zerogain name change -hi fi rage

I haven't hurled a single insult in your direction at all, but I am trying to put across the simple notion that for you to say "I have science on my side gives me the right to denigrate whatever you do" is crossing some lines that you seem to think does not exist, hence you get some errrrrm . . . robust responses from other folks.

By all means think quietly to yourself "fools" if we freely choose to ignore your sage wisdoms because that is our prerogative, but that's all you should do - THINK IT and the forum will become a far happier place

 

Effem, if someone asks about upgrading their system, and someone posts "try upgrading to Transparent Opulant - it's far better and will remove your bass boom", I won't sit there and think "idiot", I will try and prevent the poster getting misled. My objective is to give people genuinely good advice that can help them get a better sound - and I am not trying to sell them anything.

You can't seriously be suggesting I don't respond for fear of upsetting some people's belief structures?

 

Young sir, if that is your sole objective then what reason could I or anyone else find to complain about? Maybe it's your style of posting that comes across a bit too assertive? Very often what I believe to be good sound advice gets overturned or ignored because that is the nature of forums at times

 

Possibly progress.

If it measures differently then maybe it is? Good. How do we know the measurements are the right ones?

If you look at the various measurements done then cables seems to have stayed in the past for too long. For amps we have seen considerable progress. For something simple like power we have progressed from how the amp heats a 8 ohm resistor (what a simple way to measure a complex parameter) to how an amp powers lower value impedances to more complex transient power response measurements.

A major revolution has occurred in speaker measurements particularly with digital measuring techniques.

But cables seem stuck with very simple LCR measurements. If this is applied to the theory then they do not account for anything really. This could be because there any no differences or we may need to review the measurements.

It was therefore good to see someone look at this issue again. Noel Keywood followed up some work done in the US which looked quite interesting. Unfortunately, MiB tells me he rescinded his results a month later. So if no one is actually working in this area I suspect we will be stuck with the 'my (simple?) measurements are good therefore there are no differences when my measurements say so'

"What matters can't always be measured and what gets measured doesn't always matter. "

 

That has been and remains my objective. This was communicated to the mods before I came back, and a long time before all of this kicked off. I told them what I thought was wrong and they seemed to agree.

They would no doubt prefer I said what I do in a more pleasant manner but on the internet, but experience tells me there's no nice way to tell someone that they have been proven wrong.

And I don't like internet traders using the forums as playgrounds for grooming their clients. Sorry. It's a bugbear of mine. I want good impartial advice - not sales brochures and spec sheets dressed up as questions or advice. I think I have the right to question those people - don't you?

 

If I may interject.
Mike, How do you know that the 'suggested' cables aren't in fact radicaly different spec'd to the ones an enquirer is currently using ?
Surely you should be in a position to quote the figures and back up your assertion that the offered/suggested cables are in fact an unsuitable ripoff rather than what would appear a doctrinaire and blanket approach on your part.
When your own cables are what I and many forum users would call ridiculously overpriced wankwire you're position is somewhat untenable in spite of the logic.ie A classic do as I say not as I do.
Or it it the only wankwire allowed is the one you use?
On a more hopefully productive note would your expertise and passions not bear more fruit if instead you say campaigned for all cable sales to be on a compulsory sale or return basis?
I'd fully support that.

 

purely as a matter of personal opinion and from what I have read, knowledge over interconnects and speaker cable for audio purposes seems a very mature science.

Such things are (I'm sure no-one would argue) just a piece of wire with plugs on the end. In terms of electronics, it just doesn't get much simpler than this.

Funnily, this whole debate around cables is NOT.. from the posts that I've read... ''cables can't make a change in sound'' rather a better supposition, namely: "cables can sound different to each other if they measure differently in terms of LCR. Changes in construction can change the LCR. There are many ways to change the LCR, some methods are cheaper than others".


Finally, I'd suggest it would be very difficult to get two pairs of loudspeakers from different manufacturers to provide exactly the same waterfall plots, and other graphed results. Simply due to the number and range of parameters (drive units, crossovers, litre size of the cabinet, construction etc). I'd suggest the same difficulty doesn't apply to interconnects and speaker cables.

That's my personal view, and I'd be genuinely happy to be shown to be wrong.

 

No progress. That's always been the position. Please read the thread.

In the absense of any evidence of unexplained phenomena it seems reasonable to accept them. If contradictory evidence existed (let us say verifiable examples of electrically identical cables sound different to a representative group), then maybe we have to look for the reason. At the moment, why would we invest time and money in looking for the reason for hearsay?

Would you not agree that there is a sizable difference between the complexity of an amplifier and a cable? Probably not actually but hopefully you get my point. At the end of the day, if anyone can reliably identify cable differences under controlled conditions, then maybe it would then be worth looking for the reasons. Would you not at least agree with that? That it's a waste of time looking for something that experience tells us is not there?

 

Even if they are (which is unlikely IME) there is absolutely no guarantee that they will perform better or audibly different in the poster's system - there is every likelyhood that they will not produce the results the respondant claims because his system is different. This is the main reason Kessler eventually refused to review cables - they are totally unpredicable from one piece of equipment to the next.

Ignoring the faintly sarcastic tone, I have already pointed out that my cables actually have cost me minus £140. If I choose to change them I will. It might interest you that my home made crossovers use terminal blocks and freebie cabling throughout - maplins banana plugs and sockets. I wouldn't be able to sell those bits on you see. Some people claim it doesn't sound too shabby.

As for the suggestion about sale or return - you only have to look at the returns figures for these types of business to know what a successful model it is - it ranks up there with the dreaded cashback in terms of proven profitablity.

You do have a money back guarantee anyway. 14 days under the distance selling regs. Just make sure you buy on the net. The thing is though, when you place that order, you WANT those cables to sound great.

 

That's because for audio cables in short lengths bulk LCR is, unfortunately, all there is.

Paul

 

The fact that you've done a bit of dealing to show a net profit on your w**kwire doesn't excuse you of using it-it'd still be w**kwire even if you were paid to use it.
The fact there's no guarantee it will work is an eroneous statement because if it doesn't work you can get your money back.
Ok, maybe campaign to have the return paid by the w**kwire shop-it's the hassle and cost(unbelievable I know) of making a return that puts people off.
You could be hifi's answer to that tw@ off Watchdog.

 

mic

blimey, i think you just need to r-e-l-a-x a little. take up a hobby or something.

 

Still curious John. Cryptic short messages aren't really helping me here. Could you kindly answer the questions I ask you?

 

mic

how blunt do i need to be...

a lot of your posts give the impresion that they are written by an over anxious teenager.

 

Why?

 

That has been and remains my objective. This was communicated to the mods before I came back, and a long time before all of this kicked off. I told them what I thought was wrong and they seemed to agree.

They would no doubt prefer I said what I do in a more pleasant manner but on the internet, but experience tells me there's no nice way to tell someone that they have been proven wrong.

And I don't like internet traders using the forums as playgrounds for grooming their clients. Sorry. It's a bugbear of mine. I want good impartial advice - not sales brochures and spec sheets dressed up as questions or advice. I think I have the right to question those people - don't you?



read this

 

Sorry John,

I am utterly fed up with having to justify myself to you or anyone else.

I've been on ZG since it's inception as have you. I'm pissed off with it becoming a laughing stock. So are a hell of a lot of other esteemed former contributors judging from the support I get via PM and email from all sides.

For simply correcting some of the misguided bullshit that has spread across ZG over the past few months like a brain eating cancer, I get personal abuse on a daily basis simply for fighting for something I care about. Then you fucking accuse me of acting like a teenager? Nice. Do you care about anything John?

 

Michael you have as far as I'm aware never had a remit to act in any way after you returned from your last ban. I do not wish you to imply that we condone your stance on the forum.

 

Digital cable, I think I asked something about this somewhere before, and on another forum I mentioned "standing waves", which I am lead to believe occur when impedence is mismatched at either source/cable/recieving clock? This apparently causes certain problems I am sure you are aware of more than I am. High frequency attenuation due to dielectric constants is another matter which can apparently affect performance? Maybe a reason why some DAC's with reclocking are less sensitive to cables?
Which reminds me of another discussion regading balanced, RCA diferences, and transformer coupling....... which is another thing which I know little about ....

Anyway. Though the above may cause jitter and aditive and subtractive errors, I am not sure if this could lead to the afore mentioned timbre, dynamics and timing? Could it?

My own experience when chosing between two certain brands and models of digital RCA cable had me question what may be going on in this matter (as both sounded different in a peculiar area), but though digital is different from analogue RCA, I think its results due to cable type, dialetric and impedance or whatever may be easier to investigate and explain?

 

Come on chaps lets take this to PM and call each other wankers, then shake hands and realise there's life outside of this.

Seriously though, Mike I agree with your stance regarding cables but I think you made all your good and rational points a few pages back. What your doing now is seemingly feeding back into what you hate most about forums - their degeneration.

I hope you don't take this post the wrong way.