Not another cable debate...

...but just a thought on why equipment sonds better when warm!

Just to put the record straight

1) I believe speaker cables sound Different
2) I believe mains cables make a difference
3) I believe lots of things make a difference and not all can be explained by science.

There are some out there who pour scorn on us believers, as they spout measurements, testing, psychoaccoustic effects etc, to disprove what we are hearing.

we've been through all the debates.

The one thing both camps get closest to agreeing on is that equipment sounds better when warm, although it seems the easiest to dispell, the science doesn't corelate the fact that electronics (in Hifi) sound better when warm.

The facts(?) are that electric conduction should get more efficient as temp drops, but most seem to agree that cold amps sound glassy and bright.

Could the answer be that when designing amps the designer tailors the sound when the equipment is warm, and that at lower temperatures the equipment may be working more efficiently, but doesn't automatically sound good, we all know that computer chips run faster the cooler you make them, but in the context of sound, faster does not nescesarily mean better.

I might of course be talking utter shite but it's late and I'm out my face so apologies just thought it would make interesting debate.

Paul

 

Hi. In my humble opinion it really depends what you understand by science. This is my understanding.

If you come to the conclusion that something makes your hifi sound different after you personally listen to it then you have carry out the first step in recording a scientific observation.

On the other, if you believe some thing like different speaker cables etc, should make your hifi sound different but you do not listen to it first before coming to that conclusion then that believe is not based on scientific observation.

Agree?

 

what,so if its not science,its............................the PARANORMAL!!??

i think you have passed your first cable reviewer exam

 

Everything can be explained by science as long as you know all the factors involved and everything that influences the sound we hear. Fact is it's rather complicated and nobody has worked it out or proven everything yet.

imho the dielectric is very important, particularly for interconnects. Teflon tends to give a very distinct sound.

 

sorry that is incorrect

not getting involved in cable debate tho

 

Correct penance was not wanting this to turn into cable debate, stated my beliefs so ppl know which side I'm on, but am genuinely curious as to why equipment sounds "different when warm.

So guys not inteseted in why cables work this has been covered extensively, so what are peoples thoughts on why there might be differences between warm or cold temperatures.

 

Just for the record, im with you on this one

 

At the most basic level, electrical properties of conductors changes at different temperature. So why are you so surprise your box of elecronics sound a bit different at different temperature?

By the way, I notice my toaster makes nicer toast bread after they are nicely warm up first. The first slide are unevenly brown. However, the second and third are very very tasty.

 

I must have missed that one

Metallic conductors have higher conductivity at low temperatures, but this is completely different from saying an audio circuit will work best at low temperatures. In general you'd expect that a given piece of equipment is designed with a given set of electrical parameters in mind - and in a sensible design, these electrical parameters should be what you've got when the device is running at its normal operating temperature.

 

I know the physics behind this, but all the non believers will argue that electronics should be more efficient therefore better, I just thought of a hypothesis, as to why more efficient may NOT equal BETTER sound.

So is the reason cause products are warm when the designers "tune" them.

Thoughts please and stay away from cables.

 

i take this as meaning you are thinking along same lines, peter?

 

How is it not correct? Are you religious?

 

science can not explain what is at the end of space for a start.
there are many things that can not be explained by science
no im not religious, would it be a problem if i was?

 

A line is a conductor right?

I guess they know that their box of semiconductors are going to get warm after a while. Therefore the circuit should be tune with the ideal operating temperature in mind not when the amplifier is cool.

By the way, what do you mean by the word science?

 

My choice of the word may be somewhat vague, by using it you should assume it to mean, the physical pricipals of electronics and the measurements used there-in. i.e the subjective differences some people hear cannot be explained by any parameters we can measure.

Paul

 

Science could explain that if we knew all the factors involved, as I said originally. You just took part of what I said, I had qualified the statement somewhat.

Anyway imho there is far more chance of us explaining cables than of explaining the universe!

 

amen!

 

(If you consider this a rehash of what PeteH and wolfgang have already said, you may have a point )

It seems there're a couple of things to get straight here...
a) The physical and electronic properties of everything change with temperature - no discussion there.
b) "Fast" in hi-fi terms: whatever else it means, it has nothing to do with frequency response - the "slowest" amp in the world will still have a reasonable frequency response up to 20kHz (and anything above 22.05 kHz in a CD based system is being made-up, arguably reasonably so, by the system).

Assuming boxes are not being designed to totally unrealistic parameters (e.g. zero resistance of wires etc), the design will involve some degree of balances of and/or compensation for real-world RLC parameters. As the temperature changes the degree of these compensations, and the effects for which they are compensating will change, so things will be less accurate at a temparature other than the design temperature - and so will probably sound worse.

Whenever a device is designed it will be designed to a tolerance, and the tighter the tolerance the tighter the will be the temperature spec. to achieve that tolerance. As a general rule, people design for a steady-state operating temperature, i.e. the temperature at which the component will sit comfortably when running long-term. It could of course be designed at initial turn-on temp, but in that case you'd probably only be able to listen to it for 10 mins before then having to turn it off for an hour or three before it sounds good again. There are I guess valid questions as to the design process that requires a week-long warm up before it comes on song (e.g. my CDP), but if that's what it takes to achieve the design goal, then so be it.

Frequencies in hi-fi (as opposed to computing) are so far off the margins off possible performance of electronic components we are not worrying about pushing the boundaries of technology (although the boundaries of economics may be pushed harder). Hence saying that you can get your computer to run faster if you cool/freeze the CPU may well be true, but that's a completely different effect to the quality parameters of interest in hi-fi.

I think this says more about the believer than the non-believer. I doubt that ANY non-believer would say such a thing, as it shows a complete lack of understanding of any of the physical principles involved, which is the basis of the non-believers' arguments.

As a sceptic/agnostic in these matters, I believe that everything that can be heard (as opposed to merely perceived) is explainable by science - but that our current understanding may not be good enough to explain it today.

 

Is that it?

The reason I ask is because I think the misunderstanding is the past is people are talking about different things. I do agree that just because you could not measure the obvious audible differences it does not means they are not real. Maybe the tools we have to measure are not sensitive enough or they are measuring the wrong things all together.

I also agree that just because I could not hear the differences it does not means your observation is wrong. I could simply refuse to allow myself to take notice of the differences even if it is staring in front of me.

Question is how do you demonstrate the presence or absence of differences convincingly that they are not imaging by some of us all along?

 

If you mean, do I recognise that the physical properties (specifically electrical parameters in the cases under discussion, or possibly magnetic parameters if you want to talk about speakers warming up too) of materials change with temperature, then yes, of course. If you mean, have I heard a difference between my system running cold and running warm, then no, although I acknowledge that such a difference certainly exists physically and that said difference may be large enough to be audible.

And if you mean, do I believe in magic wires, racks, etc., or do I believe that anyone can hear immeasurably small differences, then categorically no, I don't.