zerogain name change -hi fi rage

[mosfet]

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

Paul

A common belief among believers of various persuasions (alternative medicine, the paranormal and so on) is that scientific understanding lags behind their experience and this, in itself, can become proof to the believer the phenomena in question is real e.g. manifest in reality and not in the mind. This belief is routinely demonstrated by cable believers.

I recognise the possibility resistance, reactance and capacitance does not solely account for cable sound, however the probability this is the case, given what is known about electrical transmission from DC to GHz, is remote. I also recognise the possibility the moon has a man living inside it.

Generally speaking, believers always have problems with the mundane. There has to be more..

 

[sastusbulbas]

If you can draw it that might help.

This was regarding the L shaped room I use mainly!

Think of the long part of the L being my longest wall, with the foot of the L being the largest square within the L shaped room.
The way I have it segmented at the moment is with speakers and equipment on the long wall, the HiFi equipment sits in the smaller part of the L (small dining area) against the long wall. the speakers fire into the largest square, set up as if it was a regular room with an imaginary wall dividing the top part of the L (the smallest section).
I sort of look at it as a big square, with a little square to its right where I set up the electronics.
Its not too big, very roughly, 8-9ft ceiling, long wall is around 25ft?, main wall to its right around 15ft? the left 10ft? (I have been drinking whisky)

Speakers are 2m apart, 40cm from back wall, the left is about 1m from side wall, the right has the small square part of the L to its right, bass cabs are firing straight, with heads toed in just in front of listening point, which is about 2.5m-3m away.

Some of the room can be seen in the photo section of The-Crooked-Path forum website. The first few photo's are of my main listening area.

The room is poor, probably a good place to try Tact or similar?

 

[cooky1257]

A common belief among believers of various persuasions (alternative medicine, the paranormal and so on) is that scientific understanding lags behind their experience and this, in itself, can become proof to the believer the phenomena in question is real e.g. manifest in reality and not in the mind. This belief is routinely demonstrated by cable believers.

I recognise the possibility resistance, reactance and capacitance does not solely account for cable sound, however the probability this is the case, given what is known about electrical transmission from DC to GHz, is remote. I also recognise the possibility the moon has a man living inside it.

Generally speaking, believers always have problems with the mundane. There has to be more..

In the interests of decent behaviour and the fact I just read the announcement 'after' I'd posted something that was out of order I've removed it (without being told to, might I add

 

[shrink]

wow, some funny stuff in here.


All i will say is that I firmly believe cables can make a difference. There arent always rational explanations for it and im fairly certain that everything that defines the sound of a product is not easilly measured, if measurable at all. Im almost certain there is more to how something sounds than its LCR characteristics.

Its all very well saying that any differences in cables can be measured, and if a cables measures the same, then it will sound the same. Well how do we know we're measuring the right thing? What if, the very thing that defines a cables sound, is something that we simply do not know how to measure.

Thats like me defining a priceless painting by measuring how much red, green and blue is in it. Perhaps a painting with greater red content is more pleasing to the eye than one with increased blue. That as im sure any logical person is aware, is an over simplification of the matter.

You can define a painting by its size, its composition, what the paint is made from, what colours are in it, how light or how dark it is and what ths subject matter is. What you cant measure, is how it makes you feel. Thats because its art, and has unmeasurable qualities.

Music, just as with paintings has effects on the human mind that go far beyond what is measurable. I see no reason why it cannot be the same with hifi and all its associated periphery.

There will no doubt be elements to a systems performance that cannot be rationally measured. Do they need to be?

What matters at the end of the day is how something makes you feel. If someone feels that kit A sounds better than kit B, and it makes them enjoy their music more. Then so be it. I see no reason to argue that point, or to belittle their feelings and opinions.

Anyone reducing music and its reproduction to just a bunch of figures, graphs, statistics and measurements, is surely missing the whole point of listening to music.

 

[bottleneck]

What if, the very thing that defines a cables sound, is something that we simply do not know how to measure.

This is of course possible, but from what I have read and know incredibly unlikely.

Of course, none of the major audiophile cable manufacturers publish the LCR or their cables (that I am aware of), nor offer to impedance match your equipment.

why? a few possible explanations..
* keeping the basic science ''mysterious'' keeps the buying public in the dark and protects large profit margins
* it would remove the perceived ''differences'' between cables and the brand awareness they have paid to build
* scarily, perhaps because they don't measure the LCR when building a cable and make some kind of blindfolded bodge.

This last point makes me shake my head in wonder, and swear to stick to professionally made studio cables.

 

[Stereo Mic]

Reproduction of the recorded arts is a science - not an art form.

An excellent post by Bottleneck. A cable believer citing that we don't know how to measure them is to me as valid as saying that ghosts exist but we cannot yet measure their presence. I suspect there are some on this forum as everywhere who wholeheartedly believe in ghosts and the spirit world. I personally don't as there exists no objective evidence of their existance.

 

[ADPully]

Reproduction of the recorded arts is a science - not an art form.

Note removed as requested by SM


Designing equipment and general reproduction is a science yes but getting the most out a system in a given situation is an art.

Andy

 

[bottleneck]

In audio, I believe creativity (or 'art' if you like) can be seen in design.

Take for example Shinobiwan's design of new speakers in the DIY forum. It's not hard to appreciate the form. It's a combination of art and science you could say.

I wouldn't agree that an understanding of how hif works, how room modes affect sound, how speaker placement can alter a measured response has 'art' - it's known and measured - science.

 

[ShinOBIWAN]

Anyone reducing music and its reproduction to just a bunch of figures, graphs, statistics and measurements, is surely missing the whole point of listening to music.

A pair of ears didn't get us to the understanding of audio we have now. It seems that because we hear with ears and see with eyes then visual interpretive information about music/kit isn't relevant ie. any measurement or data.
The average listener probably doesn't care but the science is a steady ground to tread and offers quantifiable performance feedback that can be used to harness the true intent of a loudspeaker and or component.

Being rational about this. I don't think measurements have any basis when listening to music but if your tweaking a system, needing feedback or designing a component then they really are invaluable. Folks need to make a distinction and realise the science guy and the subjective guy are the same person when it comes to decent audio.

 

[Stereo Mic]

Folks need to make a distinction and realise the science guy and the subjective guy are the same person when it comes to decent audio.

What about when subjective guy says they get a jaw dropping improvement of 75.325% in all areas when fitting something the objective guy can measure to be electrically and acoustically identical to the outgoing part?

 

[ADPully]

No thats crap. I don't believe that. Kindly delete that rubbish.

I will gladly. But Please dont amend my own quotes again.

Andy

 

[Stereo Mic]

If you ask me not to I won't. Can you point the offending one out?

 

[ADPully]

If you ask me not to I won't. Can you point the offending one out?

Im just off out for a works "funday" I will try and locate it later.
Thanks for the reciprocation.

Andy

 

[ShinOBIWAN]

What about when subjective guy says they get a jaw dropping improvement of 75.325% in all areas when fitting something the objective guy can measure to be electrically and acoustically identical to the outgoing part?

Then subjective guy needs to take some pills.

What I was really trying to put across is that people sit, enjoy and don't care about anything but the experience and by the same token also use the theory or data to get them there and to evaluate and fix problems.

When it comes to audio I think a definite balance is to be struck and you need to know that blanketing everything with one approach or the other isn't what good system or component design is about.

 

[Stereo Mic]

When it comes to audio I think a definite balance is to be struck and you need to know that blanketing everything with one approach or the other isn't what good system or component design is about.

Absolutely, but the question that arises is with regards to subjective differences that you cannot later confirm.

Let's say, as a DEQX user, you load three filters, or with TACT, five target curves. You don't look at them and decide which you prefer - you sit and listen at length and decide which sounds better to you at the listening position.

But once you have decided, you can look at the screen and see you chose say a shelving down of 2db at 1khz or a gentle roll off from 8khz - you can see the reasons for the sound, and over time, you can associate one with the other - understand what that shelf will subjectively sound like in the midrange or with regards to bass response. Once you've reached this stage - measurements tell you a lot, but at the end of the day they serve to confirm the reasons for audible differences - not as a blueprint for sonic bliss (although ATC might argue with that)

What we have a problem with is cable advocates claiming huge jaw dropping improvements when any glance at relevent measurements shows absolutely no difference whatsoever. At that point, the subjective experience is clearly unsatisfactory, and controlled conditions are required to confirm the orginial findings. Of course they never do, leaving us to conclude that the original subjective response was in the mind and not genuine. At this point, despite all of the reasoning, subjective man gets mad! Possibly because they don't understand the relevence of measurements in the first place?

 

[lordsummit]

Can you all make sure you have read the announcement at the top of the forums thank-you. I'll delete any obnoxious posts I find.

 

[sastusbulbas]

If you have two cables with identical conductors, if both have different dielectric will they sound the same?

How much of a difference can the dielectric make?

And what about synergy, if Amplifier A is quite stable driving any old cable, but Amp B goes to the funny farm, and Amp C has such poor resolution it makes no difference wether you put wet string or knicker elastic on it, In what way does this affect the users attitude toward cable!

To be honest with some of the hype and expectations some users of basic best buy What Hi Fi component have regarding cable, and no doubt the age of some of the older classic kit and the effect age has on its internal components and hearing accuity of some, no wonder with all the internet hype and know alls, and all the magazine hype with high resolution systems in well set up locations and colourful language, no wonder there is so much disapointment and stubborn attitude.

 

[Purite Audio]

Presumably this means that any equipment wired with silver is also just foo foo?

 

[sastusbulbas]

For instance, Ecosse Baton XLR, well designed, nice to look at, but in my system Chord Anthem XLR seems to have better low frequency extension and resolution?

The Batton defininitly seems blurred and softened at the lower frequencies in comparison. Is this in my head, or down to synergy? Or is it an actual cable trait!

For instance, could the wrong cable in the wrong system produce a warm bland sound with no impact or slam? And would it be wise to blame the room or system and try to aleviate this with EQ, or experiment with the cable first?

I remember an old argument regarding amplifiers, it is either good or not, I cannot help but feel this may have been another near discussion on how all good amps should sound the same, and cable should have no affect.

Sadly though, plenty of amp and speaker combo's do seem to have subtle effects landed on them by cable choice. I myself do not think this equates to poor ancillaries, but points to remind us there is the subjective performance of a group of components as a whole to consider in its chosen enviroment, not the individual component.

Is it an indication of room, amp or user problem, if someone feels the need to reposition speakers with an amplifier change? Should this happen, or should all speakers need the same position with all amps?

Should a digital cable be capable of affecting the size width and height of soundstage?

How does a user draw the line if hearing something which should not be according to blurb?

 

[Stereo Mic]

Keith,

If Kondo's theories about aged silver were correct, would it not stand to reason that an an older Ongaku would sound better than a new one?

Your question is an impossible one. We have no measurements. What we do know is that the difference in loop resistance between silver and copper is negligable when taken as part of an overall equation - but there is a difference . We also know that Kondo equipment sounds utterly delightful and convincing, but I would question whether the power amplifiers in particular, accurately reproduce the signal.

Has anyone blind tested electrically identical circuits comparing silver and copper? What can you provide to cause me to believe that silver is an essential ingrediant in high quality audio?