Do good cables make an audible difference in sound? - Page 6 - AVS | 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: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-25-2014, 10:40 AM
Senior Member
 
koturban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post
The last time I jumped off a 200 ft cliff, I flapped my arms and landed softly without a scratch.

Well, anybody could get lucky just once.
How about on several occasions?

I await Amir, et al, to duplicate my efforts.
koturban is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-25-2014, 10:43 AM
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: 351
How about on several occasions?

When you can do it 15 out of 20 times, I'll believe you.
Marc Wielage likes this.

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

mcnarus is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 11:11 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: 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
But... maybe that is because human beings do not have the ability to compare three sonic events sequentially as ABX testing requires?
ABX makes no such requirement. It does require comparing two events sequentially, but so does any other comparison.

I know where this line of malarkey comes from (a certain self-proclaimed internet eggspurt) so I don't fault people who recite it because it seems logical enough. After all we call it an ABX test so you must have to compare A, B, and X in sequence and there you are, comparing three sonic events sequentially. Perhaps counter-intuitively that's not how ABX works.

Here's how ABX really works:

Yes, an ABX comparator has 3 buttons marked A, B, and X but it is completely possible to ace an ABX test and never touch either the A or the B button (pick one). I've done it many times and so have others.

Just go down the list of X's and compare them to say B, and identify each X as being A or B depending on whether it sounds the same or different from B. That's 100% paired comparisons. You never listened to A. Done.

So what is the other button for? The other button allows you to do a sighted evaluation whenever you want to.

Just do paired, sighted comparisons between A and B until you know what the difference is. Seems simple enough, no?

Once you think you know the difference between A and B, then compare A or B or both to X, again using paired comparisons.

The actual thought process goes something like this:

I know that X is either A or B but not both A and B because A and B are different.

So, if I do a paired comparison between A and X and remember the result, and then do a paired comparison between B and X and compare that result to the result of the first comparison, the outcomes of the two paired comparisons are either going to make sense or not.

If for example I decide that X sounds like both A and B, then that is illogical so I must not really know what the difference between A and B is.

I then need to go back and refresh my mind by doing more sighted evaluations between A and B.

So ABX allows the listener the chance to retrain his ears with what the audible difference between A and B are as many times as he needs to until he gets a logical outcome from his paired comparisons between A and X, and B and X.

This actually works splendidly providing that there is a discernible audible difference between A and B. When there isn't a discernible audible difference, you may also figure that pretty quickly. We instruct people to do their best, and if they can't do anything else just make their best guess and move on. At the limits of the listener's sensitivity, sometimes the guesses come out as indicating statistically significant reliable detection of the difference and that counts as a success.
FreeFire likes this.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 11:44 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: 1211
['quote=arnyk]
I don't think taht there are any golden eared psychoacousticians because the very process of learning psychacoustics demolishes most if not all golden eared myths. Blow away enough golden eared myths and zap, zoom powie! you can pass for an objectivist! ;-)
[/quote]

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
By that logic, I don't exist .
Possibly speaks to your knowledge of psychoacoustics which I've corrected many times, often with frustrating results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
we need to think back to what real experience folks have with DBTs as to think there are no golden ears or more properly stated, trained listeners.
Seems to demonstrate a lack of understanding of the objectivist/subjectivist controversy.

Golden Ears and scientifically trained listeners are two different, mutually exclusive groups of people. Golden ears don't believe in doing scientific listening, and scientific listening is required to become a scientifically trained listener. Therefore Golden Ears can't become scientifically trained listeners without losing their status as Golden Ears. Pernicious stuff, that science!

Here's a bold prediction. We now know that John Atkinson has listened to my keys jangling + test tones files, as he reported here the outcome of listening to them using his monitoring system. We also know that he enquired about ABX comparators for the Mac, and he was given links to two of them. I boldly predict that he will never report the outcomes of his ABX tests because that will seriously endanger his standing with the Golden Ears.

One way to do ABX tests and preserve one's standing with the Goldne Ears to to subsequently sufficiently abuse any experiemental outcomes that they obtain with ABX testing. So Amir, there is hope for you and your ongoing relationship with the Golden Ears.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Just get a job at any company performing psychoacoustics/codec testing and you immediately run into these trained listeners who are used for critical listening.
Precisely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Only if one lives in the vacuum of forum knowledge does one concludes what Arny is saying.
False claim because I've known about how people doing performing psychoacoustics/codec testing and development work for decades. Also, an insult to my intelligence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
When I ask Arny why he can't hear what I can hear, he says he damaged his hearing in Army and struggles to hear much above 8 Khz. Clearly then Arny would underperform large swath of the population. How could he be in a position to judge anything in this regard?
False claim because I have proven in ABX tests that I hear pure tones up to and including 12 KHz at modest levels. I've posted that here on AVS so its up to you Amir to explain why you are saying otherwise. I also explained the psychoacoustic explanation for the observed facts in this matter, but it seems to have flown right over you head based on the false claim above. There goes any claim you might make to properly understanding Psychoacoustics.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 11:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Spiky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 2,132
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
nothing vague about it at all, you may want to review the opening post


my questions spoke to the lack of agreement on the issue of a cables
You have pretty well (unintentionally I'm sure) identified the problem with discussions about cables. Both "sides" usually refuse to identify what they are talking about, even if they appear to be listing long comments about technical numbers. So congrats, you've made a typical cable thread.

I've seen months-long arguments between two people only to find out they are using the exact same cable for the exact same reason. Neither could be bothered to define what they actually meant by their words like "good", so they just keep arguing....
Spiky is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 12:09 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: 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiky View Post
You have pretty well (unintentionally I'm sure) identified the problem with discussions about cables. Both "sides" usually refuse to identify what they are talking about, even if they appear to be listing long comments about technical numbers. So congrats, you've made a typical cable thread.

I've seen months-long arguments between two people only to find out they are using the exact same cable for the exact same reason. Neither could be bothered to define what they actually meant by their words like "good", so they just keep arguing....
I suspect that many people here are using or are at least in agreement with the same definition of what a good speaker cable is.

A good speaker cable is one that does not change the sound quality of the speaker it is connected to, regardless of its length within some defined normal range of lengths. IOW if the normal range of lengths is up to 8 feet, the sound of the speaker attached to a good 8 foot cable does not change as the cable's length is reduced to as close to zero as is practically possible. In practical terms, a good 8 foot speaker cable does not change the sound quality of the speaker in any audible way over the range of lengths of from 6 inches or less to 8 feet.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 12:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary Lightfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 83
What kind of lengths do you think may make an audible difference?

Gary

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc
Who says Cameron is "right" and why do we care about him so much - lol!

I trust Gary Lightfoot more than James Cameron.
Gary Lightfoot is online now  
Old 07-25-2014, 12:57 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiky View Post
You have pretty well (unintentionally I'm sure) identified the problem with discussions about cables. Both "sides" usually refuse to identify what they are talking about, even if they appear to be listing long comments about technical numbers. So congrats, you've made a typical cable thread.

I've seen months-long arguments between two people only to find out they are using the exact same cable for the exact same reason. Neither could be bothered to define what they actually meant by their words like "good", so they just keep arguing....

no one else had a problem understanding the question except for the guy that decided to take over the thread and yourself

feel free to abstain from posting in this thread if the question you wanted asked by me was not.

again I say, this has been a very good thread

the question is not getting changed 7 pages later

thank you for understanding

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-25-2014, 01:35 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: 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiky View Post
You have pretty well (unintentionally I'm sure) identified the problem with discussions about cables. Both "sides" usually refuse to identify what they are talking about, even if they appear to be listing long comments about technical numbers. So congrats, you've made a typical cable thread.

I've seen months-long arguments between two people only to find out they are using the exact same cable for the exact same reason. Neither could be bothered to define what they actually meant by their words like "good", so they just keep arguing....
I suspect that many people here are using or are at least in agreement with the same definition of what a good speaker cable is.

A good speaker cable is one that does not change the sound quality of the speaker it is connected to, regardless of its length within some defined normal range of lengths. IOW if the normal range of lengths is up to 8 feet, the sound of the speaker attached to a good 8 foot cable does not change as the cable's length is reduced to as close to zero as is practically possible. In practical terms, a good 8 foot speaker cable does not change the sound quality of the speaker in any audible way over the range of lengths of from 6 inches or less to 8 feet.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 01:42 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 15,160
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Liked: 419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot View Post
What kind of lengths do you think may make an audible difference?

Gary
To coin a phrase used by a few... "it depends".
Ratman is online now  
Old 07-25-2014, 01:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1986
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
On another site this was presented as a poll.
A poll gathers opinions, not facts, and there are any number of phrases, most of them not repeatable here, that define the worth of opinions.

As for the facts with respect to cables, they do sound different, based on the Holy Trinity of Resistance, Capacitance and Inductance. No engineer worthy of the name ever says differently. The issue is whether audible improvements in resistance, capacitance and inductance are commensurate with price. The answer is no. Some of the best cable specs come from very inexpensive products, while some of the most expensive cables made are pure unadulterated crap.
Required reading:
http://consumerist.com/2008/03/03/do...onster-cables/
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
Glimmie, FreeFire and RickJames like this.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 02:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
A poll gathers opinions, not facts, and there are any number of phrases, most of them not repeatable here, that define the worth of opinions.

As for the facts with respect to cables, they do sound different, based on the Holy Trinity of Resistance, Capacitance and Inductance. No engineer worthy of the name ever says differently. The issue is whether audible improvements in resistance, capacitance and inductance are commensurate with price. The answer is no. Some of the best cable specs come from very inexpensive products, while some of the most expensive cables made are pure unadulterated crap.
Required reading:
http://consumerist.com/2008/03/03/do...onster-cables/
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
thanks for posting bill

have you read the thread? some great stuff for a hobbyist such as myself

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-25-2014, 04:13 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: 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot View Post
What kind of lengths do you think may make an audible difference?
A cable that is really bad can cause an audible difference at any useful length.

A bad cable will cause an audible difference when it is as long as it is, and it may cause an audible difference when it is even significantly shorter than the longest length that it was used for.

A practical example of a bad speaker cable would be a speaker cable made up of this wire:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...m_term=2781301

Radio Shack 24 gauge speaker wire part number Model: 278-1301



It's 24 gauge speaker wire that has a resistance of 5 ohms per 100 feet according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge.

If you cut it in half to make 25' speaker cables each cable will have a resistance of 1.25 ohms.

If you use it to hook up a pair of nominal 8 ohm speakers with this impedance curve:

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-spe...iew_fullscreen



Around 125-250 Hz there is a broad valley in the impedance curve down to about 4 ohms. This causes a loss of about 2.3 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

Between 500 and 2,500 Hz there is a broad peak up to about an average of 9 ohms. This causes a loss of only about 1 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

These regions are broad, about an octave wide each, and the difference of about 1.3 dB in the response of the speaker between these ranges is likely to be audible as a slight loss in upper bass or warmth.

If we look at the response of the speaker:

it is really pretty flat in this range, and the difference might actually be heard. However standing waves make make it somewhat less flat at the listening position.

The 25' 24 gauge speaker cable fails to be a good speaker cable.
amirm likes this.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 04:33 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: 1211
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniobiz1 View Post
Amir, you don't KNOW that email does not corrupt audio attachments, because you did not test it. You don't have any data about it.
Lots of people have tested file corruption of attachments by email, probably without knowing it.

A good test is to attach a executable program file or a zip file, which people do all of the time without the slightest bit of difficulty.

Change even one bit in either kind of file and there is generally big trouble!

The idea that the sound quality of audio files is changed when they are transmitted as email attachments is absolutely ludicrous.

Let's say that audio files undergo random changes while they are transmitted. The outcome would be clicks and pops during playback, not subtle changes.
arnyk is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 05:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,818
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1328 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniobiz1 View Post
Amir, you don't KNOW that email does not corrupt audio attachments, because you did not test it. You don't have any data about it.
How do you know I did not test it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonio
I consider that you won the argument with Arny Krueger, because I believe your results. Still, what your results prove is that under extremely unrealistic conditions a difference can be heard.
What was unrealistic about it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonio
I'm not trying to undermine your results, mind you, just trying to understand what it means for when we, the music listening general population, listen to a song.
Fair enough .

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonio
My interpretation is that it means absolutely nothing. It's like hunting a dead pixel in a display, a pixel you can see only if you look for it. You found it and proved it was there, and for that I honestly congratulate you (no sarcasm or irony here; I think we owe this to you).

On the other hand, you proved that all those claims of differences between night and day mean nothing. You had to find a segment, "lock" on it, as you said, and play it back and forth, for 20 seconds each time, to find which was which. This has obviously nothing to do with music listening.
ABX tests do not allow qualifications of the results. It only gives you binary answer. As such, I don't know how you know the extent to which I heard or didn't hear the difference.

Remember, my hearing has suffered greatly over the years. But even in my prime there were folks without any training who could outperform my listening abilities. So even if you assumed this was a hard test for me to pass, it may not be at all for someone else.

Also, such non-linear distortions are highly content dependent. Who says Arny's file or Scott/Mark's are the worst case? There is no science behind any of those selections. The only premise was that they had ultrasonic content. Well, I don't hear ultrasonic content. So what made the files sound different is unknown.

In audio compression, the fidelity range is incredible. A clip can be transparent while another unlistenable (to me anyway ). In that field we can explain that because we precisely know what the codec is doing and how and why distortions are created. Here, we have picked content at random with no relationship to system deficiencies.

We would be much farther along if we had not until now dismissed 100% the possibility that such degradations are audible. By biasing our entire population here, we managed to sharply reduce the amount of experimentation. And planted the seeds of bias in anyone who would want to try: "you are not going to hear a difference." Oh what a surprise that they don't!

Remember also that some of the challenges I had were tool based. It is a pain in the neck to use Foobar2000 ABX plug-in to conduct such tests. The tool makes it exceptionally hard to focus on a critical segment. Even if you find it, the moment you exit the program all the settings are gone! This is a tool that itself is biased to reduce the positive outcomes!

So no, this is not the worst case situation. Yes, despite the handicaps I managed to do far better than others here. A capability that no one would even contemplate me having it. All the years of experience and training in this area was considered to be voided based on don't who don't have any experience as such. Perfectly logical people chose to believe these assertions rather than saying "wait a sec, I don't trust the word of a stranger on a forum over what my doctor says. Why am I doing that in this area?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonio
So it is YOUR very findings that give people on this forum the right to think that it is a very reasonable assumption to think that the "night and day" claims are just in the heads of those who make it.
Seeing how these people are the very ones who spread myths and misinformation about inability of anyone to hear such differences, I say we dismiss anything they have to say. They shouldn't have had credibility before but they did. Knowing what we know now, why would we listen to them at all?

Remember, these are the same folks who are refusing to run these test and report them. What they constantly demand others to run, they won't themselves. Why? They are worried they would look bad. Well, it is time to look bad .

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonio
However, congratulations again, and let me add that I rarely found someone so willing to debate and so capable of not letting things go. I think that Microsoft hired you for this quality. Or maybe fired. Or both
I am speechless. A reasonable post ending this way? Shame.

So you know, my abilities to debate came from my love for audio which started when I was in elementary school. About 40 years ago when I was a young kid, I went to my friend's house and his older brother had a Sony 777 Reel-to-Reel tape deck. I had never heard music sound so good, and a machine that beautiful prior to that time. All I had was a cassette player. The Sony R2R cost about $1,000 from what I recall (these are 1970s dollars). My daily allowance was 25 cents or something like that. Clearly I was not going to save that up on my own. So I went to my dad and asked him to buy that deck for me. He asked how much it was and just about fell off his chair when heard the amount. Knowing that I was passionate about electronics and audio he made a deal with me. That if I could convince him why that equipment was better than say, a $100 cassette tape, he would buy it from me. I accepted the mission.

My dad worked very long hours. He would go to work early in the morning and come home 9:30 to 10:00 at night. I would patiently wait for him to come home, eat his dinner sit down to relax. And then hit him with an argument after argument. I would talk about such things as frequency response, signal to noise ratio, etc. He was not technical so none of this had meaning to him but he would counter with this argument, or that argument. This went on for months and months! Still no money to by the Sony R2R. But boy was I getting good practice! Everyday I would think of how to counter his argument with yet another answer.

I failed in the overall mission but my dad felt sorry for me and bought me a cheaper deck called an "Elcaset." It was a new format that combined R2R and cassettes. It was one of the happiest days of my life!

Fast forward decades later and the skills I learned to think through convincing arguments hugely advanced my career at Microsoft where in addition to building technology, I also managed our business development activities to partner with hardware companies like every major CE company in Japan and Korea. As it turned out they were all hated Microsoft due to bad business experiences or fear of Microsoft taking over their business (little did they know that Apple and Google would do that). I managed to get over these hurdles one by one where one day, the last and biggest enemies of Microsoft signed on to support our audio/video technologies in their products.

Today, every blu-ray player you buy has technology from my team. Every Android phone/tablet you buy has technology from my team. Every smart TV has technology from my team. Of course every PC does too and so does every game console. The list goes on. I built relationships that were so genuine and trustworthy that it superseded their lack of trust and poor interactions with Microsoft in the past. It takes a lot of skill to get Kutaragi-san who started the gaming business at Sony to order his team to put WMA in PlayStation when Microsoft was their direct competitor with Xbox. Of course I had a fantastic team behind me but the lessons my dad taught me about thinking through your arguments and being persistent paid off.

So you might want to consider all of this next time you finish a post with a personal jab like that. My skills are not limited to technical arguments alone .

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 07:49 PM
Member
 
antoniobiz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 72 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I am speechless. A reasonable post ending this way? Shame.
First of all, I apologize if I offended you. It was not my intention in any way. It was a playful way to say that bosses don't like people who won't let go (playful but evidently badly worded). Nothing more than that. I previously told you that, while I often disagree with you, I appreciate the way you discuss things. However, I will be more careful in the future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
How do you know I did not test it?
Because it makes no sense. Under normal conditions, a file is a file. But I don't have to explain this to you. You can say I don't know, and it's true. However, this is not reasonable. It is just a not very elegant way to win an argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
What was unrealistic about it?
Well, your description: finding a segment and "locking" on it. That is not how one listens to music. That is how I listen to a bass line buried in a mix trying to figure it out, in order to play it myself. Again, you could tell me that I don't know how you listen to music, and it would be true. But still, not very elegant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
ABX tests do not allow qualifications of the results. It only gives you binary answer. As such, I don't know how you know the extent to which I heard or didn't hear the difference.
Qualifications are allowed from a practical standpoint. It is a matter of reasonability. If it takes trained ears, headphones, finding a segment and locking in on it to obtain a positive result then two things are clear to me: one, the ABX outcome is positive; two, from a practical standpoint the result is meaningless to me and basically to everybody I know in real life. If you think about it, you buy your equipment to listen to music or movies or whatever, and end up deciding what to buy doing something completely different. As for all those people who can hear even better than you, if you say they exist, I have no doubt they do exist (again, no sarcasm or irony, here). However, the whole audio world has been looking for them for at least 30 years, and apparently so far you are the only one who could prove something. And you had to bend backwards to prove what you did prove. (While I'm typing I read that you performed the test again successfully, changing the dither. Yet you missed the first two iterations, so the difference is minimal at best, otherwise you wouldn't have missed them).

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Remember, my hearing has suffered greatly over the years. But even in my prime there were folks without any training who could outperform my listening abilities. So even if you assumed this was a hard test for me to pass, it may not be at all for someone else.
I don't think is was hard for you. I just think that what you had to do to pass it has nothing to do with music listening (and you are a trained listener).
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Also, such non-linear distortions are highly content dependent. Who says Arny's file or Scott/Mark's are the worst case? There is no science behind any of those selections. The only premise was that they had ultrasonic content. Well, I don't hear ultrasonic content. So what made the files sound different is unknown.
I don't think the files are important. Again, the hypothesis is that one format is better than the other. So this should be true of any file that uses the hypothetically better format capabilities.

Anyway, you get my point. This kind of testing, while very useful from a theoretical point of view, is totally useless when I get to do what I purchase my equipment and my music for: listen to it. If I thought I was missing something, your findings relaxed me even more than before, and I appreciate them, and appreciate your effort and your will to share them.

What you wrote about your career is very interesting, and thanks for sharing it.

Apologies again, no jabs from me. Hope there are no hard feelings.
antoniobiz1 is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 07:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,818
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1328 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniobiz1 View Post
Apologies again, no jabs from me. Hope there are no hard feelings.
No. We are fine .
antoniobiz1 likes this.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 09:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,818
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1328 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
Seems to demonstrate a lack of understanding of the objectivist/subjectivist controversy.

Golden Ears and scientifically trained listeners are two different, mutually exclusive groups of people.
Hi Arny. In forum food fights you are right but not in real world. It is like a number of other things here: people make up their own fictitious things and then battle over them.

In the industry, Golden Ears has one and only one meaning: someone who has better than average listening ability, able to hear subtleties that others cannot. Even the Wiki says the same thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ear

A golden ear is a term in audio circles referring to a person who is thought to possess special talents in hearing.[citation needed] Golden ears claim to be able to discern subtle differences in audio reproduction that most inexperienced and untrained listeners cannot, much like trained wine experts claim to discern differences among wines inexperienced tasters cannot.[citation needed]

Yes, it says citations needed which may be why such a confused definition is used in forums. As best as I can tell, you all use the term as a sarcastic remark to refer to any audiophile who says they can hear differences that you think are impossible. No one in the industry remotely uses that definition. Golden Ears are known by name and credentials proven over time in their company with acuity above and beyond many others. That is what people called me at Microsoft although I always prefered the term trained/expert listener.

So no, the terms are not only not mutually exclusive but the same in this regard. Knowing that, I hope moving forward we don't continue with this made up definition that immediately indicates we have never spent one minute in music label, or any technology company developing audio technology in need of critical listening.

To wit, here is a memorandum on passing of David Smith of Sony Music: http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/jaes.o...54_9_PG891.pdf

As an engineer at Sony Music, David gained many years of recording experience, both in the Sony facility and in the field. Because of his talent and high standards as Sony’s “Golden Ear,” the recordings he oversaw were superb. His focus on microphone quality was particularly noticeable for recordings of many world-class musicians.

http://www.aes.org/technical/documents/i2.pdf

4.6 Collaborative work
The standardization of audio compression techniques, for example, is a lengthy and expensive process.
There is no purely objective measure for audio quality. As a result, audio compression algorithms must go
through many stages of subjective listening tests.
The listening tests take place at many worldwide
locations and require the convergence of many professionals from around the world. In addition, the
candidates for these tests come from a select group of "golden ear" listeners. These special listeners have
the ability to detect problems in the audio that most humans would not hear. As such, it is critical to have
them participate in these events.


Maybe people in the industry also use Golden Ear as a derogatory term but in my many years of interactions with countless business and technical people in the music and related technology industry, it was always a complimentary term used to refer to people with much better than average listening ability.

Quote:
Golden ears don't believe in doing scientific listening, and scientific listening is required to become a scientifically trained listener. Therefore Golden Ears can't become scientifically trained listeners without losing their status as Golden Ears. Pernicious stuff, that science!
Well, this "golden ear" has the training, and knowledge of what he is listening to, my low IQ notwithstanding . But sure, if you bastardize the word then you could make it whatever you all like.

Quote:
Here's a bold prediction. We now know that John Atkinson has listened to my keys jangling + test tones files, as he reported here the outcome of listening to them using his monitoring system. We also know that he enquired about ABX comparators for the Mac, and he was given links to two of them. I boldly predict that he will never report the outcomes of his ABX tests because that will seriously endanger his standing with the Golden Ears.
You guys keep changing the topic Arny. I was talking about how it is possible that you have never run into or know people that have my training/listening abilities The answer has to be that you have not spent any time in the industry. What other explanation is there for you using the incorrect forum definition of it????

Quote:
One way to do ABX tests and preserve one's standing with the Goldne Ears to to subsequently sufficiently abuse any experiemental outcomes that they obtain with ABX testing. So Amir, there is hope for you and your ongoing relationship with the Golden Ears.
I don't see audiophiles calling themselves Golden Ears any more than you refer to yourself as a "meter reader." So no, my relationship is 100% safe with that group. Their reception has been far more constructive and polite than meter readers in my own camp I must say. Maybe we can finally interest them in running these tests. Sure as heck ridiculing them often with voodoo audio science all these years has certainly not worked.

Quote:
False claim because I've known about how people doing performing psychoacoustics/codec testing and development work for decades. Also, an insult to my intelligence.
Then what explains you not acknowledging the role of trained listeners Arny? Why do you always equate the results of any random DBT with application to everyone here?

A couple of months ago you were asked: How much THD or IM distortion can be present before it's audible to a trained listener with normal or excellent hearing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
That depends. The transition points (hear/can't hear) are complex and can depend on many things. General rules are known. Distortion on the order of 10% is generally audible. Distortion below 0.1% is rarely if ever audible, even under the most ideal of conditions for hearing distortion. Distortion below 0.01% is generaly not heard. This is also called the -80 dB rule. Distortion below 0.001% is ridiculously low and thinking about hearing it is a flight of fancy. That is also called -100 dB artifacts or -100 dB rule, and this is a highly conservative safe condition. Some non high end equipment is this good or even better. You might hope that all high end gear beats the -80 dB rule but some of it does not.
Were you answering this in the context of trained listeners? If so, why do you keep saying "generally?" He is not asking generally, he is asking about trained listeners with normal or excellent hearing. When have you measured such people? How did you measure them? Or is it that you assumed there are no listeners that do better than general public?

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 09:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,818
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1328 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
False claim because I have proven in ABX tests that I hear pure tones up to and including 12 KHz at modest levels.
We have never seen you ever post results of your ABX tests sans one that you created with obscene amount of distortion. So I hope you forgive us if don't put much weight on that after you said this just a few days ago for the reason why you can't hear these differences:

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
I now struggle to hear the effects of an 8 KHz brick wall filter at normal listening levels.
If you were a chef, that would be like not being able to taste the difference between pork and chicken. Please forgive me for being blunt but anyone who has such truncated hearing and can't pass any of the tests put forward can't be a judge of audio quality and reproduction.

Quote:
I've posted that here on AVS so its up to you Amir to explain why you are saying otherwise. I also explained the psychoacoustic explanation for the observed facts in this matter, but it seems to have flown right over you head based on the false claim above. There goes any claim you might make to properly understanding Psychoacoustics.
I am not saying otherwise Arny. I am repeating the following:

1. You struggle to hear above 8 Khz.

2. You say your hearing was damaged in the Army presumably a few decades back.

3. You are saying the damage due to #2 was gradual. That makes no sense to me. If you damaged your hearing due to arms fire and such, it doesn't take years to set in.

4. You have not reported the results of any tests you have thrown at me and others. No one advocates ABX DBTs more than you yet you are one of the least willing to run and repor them.

5. You say that my listening abilities are better than you in this regard. Wouldn't it reason then that my observation of audio fidelity is and have been more accurate than yours? And maybe this is why you so insistently say there are no audible differences that others may very well be able to hear?

6. You have never acknowledged anyone having better hearing ability than you, have you?

7. That your IQ is three digits and mine two.

8. You have said that you have been involved in > 100,000 DBTs yet when asked, the only test you say you have ever documented is this from 32 years ago which until I post it, was not matter of public record for anyone here to be able to read:



So when your hearing was not yet damaged, you heard differences.

9. There must be two more things but I am too lazy to think of them to make it 10 items .

Sincerely,
False Claim
(formerly Amirm)

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 07-25-2014, 10:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 709 Post(s)
Liked: 885
For some reason I am reminded of
amirm likes this.

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is online now  
Old 07-25-2014, 10:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,818
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1328 Post(s)
Liked: 731
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
For some reason I am reminded of Kenny Omega VS. YOSHIHIKO
This is one of the funniest videos I have ever seen! I can't stop laughing.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 02:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary Lightfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
A cable that is really bad can cause an audible difference at any useful length.

A bad cable will cause an audible difference when it is as long as it is, and it may cause an audible difference when it is even significantly shorter than the longest length that it was used for.

A practical example of a bad speaker cable would be a speaker cable made up of this wire:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...m_term=2781301

Radio Shack 24 gauge speaker wire part number Model: 278-1301

<snip image>

It's 24 gauge speaker wire that has a resistance of 5 ohms per 100 feet according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge.

If you cut it in half to make 25' speaker cables each cable will have a resistance of 1.25 ohms.

If you use it to hook up a pair of nominal 8 ohm speakers with this impedance curve:

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-spe...iew_fullscreen

<snip image>

Around 125-250 Hz there is a broad valley in the impedance curve down to about 4 ohms. This causes a loss of about 2.3 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

Between 500 and 2,500 Hz there is a broad peak up to about an average of 9 ohms. This causes a loss of only about 1 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

These regions are broad, about an octave wide each, and the difference of about 1.3 dB in the response of the speaker between these ranges is likely to be audible as a slight loss in upper bass or warmth.

If we look at the response of the speaker:

<snip image> it is really pretty flat in this range, and the difference might actually be heard. However standing waves make make it somewhat less flat at the listening position.

The 25' 24 gauge speaker cable fails to be a good speaker cable.
Hi,

Thanks for the detailed reply of what a bad cable might do there.

Is the initial impedance/frequency plot one you measured with the 24swg cable, or the standard plot for the speaker, and the changes that you say will happen with the bad cable are those which you know/can predict will happen due to experience and knowledge, or actual test results?

Not having done the testing myself, I was wondering how a resister in line with a speaker would change it - I would have thought it would have added to the crossover globally rather than at a specific frequency range. This is something that I will one day have to try myself. A cable would do much the same, but add some inductance and capacitance to the whole speaker too.

I would have thought that the impedance and capacitance of a wire would have had more effect, and as the voltage and current changed, so would the effect on the speaker. How much I don't know, but I would think longer run would make a difference. We'd have to measure that to see by how much and if it were audible. I agree that long runs of cables will have more effect than shorter runs, but by how much and how audible is the question.

The awg table does tell us something though - that all copper wire of the same cross sectional area (twisted or solid) will have the same resistance because it doesn't make any comments or add any factors for variations (mains wire regs books add factors for how the cable is clipped, or if it's in insulation etc for example). I would also assume any copper awg number would have the same capacitance and inductance (so wire is wire). Therefore, choosing the correct cross sectional area cable for the application will mean that even mains flex will sound the same as the equivalent CSA speaker wire. The main difference is that the insulation for the two will be different due to the presumed application (one carries higher volts and current and can be lethal). Indeed, some in-wall wire looks very much like mains flex.

I would think that most people on this forum would choose a decent size cable rather than an obviously very thin cable.

I think what needs to be tested is the audibility of changes of different gauge wire and different lengths to show where the differences lay. That's something that I think would provide conclusive evidence and I wonder if that has been done before and what the results were.

Amirs testing shows the differences between cables of different make up (copper vs aluminum for example) but I'd be interested to see a test of the above. I can't do it myself right now but if no one else does, I will have to have a go one day myself.

The other thing I was wondering about is that when comparing cables over such a broad frequency range, if you don't know where bad cable is going to effect that frequency range, unless it was an extremely large db difference it would be very difficult to hear it because our sonic memory is intrinsically bad and usually the differences are very small.

Oh, and my initial answer to the OP s question as to why less people here would say that cables make a difference, is because this is the AV SCIENCE forum, so less people here are likely to be duped by certain claims than those perhaps less well informed outside of a community like this. Just a guess though. So I would think that given the awg table, all good cables will sound the same.

Being a science oriented forum, it's great to see some real data on various aspects of the discussion.

Oh, and can anyone answer my previous question regarding the differences in cable compared to the differences in the manufacturing tolerances of components in a speaker crossover? Like I say, all speakers are going to be different due to different tolerances, yet no one ever seems to say that they can hear a difference in their speakers.

Gary

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc
Who says Cameron is "right" and why do we care about him so much - lol!

I trust Gary Lightfoot more than James Cameron.
Gary Lightfoot is online now  
Old 07-26-2014, 06:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Lightfoot View Post
I was wondering how a resister in line with a speaker would change it - I would have thought it would have added to the crossover globally rather than at a specific frequency range. This is something that I will one day have to try myself. A cable would do much the same, but add some inductance and capacitance to the whole speaker too.
That's a easily seen in speaker modeling software, as is the effect of capacitance and inductance. Intuitively one would think that added resistance would have a linear effect across the frequency spectrum, but here, as is usually the case with all things audio, intuition is incorrect. Added resistance changes system Q, which changes frequency response.
Gary Lightfoot likes this.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 07:19 AM
Member
 
Diggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 7
I'm sensing that most of the objection revolves around spending thousands on cables, when most "normal" people have the internal debate over whether to buy zip cord from Home Depot for $20 or a $50 roll of MC. At some point, the issue becomes cosmetic/enthusiast-oriented purchases that transcend the audible. Look at the back of TK's new theater -- I suspect MC was either donated for the installation or selected because it looks a little nicer than typical 12-gauge zip. Either way, with an installation such as that it never hurts to go a step or two above normal, and having a recognized quality brand makes sense from a holistic perspective.

Without question, some cables sound different, but then the question becomes is that intentional by the manufacturer or a fix for deficient wiring that was in place previously?
Diggles is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 07:24 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
A cable that is really bad can cause an audible difference at any useful length.

A bad cable will cause an audible difference when it is as long as it is, and it may cause an audible difference when it is even significantly shorter than the longest length that it was used for.

A practical example of a bad speaker cable would be a speaker cable made up of this wire:

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...m_term=2781301

Radio Shack 24 gauge speaker wire part number Model: 278-1301



It's 24 gauge speaker wire that has a resistance of 5 ohms per 100 feet according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge.

If you cut it in half to make 25' speaker cables each cable will have a resistance of 1.25 ohms.

If you use it to hook up a pair of nominal 8 ohm speakers with this impedance curve:

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-spe...iew_fullscreen



Around 125-250 Hz there is a broad valley in the impedance curve down to about 4 ohms. This causes a loss of about 2.3 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

Between 500 and 2,500 Hz there is a broad peak up to about an average of 9 ohms. This causes a loss of only about 1 dB due to the resistance of the wire.

These regions are broad, about an octave wide each, and the difference of about 1.3 dB in the response of the speaker between these ranges is likely to be audible as a slight loss in upper bass or warmth.

If we look at the response of the speaker:

it is really pretty flat in this range, and the difference might actually be heard. However standing waves make make it somewhat less flat at the listening position.

The 25' 24 gauge speaker cable fails to be a good speaker cable.
all this is good but can you speak to the real world applications as well? Wire is useless until it is terminated with a connector.

I know I have read both here and elsewhere where connectors induce flaws.

As a hobbyist the straight "wire" conversation is not the full story.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-26-2014, 07:30 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diggles View Post
At some point, the issue becomes cosmetic/enthusiast-oriented purchases that transcend the audible.
Totally on point!

As a hobbyist I don't mind spending a couple hundred dollars on a cable or two BUT I don't want cable that is inferior to Radio Shack at 10 times the price.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-26-2014, 08:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bill Fitzmaurice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 10,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 1986
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
all this is good but can you speak to the real world applications as well? Wire is useless until it is terminated with a connector.
I know I have read both here and elsewhere where connectors induce flaws.
Connectors are not a necessity, they're a convenience. You need not use them at all. Just like wire there is no correlation between connector price and performance. Where connectors can pose problems is when they make a poor connection between the connector and the wire and/or between the plug and jack. That's a mechanical issue, not electrical.

At some point, the issue becomes cosmetic/enthusiast-oriented purchases that transcend the audible.

That point comes at about fifty cents a foot for wire, and three dollars each for connectors.

Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design

The Laws of Physics aren't swayed by opinion.
Bill Fitzmaurice is offline  
Old 07-26-2014, 08:41 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
Connectors are not a necessity, they're a convenience. You need not use them at all. Just like wire there is no correlation between connector price and performance. Where connectors can pose problems is when they make a poor connection between the connector and the wire and/or between the plug and jack. That's a mechanical issue, not electrical.

At some point, the issue becomes cosmetic/enthusiast-oriented purchases that transcend the audible.

That point comes at about fifty cents a foot for wire, and three dollars each for connectors.
thanks again for your input but I have read that some connectors are indeed flawed to the point of introducing testable unwanted regularities. One I read about was fairly pricey.

i take it this is few and far between as is suspect wire. That said, a hobbyist who values science would enjoy a short list or tip of what to avoid.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-26-2014, 08:46 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 5,456
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 570 Post(s)
Liked: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayDunzl View Post
For some reason I am reminded of Kenny Omega VS. YOSHIHIKO
I though sure the dummy would tire him out and win.

That is what generally happens.
amirm likes this.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is online now  
Old 07-26-2014, 10:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary Lightfoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 130 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post
That's a easily seen in speaker modeling software, as is the effect of capacitance and inductance. Intuitively one would think that added resistance would have a linear effect across the frequency spectrum, but here, as is usually the case with all things audio, intuition is incorrect. Added resistance changes system Q, which changes frequency response.
Hi Bill,

Thanks for the reply.

How much inductance and capacitance do the cables introduce though? Like the AWG table that definitively states the resistance of copper cable, I would think there would be definitive values for inductance and capacitance for those cables too.

Would say a 25 foot length of 18 gauge (approx 1.6mm squared with a current carrying capacity of 15 amps) introduce enough capacitance and inductance to change the sound of a speaker enough to be audible compared to an 8ft run of the same cable? It's only a 17 ft difference.

Also, would those differences be more than the tolerances of the components that make a speaker crossover?

Are there better conductors than copper? If we use copper as the baseline, it would be interesting to see what introduced less resistance/capacitance/inductance into a speaker.

Gary

Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc
Who says Cameron is "right" and why do we care about him so much - lol!

I trust Gary Lightfoot more than James Cameron.
Gary Lightfoot is online now  
 
Thread Tools


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