Expensive cables a waste of $$ - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 110Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-18-2014, 11:06 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post
Wait, so you're saying that they don't need to provide third party measurements to back up their claims?
No they don't. Again, their claims of improved audio is backed by countless customers they have. It is you and I that like to have those measurements but we are not and will not be customers of their products.

Quote:
and just going off of what their customers have to say about the speakers is more then enough, and its up to everyone else to prove their claims wrong? .....LOL That's the best reply I've ever heard.
What is there to be confused about? The purpose of a company is to create products that sells to their potential customers. It is not to deal with people sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks at them. Per above, we won't buy anything from them even if the measurements show something meaningful to us, lest you have $44,000 burning a hole in your pocket!

This is the most glaring fallacy in these forum arguments. You can't convince an atheist that God exists by putting your hand on the bible and swearing to it. Why do we keep imposing our standards of proof, on the other camp to use to prove their point when the whole issue is that they don't believe in it? This is a circular argument.

It is not like they say there are measured differences. They say the cables sound better and so many people agree. Fact that we don't agree should simply lead to us not buying the products. Or using our own resources to get the data we need as I have done above. Not spending time and energy beating up their customers for a proof that we need, and they don't.

Quote:
Looking at your measurements, it looks like you are worried about frequencies that you probably can't even hear?
No. Again that is Arny's theory, not mine. If you have two ultrasonic tones at say, 30 Khz and 33 Khz, and the system is non-linear (i.e. distorts), it will generate distortion tone at 3 Khz (difference between 30 and 30 Khz). That obviously is in the audible band and in the most sensitive part of our hearing. Indeed Arny has created such a test track and some people have reported Intermodulation distortion as this is called in their systems.

Here is Arny passing such double blind tests and the thread to find the clips he used:

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post
BTW here is the ABX log for me running an ABX test on just the keys jangling portion of the file:

--------------------------------
*Note - levels and passage selection fudged for best false positives


foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.3.2
2014/07/28 07:53:00

File A: C:\Users\client64\Music\AVS\Keys jangling\keys jangling full band 2496 test tones f3 4416.wav
File B: C:\Users\client64\Music\AVS\Keys jangling\keys jangling full band 2496 test tones f3.wav

07:53:00 : Test started.
07:54:38 : Trial reset.
07:56:40 : 01/01 50.0%
07:56:55 : 02/02 25.0%
07:57:15 : 03/03 12.5%
07:57:21 : 04/04 6.3%
07:57:27 : 05/05 3.1%
07:57:35 : 06/06 1.6%
07:57:42 : 06/07 6.3%
07:57:55 : 07/08 3.5%
07:58:10 : 08/09 2.0%
07:58:27 : 09/10 1.1%
07:58:35 : 10/11 0.6%
07:58:52 : 11/12 0.3%
07:59:09 : 12/13 0.2%
07:59:15 : 13/14 0.1%
07:59:22 : 14/15 0.0%
07:59:52 : 15/16 0.0%
07:59:59 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 15/16 (0.0%)
--------------------------------

Obviously, I'm not going to BS anybody, this was a bogus test. I selected the level and the portion of the track that I actually listened to to maximize the audible difference based on nonlinear distortion in the crappy monitoring system in this PC producing more audible IM with the 2496 test file than with the 4416 file.
So according to Arny, this effect is completely audible.

Audio technology often is much more complex that we assume .

Best regards,
Guy in chef hat.
David Susilo likes this.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-18-2014, 11:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked: 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post




The top lines are on top of each other show that there is no frequency variations when the source impedance is high. Once we load that down to 600 ohms, which is the measurement of some pre-amps, the rolled off graph materialize. This is for Transparent cable which like MIT has a filter box. We see that it filters out the ultrasonics.

uh...

I don't understand your comments vs the graph.

Could you re-explain your test setup - source and load impedance values?

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
they aren't wired in SERIES. That's the difference. Look at it this way. If you take an EQ and wire it in series, it's to equalize the music to the listener. If you wire the filter in parallel to cable wire it makes the cable get equalized so the cable isn't filtering the music in a nonlinear fashion. Obviously the point is matching the filters to the cables to make sure that the end result is a linear cable.

So his example is only good for EQ's wired in series NOT in parallel. I really hope you understand the difference. When I see people ask questions and discuss MIT products, this is VERY often misunderstood and it's important know the difference between an EQ wired in series vs in parallel and that MIT wires them in parallel to essentially EQ the cable for linearity, not the music. Adding EQ (badly designed) can add other artifacts and colorations which is why some people don't like using EQs in their stereo.
Do you understand how parallel wiring works? Some of the signal hoes through the neteork and some doesn't. The part thst does gets treated precisely the same as would occur for the entire signal in series. Part doesn't. So you get is effect the series effect just turned down a bit. So overall a dlightly smaller roll off. But no magic occurs onaccounta parallel connections because they ate not magical.

In the recording world one puts an eq in series and if the effect is too much you reduce the ew settings yielding precisely the same result as mixing eaed and un-eqed signals. If its not the same the eq is doing other stuff like compression
JHAz is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by spkr View Post
Today, you didn't start out with "Good morning". Inconsistency is the name of your game as shown in my previous post #183.
It is always a good morning when I wake up to you all's thoughtful responses.

So you can't explain your own post? You can't explain why you thought you were suffering from EMI/RFI? You can't explain why it caused static noise? You can't provide any measurements, reference or anything technical to back your statement?

You just threw some technical buzzwords out there hoping they would get accepted as is?

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:15 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jonny5nz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
I would avoid it. Here are the results of my measurements of speaker wire:



You could very well be getting the junk wires sold at BestBuy or Fry's.
Yeah, the problem is that in NZ we don't have those stores, so I don't know where to get good quality budget speaker wire.... You do make me worried about the wire. If I bought a sample of the wire, is there a way for me to easily test it for resistance?
Jonny5nz is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 6,589
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1240 Post(s)
Liked: 1202
Your argument that it's up to the naysayers to prove MIT's claims wrong is the craziest argument that I've heard so far. Why does it only seem like that's a available excuse with audiophiles and guys selling crazy weight lose pills?.....lol


If a company builds a product and claims it does something amazing and then charges someone 45 grand to have it, shouldn't they have proof via third party testing that it does what they say it does?


Of course customers are going to agree, if I spent that kind of money on speaker cables I'm sure the placebo effect would be in full effect. I mean why wouldn't I be looking for every reason to justify dropping that much money on 8ft of copper wire....lol

Last edited by jbrown15; 08-18-2014 at 11:41 AM.
jbrown15 is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jbrown15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 6,589
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1240 Post(s)
Liked: 1202
@amirm I'm curious to know, do you sell MIT products and that's why you are defending them so much?


I see you're located in Bellevue, do you have any of these cables that you could setup for a demo? I'm 5mins across the Canadian border and would be willing to driver down to hear these cables for myself if that was possible. Maybe shoot me a pm if this is something we could arrange?


I really don't want to be someone that's a naysayer without hearing something for myself.

Last edited by jbrown15; 08-18-2014 at 11:25 AM.
jbrown15 is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,662
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Does anyone wonder... If wire/cable A was better than wire/cable B... then why doesn't the manufacturer provide the "technical specifications/comparisons" to justify the "audiophile" price?

IMHO, because most fish would not swallow the hook.

Last edited by Ratman; 08-18-2014 at 11:41 AM.
Ratman is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryn Ravenlocke View Post
I am well aware that such protocols do exist. The curiosity in me is much more directed at what the response would be from conducting such a test. If the results came up that essentially all copper wire is copper wire and that there is no benefit to expensive cables, I can already see many of the arguments against the test. If it came up that there really is benefit to insanely expensive cables, I can also see the arguments against those results. I'm not even saying either side would have valid arguments, just that they would have one.
If you are interested in doing a test, at least settle on one setup and one listening room. You will not find a second room that is measure to 0.1db to each other, at least I seriously doubt that is possible.
Also, by the time you drive from one to the other, your memory for small details of the one you just left is also gone.
Third, how would you keep these two places unknown to you which has what cables, etc. Just because someone didn't tell you is not enough.
How will you judge written statements from 20 trials? Will you drive back and forth that many times?
Never heard of this kind of testing being considered in the first place.
CharlesJ is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jonny5nz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 666
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Is the Belden 12-gauge 5000UE recommended for speaker wire?
Jonny5nz is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post
@amirm I'm curious to know, do you sell MIT products and that's why you are defending them so much?
Me personally? I sell nothing. I retired as an executive at Microsoft and 30+ years in the industry. Been fortunate enough to not have to try to make a buck anymore. Hence all these posts. But even if I were going to make money, it sure wouldn't be in selling cables.

If you mean my company, Madrona Digital, the answer is no again. Our entire business is custom electronics. We use miles of cables per month and we buy them in bulk. No MIT cables. No fancy cables at all. We terminate/make our own cables.

Also, I am not defending MIT cables and as I said, would not be in the market for them even if they had some merit.

My posts are intended to keep us unbiased and objective. And to dismiss layman talking points created to argue with the other side when technically they are not correct.

Quote:
I see you're located in Bellevue, do you have any of these cables that you could setup for a demo? I'm 5mins across the Canadian border and would be willing to driver down to hear these cables for myself if that was possible. Maybe shoot me a pm if this is something we could arrange?
Per above, we don't have any cables to show you at Madrona. You are welcome to come and hear our superlative theater though . Send me a PM if you like to visit.

The Transparent wires I have I acquired prior to forming Madrona Digital. I got them all for free as part of a package of higher-end electronics. Salespeople get more commision on cables than electronics so it is pretty easy to convince them to lower the price of the gear and throw in the cables. Some of the cables retail as much as $500 and I still got them for free.

Quote:
I really don't want to be someone that's a naysayer without hearing something for myself.
Kudos to you .

Proper testing of cables can be quite challenging. Switching cables manually takes longer than our short-term auditory memory which is just a few seconds. Instantaneous switching is required without changing the items under test.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny5nz View Post
Is the Belden 12-gauge 5000UE recommended for speaker wire?
Yes.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked: 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny5nz View Post
Is the Belden 12-gauge 5000UE recommended for speaker wire?
Here are the specs

There are other choices

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Hey guys. I have a limited budget and was wondering whether this 12 guage speaker wire would be okay to run from by equipment rack, along the soffits, down the corner bass trap to the speakers? http://www.aliexpress.com/item/50-ft...622694291.html

What do you reckon?
It's probably fine. How long is the run, and what is the nominal impedance of your speakers?

Quote:
Is the Belden 12-gauge 5000UE recommended for speaker wire?
Yes. It's what I use.

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

mcnarus is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 11:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
[QUOTE=FMW;26664241... He explained pretty well. MIT cables have filters attached to them designed to equalize the frequency response. ....[/QUOTE]

But, if the cable has flat response in the audio band, what are they equalizing? After all, they do not come to your house to equalize the cables to compensate all your components and room, do they?
And, I believe there are super EQs on the market for way less than that $40k box that will do a much better job.
CharlesJ is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:00 PM
Senior Member
 
spkr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
It is always a good morning when I wake up to you all's thoughtful responses.
A prime example of backpedaling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
So you can't explain your own post? You can't explain why you thought you were suffering from EMI/RFI? You can't explain why it caused static noise? You can't provide any measurements, reference or anything technical to back your statement?
So "static noise" is back on now. Were was it yesterday?

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
You just threw some technical buzzwords out there hoping they would get accepted as is?
Is that really what I did or is that the distorted version of what I did? Given your track record of distortion, the latter has the highest probability.

Last edited by spkr; 08-18-2014 at 12:04 PM.
spkr is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Please show me objective measurements between MIT cables and another cable that proves they sound the same.
I don't even know whether they sound the same. The MIT might be so badly designed that it sounds different.

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

mcnarus is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,662
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 235 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Yes.
Shortest and most concise answer I've ever read from you! Keep up the good work!
Ratman is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
But, if the cable has flat response in the audio band, what are they equalizing?
They are poor, and the people who can afford their cables are rich.

So they are equalizing wealth.
briansxx likes this.

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

mcnarus is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked: 679
Personally, I like my magnet wire for which I paid an astonishing $0.085/per foot per conductor.

No shields.

Almost no insulation.

Stays where you put it.

Looks as good as anything else to me.

Works for me.

It's not for everyone.

Even has a couple of manufacturers using some variations on the theme, Mapleshade and Anti-Cables if you want to spend more or impress your buddies.


I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Me personally? I sell nothing. I retired as an executive at Microsoft and 30+ years in the industry. Been fortunate enough to not have to try to make a buck anymore. Hence all these posts. But even if I were going to make money, it sure wouldn't be in selling cables.

....
Your wire figure keeps popping up. I remember your description of your measurement method.
I asked a while back if you still had some of that cable left on full rolls and if possible to measure the full or almost full roll and compare the numbers to the cut off length you measured. Curious how being rolled up actually measure per unit versus just that short length.
CharlesJ is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Its amusing for awhile, to see Dunning-Kruger Effect at work first hand, but after a few instances of multiple page long posts that don't actually say anything, or the same person posting anywhere between two and six posts in a row, the value of the Ignore List in separating the wheat from the chaff is welcome.
Well, that makes 4. If everyone did this, AVS would be a much nicer place.

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

mcnarus is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:08 PM
Member
 
aceg1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 86
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 14




Maybe the easier route to convince people cables make a difference is to shift the argument from one of audible difference (difficult to measure and quantify) to one of visual differences which can be easily measured and proven. See the excerpt from wikipedia at the end of this post regarding the HDMI spec. With the advent of higher data speeds, poorly constructed HDMI cables and insufficient wire gauges led to the revisions of the HDMI spec. The excerpt below mentions the numerous tests and cable construction requirements including wire gauge for the HDMI cable (for those interested). Notice the length and wire gauge restriction for category 1 HDMI cables. Try using a cheap category 1, standard HDMI cable over a twenty foot run and sending a 1080P signal and see what happens. To the skeptics, how could a drop in signal or no signal at the other end occur since the cable is only transmitting 1s and 0s? Because cables make a difference. The construction, wire gauge, etc. This phenomena is not limited to HDMI cables. The same is try of USB cables sending high quality audio due to the handshake requirements. Although not posted (I don't believe it's posted), Nordost has shown and proven due to the construction of their cables, Nordost can make longer USB cables than traditional USB cable makers for transmitting high quality audio. Just more fuel to the fire.
Cables[edit]


Although no maximum length for an HDMI cable is specified, signal attenuation (dependent on the cable's construction quality and conducting materials) limits usable lengths in practice.[117][118] HDMI 1.3 defines two cable categories: Category 1-certified cables, which have been tested at 74.5 MHz (which would include resolutions such as 720p60 and 1080i60), and Category 2-certified cables, which have been tested at 340 MHz (which would include resolutions such as 1080p60 and 2160p30).[111][119][120] Category 1 HDMI cables are marketed as "Standard" and Category 2 HDMI cables as "High Speed".[1] This labeling guideline for HDMI cables went into effect on October 17, 2008.[121][122] Category 1 and 2 cables can either meet the required parameter specifications for interpair skew, far-end crosstalk, attenuation and differential impedance, or they can meet the required nonequalized/equalized eye diagram requirements.[119] A cable of about 5 meters (16 feet) can be manufactured to Category 1 specifications easily and inexpensively by using 28 AWG (0.081 mm²) conductors.[117] With better quality construction and materials, including 24 AWG (0.205 mm²) conductors, an HDMI cable can reach lengths of up to 15 meters (49 feet).[117] Many HDMI cables under 5 meters of length that were made before the HDMI 1.3 specification can work as Category 2 cables, but only Category 2-tested cables are guaranteed to work for Category 2 purposes.[123]
As of the HDMI 1.4 specification, these are the following cable types defined for HDMI in general:[124][125]
  • Standard HDMI Cable – up to 1080i and 720p
  • Standard HDMI Cable with Ethernet
  • Automotive HDMI Cable
  • High Speed HDMI Cable – 1080p, 4K, 3D and deep color
  • High Speed HDMI Cable with Ethernet
An HDMI cable is usually composed of four shielded twisted pairs, with impedance of the order of 100 Ω, plus several separate conductors.
aceg1 is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,645
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
No they don't.
Really?

So they are selling enhanced quality and ability that they don't have to prove. Which doesn't make sense, and in a technical forum, this just is accepted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
Again, their claims of improved audio is backed by countless customers they have. It is you and I that like to have those measurements but we are not and will not be customers of their products.
Countless customers thought the earth was flat and balanced on the back of a humongous turtle. This was proven wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
What is there to be confused about? The purpose of a company is to create products that sells to their potential customers.
Within ethical and legal constraints. I can't go out and sell water calling it whoop dee doo super duper H2O and have people take out mortgages to pay for it since it cures arthritis. Sooner or later the regulatory agencies reel me in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
It is not to deal with people sitting on the sidelines throwing rocks at them. Per above, we won't buy anything from them even if the measurements show something meaningful to us, lest you have $44,000 burning a hole in your pocket!
Poor babies. They make outlandish claims, charge people huge premiums for it and they grow peckish when they need to provide proof? Will I buy one? no - would I buy one? no. I prefer things that work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
This is the most glaring fallacy in these forum arguments. You can't convince an atheist that God exists by putting your hand on the bible and swearing to it. Why do we keep imposing our standards of proof, on the other camp to use to prove their point when the whole issue is that they don't believe in it? This is a circular argument.
Hardly. The whole point of science is to impose standards of proof, expose arguments to review and belief in the repetition of results. All scientists subscribe to that. It's not an opinion poll, it is a process to at least get close to the truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

It is not like they say there are measured differences.
So they admit that there is no difference. It's a religious thing, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
They say the cables sound better and so many people agree. Fact that we don't agree should simply lead to us not buying the products. Or using our own resources to get the data we need as I have done above. Not spending time and energy beating up their customers for a proof that we need, and they don't.
If they want to dump their money on this, more power to'em - but don't claim improvements that may gull people into buying into this or similar miracle products.
jbrown15 likes this.
hernanu is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:23 PM
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 JHAz View Post
Do you understand how parallel wiring works? Some of the signal hoes through the neteork and some doesn't. The part thst does gets treated precisely the same as would occur for the entire signal in series. Part doesn't. So you get is effect the series effect just turned down a bit. So overall a dlightly smaller roll off. But no magic occurs onaccounta parallel connections because they ate not magical.

In the recording world one puts an eq in series and if the effect is too much you reduce the ew settings yielding precisely the same result as mixing eaed and un-eqed signals. If its not the same the eq is doing other stuff like compression
Well, as far as I know the cables have a noticeable difference as the lower level detail in recordings is more audible. I was just listening to a Peter Gabriel recording and it's an album I've heard on many different systems over the course of 20 years and I just for the first time dragged it out on my new system and i could hear a guitar part that was never heard before. Swap the cables out, I can't hear that guitar part anymore. Things like that are audible differences obviously I have no idea how much dB difference there is in that case, but it's noticeable. Now, MIT has various things they are doing to prevent certain things from happening so it's not just that they have filters wired in parallel, so I can't really say if what they are doing other than that to explain their cable designs. they have more than just a filter wired in parallel, so what else is going on inside might prevent issues that you might be talking about. They have another box at the other end of the speaker cables towards the amp output connection that I'm not exactly sure what kind of design is inside that. They only talk about it a little, but I haven't seen measurements of before and after they put that box on the other end of the cable and I haven't seen one opened up. Obviously, when you look at the insides of their filter boxes, there could be other things they are adding to not allow issues to happen since they aren't going to tell you everything, plus their filters are not a standard Zobel filter, they are their own design so maybe the way the filter is designed might have or not have other harmful side effects that you are referring to. So, you might want to ask Brisson about it to see if he knows what you are talking about and he might explain how they handle that issue. He attends RMAF almost every year and he has panel discussions, so if you attend this year and he's there, ask him. Or if you know someone attending and they run into him, that's a good time to ask.. I'm confident that if he's aware of any problems like that, they've designed around that issue. Bruce is pretty anal about measuring and fixing problems. The guy literally spends most of time, even in his spare time measuring cables. He's kind of obsessive about measuring cables. He also collects cables and will even measure them years later to see if they still measure the same. I haven't been to his house, but I'm sure he's got a huge collection over the years.
drblank is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 12:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,043
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
Well, as far as I know the cables have a noticeable difference as the lower level detail in recordings is more audible. I was just listening to a Peter Gabriel recording and it's an album I've heard on many different systems over the course of 20 years and I just for the first time dragged it out on my new system and i could hear a guitar part that was never heard before. Swap the cables out, I can't hear that guitar part anymore. Things like that are audible differences obviously I have no idea how much dB difference there is in that case, but it's noticeable. Now, MIT has various things they are doing to prevent certain things from happening so it's not just that they have filters wired in parallel, so I can't really say if what they are doing other than that to explain their cable designs. they have more than just a filter wired in parallel, so what else is going on inside might prevent issues that you might be talking about. They have another box at the other end of the speaker cables towards the amp output connection that I'm not exactly sure what kind of design is inside that. They only talk about it a little, but I haven't seen measurements of before and after they put that box on the other end of the cable and I haven't seen one opened up. Obviously, when you look at the insides of their filter boxes, there could be other things they are adding to not allow issues to happen since they aren't going to tell you everything, plus their filters are not a standard Zobel filter, they are their own design so maybe the way the filter is designed might have or not have other harmful side effects that you are referring to. So, you might want to ask Brisson about it to see if he knows what you are talking about and he might explain how they handle that issue. He attends RMAF almost every year and he has panel discussions, so if you attend this year and he's there, ask him. Or if you know someone attending and they run into him, that's a good time to ask.. I'm confident that if he's aware of any problems like that, they've designed around that issue. Bruce is pretty anal about measuring and fixing problems. The guy literally spends most of time, even in his spare time measuring cables. He's kind of obsessive about measuring cables. He also collects cables and will even measure them years later to see if they still measure the same. I haven't been to his house, but I'm sure he's got a huge collection over the years.
I assume you are a human being. So your sighted findings are about of the same value as finding that some folks who get a placebo have cancer remission. IT's THE PLACEBO.

Obviously.

Or not.

FTR, I've had plenty of unprovable experiences, too. Not saying the experience didn't occur. Just that it might be due to other factors, from mind set (leaving aside the tremendous power of the subconscious, over which nobody has any power whatsoever) to having your ears in a 2 inches different location, changing the measurable FR at the listening location. And for the further record, I know, with absolute certainty, that the cumulative frequency resoibse of my speakers (and most typical speakers) changes significantly as you move a degree or two, let alone five or 10 degrees, on the vertical axis. It's a simple measurable physical fact. I, however, simply do not hear it. I suspect I'm well-trained not to notice those changes onaccounta I've listened to multi-driver speakers my whole life.

But that is nothing but a WAG. Maybe I just have learned to listen for a 64th note "miss" between bass and drums, or a 10 cent sharp bend on a guitar string (because I hear them both, and struggle not to correct everything to the point of robotic sound when I'm recording), while not teaching myself to hear the difference in FR as I move around the axis of a multidriver speaker, because it kinda doesn't matter musically.

I also can't tell you one of the cable smight not have had such ridiculously high capacitance (this is a favorite trick of high end cables, AIUI) that it rolls off enough highs to bury the guitar, if it's very subtly mixed. NOr can I suggest with any certainty that simple resistance (this seems unlikely to me) might not be adequate to reduce total SPL enough to put something on the edge of audibility into the noise floor, simply by making everything quieter.

FWIW, IME, once I hear something "new" in a mix, I can't un-hear it, absent a change in volume level that makes it inaudible . . .

Last edited by JHAz; 08-18-2014 at 12:45 PM.
JHAz is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 01:02 PM
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 JHAz View Post
I assume you are a human being. So your sighted findings are about of the same value as finding that some folks who get a placebo have cancer remission. IT's THE PLACEBO.

Obviously.

Or not.

FTR, I've had plenty of unprovable experiences, too. Not saying the experience didn't occur. Just that it might be due to other factors, from mind set (leaving aside the tremendous power of the subconscious, over which nobody has any power whatsoever) to having your ears in a 2 inches different location, changing the measurable FR at the listening location. And for the further record, I know, with absolute certainty, that the cumulative frequency resoibse of my speakers (and most typical speakers) changes significantly as you move a degree or two, let alone five or 10 degrees, on the vertical axis. It's a simple measurable physical fact. I, however, simply do not hear it. I suspect I'm well-trained not to notice those changes onaccounta I've listened to multi-driver speakers my whole life.

But that is nothing but a WAG. Maybe I just have learned to listen for a 64th note "miss" between bass and drums, or a 10 cent sharp bend on a guitar string (because I hear them both, and struggle not to correct everything to the point of robotic sound when I'm recording), while not teaching myself to hear the difference in FR as I move around the axis of a multidriver speaker, because it kinda doesn't matter musically.

I also can't tell you one of the cable smight not have had such ridiculously high capacitance (this is a favorite trick of high end cables, AIUI) that it rolls off enough highs to bury the guitar, if it's very subtly mixed. NOr can I suggest with any certainty that simple resistance (this seems unlikely to me) might not be adequate to reduce total SPL enough to put something on the edge of audibility into the noise floor, simply by making everything quieter.

FWIW, IME, once I hear something "new" in a mix, I can't un-hear it, absent a change in volume level that makes it inaudible . . .
No, it's called being able to hear a track using one cable vs not hearing the same track with another cable.

No, this is an entire guitar part that plays through the entire track and it's mixed very low in the recording.


Please stop your ASSumptions because that's what you are trying to make me out to be and in the process you are the ___.
drblank is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 01:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Gates's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrown15 View Post
@amirm I'm curious to know, do you sell MIT products and that's why you are defending them so much?


I see you're located in Bellevue, do you have any of these cables that you could setup for a demo? I'm 5mins across the Canadian border and would be willing to driver down to hear these cables for myself if that was possible. Maybe shoot me a pm if this is something we could arrange?


I really don't want to be someone that's a naysayer without hearing something for myself.
Actually, I just finished reading the whole thread and I was going to ask that about Drblank.
Gates is offline  
Old 08-18-2014, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 8,018
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 182 Post(s)
Liked: 252
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Well, that's your opinion. The problem with the academy you rely so much on is CLUELESS as to how to determine what an audio cable is actually supposed to do because they know nothing about MUSIC and how to evaluate what makes a better quality product for preserving the music signal through a cable. They are absolutely CLUELESS.

Do you think that the medical publications know everything there is to know about medicine? They approve medical drugs all of the time that get pulled off the market for causing all kinds of medical problems. Heck, the medical industry has praised antibiotics for decades, but more recent studies have proven that antibiotics are bad to prescribe on a regular basis, my doctors stopped prescribing antibiotics for normal issues and they only prescribe them only under more severe scenarios because they know more than they used to about something that society took for granted. Same thing with your EE industry. If they don't know about what research these small companies are doing, then they are ignorant about what's being done to advance audio cable design. Heck, the EE industry doesn't even know how to create standards in how to evaluate quality of sound.

I take MIT Cable a lot more seriously because their head engineer co-designed high resolution measurement equipment with a leading company called HP to conduct his research and before that, there was no test equipment even on the market capable of making the measurements they wanted to make so Mr. Brisson's contribution to the EE industry should have recognized for his contribution to assist in development of high resolution measurement equipment that is more widely used that allows more precision in how other EE's measure things in other industries in addition to the audio industry. He also co-developed a proprietary measurement s/w with HP that the EE community doesn't know about because it's specifically only used by MIT and they haven't released this measurement software and HP isn't going to develop some BS measurement software. So, to me MIT Cables have PLENTY of credibility and they use fundamental physics, science and electronics theory, they just were smart in how they brought several different disciplines together to create products.

If you want to live in archaic ways to design cables, that's your decision, but you are living in the past where only basic theory is used along with basic measurements and basic measurement equipment, which only allows one to look at cables from a basic perspective. Grow up and LEARN. Things change and it's because small companies with bright people can make contributions to the industry is just that people with small minds like yourself are too clueless and callously dismiss something because some journal doesn't know about the technology.

I don't know if you are aware of this but when the transistor and integrated circuits first came to market, people like you didn't want to accept this new technology since it was different and didn't follow conventional thought, but as people got used to the technology, it became widely accepted and now it's normal. What guys like MIT are doing is pushing the envelopment and just because some clueless people don't know about the technology or just simply don't take the time to learn about it doesn't mean it's not credible.

I think the fact that top recording engineers, top mastering engineers and top audio equipment use their products and are used in the evaluation of their products IS proof that the technology is how they have become credible. They have also been around for over 30 years going on 40 years and in the audio industry, that's a long time. They have many patents with more in the wings, they have credibility in the audio world that works with high end audio equipment, they are consistently getting Best of Show awards amongst the people that are in the high end audio industry.

Yeah, small minded people always use that marketing card when it's convenient and that's because you simply don't know much about the technology because the mfg wants to keep certain information contained due to "trade secrets" or they simply don't have the time to publish more technical information or because they waiting for patent approval before they release the information. Whatever the reason, they do use high quality measurement equipment and they objectively look at measurements before they conduct listening tests and they rely on top people in the industry that have the training, experience and abilities to perform subjective listening tests. In order for companies to survive, they have to make a profit, but they have to serve the market where the market accepts them. MIT has a proven track record and just because you want to be a child about it, isn't going to make them go away. People buy their products because they like what they hear and that's ultimately the bottom line. Measurements don't tell the whole story when it comes to audio products, people have to listen to them and make up their own minds. If you don't put yourself in the position to listen to them, then you don't know what they sound like.

What cables do you use and how did you come to the conclusion to buy those products? Price? Name recognition? Because of some measurement? Be honest..... Oh wait, you never answer any of my questions honestly, so I'll never get a straight answer from you, only responses that are evasive and filled with silly defensive BS.

The one thing about those silly journals is they aren't always up to date on the latest technology unless it's a big enough market. The high end cable market is a niche market and they might not even know how to approach it. Partly because MIT Cables didn't release all of the methodologies on how they test their products. MIT is not TRYING to get some journal to write an article about them. Maybe that's not of interest to them since they are doing just fine without it.

If MIT Cables wanted to license their technology to others, then maybe they would be more interested in getting their technology more recognition amongst the EE crowd, but they don't go to colleges to teach students about what they are doing because they simply don't have the time or interest in it because they are running a very small company of only around 25 people and Bruce spends most of his time in his testing labs measuring cables, designing new products, conducting listening tests to see if a new design is better and not really worried about whether he gets his work published. He simply doesn't have time to spend trying to teach someone that writes for a journal to get his work published. He is in a VERY small, niche market, the company has many patents, they obviously have more on the way and they are focused on designing products, learning new things and doing what they need to do to survive in that industry.

He's not trying to sell his products to the masses, for one, they can't mass produce their products in mass quantities and keep the quality maintained because there is a LOT of precision measurements the have to make when they match capacitors, resistors, inductors and it's almost impossible to let some factory in China or some other country with low wage employees mass produce their products for mass distribution. Some of their products are only built to order and take weeks to make. So, they aren't interested in trying to compete against Belden Wire that caters to a bigger market. They are focused on their market and they only have so many people and can spend limited amounts of money marketing to a niche market.

I really don't know what your problem is only that you seem to think that anything that you can't afford is nonsense. Cable mfg are always working on new ways to design and mfg cables to improve the sound quality. The market is obviously there and there are companies going after their own piece of the pie and since it's a small market these companies don't want to release too much information for whatever reason. It could be to protect their product design, they don't have the time to sit there and produce published information to discuss their technology and it's quite possible that the average consumer doesn't really want to sift through thousands of pages of technical information that explains a cable when all the person has to do is spend time listening to the product in their system. Yeah, I know, it would be great if there was a standardized method that these companies used to measure the sound quality of their products, but there isn't.

Heck, just to measure the sound quality of a speaker isn't really that good either. How many speaker mfg regardless of price range publish measurement data on their speakers? Amps, receivers, etc. etc.? Not that many. Why?

There are countless designs of speakers, crossovers, etc. but you don't seem to be all that concerned about them proving anything. Why are you so hung up about cables? Is it that you still think that a speaker cable is just a piece of copper wire twisted and then shoved through a plastic jacket and that's all you need? Well, that's kind of being small minded.
You still have not addressed this major issue. Perhaps my fault as I quoted the wrong post and you didn't see it. So I ask again:

I glanced through these papers. One thing that struck me is the bio of Bruce Brisson. No where does it state any degrees earned in engineering or physics. There is also no mention of any association with any of the recognized engineering institutes, IEEE, AES, SMPTE, etc. Yet he does give a career background. Now who puts their career background at the end of a technical paper and doesn't list education or equivalent credentials?

What's up with this? It seems highly likely those scientific papers are heavily plagiarized.

Bruce Brisson is NOT an engineer by any legal standard in our society based on his current bio. If that is incorrect please post the university or equivalent accredited experience.

P.S. And that HP story is another load of hogwash. HP is a billion dollar company with T&M contracts with the worlds largest electronics firms and defense contractors. they aren't going to waste their time consulting with a garage operation like MIT staffed by non technical audiophiles with absolutely no formal electronics backgrounds.

Glimmie's HT Page
Being redone - comming soon!


Last edited by Glimmie; 08-18-2014 at 01:27 PM.
Glimmie is online now  
Old 08-18-2014, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RayDunzl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 483 Post(s)
Liked: 679
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post
FWIW, IME, once I hear something "new" in a mix, I can't un-hear it, absent a change in volume level that makes it inaudible . . .
I almost said that same thing recently, probably on the ABX test threads...

My case, increase intelligibility or articulation as this thread is now exploring, and those mumbly words aren't so mumbly anymore when you go back.

I'll be back later...


links::: 1.5RQ > digits > 1177a > OpenDRC-DI > DEQ2496 > DAC2 > KCT > FPB 350mcx > reQuest > Sweetspot
RayDunzl 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