Seeking education about those ultra-expensive interconnects - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Liked: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

Minus the English, AES papers, peer review, sanity, etc. Sure.

LTS is their AES chapter and his work has been public for decades for the world to read. Besides, you don't have any idea of what peer review it means anyway. I do because researchers on my team were the "peer review" for major conferences on audio processing. Peer review does NOT mean anyone is agreeing with the findings of the paper. It simply means the people did not flunk college classes. So the weight you all put on them is without merit.

What papers have you had published? AES? Sanity? Nothing.

Quote:
Except for "diffraction", smooth directivity/off axis, compression, etc. or anything else remotely linked to competent loudspeaker design. Sure.

So his speaker design methodology has some bearing on amplifier tests? You whine about strawman arguments all the time yet, do it all the time. The guy designs speakers differently than you would so he must not know anything about amplifier tests? You know, the part you asked me about. Amplifier testing.

Quote:
Did you do any work on the Revels you sell? The Paradigms? I'm trying to follow your "New Age" logic here. Did I miss your input on these designs??

You didn't miss anything because unlike you, I don't take their data and pretend it is mine and parrot it. That I can read word for word from your posts.

Quote:
Weren't you working on that cool blue screen window thing at Microsoft when the Revels were developed?

No, I was working on Unix operating system, you know, the thing that runs under Mac OS and is the parent of Linux operating system. Since the next post is going to be the famous, "you lied, you have never done that" let me preempt and save us some noise: http://www.amazon.com/Optimizing-UNI...8855297&sr=8-2

So now what is your contribution to field of computers?

Damn: that thing is going for $71! When I wrote it two decades back, it retailed for $25.

Quote:
I swear if you send me a shuffler (stereo) for Christmas, I'll start testing.

Got it. So anyone from here on can claim their subjective impressions are right since no one is sending them an ABX fixture to test things . Look, it is fine to not have the test equipment to perform proper testing. What is not fine is then claiming in absence of that, you are still right. And to attempt to wear the objective badge. You are subscribing to pure subjectivity there. An excuse doesn't change that nature of that.

Quote:
Ok, gotta run for now, see ya soon.

I would too if someone had just post a video of something I said did not exist!

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

There may indeed be spurious little groups of electrons doing interesting acrobatics in a wire or circuit BUT, if they do no harm to the devices AND are undetectable in the bandwidth of our hearing and sight, what are you so concerned with them in THIS frame of reference?

.

I think this is where the rubber meets the road. I think audiophiles way overemphasize their hearing abilities and think they can hear like bats. In the normal world, most people are just concerned about hearing "normally" and how they will afford hearing aids if they are lucky enough to make it into old age.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #633 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:18 PM
Senior Member
 
hevi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by rock_bottom View Post

Hevi, what is the reason for using this gated sin^2 pulse in the first place? What's usually desired is the actual impulse response or one of the many things that can be derived from it (step response, magnitude and phase of the frequency response and so on). It seems to me that someone seeing the data may be misled into thinking what's being shown is the actual impulse response.

I mentioned that in an earlier post. The 0.2us Sin^2 pulse has the bulk of its energy in the audible range of the spectrum whilst still being "short", and at the same time its shape lends itself well for this kind of "visual inspection" excersizes. The Sin^2 has been used in signal processing since the age of dawn to check for reflections and other artifacts, just because of these characteristics (but when used in video broadcasting, for example, it is of course much shorter).

But, if you feel that it is too "easy" on the speakers and not revealing enough, feel free to download the .WAV and do this test on your own speakers.

hevi is offline  
post #634 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

JN my point about this being an AV (audio Visual) science forums merely restates that we (most of us) are concerned with what we can hear and see.

As I do. Your statement is confusing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

There may indeed be spurious little groups of electrons doing interesting acrobatics in a wire or circuit BUT, if they do no harm to the devices AND are undetectable in the bandwidth of our hearing and sight, what are you so concerned with them in THIS frame of reference?

You've no idea how noisy a system can be when a quarter million volt vandy is sparking 10 feet away. And, how easily it can be quieted down once the coupling mechanism is understood and removed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

I have seen NO ONE in the pro audio business who is as concerned about the hyper-detailed mapping of ground currents as you seem to be BUT I have also seen/heard and installed massive AV systems with multiple layers of signal and interconnects that perform flawlessly. They/we must be doing something right.

Of course they are..you state nothing I have not already said.
How many massive av systems in the field run unbalanced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

BTW, you should be aware that a LOT of AV equipment has signal grounds that are NOT directly connected to the electrical safety ground. Much of the ancillary equipment has no safety ground and uses SMPS with no earth ground reference on the DC output.

I am well aware of it. I am also aware of NEC, and well aware of what is required to get listed without bonding external connections to safety ground.

I am also aware that this is not followed in many cases with the "high end" crowd.

The fact that extreme AV professional equipment is built to standards well above normal consumer does not mean that equipment which is not built to such levels has no problem. What exactly are you saying?? ""My pro equipment has not ground loop problem so it doesn't exist?"" I don't think that's your meaning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

If we can obtain proper system operation with ZERO detectable flaws, why should we delve into quantum physics simply to play with the mathematical models? Our intent is to install the system, debug it, tweak it to its maximum design potential, do the show and move on to the next one. The pro AV industry has a rather impressive track record as a whole.

First of all, it's not quantum physics. It's standard Faraday and Ampere, the stuff electric motors are made of..

Second, you continue to push the "av industry", not consumer high end electronics...that is a diversion from the topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizmologist View Post

As I mentioned earlier, a decent experienced AV tech can solve just about any audio/video system issue by intuition as opposed to the slide rule (calculator) approach. (and generally MUCH faster)

I am sure there ARE situations where this is a necessity, but AV is not in that category.

First, I already mentioned that most home consumers have no access to a decent av tech, second, it is possible to design the equipment so that one is never required, third, there are instances where an AV tech will not understand the basis of the problem. I am confident the latter is also a very small subset.

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #635 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 38
JN do you have any data to suggest that "audiophiles" have better hearing than us normal folks? Sean Olive's research seems to suggest the opposite with magazine reviewers scoring way down among the groups.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #636 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:32 PM
Senior Member
 
hevi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by rock_bottom View Post

Another question, Hevi. Your video says the pulse is 0.2 uS. That's the period of the raised cosine (sin^2(x) = 0.5(1-cos(2x)), so that would be 5 MHz for the "2x" term. How do you generate that with a sample rate of 44.1 kHz (~22.7 us sampling period)?

Oh, my bad! Of course it is a 200us pulse (0.2ms), which can be seen in the screen-dump (as I said in the disclaimer, I've had a looong day at work today and I've begun drinking heavilly, as viking tradition inply for midsummers eve ).

H

hevi is offline  
post #637 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

Not Arny, but I think "most people" would have to be defined as well as "expensive interconnects", but my opinion is that if you look at the people who own ethier stereo systems or home theater systems, the answer is no most people don't. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the members of AVS are a very very small part of the entire owners of AVS gear and would look at this thread, and think we should be sent to the looney bin or worse.

Using a blanket statement such as was done to divert from the technical is disingenuous. AKA, ground loop issues do not exist because most people have A/V receivers and HDMI..

Within a thread titled "seeking education about those ultra-expensive interconnects...

Lets state some facts, shall we? (Note, flawlessly is defined as meeting specification)

1. An amplifier on a test bench will perform flawlessly.
2. An IC tested on a test bench will perform flawlessly.

Within the home, connected up, will the components work the same as each individually did on the bench?

No.

I've explained some of the reasons why.

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #638 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

JN do you have any data to suggest that "audiophiles" have better hearing than us normal folks? Sean Olive's research seems to suggest the opposite with magazine reviewers scoring way down among the groups.

With respect to overall bandwidth? Certainly NOT. Humans, one and all.

With respect to localization discernment? Some researchers have published results where subjects were able to train for better discernment.

I personally can work to better distinguish subtleties within some songs, but find that it is a fleeting and many times non reproducible thing.

The trying, the finding, that is the fun part of listening to music.

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #639 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:38 PM
Senior Member
 
audiophilesavant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

Within the home, connected up, will the components work the same as each individually did on the bench?

No.

I've explained some of the reasons why.

So let's say I am an audiophile and have a turntable, a CD player, a preamp, a power amp and a pair of speakers. What's should I do differently than just connect everything up in the normal manner?
audiophilesavant is offline  
post #640 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:41 PM
Senior Member
 
rock_bottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 430
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevi View Post

Oh, my bad! Of course it is a 200us pulse (0.2ms), which can be seen in the screen-dump (as I said in the disclaimer, I've had a looong day at work today and I've begun drinking heavilly, as viking tradition inply for midsummers eve ).

Thanks - I just went through your earlier posts in the thread, saw the scope capture and was about to post about that. You beat me to it. Makes sense now. Looks like the spectrum consists of three sinc() functions, so I'll have a look at how constant the sinc function centered around zero frequency is out to 20 kHz.
rock_bottom is offline  
post #641 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:50 PM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

Lets state some facts, shall we? (Note, flawlessly is defined as meeting specification)

1. An amplifier on a test bench will perform flawlessly.
2. An IC tested on a test bench will perform flawlessly.

Within the home, connected up, will the components work the same as each individually did on the bench?

No.

I've explained some of the reasons why.

John, lets say someone found a way to make IC perform flawlessly at home. Will there be audible difference between this and the case where it performs typically (not flawlessly)?
diomania is offline  
post #642 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post

So let's say I am an audiophile and have a turntable, a CD player, a preamp, a power amp and a pair of speakers. What's should I do differently than just connect everything up in the normal manner?

That's easy. Throw it all away, buy an A/V receiver, an HDMI cable, and a CD player with HDMI out.

Then call Arny..


If, for any reason whatsoever, you find that substitution of a line cord, an outlet, an IC, or a speaker cable causes a change in your system that you can hear (dbt or not), you have purchased one or more components that were not designed for all scenarios of grounding.

Under no circumstances should these things affect a system....period.

The fact that anything like that can affect sound is a clear indication that the engineering community in general, the audio engineering community specifically, has neglected something in the design of your components. My first issue is that many within the engineering community flat out refuse to learn the nature of the beast, but try to save face after giving "absolute" pronouncements from 20 years ago.

What is needed is a specific methodology to measure the system for problems of this nature.

Anybody want to go into business building test sets?

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #643 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

John, lets say someone found a way to make IC perform flawlessly at home. Will there be audible difference between this and the case where it performs typically (not flawlessly)?

It's not the IC. It's the entire system.

Fix the system, and there will be no difference between IC's (other than gross capacitive problems).

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #644 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Liked: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

JN do you have any data to suggest that "audiophiles" have better hearing than us normal folks? Sean Olive's research seems to suggest the opposite with magazine reviewers scoring way down among the groups.

Sean's tests says little about audiophile hearing abilities in general as you state. What it says is that trained listeners, can recognize speaker test anomalies far better than the groups he tested in the camps you mention.

Same was our experience at Microsoft. Our trained listeners were far better than vast majority of audiophiles. But occasionally, we would see someone with as good of ability if not better, with zero training. This came out of testing literally thousands of people across many test cycles. If we had just tested 50, the conclusion would have been that no one is better than trained listeners. But even if we had, the conclusion would be relative to testing compressed material. Our testers could easily flunk the speaker test that Sean ran.

Taking us back to this topic, it is entirely possible that Ing and crew are trained now with respect to what they hear in amplifier tests. And as with Sean's testing, are far more capable than any ad-hoc ABX test set up by someone who has just done that one test, and has never been trained on what to hear and what the distortions could sound like.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #645 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 12:58 PM
Senior Member
 
audiophilesavant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

If, for any reason whatsoever, you find that substitution of a line cord, an outlet, an IC, or a speaker cable causes a change in your system that you can hear (dbt or not), you have purchased one or more components that were not designed for all scenarios of grounding.

So then for the audiophile, it is a fun fact to know and tell, but there is nothing you can do about it.
audiophilesavant is offline  
post #646 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Sean's tests says little about audiophile hearing abilities in general as you state. What it says is that trained listeners, can recognize speaker test anomalies far better than the groups he tested in the camps you mention.

.

"better" or faster. I thought his study showed that trained listeners could recognize the anomalies faster.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #647 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gizmologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,623
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post

So let's say I am an audiophile and have a turntable, a CD player, a preamp, a power amp and a pair of speakers. What's should I do differently than just connect everything up in the normal manner?

Be the first on your block to have a home van de Graff generator. JN seems to be locked onto that concept.

Once again JN, SPECIFICALLY what are the problematic issues detectable by the biological senses possessed by a human being that are causing you so much concern?

BTW the "quantum physics" comment was what we call sarcasm.

Can you please step for a moment back into the real world of AV and human perception?

Now, SPECIFICALLY what will anyone setting up an AV system (audiophile, pro or normal) experience if they somehow are in the grips of the dreaded ground loop you are so concerned with which falls outside the realm of real world technical abilities to easily eliminate?

Also I think we are all duly impressed with the VdG generator story so we can come back to Joe Blow's living room system.
Gizmologist is offline  
post #648 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

I actually find his ability to sell those QM10 things as a revelatory reference monitor, to be quite an accomplishment. More so at $3k.

I take it you didn't see the measurements of the latest $3k Linn speaker on Stereophile's page. Read 'em and cringe!

But the poor measured performance of these two speakers makes perfect sense to me, actually. There's basically nothing one can do with that kind of driver configuration (too large midwoofer for consistent midrange directivity, flush tweeter, too small midwoofer for real bass) in the sense of promoting accuracy for $3k that can't be done for $2k or even $1k, except for exotic cabinetry. (Which neither this speaker nor the Linn has.) The only way to do better is to use a more logical driver complement, such as a coincident/Dual Concentric or a waveguide-loaded tweeter with a crossover where the directivity of the mid and tweeter match. But that kind of system is harder/more expensive to do with off-the-shelf parts.

So the more expensive ones in that form factor have differentiate themselves by being colored, in the hopes that someone will latch onto those colorations and prefer them to a more accurate speaker.

Cynical, perhaps, but more likely than not given the measured performance of speakers with that kind of driver complement in that price range, true.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #649 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,022
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Liked: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Bessinger View Post

"better" or faster. I thought his study showed that trained listeners could recognize the anomalies faster.

I have not heard him couch it that way. That said, one goes with the other. Trained listeners are far quicker in recognizing distortion because they know precisely where to go to hear it and ignore all the other bits.

To give you an example, knowing that the compression artifacts are likely to be in a transient, and the higher the frequency the worse the effect, I am going to ignore the rest of the music and focus on that precise few milliseconds when such a sound exists. Average user will sit there listening to the whole three minute song, wondering what is different in it. In that sense, their job is hopelessly complex compared to mine. I weed out 99% of the noise and focus on the thing that matters.

That does give me speed then. I can jump to the problem area, hear the artifact (or not) and call it done. I don't wast a lot of time playing the "no op" parts, to use computer terminology.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #650 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Randy Bessinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I have not heard him couch it that way. That said, one goes with the other. Trained listeners are far quicker in recognizing distortion because they know precisely where to go to hear it and ignore all the other bits.

To give you an example, knowing that the compression artifacts are likely to be in a transient, and the higher the frequency the worse the effect, I am going to ignore the rest of the music and focus on that precise few milliseconds when such a sound exists. Average user will sit there listening to the whole three minute song, wondering what is different in it. In that sense, their job is hopelessly complex compared to mine. I weed out 99% of the noise and focus on the thing that matters.

That does give me speed then. I can jump to the problem area, hear the artifact (or not) and call it done. I don't wast a lot of time playing the "no op" parts, to use computer terminology.

Makes sense.
Randy Bessinger is offline  
post #651 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,756
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 442
John, in your system at home, have you used any special techniques for hooking it all up and if so could you elaborate what the problem was, what you did, and the resultant effect?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #652 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NIN74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Skoghall, va, Sweden
Posts: 3,570
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

To give you an example, knowing that the compression artifacts are likely to be in a transient, and the higher the frequency the worse the effect, I am going to ignore the rest of the music and focus on that precise few milliseconds when such a sound exists. Average user will sit there listening to the whole three minute song, wondering what is different in it. In that sense, their job is hopelessly complex compared to mine. I weed out 99% of the noise and focus on the thing that matters.


In the latest MOLT (LTS magazine) they wrote about how they used a song in the test. They only looped one cymbalcrash from a well-made and "difficult" song to reproduce.

Sound and video is not magic, it is pure physics. Physics that can be magical
NIN74 is offline  
post #653 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,290
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 680 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post
Using a blanket statement such as was done to divert from the technical is disingenuous. AKA, ground loop issues do not exist because most people have A/V receivers and HDMI..

Within a thread titled "seeking education about those ultra-expensive interconnects...

Lets state some facts, shall we? (Note, flawlessly is defined as meeting specification)

1. An amplifier on a test bench will perform flawlessly.
2. An IC tested on a test bench will perform flawlessly.

Within the home, connected up, will the components work the same as each individually did on the bench?

No.
That would be an unfounded assertion, presented with zero real world evidence to support it.

Quote:
I've explained some of the reasons why.
But, you haven't proven that the problem you purport to correct actually happens.

Gizmo and I live in the real world. We both routinely assemble congregations of audio gear that are pretty breathtaking, if we bother to think about it.

For example, the worship room media booth where I do most of my work has about 80 electrical outlets in it, and almost every socket is full. Yes, there are about 80 interconnected audio devices, and they are all hooked together into one system. The whole enchelda works without audible hum every time we turn it on. I did almost no trouble shooting as I hooked it up - it just all worked the first time I hooked it up. I admit it, there are some custom-built cables in it, but not that many. And, I followed some basic rules of thumb as I hooked it all together.

I also did a lot of random hooking of components together back when I built my pcabx.com web site in the late 1990s. I tested well over 100 pieces of consumer and pro equipment. My test equipment was the number one hum and noise boogey man of consumer audio, a PC with an audio interface.

I routinely got better performance out the of equipment that I tested than its specs and sometimes better performance than its own manufacturers did with AP test sets. I tested consumer and pro audio gear when it was hooked together.

So, first show me a problem in the real world, and then lets talk about fixing it. If it ain't broke I don't want to talk about fixing it!
arnyk is offline  
post #654 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 01:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,290
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 680 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post
So let's say I am an audiophile and have a turntable, a CD player, a preamp, a power amp and a pair of speakers. What's should I do differently than just connect everything up in the normal manner?
Looks like a pretty typical audiophile system to me. I've had any number of them of them over the decades and never had any problem getting any of them to work with minimal noise.
arnyk is offline  
post #655 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JorgeLopez11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MEXICO CITY
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amirm
LTS is their AES chapter and his work has been public for decades for the world to read. Besides, you don't have any idea of what peer review it means anyway. I do because researchers on my team were the "peer review" for major conferences on audio processing. Peer review does NOT mean anyone is agreeing with the findings of the paper. It simply means the people did not flunk college classes. So the weight you all put on them is without merit.

Amirm, perhaps a "peer review" audio processing conference just need a simple check you do in order to not flunk classes. But a scientific or scholarly peer review paper that is published in some scientific journal requires a lot more than simply scrutiny that you do not flunk math or any other classes.

It means your work will be subjected to a vey rigorous reviewing process by people considered experts in the field. It also means you're findings are rigorously supported by peer review information and that the scientific protocol and discussion of results are properly presented and supported as well.

I've published some peer review papers and even the simpler of my works was rejected at least two times by the referees until it was finally approved for publication in a recognized, respected journal.
JorgeLopez11 is offline  
post #656 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:08 PM
Senior Member
 
JohnPM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 448
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 19
The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking.

The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger.

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/...ckfire-effect/
JohnPM is offline  
post #657 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,290
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 680 Post(s)
Liked: 1144
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

This is the Mark Levinson No 53 switching amplifier response:
A rather incomplete piece of test data because it does not show response into more than one load impedance and it does not show response into a loudspeaker-like load.

Anybody can tweak a filter so that it is flat into a specific resistive load. Making it flat with real world loads is of the essence.
arnyk is offline  
post #658 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,756
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by JorgeLopez11 View Post
Amirm, perhaps a "peer review" audio processing conference just need a simple check you do not flunk classes. But a scientific or scholarly peer review paper that is published in some scientific journal requires a lot more than simply scrutiny that you do not flunk math or any other classes.

It means you're work will be subject to a vey rigorous reviewing process by people considered experts in the field. It also means you're findings are rigorously supported by peer review information and that the scientific protocol and discussion of results are properly presented and supported as well.

I've published some peer review papers and even the simpler of my works was rejected at least two times by the referees until it was finally approved for publication in a recognized, respected journal.
Thank God for Penthouse Letters, huh, Jorge?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #659 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
Dr_jitsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 709
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 25
I have not had a chance to read this whole thread but Audioholics found measurable differences between regular 12 g rip cord and Canare 4S11.

It should be noted that Canare is only a buck and some change a foot.

Here is the Cliffs note version of what they found:

All of the measurements were completed on a fully calibrated and certified Wayne Kerr 6420 Impedance Analyzer. The 6420 was calibrated for full frequency bandwidths and for greater accuracy the measurements and calibration process was repeated twice for consistency.

The Canare 4S11 has appreciably lower inductance than standard 10 or 12AWG zip cord. The series inductance was measured to be under 0.120uH/ft which is an excellently low figure for such a low gauge cable and non-fancy cable geometry.

The Canare 4S11 cable capacitance is under 40pF/ft which is commendably low and should not present any amplifier stability issues, even for relatively long cable runs for even the least robustly designed amplifiers.

So yes, cable matters, especially on higher end equipment.

Ideally, I would also go with good quality bananas like the German made WBT's.

There is a very good deal going on for these items right now, but you will still pay over $100 a cable. However these will outperform many ridiculously priced cables.

I am going w/ The above combo for my front stage, the new 13 g quad Canare and cheaper connects for my rear stage and subs and cheap 12 g for my far rear speakers which are bookshelf RB 51's.

My cabling for a 9.3 system is coming in at around $750.

Some consider that a lot, other consider it a bargain.
Dr_jitsu is offline  
post #660 of 2598 Old 06-23-2011, 02:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post
So then for the audiophile, it is a fun fact to know and tell, but there is nothing you can do about it.
Not at all.

It is currently a random process. And, you vote with your dollars.

But for the most part, vendors of the high priced wires are not attacking the real issue, they can't.

There are simple things you can do to try to minimize it, like dropping the loop areas between the amp, source, and line cords. But beyond that, you have no control over what's under the hood.

Anyone who wishes can simply run their poweramp line cord through a toroid, and push 100 milliamps swept sine through the safety ground. But just be careful, if the coupled sensitivity is high, you'll pop something. Best to use resistive loads. But other than the loads, the tst must be done in-situ.

Cheers, John

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off