Speaker Wire Noob Thinking About Silver

slipperybidness

slipperybidness

Audioholic Spartan
Ok, i know what the run of the mill measurements are for a DAC, amp, etc and i understand it. But, since we are talking about measurements, i may have a couple of questions.

- My former house had lots of glass paneling in the room i was in. It sounded lousy/"glassy". I covered them all up with wood panels and it sounded a whole lot better. Measurements at my listening position were identical with the exposed glass vs glass covered with wood paneling. But, the sound changed. If you know any better, would you be able to show me a graph and point me to what measured variable it is that caused this change?

- I have a couple of R2R DACs that don't measure as well (if you look at the regular run of the mill measurements for a DAC) in comparison to some DS DACs i've had. But, this R2R DAC has a unbelievably precise and deep soundstage (oh yes, that illusive thing). Can you point me to a graph and a measured variable that shows why that soundstage is the way it is and why it can feel more precise and deep with usage of a certain DAC in a A/B test.

- I have some speakers with concentric drivers that sound very holographic. It literally feels like i can reach out and grab somebody (kinda like VR for the ears, as weird as this sounds). What is a measurement, graph, variable etc that can point to this?

These are legitimate things in my experience i am curious about. Can everything that is perceived by the human ear be measured and represented graphically/numerically? I think not. But, i stand corrected if it can be.
First item to consider/remember.....you ARE biased!

Bias is real, and bias is difficult to defeat! You may claim that you are unbiased, but many experiments have proven that humans have bias that WILL cloud your judgment!

If you see the gear, then you know what to expect, then you have an expectation bias, then you hear exactly what you expected to hear. This is exactly why your subjective comments cannot be considered reliable to yourself, much less to us.

I understand, this reality is a tough pill to swallow! This is why any subjective testing must be performed with proper Double Blind Testing protocols!

I am an analytical chemist by profession. It is quite common for me to delegate particular lab work to people that are less experienced than me, and have absolutely no idea on what the data "should look like". By doing that, I remove my bias from the analytical work, as I know what to expect and if I find something different than expectation, then I may start questioning the data as a first action, while the data was indeed real and we should have reacted to it vs. coming back to question it.
 
pcosmic

pcosmic

Full Audioholic
I have no idea what your point is here. Do you have one? I never claimed to have an accurate 3-D model of soundfields and their perception. In fact, I simply pointed out that a single frequency response sweep at a single position isn't sufficient to capture such complexities. So I take it you're just agreeing with me.



It's a common excuse because it's correct. So try a level-matched, double-blinded DAC comparison and listen for soundstage differences. Get back to me with your results. I've done such comparisons. I'm guessing you haven't.



I have no idea what your point is here either.



I have no idea what your point is here either. Nobody claimed what you're arguing against. Having a model of human hearing that incorporates brain processing is entirely different from knowing limits of human hearing.
Edit to add: I have no idea why you mention the 'bioengineering dudes' you know modeling the human spine. I don't recall the spine having much to do with hearing. Unless your ears are somehow located in a different place than mine, your auditory nerves don't go through the spine. They are cranial nerves. So I get the impression you're just bullsh!tting to try to impress us.
The point is, since no engineering team can currently prove to you with data that sitting in a glass box makes your music sound lousy, you should have no problems sitting in a glass box and cranking it up. If I am covering up my glass with wood to make it sound better, it is just unproven audiophool koolaid. You should be very happy cranking it up in a glass box.



The point is, if I am about a dB off (without level matching) and listening at a 88 dB baseline (swings up to a 100db)….and I can clearly point out that one DAC is a lousy flat blur and I perceive clear instrument separation and precise placement of it in a apparent 3D soundstage on another DAC, what does level matching of 1 dB accomplish man? I heard one at 87 dB and the other at 88dB baseline, so be it. That’s your excuse? a lack of level matching? I put 2 other non-audiophile musicians on a blindfold and randomly switched back and forth. They were able to tell the difference like night and day each and every fcking time. You will level match to the exact 1db dB and prove me a miracle? Or wait, do you have a coupla 10 dollar DACs and a 100 dollar speaker? If that’s the case, everything would sound the same to you, one big flat blur.



If I gathered every snippet of data from the manufacturer/designer for a specific speaker and threw a whole big pile of graphs, spreadsheets, spin-o-rama whatever and asked you to point to the exact snippet of data that shows this is why this speaker sounds a bit holographic. You couldn’t do that, could do? You simply don’t know why that phenomenon occurs, do you? Go read up something stale/simplistic on ASR, come back and let me know. I doubt many speaker designers out there even know why the speakers they make sound the way they do.



Is the human ear and a fcking mic equivalent as sensors? Is a DAQ and the human CNS equivalent? What you perceive as music is a very complex sensor’s signals interpreted by your very complex brain, about which you or the scientific community have very little understanding of. But, yep, a mic and a DAQ can prove everything for you, eh? Get outta here dude. The more you know, the more you start to realize how little you know. You obviously haven’t gotten there yet.
Since, you are merely scratching the surface with your rudimentary instrumentation (a mic and a DAQ whoop di doo), you could dismiss everything (you can't understand or model) as 'listener bias' and try to look brilliant on a forum, I suppose.
 
Last edited:
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Have any blind test experiments ever revealed that silver cable sounds different from copper? No? Case closed.
 
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Warlord
My hunch is that the windows under wood could be measured with an RT60 or waterfall graph.
 
M

Movie2099

Senior Audioholic
Have any blind test experiments ever revealed that silver cable sounds different from copper? No? Case closed.
Well........I mean AudioQuest has.....Maybe even Synergistic Research....Both high end and very reliable companies.
 
pcosmic

pcosmic

Full Audioholic
Well........I mean AudioQuest has.....Maybe even Synergistic Research....Both high end and very reliable companies.
article-2262927-16F68066000005DC-622_306x353.jpg


Thanks for the suggestion about AudioQuest. I checked with BestBuy. They mentioned that for Audioquest cables to work really well, ya gotta run another pair in parallel and stick it up the ass. It widens the soundstage and makes everything more 'organic', 'effervescent' and 'musical' when you are plugged in like that in your seated position along with your speakers.. I said no thanks and moved on. But, since you decided to take the plunge and got all wired up with Audioquest, is it actually sounding very organic and musical for you with bestbuy's recommended install?
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Well........I mean AudioQuest has.....Maybe even Synergistic Research....Both high end and very reliable companies.
"Reliable?" Both companies are frauds. I don't know what blind tests you think they have conducted, but if it was a legitimate comparison, they could publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal. They haven't done that, because that would expose them for the liars that they are.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Lol Fraudioquest and Thed's bullshit. Wonderful.
 
Pandaman617

Pandaman617

Audioholic
A few months back I did a blind A/B listening test with an associate of mine who is always raving about his $1,000+ cables and Wilson Audio speakers. He COULD NOT indicate an audible difference in sound quality with his OWN speakers and amplifier of his choosing as well as source material using his cables and my 10 AWG Knu Konceptz speaker cable that’s readily available for $35-$40 for 100’. Don’t buy into the crap hype you’ll read about on other sites and forums.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
"Reliable?" Both companies are frauds. I don't know what blind tests you think they have conducted, but if it was a legitimate comparison, they could publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal. ...
In a heart beat. :D
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
A few months back I did a blind A/B listening test with an associate of mine who is always raving about his $1,000+ cables and Wilson Audio speakers. He COULD NOT indicate an audible difference in sound quality with his OWN speakers and amplifier of his choosing as well as source material using his cables and my 10 AWG Knu Konceptz speaker cable that’s readily available for $35-$40 for 100’. Don’t buy into the crap hype you’ll read about on other sites and forums.
A $1000 cable? That is nothing.
How about a 5 figure cable and a $1million stand alone listening place, everything his except the 12 ga alternative cable:
Observations of a controlled Cable Test | AVS Forum
 
B

Beave

Senior Audioholic
I now regret responding to pcosmic.

Lesson learned.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top