new scientist

Hello all, just thought I'd give a status report on the 'fact finding' mission I'm on. I have recieved no reply to either email sent (both R. Andrews and Ray Kimber). Will give them till Friday then will send another. If this fails to bring about a response I shall try the trusty pen and paper if I can get the relavent addresses. The purchase of the 'Black Book Vol 1' by Ben Duncan has been processed and should hopefully arrive before the weekend. If anyone has some other angles of approach for finding what research there is already out there on this topic I'm open to suggestions. Cheers Ben.

 

Ben, you could try contacting RA via his web log.

http://russandrews.blogspot.com/

 

Why not try a letter bomb? They seem to be somewhat 'in vogue' at the moment.

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

Loudspeaker cables, yes. But only by virtue of differences in cable DC resistance causing audible power loss at loudspeaker minima impedance.

The rest: all the proven understanding, all the evidence (what there is from blind listening trials), all the marketing and most anecdote strongly suggests listener suggestibility as the most likely explanation.

The other possibility, that there is some other as yet unknown explanation, is a favourite for all manner of woo woo and crank ideas. This possibility, because it is a possibility, isn’t however an explanation. Although it is often given as and believed to be such.

 

This "explanation", although perfectly feasible, is completely contrary to my own experiences and those of many other people I know personally.

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

Don't take this the wrong way Paul, but personally I don't give much credibility to anecdotal evidence most especially where it apparently contradicts fact. Subjective evidence is useful, not to be dismissed out of hand, but really very unreliable.

I've tried asking various cable vendors why their cables are better than what I'm using at the moment (2.5mm copper loudspeaker cable and shielded coax interconnect). A pertinent question I think.

The answer I get is always the same. Either an attempt to convince me with bogus science or what I call the try it and see mantra. The try it and see mantra has been used as a dupe for a long time to sell all types of product - relying exclusively on human psychology to be effective. And very successful it is too (even made an appearance on a recent edition of The Real Hustle).

When I get an answer that isn't either of these then I'll certainly try!

 

mosfet, try some of zanash's silver ribbon speaker cable.

silver is a better conductor than copper, ribbon has more surface area per cross section than wire, signal transmits largely due to skin effect at audio frequencies.

more skin, better conductor, sounds reasonable to me.

infact it sounds more than reasonable, it sounds sharp, unhazed and slightly more focussed... and all for about 1/5 the cost of some high end copper crap.

 

I know what you are getting at there, but I think it is also a very good way to see if something makes a difference for you. And that is what really matters when buying something like that. I don't think you can put someone down for saying 'give it a go and see what you think'. They might actually believe in their product!

Are you sure about that? I thought it was mainly an effect at radio frequencies.

 

The try it and see thing works mainly because in a large number of cases, people simply don't get round to returning the product even if they decide it hasn't worked for them. So in fact you can make money this way even if none of your customers actually find the thing to be any good. It all depends on how persuasive your marketing is, and if it contains inaccurate claims then really it's a scam.

 

No offence taken, Mosfet. I don't give much credibility to "facts" that don't take into consideration things that are important or of relevance to me.

I agree, but since the appreciation of hi-fi is as far as I'm concerned subjective then subjective evidence based on practical experience is to me what matters most. Regardless of what science says I will always use my ears to make hi-fi decisions.

Yes it is a pertinent question and I admire you for asking it - them responding with bogus science is quite predictable, however I see nothing wrong in the "try it and see mantra". If you accept their offer all you then have to do is listen and trust your ears. I don't see the difficulty in that. Or don't you have faith in what you hear? Strangely, this fairly basic skill seems to be a problem for the scientifically minded fraternity. The danger of fuelling your mind with scepticism is when it unhelpfully interferes with your decision making process.

I don't doubt that happens but as far as hi-fi is concerned there comes a point when you have to trust your ears otherwise making a decision about anything becomes problematic, and I don't have the energy. All I want is to listen to music so when I audition equipment, cables, or whatever, my sole criteria is what improves the sound the most to my ears, and to get the process over and done with as soon as possible. Anything else is completely and utterly irrelevant.

I think you could be waiting a very long time!

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

Good point, and very true!

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

Let's have some numbers. To help you there's an easy guide to skin effect here.

Paul

 

Do you fancy a game of Bingo?

Paul, why not just listen to what sounds best, or is that too simple?

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

interesting read ...a lot of assumptions are made ie lets assume that etc.... its a bit thin on conclusions to ? ie its doubtful you'd be able to tell the difference between copper and silver ....It then becomes obvious to me that this is just theoretical peice, other wise it would have said something like.. the audio differences between the conductors was clear.

Having built identical ic's from copper, silver, aluminum and gold I've heard the change in flavour they make.

The maths looks ok ...

some interesting bits on stranded cable too.

 

squirrel is claiming specific well known physical effects are the cause of differences in sound. It's reasonable to ask him to elaborate.

Paul

 

Zanash, the criteria I use for judging cables are simple: which ones make music more enjoyable to listen to?

Nothing else really matters.

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

Indeed it is. Carry on.

Are you sure you don't want a game of Bingo?

-------------------------------------
Paul

 

The trouble is that, in general, they aren't actually clear at all.

Paul

 

This is correct. Radio engineers have to allow for it. At audio frequencies it is negligible. Here's an analysis by Dr. Jim LeSurf, retired university physics lecturer and audio enthusiast.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/skineffect/page1.html

He shows that the difference brought about by skin effect at audio frequencies is that some frequencies will arrive at the listener's ear 16 microns (micrometres) before the others. Can't see that making much audible difference.

 

Equally, the danger of fuelling your mind with too little scepticism is that you are taken in by everything on a subjective "first listen" and end up buying stuff that in the long term (once its psychological novelty value has worn off) you realise doesn't make the slightest bit of difference.

Then again, auditioning absolutely everything you hear / read something good about also saps the energy somewhat ... the sceptical approach does help to narrow down your shortlist at least.

Anyway, I'm not really trying to argue with you, Paul, I know what you're saying.