Don't get me wrong. I just want a meaningful outcome, especially after the long, hard, and meticulous effort you put into the wires to control one aspect at a time. It is your experiment, after all. I don't count but I hate to see you do all this for a weak link.

Yah, I did mess up...no resistance measure..oh well..

You only made one set of that cable design? I thought you bought a whole bunch, or is that the raw material that your took apart to make the cable? How long was it? Can't you replicate it and measure? Or measure the whole roll and figure the unit resistance?



Of note is the fact that at low levels, the sound appeared correct to him.

If I remember correctly, that level was 75dB spl - 80dB spl for his 92.5 dB spl sensitive speakers. that is less than 0.1watts.

.but, as he increased the power, the bass fell off..both of us have the impression that resistance was at play here..since bass is by far the biggest power hog, it also seems logical.

If it has a problem above 0.1 watts, one has to wonder. Speaker impedance dip issues? Amp output impedance issue?



Well, it can be, but But, since the differences cited were "seen" to be different at different levels, absolute level isn't a player here..I'm rather confident, without asking, that he does not have a loudness control..

It would have been much better if somehow all this could be followed by measurements. I have real confidence issues about perception reliability.

His description of 3 dimensional soundstage issues were by far the most detailed description I've come across...and it raises a whole spectrum of issues which are extraordinary..

While it may seem so, I must question the listening protocol and what perception and how bias influenced the description. Not knowing the reliability of this observation but we know the protocol cannot be reliable.


The transforms required to get from two point sources at different distances (the sax and washboard) but in the same angular location, to the two independent virtual images created within the mind by two point sources (the speakers) are not going to be easy math, so I'm thinking about it..

Before you do any math though, I would try a better listening protocol first. That is the weakest link in this experiment. You cannot get reliable inputs without a reliable protocol. But that is my humble opinion and I am a nobody

Toole and the Canadian Research Lab and other speaker makers that were exposed to that experience use DBT liseting for any evaluations of sound.

http://miragespeakers.com/nrc_story.shtml

While this is another speaker company, they were there at the same time periods, Toole and Paisley.





Yes, it's all subjective..

Very big issue.

yes, it assumes a level of trust and reliability.

Trust is insignificant next to subconscious bias. I would not even question his honesty but bias which he has no control of or even knows when it is in or out.

and yes, I will continue to work with Ted in this fashion, as I seen nothing to indicate that he will be anything other than completely professional and honest.

Still cannot overcome the issue of bias. You just cannot do perception testing in sighted condition. Sorry. Unreliable.


he provided impressional detail I would not have been able to.

Looks like it. But, one cannot trust sighted listeing for such experimental endevor as you are embarking on. All for not.



DBT will come with time, but for now, I am trying to establish what it is that is being heard.


But that is the whole issue with listening. You just don't know what he heard so far. It very well be confirmed by DBT duplication. Or, it may be totally dismissed. You just don't know. Then, you introduce DBT in the middle of the experiment and wonder what happend, why couln't be detected? Perhaps there was nothing to detect from the start?



these initial rounds of tests, I believe, will provide a better metric for observing differences.

I am not sure of that. How can unreliable listening in the early stages set a benchmark?

Gene is chompin at the bit to measure the remaining cable..I will arrange for that. But he does not DBT, simply electrical eveluations.


I wish to test my assertion that my cable has no skinning inductive loss up to at least a megahertz..I designed it so to eliminate skinning as a factor, and to keep the inductance low..


His testing can do that?


Do you want to contact or for me to intercede with Tom Nousaine? He has access to listening panels I think, and DBT protocol for sure