Do good cables make an audible difference in sound? - Page 12 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 203Likes
 
Thread Tools
post #331 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:08 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post
The circumstances within which the quoted test was conducted.

The rest of your questioning, well, I don't get the point, on the surface it seems like obfuscation.. or some form of self-validation. You want me to define the context of you & we... really???

The topic of this thread is "do good cables make an audible difference?", my point is simply given what has been, and can be measured, it is way to convenient to focus on specific measurements out of context, rather than its' impact on the whole.

I'd venture your "math" would support that some of the stated differences don't amount to the equivalent of a bee-fart in a hurricane in the "big picture".
Let's not gargle with one another, let's just spit it out.

You have made some direct and ambiguous statements, both which you have failed to provide one iota of mathematical proof to support; but yet, you seem to desire to persuade me to align myself positively, with your comments. So, the answer is yes, if you truly desire to persuade towards anything, outside of which were already in accord (and there is some accord), the answers to my questions are required.

I don't see how there can be an obfuscation now, at least from my side; you however, have remained largely roaming in ambiguity.

Last edited by Garidy; 08-08-2014 at 12:14 PM.
Garidy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #332 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:10 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerim View Post
Because the computer or knock sensor in his car is malfunctioning, nothing more.
A knock sensor doesn't produce knock, it senses it, acoustically, I might add. - kind of fitting after all!
Garidy is offline  
post #333 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:13 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 15,359
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Liked: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerim View Post
Because the computer or knock sensor in his car is malfunctioning, nothing more.
Ah! Then perhaps another recall is in order after I get my ignition switch replaced.
Ratman is online now  
post #334 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
David James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Longmont, CO
Posts: 1,964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 77
I know I shouldn't, but I can't help but hear & interpret the words I'm reading through the lips of the avatar of the poster.
theskins44 likes this.
David James is offline  
post #335 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:45 PM
Member
 
jerim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 101
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garidy View Post
A knock sensor doesn't produce knock, it senses it, acoustically, I might add. - kind of fitting after all!
Right, it senses it, and alters the timing to stop the engine from knocking. If the engine knocks, it's malfunctioning.

Was there any point to your comment?
jerim is offline  
post #336 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 12:56 PM
Member
 
theskins44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: halifax, nova scotia Canada eh
Posts: 94
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by David James View Post
I know I shouldn't, but I can't help but hear & interpret the words I'm reading through the lips of the avatar of the poster.
nice!!!! Gotta get me one of those HI END avatars
theskins44 is offline  
post #337 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 01:12 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerim View Post
Right, it senses it, and alters the timing to stop the engine from knocking. If the engine knocks, it's malfunctioning.

Was there any point to your comment?
Not necessarily, but that's a discussion for a different forum...no worries...
Garidy is offline  
post #338 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 01:57 PM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,530
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diggles View Post

As I've said before, there's a gap between getting voodoo tweaky-cableitis and
Sticks and stones may break people's bones but calling names will never hurt them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diggles View Post
simply matching the level of cable quality/cache/brand appeal to a system. Very different concepts that get lost with red herring stories like this, many of which I wonder are even real.
No, both concepts have the identical same fallacy behind them, and that is the false and frequently disproven misapprehension that cables generally sound different.

Will cache and appeal change the performance of an audio system system? If so why not pay someone to stand in the corner of your listening room and tell you over and over again what great cache and appeal your speakers have?
arnyk is offline  
post #339 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 02:31 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Sticks and stones may break people's bones but calling names will never hurt them.



No, both concepts have the identical same fallacy behind them, and that is the false and frequently disproven misapprehension that cables generally sound different.

Will cache and appeal change the performance of an audio system system? If so why not pay someone to stand in the corner of your listening room and tell you over and over again what great cache and appeal your speakers have?
It should behoove any that comment on cable differences that they cite the length(s).

Cables do in fact sound different, however, at short lengths, no so much. In fact probably not, 99% of the time. So the main debate should be about, at what length do most, if not all cables, become sonically (not electrically) indistinguishable!

I am confident that many of us in here will agree once again, that in the range of 8-9' one would be hard pressed to pass an ABX test, or some variant of, but that at 6-7', such is virtually impossible, except for a very few outliers, whom we should be glad to have amongst us, to share with us, what the rest of us are missing.

I almost feel like saying, who care about speaker wire, but the truth is, I in fact do, but as I have completely evidenced, I don't hold an extreme view, nor do I place much weight on such considerations at lengths under 3 meters. There's frankly, there's much more audio goodness to be mined elsewhere.

Sorry guy's, audio nirvana isn't going to be discovered in a length of speaker wire.

Last edited by Garidy; 08-09-2014 at 09:52 AM.
Garidy is offline  
post #340 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 03:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,219
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 352
I am confident that many of us in here will agree once again, that in the range of 8-9' one would be hard pressed to pass an ABX test, or some variant of, but that at 6-7', such is virtually impossible, except for a very few outliers, whom we should be glad to have amongst us, to share with us, what the rest of us are missing.

I am confident that the vast majority of people here do not agree with this. Indeed the statement is so vague that I couldn't say what I am being asked to agree to.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #341 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 03:41 PM
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,825
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gecko85 View Post
You guys can argue semantics all you want, but at the end of the day I've never seen an ABX or blind test that's been able to discern a difference between standard speaker cable and "high end" snake oil cable. I linked to a whole slew of tests that have been done over the years, and not a single one found a difference. Still waiting for the magical test that shows otherwise.
If that is the case, we can dismiss them all out of hand. A proper test must have controls. One of those controls would be a cable that we "know" changes the sound. Say one with a filter in it, or a speaker cable that is super thin and long. And these of course would generate positive outcomes.

It is trivial to create tests that are not critical enough to find differences. The way we know that is the case is by using controls. If in all the tests you mention no one put in a 22 gauge wire to see if people can hear that, then they are all violating industry standards for proper testing and results cannot be reliably used. This is the problem with DIY/hobbyist tests where people don't know how to perform these kind of tests. And have sufficient expectation bias that when they get negative outcome, they believe and no longer investigate.

People keep talking about "proper cable" or "proper thickness." How come so much energy has been put forward toward finding no outcome than testing at what thickness/properness transparency is achieved? The fact that this vagueness has not been investigated to mean anything specific, is proof positive that we are looking for an argument rather than advancing our knowledge.
Garidy likes this.
amirm is offline  
post #342 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 04:03 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post
I am confident that many of us in here will agree once again, that in the range of 8-9' one would be hard pressed to pass an ABX test, or some variant of, but that at 6-7', such is virtually impossible, except for a very few outliers, whom we should be glad to have amongst us, to share with us, what the rest of us are missing.

I am confident that the vast majority of people here do not agree with this. Indeed the statement is so vague that I couldn't say what I am being asked to agree to.
hmm, number x = potential threshold for audible differences, anything under x isn't probable to induce audible differences... x happens to be 7' max.

To disagree with this statement is tantamount to stating that you believe that there are audible difference in cables, but your not saying that because that would be in contradiction to all of your previous statements, regardless of how ambiguous they have been. To me this is just more ambiguity from you.

Unless of course ,you've just changed your mind?

Last edited by Garidy; 08-08-2014 at 04:24 PM.
Garidy is offline  
post #343 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 04:29 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 11,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
How come so much energy has been put forward toward finding no outcome than testing at what thickness/properness transparency is achieved?
That was figured out long before you were born. The factors that influence the result are resistance, capacitance and inductance. Period. What the cable shysters never reveal is the resistance, capacitance and inductance per foot of their cables, nor the fact that the best possible resistance, capacitance and inductance figures can be found in common zip cord. Ignorance of that fact by the general public, not to mention those who really should know better, is what keeps them in business.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is online now  
post #344 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 04:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
If that is the case, we can dismiss them all out of hand. A proper test must have controls. One of those controls would be a cable that we "know" changes the sound. Say one with a filter in it, or a speaker cable that is super thin and long. And these of course would generate positive outcomes.

It is trivial to create tests that are not critical enough to find differences. The way we know that is the case is by using controls. If in all the tests you mention no one put in a 22 gauge wire to see if people can hear that, then they are all violating industry standards for proper testing and results cannot be reliably used. This is the problem with DIY/hobbyist tests where people don't know how to perform these kind of tests. And have sufficient expectation bias that when they get negative outcome, they believe and no longer investigate.

People keep talking about "proper cable" or "proper thickness." How come so much energy has been put forward toward finding no outcome than testing at what thickness/properness transparency is achieved? The fact that this vagueness has not been investigated to mean anything specific, is proof positive that we are looking for an argument rather than advancing our knowledge.
I am trying to see how this logic would not require, instead of a placebo, a known strong cancer causing agent as the control for FDA trials of a new cancer med.
JHAz is offline  
post #345 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 04:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,442
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 886 Post(s)
Liked: 1089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
... the best possible resistance, capacitance and inductance figures can be found in common zip cord ...
This whole place is becoming a theater of the absurd.
amirm and Garidy like this.

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest + Cheezewoofer Wattless Deluxe > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is offline  
post #346 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 05:04 PM
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,825
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
That was figured out long before you were born. The factors that influence the result are resistance, capacitance and inductance. Period.
No it is not "period." That is the kindergarten answer. Whether a speaker cable changes the frequency response of a speaker has to do with the impedance of the speaker relative to the cable. While we know this from theory, there is no experimental data I have seen that demonstrates this. That was the point of my post.

Quote:
What the cable shysters never reveal is the resistance, capacitance and inductance per foot of their cables, nor the fact that the best possible resistance, capacitance and inductance figures can be found in common zip cord. Ignorance of that fact by the general public, not to mention those who really should know better, is what keeps them in business.
I don't care about "cable shysters." They are not here and my question was therefore not aimed at them. I read this on your forum rules:

" There is a zero tolerance policy with respect to personal attacks on other members. Violators will be subject to immediate expulsion without notice. We're here to help each other. If that's not your agenda you're in the wrong forum."

I hope you reflect on this in your future posts addressed to me and raise the level of technical insight and lower the personal remarks.

I know all of these talking points we use to abuse the other camp. So when I say something, it is not because I have not heard or know about the tired arguments we keep repeating. I am trying to get you to think, and consider that we are putting forward data that does not hold up to scrutiny of "those who really know better."
amirm is offline  
post #347 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 05:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,219
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 352
hmm, number x = potential threshold for audible differences, anything under x isn't probable to induce audible differences... x happens to be 7' max.

To disagree with this statement is tantamount to stating that you believe that there are audible difference in cables


Not at all. I'm saying that "x happens to be 7' max" is a scientifically baseless statement. (In part because it is woefully ambiguous!) Cables much longer than 7' can be (and often are) audibly transparent.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is offline  
post #348 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 05:14 PM
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,825
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post
I am trying to see how this logic would not require, instead of a placebo, a known strong cancer causing agent as the control for FDA trials of a new cancer med.
I am not in medical profession but my wife was. She worked in the chemistry lab of the hospital. At the start of every shift they would run sugar water through the machine to make sure that it reported the same. This was mandatory protocol. And it is this type of control which is lacking completely in these hobbyist tests. Would have had the same belief in the results of these tests if 100 foot of 22 gauge wire was also transparent?

Back to your analogy, in medical profession they have the advantage of diagnostic tests. They don't ask the patient, "do you have cancer?" Unfortunately in audio that is what we do; we have no diagnostic test as to what a person heard, only what they say they heard. In medical profession, they don't have a hobbyist whose sum total of medical knowledge is reading forum posts, waking up one day and running that cancer research. In the audio world unfortunately every tom dick and harry thinks because they have ears and have hooked up stereos together, they are qualified to run a "scientific" listening test.

If these tests had generated positive outcome, no one would have believed a single thing about them and would have been critical of everything from color of the walls to the cloths the listener was wearing . Witness how Arny is still trying to find a way to invalidate our high-res vs CD DBT ABX tests even though we played everything by his rules. Where is he to invalidate the wire ABX test results you are mentioning? How come there is no equal treatment?

I have no preference for fancy cables and use whatever is around me. But I do have a preference for quality discussion which is not biased at the start and one-sided in what standards it uses to evaluate the results. And brings nothing new to the discussion from technical point of view.
Garidy likes this.
amirm is offline  
post #349 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 05:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 15,359
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Liked: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
This whole place is becoming a theater of the absurd.
No... "has" become.
It's all about whom can pee further.
Ratman is online now  
post #350 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 05:55 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
No... "has" become.
It's all about whom can pee further.
hmm, that's close to what I think:

I think it's become about those who can't piddle past the tips of their shoes, trying to learn from those pretending that they can make it to the edge of the yard, when everyone should just be learning from the guy's who can make it across the street.
Garidy is offline  
post #351 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 06:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,442
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 886 Post(s)
Liked: 1089
I'm not the one picking my nose in public.

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest + Cheezewoofer Wattless Deluxe > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is offline  
post #352 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 06:13 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
I'm not the one picking my nose in public.
+1

I'm thinking about becoming a cheese eater instead.
Garidy is offline  
post #353 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 07:40 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 11,355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 2245
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Whether a speaker cable changes the frequency response of a speaker has to do with the impedance of the speaker relative to the cable.
The only correlation between cable impedance and its effect on the response of the speaker is that impedance is the sum of resistance, capacitive reactance and inductive reactance. Since each of the individual components of impedance affects the result in a different manner one can't consider the impedance alone. You could have a thousand cables all with the same impedance, each with different resistance, capacitance and inductance, so each would have a different transfer function. When calculating the transfer function of a cable the individual contributions of resistance, capacitance and inductance are separately calculated and summed to give the final result. These calculations are quite elementary. Resistance, capacitance and inductance specs of many wire varieties are available from reputable manufacturers, like Belden, so in less time than it took me to write this reply I could have plugged values into a calc and determined the exact effect on the frequency response by a given cable of a given length on a given speaker.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is online now  
post #354 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 09:30 PM
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,825
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
The only correlation between cable impedance and its effect on the response of the speaker is that impedance is the sum of resistance, capacitive reactance and inductive reactance.

Since each of the individual components of impedance affects the result in a different manner one can't consider the impedance alone. You could have a thousand cables all with the same impedance, each with different resistance, capacitance and inductance, so each would have a different transfer function. When calculating the transfer function of a cable the individual contributions of resistance, capacitance and inductance are separately calculated and summed to give the final result. These calculations are quite elementary. Resistance, capacitance and inductance specs of many wire varieties are available from reputable manufacturers, like Belden, so in less time than it took me to write this reply I could have plugged values into a calc and determined the exact effect on the frequency response by a given cable of a given length on a given speaker.
OK, let's have you do that and predict the effect on audibility.
amirm is offline  
post #355 of 604 Old 08-08-2014, 11:21 PM
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 311 Post(s)
Liked: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
The only correlation between cable impedance and its effect on the response of the speaker is that impedance is the sum of resistance, capacitive reactance and inductive reactance. You seem to be heading generally, in the correct direction, but I would suggest that you're askew. DC resistance can in no way, be directly summed to AC capacitance or inductance scores (at least not for any useful purpose), and if they could, they would tell you nothing about the AC impedance qualities of a given length of cable. It you're suggesting that DC resistance, and DC capacitance, and DC inductance can some how be directly summed to provide a depiction of AC impedance qualities, then I fear that you're even more askew. I'm not quite sure what it is your claiming here, but you do seem to me on the right path, but far from it's end.

Since each of the individual components of impedance affects the result in a different manner one can't consider the impedance alone. For sinusoidal linearity and frequency analysis (Non-FFT), impedance is the sole determinate and this test metric is just about the oldest I'm aware of. If your now covertly speaking to phase errors, you'd be correct.

You could have a thousand cables all with the same impedance, each with different resistance, capacitance and inductance, so each would have a different transfer function. You seem to be keeping DC resistance in your calculations (I might add that you have also failed to cite a single frequency or, speak to their importance.), when they don't have a direct relevance to AC waveforms. Also, if all of the cables had the same impedance scores across the entire audio band, that would suggest the same sinusoidal plotting of the frequency response for each cable. They may in fact have very different phase and group delay qualities, but they would appear on a bench to have identical frequency responses, when impedance has been used to plot such. These timing errors effect the tonal qualities by reducing the actual power (P) score (true Wattage behind each frequency). When reactive loads are present like capacitance or inductance, they cause reactive power (Q), not true power (P) to become present at some points. This type of power actually counters the effects of the true power (P) applied to a circuit. The significance of this is when only reactive power (Q) is present, no work can be performed. The difference between the two (S) can be divided by Q to estimate a devices efficiency. The more true power present, the better. To further educate: when purely inductive or capacitive loads are present, they will effect a 90-degree phase shift. In pure unmitigated occurrences as these, an amplifier will not output Wattage, because in such a scenario, the circuit is only seeing reactive power (Q). Outside of a pure state, their properties can be used and intermingle with other filters, to produce may different types of hybrid filters, with various orders and types of filtration, which will permit work/ P, but they still produce phase shifts, which result in various slopes of power decay (read between the lines - I'm providing a little more insight into why inductance and capacitance, reduce over power and bring about frequency attenuation) . However, phase shifts/errors are still afoot due to the shift between the Voltage and the Current waveforms, caused by the presence of these reactants. So what this adds up to, is that cables can effect the Wattage output of all frequencies, or just various frequencies, or a mix of both, if they add significant inductance, capacitance or impedance into the final stage of electrical signal delivery. Frankly, they can directly mess with passive crossovers designs (I think some of you, might have already gathered why). This is why it's requisite that only those with the appropriate training and equipment draw 'professional' conclusions about transfer functions.

Here's an example that might bring this closer to understand, for more readers:

Energy being emitted out of an output, is mixed with Q & P: Q is properly recorded as VAr and P as Watts; both have coulombs in them, but the Q Voltage wave is out of phase with the Q current wave, for a given frequency(s), creating reactive power, thus mitigating its ability to perform work. P. both waves are in sufficient alignment, to produce work.

So, if a newbie was to apply their limited knowledge of Watts Laws, they would likely seek to determine the useable Wattage by measuring the output Voltage, hopefully using at least an o-scope, making their measurement just before the onset of clipping. Take that Voltage, square it and divide it by the drivers nominal impedance rating, and believe that they now have a good idea of the Wattage output, at whatever the frequency that they injected. A real keener, would likely take several measurements, at different frequencies, and plot them, thinking even better things about the accuracy of his calculations. One may even use a current clamp, to gain a more accurate current score and simply multiply the measured Voltage by the measured current... However, most if not all will have failed to realize the phase errors and their significance. Q must be subtracted from P, to determine S, the total usable power before clipping. So how does one determine Q, then take it to RMS Power? Good question, one that I will answer in due coarse (by the way, this also takes into understanding the pros and cons to current leading voltage and vice versa, and provides insight as to how it's possible for seemly properly functioning amplifiers to sound different - it's all about the phase) .

So now, you should be realizing a host of new possibilities.

All this aside, this kind of stuff, is at the edge of true, electrical engineering, therefore, it does become taxing to learn, and does require a real commitment of ones time. So please, just trust me when I say, as I have said, many times now, cables under 3 meters are not likely to produce audible differences from each other, regardless of the fact that they maybe electrically different (it is possible but of low probability, but not zero). It should be a given by now that the AWG must be appropriate - 14 Gauge can handle the Wattage output of any AVR, @ 3 meters or less in length.

If you just want to learn this stuff for the sake of learning, that's a whole different ball of wax, and I say welcome aboard. But for most hobbyists, I think doing so would be a waste of time, IMO.


When calculating the transfer function of a cable the individual contributions of resistance, capacitance and inductance are separately calculated and summed to give the final result. It should now be obvious to you that this is, at the very minimum, is incomplete and therefore does not support of your position, as being factual.

These calculations are quite elementary. Perhaps what you have been referring to is, but accurate calculations are not!

Resistance, capacitance and inductance specs of many wire varieties are available from reputable manufacturers, like Belden, so in less time than it took me to write this reply I could have plugged values into a calc and determined the exact effect on the frequency response by a given cable of a given length on a given speaker. Exactness is impossible through any means of measurement. The means that you have stated, would only produce crude estimates, ones that I currently suspect would produce unusable results, for use in objectively comparing short runs of audio cable.
Please note above:

Last edited by Garidy; 08-09-2014 at 09:43 AM.
Garidy is offline  
post #356 of 604 Old 08-09-2014, 01:45 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,530
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1214
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
If that is the case, we can dismiss them all out of hand. A proper test must have controls. One of those controls would be a cable that we "know" changes the sound. Say one with a filter in it, or a speaker cable that is super thin and long. And these of course would generate positive outcomes.

It is trivial to create tests that are not critical enough to find differences. The way we know that is the case is by using controls. If in all the tests you mention no one put in a 22 gauge wire to see if people can hear that, then they are all violating industry standards for proper testing and results cannot be reliably used. This is the problem with DIY/hobbyist tests where people don't know how to perform these kind of tests. And have sufficient expectation bias that when they get negative outcome, they believe and no longer investigate.
12 gauge wire has a resistance of 1.588 milliohm per foot or 19.056 millioms for a 6 foot 2 conductor cable.

22 gauge wire has a resistance of 16.14 milliohms per foot or 193.68 millioms for a 6 foot 2 conductor cable.

The difference, 174.625 milliohms will cause a difference of less than 0.2 dB in an 8 ohm load, which is not nearly large enough to act as a reliable control in an experiment like this.

I guess that the lesson is that finding reliable controls is not trivial. You actually have to apply some engineering skills! ;-)

BTW I am 100% in favor of using controls like this in audio listening testes. If you will recall my recent jitter test started out with a test involving jitter so large that it was IME and most other people quite unmistakable. I think it was at least 8 times my best guess at the threshold of audibility.

In the high sample rate test I contrived a test signal that was almost unbelievably extreme in terms of ultrasonic content and most people still could not hear it, so it was a questionable control. On that one I can only say that I tried.

If this concept were applied to a speaker cable test, it would require putting actual attenuating resistors into the speaker lines - something like 1 ohm or more each. The alternative would be wire so fine that it might be too fragile.

Last edited by arnyk; 08-09-2014 at 01:52 AM.
arnyk is offline  
post #357 of 604 Old 08-09-2014, 07:11 AM
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,825
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1334 Post(s)
Liked: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
12 gauge wire has a resistance of 1.588 milliohm per foot or 19.056 millioms for a 6 foot 2 conductor cable.

22 gauge wire has a resistance of 16.14 milliohms per foot or 193.68 millioms for a 6 foot 2 conductor cable.

The difference, 174.625 milliohms will cause a difference of less than 0.2 dB in an 8 ohm load, which is not nearly large enough to act as a reliable control in an experiment like this.

I guess that the lesson is that finding reliable controls is not trivial. You actually have to apply some engineering skills! ;-)
Good morning Arny. As I and others have said, I have no engineering skill. Really, no skill at all other than typing.

That said, I don't know where the 8 ohm came from. As you know, speakers do not have a single, fixed impedance number like the marketing guys specify for speakers (the value is often used to inflate efficiency of the speaker). Instead the impedance changes with frequency (message I was trying to communicate to Bill). Here is an example from the excellent speaker, Revel Salon 2 in stereophile review:



We see a broad dip in impedance that goes from 3.5 to 4 ohms. Using the latter to tilt things more in your favor, the db drop is now .4 db. As I explain in this article on audibility of small distortions we are able to detect differences as little as 0.5 db when the frequency response deviations are broad as is the case above.

Of course when we are trying to create a control, nothing is forcing us to use 6 foot of cable. Let's use the 100 feet that I mentioned in my follow up post. Now the dip causes a 5 db drop. Comparing that to the impact of the same wire on the peak at 1 to 2 Khz the drop is about 2 db. This means that we have modified the frequency response of the speaker to 3 db lower (5-2) for the bass frequencies relative to mid-frequencies. I hope you agree this should be audible.

We could test our hypothesis above by performing the comparison of 100 foot 22 gauge cable against 6 foot of 12 and see what happens. We can always lengthen the 22 gauge until we reach easy differentiation.

Quote:
BTW I am 100% in favor of using controls like this in audio listening testes. If you will recall my recent jitter test started out with a test involving jitter so large that it was IME and most other people quite unmistakable. I think it was at least 8 times my best guess at the threshold of audibility.
And we are all appreciative of that Arny. Alas, until that example, you had held the position that no such controls were necessary because ABX testing has them built-in. Here is one of many examples where you have taken this position:

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Quote:Originally Posted by R Swerdlow 

In addition to the usual statistical analysis of an ABX test, I would like to see additional tests where listeners hear two choices where no differences exist (a negative control) and other tests where genuine known differences exist (positive controls).

Have to run so have not read the rest of your post . But I had to comment and extend my appreciation for pointing this out. It is biggest failing of many of these tests. Controls have to be mandatory. I hope Arny forgives me for saying this but he needs to put this right up there in his list. Without this, we are shooting in the dark.
Your response was:
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
This comment shows a lack of actual familiarity with ABX testing because it is an inherent part of ABX testing.

This was all sussed out over 40 years ago, and just waiting for you geniuses to figure out that its a good idea! ;-)
Seems like it took us 40 years to realize that was not the case .

Quote:
If this concept were applied to a speaker cable test, it would require putting actual attenuating resistors into the speaker lines - something like 1 ohm or more each. The alternative would be wire so fine that it might be too fragile.
Sorry, no. Per above you just use a much longer cable.
amirm is offline  
post #358 of 604 Old 08-09-2014, 07:37 AM
Member
 
drblank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Reliable science versus public opinion.



Reliable science versus public opinion.



Cables matter. Their length is all-important. Make them a little shorter than the distance between the components and see what happens!

The tests share a number of serious problems. They are test equipment tests, not reliable listening tests. Such listening evaluations that are mentioined seem to lack any bias controls. They involved things like 150 foot long (50 meter) speaker cables which are not exactly common in listening rooms.

It's no trick to show measured test results that could raise the hair on the back of many people's necks, and subsequently prove that they hear no difference in a proper listening test.
I don't think everyone knows what a "proper listening test" really is. Obviously, there are companies that design/mfg cables have test equipment and testing methodology that is beyond the average consumer, so I have to rely on them knowing what they are doing, which is always debatable that they all actually do.

Now with listening tests. I think there are a bunch of Do's and Don'ts that people should be aware of. I'll list SOME of mine.

1. Don't make a generalization that all cables don't make a difference because it's actually kind of easy to prove you wrong based on one comparison test of just a small handful of cables.

2. Never turn the music up past about 85dB average volume. Anything more than that is going to cause short term hearing damage/ear fatigue and it's just simply next to impossible to hear the differences in most cables if your ears are trashed. So keep the volume down to something reasonable.

3. Depending on the cables/equipment, the differences are very subtle and in those cases you have to give the listening comparison a lot more time listening to a variety of music and musical instruments.

4. Listen to recordings where audio compression is not used. Audio compression, is unfortunately prevalent in the music industry and it just destroys the ability to really hear timbre, dynamics, etc. So avoid listening tests of cables (products in general) whenever possible if the content has lots of audio compression. I would probably say that if you only listen to content that has a lot of audio compression then it's possible that you won't hear much difference in cables.

5. Understand what to listen for. Some people simply don't know what to listen for when listening to cables, so if you aren't sure, sit down with someone that has more experience in this and ask them to point it out as you listen at the same time. It's always helpful to have someone guide you if you are new to listening to cables.

6. I personally like listening to music that is of different acoustic instruments. It's much easier to hear what the product is/isn't doing when you listen to a violin, male/female voices, upright bass, acoustic guitar, trumpet, sax, percussion instruments, etc. when it's just that instrument rather than some metal band playing at full volume.

7. Sit down and go through your music collection and pick out the best recordings to use and get to know the recordings backwards and forwards. If you don't have a lot of recordings of acoustic instruments, then you might want to build that collection. Ask others for suggestions on what recordings to use for listening tests.

There are other Do's and Don'ts when it comes to listening to cables, or equipment in general, but this a few that should be considered. I hope others can add to the list.

Last edited by drblank; 08-09-2014 at 07:40 AM.
drblank is offline  
post #359 of 604 Old 08-09-2014, 08:00 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked: 1245
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
I don't think everyone knows what a "proper listening test" really is. Obviously, there are companies that design/mfg cables have test equipment and testing methodology that is beyond the average consumer, so I have to rely on them knowing what they are doing, which is always debatable that they all actually do.

Now with listening tests. I think there are a bunch of Do's and Don'ts that people should be aware of. I'll list SOME of mine.

1. Don't make a generalization that all cables don't make a difference because it's actually kind of easy to prove you wrong based on one comparison test of just a small handful of cables.

2. Never turn the music up past about 85dB average volume. Anything more than that is going to cause short term hearing damage/ear fatigue and it's just simply next to impossible to hear the differences in most cables if your ears are trashed. So keep the volume down to something reasonable.

3. Depending on the cables/equipment, the differences are very subtle and in those cases you have to give the listening comparison a lot more time listening to a variety of music and musical instruments.

4. Listen to recordings where audio compression is not used. Audio compression, is unfortunately prevalent in the music industry and it just destroys the ability to really hear timbre, dynamics, etc. So avoid listening tests of cables (products in general) whenever possible if the content has lots of audio compression. I would probably say that if you only listen to content that has a lot of audio compression then it's possible that you won't hear much difference in cables.

5. Understand what to listen for. Some people simply don't know what to listen for when listening to cables, so if you aren't sure, sit down with someone that has more experience in this and ask them to point it out as you listen at the same time. It's always helpful to have someone guide you if you are new to listening to cables.

6. I personally like listening to music that is of different acoustic instruments. It's much easier to hear what the product is/isn't doing when you listen to a violin, male/female voices, upright bass, acoustic guitar, trumpet, sax, percussion instruments, etc. when it's just that instrument rather than some metal band playing at full volume.

7. Sit down and go through your music collection and pick out the best recordings to use and get to know the recordings backwards and forwards. If you don't have a lot of recordings of acoustic instruments, then you might want to build that collection. Ask others for suggestions on what recordings to use for listening tests.

There are other Do's and Don'ts when it comes to listening to cables, or equipment in general, but this a few that should be considered. I hope others can add to the list.

There is only one that matters and that is bias controlled listening. The rest are audiophile nonsense, I'm afraid.
FMW is online now  
post #360 of 604 Old 08-09-2014, 08:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 15,359
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Liked: 464
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
There are other Do's and Don'ts when it comes to listening to cables, or equipment in general, but this a few that should be considered. I hope others can add to the list.
Don't believe everything you read on the internet/forums.
Ratman is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread Audio Theory, Setup, and Chat

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