Say Tony, why haven't you posted this one yet?

[E-Stat]

As the primary poster of Audioholics findings both here and at AA, you're falling down on the job, man !

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...istortion.html

Here's the summation:

"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."

rw

[Tony_Montana]

Thanks E-Stat for the link. But for reason I'm not able to open it. May be Audioholics server is down. I will keep trying.

Here's the summation:

"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."

Could you please repeat that

[mtrycraft]

As the primary poster of Audioholics findings both here and at AA, you're falling down on the job, man !

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...istortion.html

Here's the summation:

"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."

rw

He is talking on a measurement and engineering basis only. But you knew that, didn't you and just making a fuss over nothing otherwise you would have picked one with some DBT listening involved. What? He didn't do such listening tests? My o my.
Try to get better examples to support your lousy speculations.

[mtrycraft]

Thanks E-Stat for the link. But for reason I'm not able to open it. May be Audioholics server is down. I will keep trying.
Could you please repeat that

Here ya go.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...istortion.html


But don't be surprized if Bruno didn't support that quote with a DBT listening test. But e-stat knew that and making hay out of nothing.
Bruno did an engineering and measuring analysis. Great. No distortion, nothing. And, they all measure dthe same. He doesn't like unbalanced design.
Jneutron made a comment on it at AA:

He hasn't correctly considered the way a shield works..
A current in a shield does not couple to the internal conductor..it can't, because there is no magnetic field within the shield...
If you peruse the posts at AH, you will see what I am talking about..
Geeze....coupla days...Oh well.
Bruno didn't have a correct understanding of shielding/coaxial currents...his example was actually a coaxial CVR example...I use them a lot at work..

[mtrycraft]

As the primary poster of Audioholics findings both here and at AA, you're falling down on the job, man !

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...istortion.html

Here's the summation:

"It shows that people who claim that cables do not make a difference are plainly deluding themselves. On the other hand, those that say that cables should not make a difference, are dead right."

rw

You read that link, end to end? The context he is writing in? Comprehension?

[E-Stat]

He is talking on a measurement and engineering basis only....He didn't do such listening tests? My o my.

Despite your poor reading retention, can't you understand the first friggin' sentence?

..."that would explain the sonic differences that many people, including myself, have grown accustomed to hearing"

Try to get better examples to support your lousy speculations.

It is not my speculation. It is the listening observations and measurements by this Philips engineer.

rw

[E-Stat]

You read that link, end to end? The context he is writing in? Comprehension?

Absolutely. He like other perceptive folks are trying to quantifiy that which they hear. Despite the fact that conventional wisdom doesn't support the assertion, he is finding other evidence. FWIW, the incredible system that is my point of reference uses not only fancy cables, but runs balanced connections throughout.

You can't even get the first sentence right.

rw

[markw]

This paragraph appears (in red) about 1/2" below your quote. Shoulda paged down a little more.

"We are greatly appreciative of Bruno's efforts in this article. However, I felt it important to mention that much of the focus of this article pertaining to microphonics and triboelectric effects is relative to how interconnects may interact when interfacing high gain low impedance drive to high impedance circuit terminations, such as the case with microphones and phono preamps. In reality the triboelectic effect rarely becomes a real world problem in consumer audio. Microphone applications must be considerate of these effects, especially since the cables attaching the microphones are often in motion caused by the singer and/or local mechanical vibrations which can induce noise into the system. In such instances there are specifically designed cables with dampening materials (usually cotton) to nullify this problem by acting like shock absorbers to reduce contact area as well as employing a different shield construction which is less prone to triboelectric noise."

[jneutron]

Absolutely. He like other perceptive folks are trying to quantifiy that which they hear. Despite the fact that conventional wisdom doesn't support the assertion, he is finding other evidence. FWIW, the incredible system that is my point of reference uses not only fancy cables, but runs balanced connections throughout.

rw

I concur..he describes changing a cable by adding to the shield, then stating that he hears a difference.

My "bone of contention" is the description of the theory to explain what he is hearing..

His transformer model is incorrect.

However, he is using SOTA analysis equipment in a good effort at attempting to determine the source of the audible difference..That is in itself a very good approach. As is the application of e/m theory to try to explain it..the fact that he was incorrect in that theory part is of little concern. That will be corrected.

But, he does not harp unending about a tweak to the shield to "Open the blackess, close the soundstage", whatever...then start about electrons, grains, piezo, motor-generator...He applies known technology to attack the audible discrepancy...no invocation of magic..

That is how SOTA will advance.

Cheers, John

[Tony_Montana]

The link opened up finally today.

That was an interesting read. As Jneutran and others have mentioned, the author stick to issues and well known cables effects rather than spit out bunch of no nonsense cables' effects that make one's head spin. We should give him credit for that. I wished more people that deal with cables would take an approach like that.

One interesting effect he mentioned about unbalance cables was shortcoming of its shielding, and how voltage drop across the resistive component of the shield will appears as an error voltage at the receiving end. That is a well known problem that does not come as a surprise. As matter of fact, I talked about that issue back in the old forum:

http://archive.audioreview.com/03/0EF9DEEF.php

Also as to Microphonics effect such as Triboelectric Charging and Condenser Mic effect, if I read the article correctly, those issue are more related to "physical" movement of cable rather than anything else. Isn't it??

[mtrycraft]

Absolutely. He like other perceptive folks are trying to quantifiy that which they hear. Despite the fact that conventional wisdom doesn't support the assertion, he is finding other evidence. FWIW, the incredible system that is my point of reference uses not only fancy cables, but runs balanced connections throughout.

You can't even get the first sentence right.

rw

No, it is you who is lacking in the method ot science. He has not established he can HEAR audible differences in such cables. He has perceived them like most audiophiles do, in a sighted listening that has no meaning for audible differences. Got it ?

So, he is chasing ghosts as he will never find gosts. But then, how would you know?

[mtrycraft]

I concur..he describes changing a cable by adding to the shield, then stating that he hears a difference.

My "bone of contention" is the description of the theory to explain what he is hearing..

His transformer model is incorrect.

However, he is using SOTA analysis equipment in a good effort at attempting to determine the source of the audible difference..That is in itself a very good approach. As is the application of e/m theory to try to explain it..the fact that he was incorrect in that theory part is of little concern. That will be corrected.

But, he does not harp unending about a tweak to the shield to "Open the blackess, close the soundstage", whatever...then start about electrons, grains, piezo, motor-generator...He applies known technology to attack the audible discrepancy...no invocation of magic..

That is how SOTA will advance.

Cheers, John

Yes, he is doing a super job or measuring.
I have yet to see his protocol for listeing, how he established as a fact that he hears differences and not just perceives them in an unreliable sighted listeing. No one else on the planet has been able to demonstrate audible differences in IC cable under DBT conditions, the only protocol that matters.

[mtrycraft]

Despite your poor reading retention, can't you understand the first friggin' sentence?

..."that would explain the sonic differences that many people, including myself, have grown accustomed to hearing"



Yes, he claims this, he assumes that other audiophiles account has meaning, has worth. They don't, nor does your account as it is under the flawed sighted listening hence is worthless to anyone else, nor can be correlated with anything measures as it is unreliable, zero.

He has yet to state that he is able to detect audible differences under DBT protocol. Anythinf less has no meaning for his account; he has no 'get our to jail' card on that, nor do you.

It is not my speculation. It is the listening observations and measurements by this Philips engineer.

Under DBT protocol? Please cite that paragraph as I have missed that. If you cannot, he has no immunity from bias, just as you don't. Hence his observations are unreliable just as much as yours are, unreliable and worthless to anyone. He is chasing ghosts then and will never find an answer. Rather simple concept.

I serioulsy doubt he is the first person on the planet to detect audible differences under DBT conditions.

[mtrycraft]

You want facts to get in his way?

[E-Stat]

Yes, he claims this, he assumes that other audiophiles account has meaning, has worth. They don't, nor does your account as it is under the flawed sighted listening hence is worthless to anyone else, nor can be correlated with anything measures as it is unreliable, zero.

You really do need to take a reading course. And an English course given your ongoing use of run on sentences. The message conveyed is that he is reporting what he heard. Tell me Mr. Perceptive, what was "my account" in this post? Naturally, since you have zero experience in anything, what could you possibly add to the discussion?

It is not my speculation. It is the listening observations and measurements by this Philips engineer.

Under DBT protocol? Please cite that paragraph as I have missed that. If you cannot, he has no immunity from bias, just as you don't. Hence his observations are unreliable just as much as yours are, unreliable and worthless to anyone. He is chasing ghosts then and will never find an answer. Rather simple concept.

Ah, I see that you finally figured out that the "speculations" were that of the Philips engineer, not mine. You are making progress !

rw

[mtrycraft]

You really do need to take a reading course. And an English course given your ongoing use of run on sentences. The message conveyed is that he is reporting what he heard. Tell me Mr. Perceptive, what was "my account" in this post? Naturally, since you have zero experience in anything, what could you possibly add to the discussion?



Ah, I see that you finally figured out that the "speculations" were that of the Philips engineer, not mine. You are making progress !

rw

He reported what he perceived. No one, least of all he, know what he really heard under sighted comparisons.

Oh, Bruno included all those who claim to hear differences. You are one of those, if I am not mistaken. Hence you speculate as well.

[jneutron]

Yes, he is doing a super job or measuring.
I have yet to see his protocol for listeing, how he established as a fact that he hears differences and not just perceives them in an unreliable sighted listeing. No one else on the planet has been able to demonstrate audible differences in IC cable under DBT conditions, the only protocol that matters.

He has no need for protocol. He has no need for dbt, or any statistically valid method for determining audibility.

He said he has heard a difference, and he is exploring that, using some very high end technology.

If, on the other hand, he wishes to prove to the world that the differences are audible, then he will use a valid statistical procedure (an assumption based on what I've seen of him to date).

If and when he finds an electrical test which supports his assertion of audibility, then he will also have to rely on valid statistical protocols to verify it..not a bad way of approaching the problem, but one which has the added burden of mis-interpretation of electrical test results based on expectations..don't worry....I'll keep him honest..

Cheers, John

[mtrycraft]

If and when he finds an electrical test which supports his assertion of audibility, then he will also have to rely on valid statistical protocols to verify it..not a bad way of approaching the problem, but one which has the added burden of mis-interpretation of electrical test results based on expectations..don't worry....I'll keep him honest..

Cheers, John

I am not worried that you will not keep him honest

I just cannot see what measured data will convince him that that is what he is hearing if he cannot be sure he is not imagining it? As is, there is no way to know if he hears anything at all beyond a psychological issue.
I just see him putting the cart before the horse.

[jneutron]

I just cannot see what measured data will convince him that that is what he is hearing if he cannot be sure he is not imagining it? As is, there is no way to know if he hears anything at all beyond a psychological issue.
I just see him putting the cart before the horse.

If measurements provide date which greatly exceeds human thresholds for detection, ya gots ya smokin gun..it doesn't prove statistically that most will hear it, but it provides avenues of research to do such.

You have accused me of that also..it is indeed correct, and is why self-critical thinking is very important for this sequence, so that mis-interpretation is minimized.

As is checking results in several different ways..

I'm in contact with him, and have proposed collaboration on tests..It will be neat..

Cheers, John

[mtrycraft]

If measurements provide date which greatly exceeds human thresholds for detection, ya gots ya smokin gun..it doesn't prove statistically that most will hear it, but it provides avenues of research to do such.


Yes, that is for sure. No qualms with that. Is he measuring above the thresholds or below it? Ho didn't see any distortion

You have accused me of that also..it is indeed correct, and is why self-critical thinking is very important for this sequence, so that mis-interpretation is minimized.

Accuse or just pointing out and questioning? I am here to learn too

As is checking results in several different ways..

I'm in contact with him, and have proposed collaboration on tests..It will be neat..

Cheers, John


Great. Keep us updated. We are here to learn as well.