-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Yours is the last word.
rw
?????
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfalls
?????
Perhaps you didn't notice that the thread has included some discussion points other than fuses.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
1.) I'm all for acoustic tweeking in rooms. That would include speaker placement as well. Better isolation or decoupling of a turntable from vibrations. These are all measurable items. If you mod the values of capacitance, inductance, or resistsance, of course you may hear something different. But again that is measureable
2.) A DBT test?? Your point? So? Look at my point 3 below. At least I'm open enough to say that what I may perceive to hear is actually governed by other influences such as sight or knowing in advance what I'm using. Hardly objective in my books.
3.) I distrust my first impressions of my Yamaha over the Panasonic becuase I was going on audio memory and I was not able to switch back and forth quickly enough between the two receivers to actually hear a difference. I also fail to understand your point three about using receivers.
But fuses, expensive cables where the parameters such as resistance, capacitance and inducatance are so small, ( less than .001% different in values compared to cheaper brands ) that it is impossible to hear that difference. Humanly impossible. Don't throw out your education based on subjective results. Floyd Toole and the people that believe in his methodolgy and successful results are the only people I trust to give me an obejective results. All of the other people in magazines who report subjective results about audio cables and interconnects and other tweaks which are not based on scientific principles in the audio industry are perpetrating fraud as far as I'm concerned. I beleive you that you think you can hear a difference. I think your claim is sincere. (I'm not lumping you into the category of these audio magazine critics ) but I do question your subject results.
Funny, I just linked this to another thread recently. Malcolm Hawksford completed the most thorough and convincing study on audio inter-connects to date. This was done in 1985.
You will see from his findings, that there is much science to cables, connectivity and such. These companies and magazines that you say are pulling our strings, are not doing so at the level you think they are. The truth is out there. It's not that expensive, fancy interconnects don't do what they say they will. It's that there are other, arguably better ways to get the best connection, and more importantly, cheaper! This leads anyone searching hard enough, to solid core.
I'm not sure if from your statements, you don't believe that there's a difference from a Radio Shack analog connect to a Audio Research for example. I can assure you there is, and it's quite audible, best described as brightness. I can't say for sure, but I think this is the point that E-Stat may have been trying to make with his "test". Perhaps your hearing is not sensitive enough to pick up on these improvements. Anyhow, that's assuming you don't see any value in a "better" inter-connect.
I just spent the better part of a week researching all of this (thanks John Michael). Enjoy!!
http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
I can't say for sure, but I think this is the point that E-Stat may have been trying to make with his "test".
Not exactly. My experience suggests that false brightness is primary a function of untrapped RFI coming from a number of sources. Effective shielding is the best answer for ICs. My JPS Labs ICs are shielded with copper jackets that are so stiff, they hold a given shape like a solid wire! Conversely, low performance speaker cables can cause a rolled off top end with some speakers. Using Audioholics measurements for zip cord, the values are as follows:
L=.16uF/ft
C=25pf/ft
R=2mohm/ft
My JPS Labs speaker cables differ greatly in the two metrics that are most important with electrostats
L=.06uf/ft
C=20pf/ft
R=2mohm/ft
Increased Inductance = 166%
Increased Capacitance = 25%
In this case, higher inductance rolls off the top end response in my system.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Why use a double blind test test? To determine what objective measurements correlate to listener preferences. Here's Toole's colleague Sean Olive on the topic: Olive. More on same topic.
You continue to demonstrate simplistic speculation. Like those who look at cables and say they have no sound, you completely miss the big picture. The big picture is that cables and connectors are part of a system with the devices at either end affected by the quality and nature of the conductors.
rw
If you understood the effects of frequency based capacitance and inductance, your redundant responses of simplistuic speculation would stop. But your posts continue you to reinforce that you really have no clue about physics, acoutsics and engineerin principles which just strengthens yout lemming like beliefs. You just don't understand physics.
-
3db, did you not see my post? Did you have a look at Hawksford's report?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
3db, did you not see my post? Did you have a look at Hawksford's report?
Sorry poppa..Windows burped and caused a repeat. Will take a look at the report. Thx for posting it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
Not exactly. My experience suggests that false brightness is primary a function of untrapped RFI coming from a number of sources. Effective shielding is the best answer for ICs. My JPS Labs ICs are shielded with copper jackets that are so stiff, they hold a given shape like a solid wire! Conversely, low performance speaker cables can cause a rolled off top end with some speakers. Using Audioholics measurements for zip cord, the values are as follows:
L=.16uF/ft
C=25pf/ft
R=2mohm/ft
My JPS Labs speaker cables differ greatly in the two metrics that are most important with electrostats
L=.06uf/ft
C=20pf/ft
R=2mohm/ft
Increased Inductance = 166%
Increased Capacitance = 25%
In this case, higher inductance rolls off the top end response in my system.
rw
Ok.. lets test your understanding of these parameters. What are the cable lengthes associated with these parameters? Do the paramters change with the length of cable? What frequency range were these parameters derived from?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
What are the cable lengthes associated with these parameters? Do the paramters change with the length of cable?
You must have a great sense of humor. Now, those are funny questions! Have you ever been interviewed by Jay Leno? :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
What frequency range were these parameters derived from?
It was not stated with either the Audioholics recommendation by DellaSalla nor by JPS Labs.
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
You must have a great sense of humor. Now, those are funny questions! Have you ever been interviewed by Jay Leno? :)
It was not stated with either the Audioholics recommendation by DellaSalla nor by JPS Labs.
rw
A little funny since you provide the specs "/ft", so will change with length. What will change with frequency is the inductive and capacitive reactance.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfalls
A little funny since you provide the specs "/ft", so will change with length. What will change with frequency is the inductive and capacitive reactance.
Hey there. Judging my the answer I received from Estat....
How difficult is it to admit when one doesn't know. Not everyone becomes/is an electrical engineer. I don't get it. Rather than learn, snide remarks are made to hide the fact.
I even question my own hearing when it comes to the Yamaha/Technics receiver change I went through. I thought I heard a difference but unless I can hear a level matched test where the receivers can be rapidly interchanged every minute or so...I won't stand by my first impression.
I would like to standby my 1st impression as the Yamaha is a much more capable receiver in terms of features and power but I'm not going to let that aspect cloud my judgement. I'd rather the SBT test.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Stat
So, who are they talking about? Peter Aczel? The guys at Consumer Reports? Julian Hirsch? How can anyone know the answer without defining that term. I can guarantee you than Harry Pearson and Dr. John Cooledge hear musical detail far beyond what I can. Although I'm a lot closer than I was when I first met them when I was 19. :)
rw
Famous Julian Hirsch joke: "He never heard a component he didn't like."
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
How difficult is it to admit when one doesn't know... I don't get it. Rather than learn, snide remarks are made to hide the fact.
Indeed, you don't get it. The answer, Mr. Science is found in the post where I state the metrics. At the expense of stating that which should be blatantly obvious, the answer is "one foot". Do you understand the concept of "per foot"? That's the way cable manufacturers like Belden, et. al. specify their metrics. Here's an example. Note the "electrical characteristic" section. Sometimes, when the value is so small, a metric is specified in a different unit of measure like "per 1000 ft". Because you asked such a profoundly stupid question, I chose to use humor in my reply to deflect and not rub your nose in such ignorance. Unfortunately, instead of saying "Oh, duh - I see it now", you continue to demonstrate that you are utterly clueless. BTW, I find that I incorrectly specified the inductance. Those metrics should be expressed in micro henries, not farads.
Normally, I wouldn't make the following statements because the concept, like my earlier post <i>should</i> be patently apparent, but I'm now convinced your next question would prompt it. If you have a two foot run of either cable noted you would multiply the per foot metric by <i>two.</i> If you have a ten foot run of either cable, you would multiply the per foot metric by <i>ten</i>. Do you understand?
Sheesh!
rw
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
Hey there. Judging my the answer I received from Estat....
How difficult is it to admit when one doesn't know. Not everyone becomes/is an electrical engineer. I don't get it. Rather than learn, snide remarks are made to hide the fact.
I even question my own hearing when it comes to the Yamaha/Technics receiver change I went through. I thought I heard a difference but unless I can hear a level matched test where the receivers can be rapidly interchanged every minute or so...I won't stand by my first impression.
I would like to standby my 1st impression as the Yamaha is a much more capable receiver in terms of features and power but I'm not going to let that aspect cloud my judgement. I'd rather the SBT test.
Sorry 3db. I quoted the wrong posting. This was in response to you answer about the parameters of E-stat's wires. I figured you didn't noticed he provided the parameters "/ft". No offense intended.
I like the Yamahas. I've had an R9 stereo receiver and two of their AV receivers (RX-V2095 (still own), RX-V2092) and have an M-65 A/AB power amp. They're workhorses. Very durable, handle low impedance loads, more surround formats than anyone. They documented parameters at many famous venues and incorporated them into their formats. The only other processors at the time with configurable formats were from Lexicon.
I don't believe they are as transparent as some, but definitely more than hold their own. They're #2 or #3, in my top mid-fi receivers, which include Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, Sony, Marantz and possibly Harmon Kardon. I haven't had much experience with the Pioneers, I've been more of a fan of their video gear and read/heard good things from others.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfalls
I don't believe they are as transparent as some, but definitely more than hold their own. They're #2 or #3, in my top mid-fi receivers, which include Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, Sony, Marantz and possibly Harmon Kardon. I haven't had much experience with the Pioneers, I've been more of a fan of their video gear and read/heard good things from others.
Apparently your experience is limited with Harmon Kardan...possibly?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Apparently your experience is limited with Harmon Kardan...possibly?
Yes, limited experience. I've looked and heard at a few, but have read good things. I didn't find the build quality as good as the Denons, Yamahas or Onkyos. I've heard and seen enough not to count them out, but feel they would be in the top 8 or 10.
Just as with the Pioneer, not a lot of experience. I owned one which came with the purchase of a Pioneer Pro100 TV, but didn't fell it was as good as the receivers I had, so sold it to my brother.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by bfalls
Yes, limited experience. I've looked and heard at a few, but have read good things. I didn't find the build quality as good as the Denons, Yamahas or Onkyos. I've heard and seen enough not to count them out, but feel they would be in the top 8 or 10.
Just as with the Pioneer, not a lot of experience. I owned one which came with the purchase of a Pioneer Pro100 TV, but didn't fell it was as good as the receivers I had, so sold it to my brother.
Speaking solely on high end models, I can assure you that HK's build quality far exceeds Yamaha, Onkyo and Denon at that. Personally, I think Denon are a shadow of what they set out to be. I'm sure this bold statement will have a few whipped into an audio rage.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppachubby
Speaking solely on high end models, I can assure you that HK's build quality far exceeds Yamaha, Onkyo and Denon at that. Personally, I think Denon are a shadow of what they set out to be. I'm sure this bold statement will have a few whipped into an audio rage.
Build quality IHO has to with amount of returns, defective units etc and nothing to do about how powerful its amps are. If you dig hard enough, you'll find on per capita basis that Yamaha is the most solid of the receivers in terms of build quality and were up until recently, the envy of the industry. I say recently becuase I'm not impressed at all with Yamaha's latest offerings have the same advertised power but with chassis weighing in some case, 10lbs less.
-
now do i want...
the item that lasts forever and sounds mediocre or the one that sounds great and needs service now and again? and just where do i find this data?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifitommy
the item that lasts forever and sounds mediocre or the one that sounds great and needs service now and again? and just where do i find this data?
Don't confuse sound quality over build quailty..two totally different beasts. NAD has a much a stouter amplifier section than Yamaha but unfortunately NAD cannot even come close to touching Yamaha in terms of relaibiltiy; reliabiltity having a direct relationship to build quaility.
I doubt very much in a controlled non sighted listening test that you are able to distinguish between two receivers operarting well within their power band through the same speakers with volume levels matched. No use having high end if its in the shop all teh time getting repaired.
The only high end amp I would ever consider purchasing is a Bryston because unlike the other "boutique" brands out there, they test their products rigerously through temperatire extremes and offfer a 20 year warranty. No other brand comes even close to touching Bryston.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
The only high end amp I would ever consider purchasing is a Bryston because unlike the other "boutique" brands out there, they test their products rigerously through temperatire extremes and offfer a 20 year warranty. No other brand comes even close to touching Bryston.
Wow a twenty year warranty on a product you may not like how it sounds. I have a question do you think all electronics sound the same?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnMichael
Wow a twenty year warranty on a product you may not like how it sounds. I have a question do you think all electronics sound the same?
I think all amplfiers mated to the same speaker level matched (speaker that does not place huge demands on the amp) and driven well within their power envelope sound the same. The differences become apparent when the amplifier has to work..ie driving low impedance or highly reactive loads. Thats when the differences become noticeable. I fail to see how two amps with the same frequency response curves, with the same + or - db limit driven full spectrum can sound different from one another when driven well within their power envelope and through the same speakers level matched. If they do sound different, then there's a quantifiable and measureable parameer that describes thatbehaviour.
-
[QUOTE=3db]
Quote:
Don't confuse sound quality over build quailty..two totally different beasts.
Perhaps, however build quality ultimately affects the sound quality.
Quote:
I doubt very much in a controlled non sighted listening test that you are able to distinguish between two receivers operarting well within their power band through the same speakers with volume levels matched. No use having high end if its in the shop all teh time getting repaired.
If you are referring to Harmon Kardan, then this is an inflated statement. I can promise you that in a blind test, if I was being offered options, I would most certainly pick out differences. I have 2 HK amps, both belonged to my father before me, 1 Citizen and 1 Marantz. They all sound different and I can fully tell the difference. I may not get it right everytime, but I would do better in your blind test than you think.
As far as being in the shop all the time, I'm not even going to touch that. My HK's have been going strong for years with no issue.
No hostility here 3db, clearly there are a few who are. But I think you're jumping the gun a bit.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
I think all amplfiers mated to the same speaker level matched (speaker that does not place huge demands on the amp) and driven well within their power envelope sound the same. The differences become apparent when the amplifier has to work..ie driving low impedance or highly reactive loads. Thats when the differences become noticeable. I fail to see how two amps with the same frequency response curves, with the same + or - db limit driven full spectrum can sound different from one another when driven well within their power envelope and through the same speakers level matched. If they do sound different, then there's a quantifiable and measureable parameer that describes thatbehaviour.
So, does this include a tube amp vs an SS?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db
If they do sound different, then there's a quantifiable and measureable parameer that describes thatbehaviour.
Its called distortion spectra. While THD is an utterly useless and misleading metric, a deeper analysis into the makeup of the distortion provides the clue. 1% second harmonic distortion is virtually inaudible while 0.1% fifth or seventh is quite noticeable. Amplifier designs vary greatly in how they distort.
Nelson Pass speaks on the topic here.
rw
|