Newbie question on Totem

[hee_cm]

Hi,

Some one has told me to reverse the connection from my Amp (CJ Premier Eleven) to my Totem Model 1 Speaker. Meaning Amp LEFT output connects to Speaker RIGHT input and vice versa.

Is it so and what is the reason behind?

Thanks.

CM

[markw]

You might want to ask them why they said that. Sounds silly yo me.

[kexodusc]

Hi,

Some one has told me to reverse the connection from my Amp (CJ Premier Eleven) to my Totem Model 1 Speaker. Meaning Amp LEFT output connects to Speaker RIGHT input and vice versa.

Is it so and what is the reason behind?

Thanks.

CM

Are you sure that's what he asked you to do? I would go back and ask this guy why...if he doesn't tell you that he misspoke or you misheard, then this guy is a goof, or he's messing around with you...either way, I'd punch him in the mouth and quit taking advice from him or he'll have you crossing wires and damaging your equipment next.
And if you double this up as a home theater, everything would be ass-backwards...not good...

Now, I love the Model 1's, but I've never heard your amp...tell us about it....

[Pat D]

Hi,

Some one has told me to reverse the connection from my Amp (CJ Premier Eleven) to my Totem Model 1 Speaker. Meaning Amp LEFT output connects to Speaker RIGHT input and vice versa.

Is it so and what is the reason behind?

Thanks.

CM

The two channels of a stereo amplifier are essentially identical. It won't make a bit of difference which way you hook it up except to reverse the left and right channels. I can't see any other purpose to it and it would be easier to just switch the interconnects to the amplifier inputs--easier to deal with than speaker cables.

A test CD would ordinarily provide tracks to check whether the channels and polarity are set up correctly.

[hee_cm]

Let me clerify, I am not talking about channel.

I am talking about having 'plus or red mark' on the speaker to attach to the 'negative or white mark' on the amplifier. This will make the speaker "out of phase".

I am so confused. Isn't that we all want to make our speakers "in phase"?

BTW Kexodusc, my amp is Conrad Johnson Premier 11A Tube Stereo Amp.

Thanks.

CM

[Rock789]

did he ask you to switch polarity for both speakers or only one?

[hee_cm]

both speakers

[Pat D]

both speakers

It helps to describe clearly what you are after! OK. As far as the operation of your system goes, it doesn't matter whether you hook up the positive terminal of your amplifier to the positive terminal of your speakers or not, as long as you hook up both speakers the same way.

Reversals of polarity are audible with test tones and this has been proven in controlled Double Blind Tests, and here is a link to some results:

http://www.pcavtech.com/abx/abx_pola.htm

It has proved rather more difficult to hear with music in a normally reverberant room. It also doesn't seem to much matter whether the loudspeaker is a phase coherent design or not. If you can find issue no. 22 of The Audio Critic, there is a letter from Prof. R. A. Greiner, a fellow of the Audio Engineering Society, who has done research on this.

It is very difficult for the consumer to know whether their system inverts polarity or not. CDPs, preamps, amps--some invert polarity and some do not. As well, some recordings are one way, some the other way, and many multi-mixed recordings are just have mixed polarity--some instruments or voices one way, some another. Frankly, for the most part, it doesn't seem to be that significant an issue.

I recently heard a system in my dealers with some Lab 47 electronics which included a switch to reverse polarity (it was even on the remote). I could hear no difference on the selections I was using.

Anyway, if you think your system sounds better one way or the other, it doesn't cost anything to hook it up that way.

[markw]

It's an acedemic argument at best. Some claim to be able to hear this. I strongly doubt it. Many units do this and nobody notices until they put it on a scope.

If both channels are inverted, they are still in phase with each other but, if it makes you feel good, go ahead. It won't hurt anything. ...won't improve anything either..

[RGA]

Reversals of polarity are audible with test tones and this has been proven in controlled Double Blind Tests, and here is a link to some results:

Actually no such thing can be PROVEN by using a DBT just as failing to achieve Statistical signifcance is PROVING that no one could distinguish. The site itself even remembers to note this -- so it is disengenuous of you to claim proof where no such thing exists.

[Woochifer]

Actually no such thing can be PROVEN by using a DBT just as failing to achieve Statistical signifcance is PROVING that no one could distinguish. The site itself even remembers to note this -- so it is disengenuous of you to claim proof where no such thing exists.

Oh brother, kneejerk reaction anytime DBT is brought up, as usual. Are you even paying attention to the context or what's being measured? This is about using TEST TONES to identify the POLARITY of a speaker hookup. The results that Pat D linked to identify 100% and 96% accuracy in picking out the correct polarity when using a test tone, think that's not conclusive enough?

The polarity test using a calibration disc is one of the most basic setup tests, and obvious ones to pick up, along with the speaker ID test. Okay, so it achieves a certain statistical significance, but the odds of these test results being random or spurious are so remote, they might as well have been asking these people whether a vat of water feels wet. Try listening to one of these out-of-phase test tones sometime, asking for proof when the defineable differences conveyed thru the source signal are so huge belies common sense.

[Pat D]

Oh brother, kneejerk reaction anytime DBT is brought up, as usual. Are you even paying attention to the context or what's being measured? This is about using TEST TONES to identify the POLARITY of a speaker hookup. The results that Pat D linked to identify 100% and 96% accuracy in picking out the correct polarity when using a test tone, think that's not conclusive enough?

The polarity test using a calibration disc is one of the most basic setup tests, and obvious ones to pick up, along with the speaker ID test. Okay, so it achieves a certain statistical significance, but the odds of these test results being random or spurious are so remote, they might as well have been asking these people whether a vat of water feels wet. Try listening to one of these out-of-phase test tones sometime, asking for proof when the defineable differences conveyed thru the source signal are so huge belies common sense.

Thanks Wooch!

RGA has decided he can legislate the meanings of words.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prove

While an ordinary dictionary may not be appropriate for technical terms in various fields, this discussion doesn't seem to require anything more. No reasonable person would expect that the statistical results of a DBT would be anything other than statistical significance. I hope RGA hasn't refused his vaccinations, which are based on statistical results, on the grounds that absolute mathematical certainty or Platonic absolute truth isn't attainable.

[RGA]

The polarity test using a calibration disc is one of the most basic setup tests, and obvious ones to pick up, along with the speaker ID test. Okay, so it achieves a certain statistical significance, but the odds of these test results being random or spurious are so remote, they might as well have been asking these people whether a vat of water feels wet. Try listening to one of these out-of-phase test tones sometime, asking for proof when the defineable differences conveyed thru the source signal are so huge belies common sense.

I didn't read it though I've read the site before. If it is so obvious as me sticking my hand in a sink of water -- then this test was need for what reason? A test supporting the notion that water is wet was the case without the need for a test.

[RGA]

Thanks Wooch!

RGA has decided he can legislate the meanings of words.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=prove

While an ordinary dictionary may not be appropriate for technical terms in various fields, this discussion doesn't seem to require anything more. No reasonable person would expect that the statistical results of a DBT would be anything other than statistical significance. I hope RGA hasn't refused his vaccinations, which are based on statistical results, on the grounds that absolute mathematical certainty or Platonic absolute truth isn't attainable.

Actually yes they would because you and those like you like to infer certain things when you say that there is no Sonic reason to buy a more expensive cd player or cable - how exactly did you come to your proofs of such claims -- by relying on probability correct/ Did you take any Philosophy courses on the question begging nature of science regarding statistical probability? I bet not -- ot you failed that bit -- Plato would roll over in his grave.

[Florian]

Blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah blah !!!!!


it is simple. If you have a good stereo image, and reverse polarity of the speaker than you will loose the stable image and everything will sound larger and undefined.

Do a simple thing and buy Terminator 2 and use the THX Optimizer. A test tone will occur and is supposed to be straight in the middle between the 2 speakers. When in phase its clearly in pahse, when large and everywhere you have the wrong polarity.

In phase= speakers move outward and inward at the same time
Out of pahse= One moves inward and the otherone outward at the same time

:-)

[kexodusc]

This is about using TEST TONES to identify the POLARITY of a speaker hookup. The results that Pat D linked to identify 100% and 96% accuracy in picking out the correct polarity when using a test tone, think that's not conclusive enough?

BWA HA HA!!! ROFLMAO

I guess the ability to "prove" something comes down to your tolerances and level of comfort...there are some people that will ignore statistically perfect test results and all the empircal evidence in the world, defying all logic...then there are those that are happy with 50% +1.

Maybe this is partly why we have confidence testing. Me, I'm a gambling man, and I'll take the 24:1 odds anyday.

[Woochifer]

BWA HA HA!!! ROFLMAO

I guess the ability to "prove" something comes down to your tolerances and level of comfort...there are some people that will ignore statistically perfect test results and all the empircal evidence in the world, defying all logic...then there are those that are happy with 50% +1.

Maybe this is partly why we have confidence testing. Me, I'm a gambling man, and I'll take the 24:1 odds anyday.

Hey, I would take those kinds of odds as well. The phase test is about as much of a slam dunk as there in auditory testing. I would even atrribute the 4% inaccuracy on one of the trials to simple human error (i.e. marking down the wrong choice or differences in hearing ability between the right and left ear).

Another interesting point on that website that Pat D linked to was the inconclusive results in identifying the correct polarity when using music as the source. This is actually in line with what the NRC concluded. Their listening tests found inconclusive results on how differences in phase accuracy influence preferences and auditory perceptions.

[Woochifer]

I didn't read it though I've read the site before. If it is so obvious as me sticking my hand in a sink of water -- then this test was need for what reason? A test supporting the notion that water is wet was the case without the need for a test.

Quite a high standard that you hold others to as far as proof is concerned, especially when you didn't even bother to address the actual topic or read the link that was provided. Like I said, a kneejerk ready-fire-aim response. If you read the results posted on that site, you'd see that it compared people's ability to correctly identify polarity reversals when listening to a test tone versus listening to a music source. That's why a DBT was used, for consistency and bias control.

Actually yes they would because you and those like you like to infer certain things when you say that there is no Sonic reason to buy a more expensive cd player or cable - how exactly did you come to your proofs of such claims -- by relying on probability correct/ Did you take any Philosophy courses on the question begging nature of science regarding statistical probability? I bet not -- ot you failed that bit -- Plato would roll over in his grave.

Actually, the better question is why you didn't bother to address the subject at hand, which was about how to identify polarity reversals. It might help if you actually listen to an out-of-phase test tone before you go into yet another anti-DBT rant and follow-up CYA diatribe. This is a case where self-righteous methodological objections are way out of place.