the music and that what this should be about MUSIC and LIFE not F-------g wire. (excuse me)
Now for some real bull poo
mtrycrafts
Seriously, I have no life.
Yes, indeed that is the claim without credible evidence.
Colin Wonfor
Audiophyte
But you like music X I hate music X is that claim credible because I disagree with you choice ? It is oh dear so I can' trust my ears but yours I can! mm sounds like you should be in politics.
I also see from you post you love to adjust the acoustic of the recordings to your taste, so no live performances for you then not to your taste ?
ref:- https://forums.audioholics.com/foru...-his-two-boomboxes-part-2-amendment-1.109238/
killdozzer
Audioholic Samurai
This is a different case altogether. This is a point where some people show their need for some sort/amount of hocus-pocus.
I had a friend who was an excellent chemist. He got a job at nuclear power plant merely by saying he would work there. All his requirements were met, he was revered by his peers etc. But it seemed as if at one point he got... I would use the word scared, of how easy it was to explain things in his field. So, all of a sudden he started spouting claims like "horoscope constellations affect the crops" and so on. The funniest thing is, he never claimed this can be proved and he actually LIKED the fact that it can't be proved and just wanted to accept it as truth.
killdozzer
Audioholic Samurai
I also get a feeling, only too often, that this story is being misunderstood. This is a positive example of questioning and challenging what you know or think you know. It was important to notice that the surface of bumble bee's wings is not sufficient for soaring type of flying or supporting its body in mid air at such low speeds. Also that it couldn't be flying like a swallow.
This is how eventually (and with use of high-speed cameras) we came to understand that bumble bee's strokes are twice fold and that it uses its wings in both directions by tilting them on their way up.
This is EXACTLY the thing that doesn't happen with expensive magic cables. As my signature says it is always unmeasurable but you just have to blindly trust me and give me a heap of dough.
Speedskater
Audioholic General
Preference is one thing, difference is another thing entirely.
While you may prefer this music to that, or this cable to that, but you can't state that this cable sounds different than that without some credible evidence.
slipperybidness
Audioholic Warlord
Peer review is key! If an article or paper is published in a non-peer reviewed manner, then it must be immediately taken as suspect.
That is one of the items that I like about this website....it IS peer reviewed! On more than 1 occasion Gene has made edits to published articles based upon feedback from the forums. He always thanks the person for pointing out the error. That is how the system should work.
How can you possibly get a reliable and consistent peer review from subjective arguments? You can't.
Accurate audio reproduction is my end goal, and accurate audio reproduction is a SCIENCE. Science is data-driven.
Johnny2Bad
Audioholic Chief
Anyone who suggests cable parameters are "unmeasurable" has not measured any, nor availed themselves of the current literature where many examples have been measured in comparative tests. The question is what, if any, of those parameters are important, and whether those are audible, and under what conditions.
I have a distortion analyzer ... you can buy the same one if you want to throw $6000 at your favourite Measurement Equipment reseller. It's not an Audio Precision ... they start at twice that ... but it measures down the the H5 at very low levels. A good LCR meter that is capable of low value resolution (most aren't). A Tek 'Scope. And a bunch of other stuff.
My first paid job in Audio, at age 19, was building cable. That was 40 years ago.
When someone is sick or simply missing, at the premium acts that visit my city at the largest venue, they call me. Not second, not third. First. I get "comp" tickets to any act I want to see, provided I'm not too greedy. There are no buzzes, feedback, or dead connections when I do a show, at least on the stuff I work on.
I have multiple Rubbermaid tubs filled with various cables. I have never paid more than $100 for any cable, many in that tub I was given at no cost to me, and the ones where it does come near that figure you can count on one hand with some fingers left over. To say I am a proponent of "exotic" cables is to make up the accusation out of whole cloth.
To me, no piece of Audio gear ... component, interconnect, antenna, loudspeaker, interface, digital processor ... is of any use unless it offers unusual value. Anyone can throw together most of the audio equipment on the market, but there are examples that rise above the noise. I want to find them.
Cost does not equal Value, and it never has. I am interested in "cost no object" audio but only in the sense that I wonder if I can incorporate the same construction, parts quality, and design into lower cost examples, and which, exactly, of the features employed actually have value.
There are a lot of ways to stretch a dollar to achieve great things with a modest budget in this hobby. To do that means extracting every ounce of performance out of what you have and what you can afford. And those ounces might involve cable, and in particular low cost cable. There is no value in expensive interconnects when they require a disproportionate outlay of cash versus the rest of the system.
So, do we need specific construction, materials and termination? Which ones? Can they be achieved at low cost? That's the kind of stuff I'm interested in.
I read AES papers from many people. So (in this thread) I mention Hawkesford and get attacked as if I wrote his paper myself. Hey, I'm just interested in what the man says. I'm not marrying him.
Once, at this site, I opened a thread where i was going to compare three loudspeaker cables. I started with the L, C and R measurements of three 5 foot long examples ... none measured identical ly ... in my first post.
But before I could go further ... my plan was to do more comprehensive tests, publish the results here, and explore whether there were any audible differences by both ear *and* measurement ... I was bombarded with three pages of derisive posts. So I abandoned the project, and if I didn't "get it" before, I was made well aware of the position held by the active posters here. So every time I respond to whether this or that is "audible" I know to expect some pushback. Okay, a lot of pushback.
But I have thick skin, I don't take it personally, and I try to find members who at least are open minded.
There are people who want to learn, and there are people who are not just comfortable in their pre-determined positions, but adamant that there is no merit to further discussion or measurement. Good on you ... I wish I could live such a simple, uncomplicated life. I am cursed with curiosity.
I have a distortion analyzer ... you can buy the same one if you want to throw $6000 at your favourite Measurement Equipment reseller. It's not an Audio Precision ... they start at twice that ... but it measures down the the H5 at very low levels. A good LCR meter that is capable of low value resolution (most aren't). A Tek 'Scope. And a bunch of other stuff.
My first paid job in Audio, at age 19, was building cable. That was 40 years ago.
When someone is sick or simply missing, at the premium acts that visit my city at the largest venue, they call me. Not second, not third. First. I get "comp" tickets to any act I want to see, provided I'm not too greedy. There are no buzzes, feedback, or dead connections when I do a show, at least on the stuff I work on.
I have multiple Rubbermaid tubs filled with various cables. I have never paid more than $100 for any cable, many in that tub I was given at no cost to me, and the ones where it does come near that figure you can count on one hand with some fingers left over. To say I am a proponent of "exotic" cables is to make up the accusation out of whole cloth.
To me, no piece of Audio gear ... component, interconnect, antenna, loudspeaker, interface, digital processor ... is of any use unless it offers unusual value. Anyone can throw together most of the audio equipment on the market, but there are examples that rise above the noise. I want to find them.
Cost does not equal Value, and it never has. I am interested in "cost no object" audio but only in the sense that I wonder if I can incorporate the same construction, parts quality, and design into lower cost examples, and which, exactly, of the features employed actually have value.
There are a lot of ways to stretch a dollar to achieve great things with a modest budget in this hobby. To do that means extracting every ounce of performance out of what you have and what you can afford. And those ounces might involve cable, and in particular low cost cable. There is no value in expensive interconnects when they require a disproportionate outlay of cash versus the rest of the system.
So, do we need specific construction, materials and termination? Which ones? Can they be achieved at low cost? That's the kind of stuff I'm interested in.
I read AES papers from many people. So (in this thread) I mention Hawkesford and get attacked as if I wrote his paper myself. Hey, I'm just interested in what the man says. I'm not marrying him.
Once, at this site, I opened a thread where i was going to compare three loudspeaker cables. I started with the L, C and R measurements of three 5 foot long examples ... none measured identical ly ... in my first post.
But before I could go further ... my plan was to do more comprehensive tests, publish the results here, and explore whether there were any audible differences by both ear *and* measurement ... I was bombarded with three pages of derisive posts. So I abandoned the project, and if I didn't "get it" before, I was made well aware of the position held by the active posters here. So every time I respond to whether this or that is "audible" I know to expect some pushback. Okay, a lot of pushback.
But I have thick skin, I don't take it personally, and I try to find members who at least are open minded.
There are people who want to learn, and there are people who are not just comfortable in their pre-determined positions, but adamant that there is no merit to further discussion or measurement. Good on you ... I wish I could live such a simple, uncomplicated life. I am cursed with curiosity.
Last edited:
Bucknekked
Audioholic Samurai
Colin
There is a subjective nature to liking music or not liking music that is entirely outside of a scientific measurement discussion. If you like a particular musician or album, that's entirely up to you and really nobody else's opinion is better or more valuable than your own. Liking music is all about opinions. And where opinions matter, yours is as solid and valuable as anybody else's.
In the realm of measurements however we aren't relying on opinions as a basis point. There are real measurements to tell us if something is performing or not. One of the tell tale signs of snake oil products is their complete lack of measurement data relevant to the extraordinary claim being made. Any "change" by a snake oil product is considered an improvement, unless its not, then you try the next product in the line.
The difference between the two, opinions and measurements, is often defined by the question at hand. There is a place for opinions, and a place for measurements. Often, two rationale people can look at the same measurements (or set of facts in another setting other than audio) and come up with two different sets of meaning. That's human beings for you. But the measurements stand and they are what they are. Opinions and meaning are another story.
Bucknekked
Audioholic Samurai
ColinSo ask yourself why a simple discussion has to become heated ? it's like the purge on religion and saying my God that Blue
No it more basic than that "I say my God is best because I am bully I want control or just I WANT" Come on guys wire is only wire after all.
The combination of material make no effect if you enjoy the music and that what this should be about MUSIC and LIFE not F-------g wire. (excuse me)
I was going to let this one slide, but, I have a few minutes so here goes.....
Any discussion involving a deity and his/her characteristics, is by its very nature a faith based or belief based discussion. Nothing wrong with that. I have faith based and belief based discussions at Church all the time.
Its important to realize that it is just that: faith based.
Whether audio components perform or show measured capabilities is a science based, or measurement based discussion. This is a much different type of discussion with a whole different set of rules.
I can comment in a faith based discussion about some small miracle that occurred in my life. Usually, nobody in my discussion is going to ask me for a measurement or an experiment so they can duplicate the experience. Its the nature of faith based experiences : they are most times unique to the individual.
But, if I make a claim about my amplifier or my cable interconnects that's a bit extraordinary, I do expect people to ask for measurements or a way to duplicate the experience. If the claim is genuine, others should be able to duplicate it and replicate the claim.
Colin, the reason here on the AH cable capabilities and other similar snake oil types of gear gets so heated so quickly is that the topic has come up 100's of times. Often with the claimants coming from other forums where magic cables are as common as pennies and accepted at face value. If there is a "pet peeve" on a forum (composed of 100's of different viewpoints), the AH has a "pet peeve" about magical cables. If anyone wants to make cable claims, its pretty common to get pushback. On this thread, it has been very mild pushback. Read some of the other threads if you want to see real pushback.
Keep those posts coming. Good to have new ideas and viewpoints.
mtrycrafts
Seriously, I have no life.
Seems like you are totally confused with the issue of audible sonic differences and one's likes and dislikes.
Back to the drawing board for you.
mtrycrafts
Seriously, I have no life.
Here are link for the myth explanation:
https://www.snopes.com/science/bumblebees.asp
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2014/07/29/4056181.htm
The first assumption was that the bees' wings were flat plates that were mostly smooth (like aeroplane wings). The second assumption was that as air flows over an insect's wings, it would separate easily from the wing. Both of these assumptions turned out to be totally incorrect — and the origin of our myth.
The aerodynamicist's initial rough calculations 'proved' that insects could not fly. But that was not the end of the story.
Sitemap
Site Information
Site Information
HTML
