Aball,
No, science has not answered all the universe's question. You are correct. However, this is an engineering problem, not a philosophical one. Believe it or not, things to do with electricity or electronics fall into the realm of electrical engineering.
I cannot explain why some 12ax7's sound better to me than others do. Most EE's that I know would not care to delve into that question and would probably shirk it off as being trivial or hokum. On the question of contact treatment, I would tend to believe that if the contacts are corroded or oxidized somewhat, then cleaning would help. This brings to my mind the question of whether the impedance effects of oxidation are linear or non-linear through the frequency spectrum. If it is linear, no worries -- turn the volume up. If it is non-linear, clean the contacts, then turn the volume up some more.
I would really like to see scientific evidence (i.e. impedance data) that contact treatments actually improve conductance between two clean conductive metals.
Another "for instance" of audiophilogy beliefs is skin-effect of audio cables. An EE prof of mine while I worked in audio shops during school worked out the calculations for skin effect for audio frequencies and a decade above for "monstrous" cables, and for coax wires. Guess what? None. No skin effect at these frequencies.
I think there is quite a bit of marketing driving our audiophile beliefs. Marketing guys sell product... |
Well said, Rodman99999.
I completely agree with your statement, "Testing is invariably done with relatively simple signals, generated by equipment that I'd never listen to on my system. Testing done, and empirical data collected by, listening to actual music is scoffed at. That doesn't surprise me in the least as there are multitudes in this world that are unable to hear, recognize or(perhaps) admit the differences/improvements that result from our innovations and tweaks."
I have read about Ken Stevens' audio engineering and design methods -- design, build, test, listen to music, re-design... I respect it very much! He uses testing to evaluate his equipment to determine if re-design will improve performance, but he also uses music listening to determine this. I would bet a lot of audio component engineers are designing so that test measurements will just get product out the door. I am sure this is nothing new.
I enjoyed your reply. It made me think. |
Rodman99999,
I must say, however, that I still think that what happens at connections is relatively simple. If the connectors are corroded, clean them. If there is a mechanical problem with them making a connection, fix it so that they make a tight connection. Simplistic. I don't think that precision polished, nanometer scale contact is necessary for optimal transmission of relatively low frequency audio signals.
I think that audio connection design has evolved to a point where they make secure contact, and are resistant to corrosion. I like to keep my contacts clean and tight and be done with it unless there is an obvious problem. I save my audio hobby allowance for things like tubes and cartridges, and my dream pair of speakers. |
If audio (or electrical) connections did indeed provide optimal transmission: contact enhancers could not further affect one's music reproduction, but to degrade it, or have no effect on it at all. I think that would be more accurate.
It's o.k. though, I can bang my head against the wall all day. The only result is that you would still spend your $30+ on something that is touted to have a real effect on an electronic system that has negligible effects on the basis of the laws of nature, which is what your system was founded on in the first place.
I am glad to see that the audio salesman who chimed in with a plug for his shop did offer a money back guarantee. That was refreshing. His caveat that your system may not be good enough to resolve the difference with and without the tweek was a bit pathetic (although only in 1 out of 10 times does this happen, so my dear friend and future customer, don't be offended, your system is good enough to be sure).
Sorry for the cynicism, tweeks are accessories. Accessories carry the highest profit margin in the store where you shop. Caveat emptor. |
I am very sorry, Rushton. I mistook your post as a plug and did not read it carefully enough. Please accept my apologies.
I agree to disagree. This is another audiophile topic that can go on endlessly in debate. I have stated my thoughts about it, and those who disagree with me have stated theirs. There it is.
I reiterate that I am glad that some companies offer money back guarantees on their tweeks. That, to me is important. That promotes experimentation, which is a critical aspect of improving one's system.
Cheers! |
The Walker treatment is organic; yahoo. (Cynical, yes.)
Reminded me to re-read Norman Koren's page: http://www.normankoren.com/Audio/
and his description, "Loose screws? Sometime in the late 1980's I visited an audiophile in San Diego. When he opened the door he exclaimed, "Norm! I've made the most incredible discovery! A simple modification that really improves the sound opens it up, sharpens the imaging, and deepens the soundstage. I've loosened the screws on all my chassis. You gotta hear it!" He learned this tweak from a friend of his who had made a small fortune with a "CD enhancer" spray called Finyl. At the time, the ads for Finyl claimed it would increase the number of bits of resolution. His system sounded terrible.
I'd heard rumors that some audiophiles had their screws loose, but I never took them literally until that evening. Gordie Freedman evidently had similar experiences.
Maybe the problem was his cable lifters, which were made of plastic and only lifted his cables 4 inches. Here's what Mapleshade says: "Odd as it may seem, laying audio cables on an artificial fiber carpet will immediately dull the sound of your stereo. And thats true for all cables, not just our Clearview wires. Unfortunately, the carpet is a huge mass of low quality insulation (dielectric). It absorbs and smears energy from the field around the wire. The effect is pretty grim, making music sound both dulled and harsh. A simple ear-tested solution is to raise the cables off the carpet by at least 8 inches. Thats exactly what our maple Triad does." You're apparently out of luck if your decor is oak or walnut. I gotta quit. You won't find any more of this stuff on my site. I promise.""
Sound familiar? |
I have no doubt about the effectiveness of deoxit. It is great for cleaning contacts, especially those of potentiometers. Old pots more often than not need cleaning. Deoxit helps to eliminate oxidation, etc.
I am glad to hear about sst filling in the contact voids of some burnt and pitted lamp bulb contact pins and their sockets -- sounds like money well spent. Which was more expensive, the bulb or the sst? Was the glow tighter and more defined? Did it have more air around it? It is 60 hz, was this mid-bass more palpable?
Adapt and overcome what? Adapt to marketing malarkey? Overcome what, your sensibilities? Try keeping your contacts clean and tight in the first place; and, some extra money in your pocket. I think I will go out and get some eagle-eye amber sunglasses now. |
Dear Rodman,
Thank you for supporting my 1st Amendment rights (honestly). I apologize for the acerbic nature and tone of my statements; I categorize contact enhancers along with other products that are heavily marketed on a pseudo-scientific basis. I worked in audio and know how hard accessory sales are pushed. The mark-up is tremendous. So, I am very cynical and skeptical of accessories.
I was going to go on with my arguments against contact enhancing accessories, but decided against it -- you are correct, I do not hear the difference. And, you are also wrong, I have tried contact enhancers. My money will never go towards them. My connectors are good quality and I keep them clean. I will, however, buy tuner cleaner, or whatever some may call it, for cleaning the pots on my pre-amps.
Cheers. |
Hi Rodman,
Absolutely right!
Happy listening! |
