Is there any reason to support the idea that cables, interconnects or any other kind of wiring can be considered directional? It seems that the theory is that carrying current will alter the molecular structure of the wire. I can't find anything that supports this other than in the case of extreme temperature variation. Cryo seems to be a common treatment for wire nowadays. Extreme heat would do something as well, just nothing favorable. No idea if cryo treatment works but who knows. Back to the question, can using the wires in one direction or another actually affect it's performance? Thanks for any thoughts. I do abide by the arrows when I have them. I "mostly" follow directions but I have pondered over this one every time I hook up a pair.
The ’S’ stands for Sinousoidal electric field, which when combined with it’s magnetic field, results in the Poynting vector that determines the direction and strength of an electromagnetic wave’s energy* flow.
*our systems’ AC or musical signals
Does the green arrows represent the signal traveling from the source to the load through the dielectric insulation?
Is the EM wave the signal, or does the EM carry the signal? Or is the signal embedded in the EM wave?
The 'S' stands for Sinousoidal electric field, which when combined with it's magnetic field, results in the Poynting vector that determines the direction and strength of the electromagnetic wave's energy* flow.
Wow, all this technobabble is giving me a splitting headache. I received my EE in 1976. Wire directions never came up in any of our studies. Perhaps it wasn’t known at the time? The school, Roger Williams University had an excellent Electrical Engineering program. Like I said in the second or third post to this thread, if there are not any arrows on the cable, try it both ways and if you hear a difference to the better, put the cables that way. Easy Peezy.
. . . It would seem to me that the best construction using drawn cable would be that each of the two conductors be a pair of wires, arranged in opposing directions to minimize the grain structure distortion.
Does anyone know of a manufacturer that does this . . .
Yes, several cable manufacturers. A type of bucking winding.
Here is a video for the LessLoss C-Marc series. Scroll down this page for more info from the LessLoss website.
- - - -
Here’s another Lessloss video that shows how the C-Marc cable is manufactured.
However, to the dismay of audiophiles, and the profit margin of cable manufacturers, the velocity of the wave along the wire is dependent of the electrical characteristics of the wire - which are dependent on the physical properties of the cable structure - material, coating, size, dielectric properties of the insulation, braiding - AND THE FREQUENCY OF THE DRIVING SOURCE.
So, if the wave velocity is strongly dependent on the frequency then the complex waveform of the audio signal will be more distorted. There will always be some distortion, the magnitude of which depends on cable length, and audiophile manufacturers will attempt to minimize the distortion - or try to make it euphonic.
dielectric properties of the insulation,
The signal travels in the spaces between the conductors. Therein through the dielectric insulation but not confined by the dielectric insulation, (unless the cable is shielded.)
I believe that’s why Teflon, for one, is used instead of cheap PVC insulation.
And I believe it helps control this:
So, if the wave velocity is strongly dependent on the frequency then the complex waveform of the audio signal will be more distorted. There will always be some distortion, the magnitude of which depends on cable length, and audiophile manufacturers will attempt to minimize the distortion - or try to make it euphonic.
It would seem to me that the best construction using drawn cable would be that each of the two conductors be a pair of wires, arranged in opposing directions to minimize the grain structure distortion.
Does anyone know of a manufacturer that does this - if not does anyone want to start a business?
.
Bob Crump did.
Posted by rcrump on September 30, 2000 at 06:45:41
Solid core wire is extremely directional so just mark the end with some masking tape as it comes off the spool. Orient the wires so you have piece of masking tape at either end and terminate the wires. Throw it on a MOBIE or whatever overnight and then listen to it noting which way gives the highest image height. This is the correct orientation.
If you run the signal and return wires in the same direction you will end up with hot spots in the stage, normally at or close to the speakers, low image height and have a gaping hole in the middle of the stage...Keep in mind I am referring to the sound of the stage (reflections) not the individual instruments spread across the stage....Interconnects or speaker wires that have pianos wandering all over the stage normally have their signal and return going in the same direction....
I looked around for a primer on the subject and found this YouTube it's about a 40 minute chat but is, I think, rather good. Simple but not simplistic.
He doesn't address directionality per se but does explain why different cables may sound different.
To briefly summarize, the signal travels through the cable as a wave - (my simile now, a bit like a slinky, the free electrons nudging the next one from the high energy side to the lower, like the balls of a slinky from the high side to the low side).
However, to the dismay of audiophiles, and the profit margin of cable manufacturers, the velocity of the wave along the wire is dependent of the electrical characteristics of the wire - which are dependent on the physical properties of the cable structure - material, coating, size, dielectric properties of the insulation, braiding - AND THE FREQUENCY OF THE DRIVING SOURCE.
So, if the wave velocity is strongly dependent on the frequency then the complex waveform of the audio signal will be more distorted. There will always be some distortion, the magnitude of which depends on cable length, and audiophile manufacturers will attempt to minimize the distortion - or try to make it euphonic.
Regarding directionality, if the crystal structure of a cable is asymmetric and that structure affects the electrical characteristics (resistance, capacitance, inductance) asymmetrically then the waveform will be affected asymmetrically as it AC so, perhaps directionality matters. It would seem to me that the best construction using drawn cable would be that each of the two conductors be a pair of wires, arranged in opposing directions to minimize the grain structure distortion.
Does anyone know of a manufacturer that does this - if not does anyone want to start a business? (joke).
Illustration of electromagnetic power flow inside a coaxial cable according to the Poynting vector S, calculated using the electric field E (due to the voltage V) and the magnetic field H (due to current I).
S represents the signal. Yes?
.
@rodman99999, I’ve used that Link many times trying to prove a point.
Imo, a SPDIF digital coax cable with a solid center conductor with RCA plugs is one of the best cables to use to check for cable directionality.
See, I couldn't even spell PhD correctly. I do not have the higher education of many in and around these forums. I do have big ears though. :) Thanks for all guys, it is appreciated. Sorry if people get angry over it. I for one, do not.
I’d like to say another thing. For the last 1,000 years, science has always been about challenging ideas, old and new. Science can give you some answers but rarely its entirety, There are 2 more questions for every answers that’s been made.
That is Science. If you think what you know is absolute, you are betraying Science on a fundamental level.
1) Your first statement above is completely incorrect. A fuse (to take your example) does not carry a voltage (whatever that means, since it is a meaningless statement in the first place). The idea of ’source’ and ’load’ are irrelevant in electrical theory; you can represent any part of a (linear-ized) circuit as a ’source’ with an ’impedance’ that is connected to the rest of the circuit ("load"). The fact that we as humans interested in hearing sound being reproduced interpret one component as a source and another as a load has nothing to do with the way in which electrical circuits behave.
I didn't bother responding to the total nonsense above, knowing that the uneducated poster/poser would completely miss the implications/ramifications, were I to mention/post anything, as regards Poynting Vectors*.
Well, this has been interesting, if a bit cranky at times. Discussions on these and other forums always seem to come down to "my Phd is bigger than your Phd" or something similar. Interesting, nonetheless.
And then: there are those* with no PhD (or anything close), which are worthy of nothing but disregard/disdain.
*ie: Dunning-Kruger exemplars, Denyin'tologists and Naysayer Church adherents, that ignore the science and experiments that have given us the many modern conveniences, medical devices and SS equipment they so love.
"As soon as electrons become sentient and can discern differences in metal, then directional cables may be a thing. Until then, even a basic understanding of electricity would tell you it’s 100% marketing and makes 0% difference in the sound you hear."
This is 21st century science in a nutshell. "My basic understanding of science is more than enough to start making claims".
Well, this has been interesting, if a bit cranky at times. Discussions on these and other forums always seem to come down to "my Phd is bigger than your Phd" or something similar. Interesting, nonetheless.
Many of the explanations are well above my understanding. I'm still struggling with how and why the current has to travel backwards as much as forward in my circuitry and how it must get to where it's going in the first place. I'm just glad that it does. My understanding of electricity and it's properties are pretty basic. It has a pretty good bite to it when it escapes and I'm able to turn it on and off with a switch. I enjoy many of it's wonderful properties without understanding it like an EE does. I'm good with that.
As to my original question about non-directional interconnects and whether they can develop a memory, I'm still a bit puzzled because there is so much disagreement on the subject. Ultimately, I will let my ears decide and see which camp I land in or if I will just keep scratching my head. I do appreciate any and all who spoke up. Thanks guys.
Do you even understand what response to impulse is, or how this is relevant to any and all signals? Very clearly not. Kindly stop posting things that do not have any connection to physics, history or reality, but only to your totally incorrect understanding of them.
... Kindly stop posting things that do not have any connection to physics, history or reality, but only to your totally incorrect understanding of them ...
Sorry, but this forum is open to all, even to those like you who claim to be a "victim" of the conversation here.
I'm glad to know I'm not the only victim
If you have a complaint about a user here, take it to the moderators. You can use the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of every page.
The story you keep telling yourself that ’nobody understands electricity’ is completely false - and funnily enough, it was Feynman that with QED (Nobel in 1965) added the last pieces to the puzzle. You quote, but you don’t read or understand.
To anyone ACTUALLY INTERESTED in expanding their understanding of this idea/theory, as regards electricity/electromagnetism, I repost:
There are simply too many variables and unknowns (95-96%) in our universe, that disallow the categorical propositions, presented by the ignorant/uneducated.
Do you even understand what response to impulse is, or how this is relevant to any and all signals? Very clearly not. Kindly stop posting things that do not have any connection to physics, history or reality, but only to your totally incorrect understanding of them.
Derek discusses the case of a very simple circuit (a battery, a switch and a 'load' which could be a lightbulb), but it's easy to see how the exact same physical mechanisms are acting on a complex, variable signal ('music'), and why lumped element models are used to simplify the representation... to the point where they can over-simplify it!
Derek discusses DC, while our conversation hinges around AC*, whether in our power cables, or- signal wires, which carry waveforms (either 50/60Hz or musical), the propagation speed(s) of which, depends on factors like frequency(s) and dielectric absorption of the dielectric involved.
*Mentioned before my first link, in my first post.
@jea48Honestly, one of the best and easiest-to-follow physics-level (rather than engineering-level) explanation of how an electric signal travels through a cable is the one by Veritasium that I linked above. Here it is again.
Derek discusses the case of a very simple circuit (a battery, a switch and a ’load’ which could be a lightbulb), but it’s easy to see how the exact same physical mechanisms are acting on a complex, variable signal (’music’), and why lumped element models are used to simplify the representation... to the point where they can over-simplify it!
To keep things more or less on topic (directionality of cables), to my mind this also shows why - in the absence of asymmetries in cable construction - the argument for cable directionality with quasi-periodic, alternating signals is a very hard one to support scientifically.
The cargo cultist is still posting - that is you, @rodman99999
At that moment he realized: if he tried to explain what he was learning, there was no way his dad could understand.
This seems to be the situation indeed. You keep posting things that you don’t understand, and no matter how much I or others try to explain to you that things aren’t how you think they are, you simply cannot understand.#
This Dunning-Kruger exemplar
That would be you, again. Ad hominem does not make you smarter or even seem smarter.
Please - inform yourself before digging yourself further into the solid rock that you have reached 5 posts ago. I will no longer reply to your nonsense posts, here or anywhere else on this forum. Take care.
My children, who are going through university now, are not taught that, and real images of atoms (electron clouds) are commonplace since the early 2000s. Wake up and smell the roses - you are out of date and out of order.
HILARIOUS!
This Dunning-Kruger exemplar doesn't even know the difference, between picturing/modeling an electron cloud and actually viewing an electron.
Cargo cults are religious practices that have appeared in many traditional tribal societies in the wake of interaction with technologically advanced cultures.
Do a bit of research and you'll learn those primitives were limited in their understanding of what they saw with their eyes, based on their prior experience, education and BIASES.
A rewind:
It isn't that the Denyin'tologists are ignorant.
It's they're knowing* so much, that's WRONG.
*heart of the Dunning-Kruger Effect
OR, two:
The Church of the Naysayer Doctrine (like every other faith-based, religious cult) has as many dopes as it does Popes.
Bring up anything resembling SCIENCE/PHYSICS, dated later than the 1800’s and they become apoplectic, not having the formal education to comprehend the concepts, or- possible ramifications. THAT would be hilarious, were it not so pathetic!
Gimme That Old Time Religion, Gimme That Old Time Religion, etc.
At the very first mention of something as simple as Wave Function (a BASIC tenet of Quantum Mechanics), the Cargo Cult will label you a KOOK.
But remember: they can only view/understand you, based on their limited experience, education and BIASES.
They have overlooked the fact that, if not for the hypotheses/theories and experimentation, regarding Quantum Mechanics: a plethora of modern conveniences, medical devices and the gear they so love, would not exist.
Had scientists, chemists and inventors shared the doctrines of the Cargo Cult (Denyin'tologists), there would be no semiconductors, computer chips, LASERs, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging devices (MRIs).
Solid State amps?
OOPS (back to tubes)!
Your Smart Phone?
FA'GET ABOUT IT!
Your car's GPS?
NOPE!
Then too: some may be willfully ignorant and just enjoy being contentious.
Others: obtuse, uneducated*, misinformed?
*Typically, from what's been exhibited here: H.S. STEM, if that, would be a safe inference.
Either way: the result, when the Cult begins it's rhetoric, is a classic demo of the Dunning- Kruger Effect.
But, I digress:
Bring up those pesky details, regarding the likes of QED, Dielectric Absorption, Poynting's theorem and possible application/effects, relative to frequency, that our musical signals are carried via photon or wave, outside the conductor and you're a KOOK?
Again: the Cargo Cult can only understand anyone with an actual background, experience and education in Physics/QED, based on their own beliefs, (limited) education, experience and biases.
One anecdote that some may find interesting; about their walks in the woods and how Richard Feynman's father would encourage him to look beyond the fact that something in nature exists, into why and how.
It saddened him that while attending college, during a visit home and one of their walks; his dad asked what he was learning in college.
At that moment he realized: if he tried to explain what he was learning, there was no way his dad could understand.
Einstein got that last one wrong (Quantum Entanglement), BUT- I still wish he'd been alive, when the Hubble Telescope proved, what he considered his, "greatest blunder" (his inability to bring symmetry to his field equation, without lambda)
FYI. In 1965 I got a 1st class honors degree (summa cum laude) in Mathematics, with Physics as a minor.
My dad was a physicist (and a fellow of the Institute of Physics) and my elder brother taught high school students who were going to read physics at University.
Just saying ...
Yep. And you aren't saying anything that is out of kilter with a "moderately up-to-date" understanding of electromagnetism, unlike others on this thread. 😉
PERHAPS: that’s changed in recent years and I missed it
Yes, that’s changed in "recent years" (very much in quotes). I graduated in 1990, I have kept myself professionally up-to-date since (unlike you, clearly), and none of the stuff from the late 19th century that you keep thinking is what people are taught, because you were taught it, is current now. My children, who are going through university now, are not taught that, and real images of atoms (electron clouds) are commonplace since the early 2000s. Wake up and smell the roses - you are out of date and out of order.
Inescapable FACT: No one understands exactly how electricity works. That’s why there’s so much Electrical THEORY.
Inescapable fact: we understand pretty well how electricity works, otherwise we would not be having this conversation on devices that use electricity on scales that range from quantum effects to human scale observables. None of the unresolved conflicts between GR and QM is applicable to computers or audio equipment. The story you keep telling yourself that ’nobody understands electricity’ is completely false - and funnily enough, it was Feynman that with QED (Nobel in 1965) added the last pieces to the puzzle. You quote, but you don’t read or understand.
Quiet snort of derision
Very loud laugh from me. Keep digging.
Incidentally - nobody here is saying that different cables do not sound different, or that asymmetrically constructed cables do not exhibit directionality in terms of their susceptibility to noise. Neither of those two observations requires any of the woo-woo that you are spouting about the lack of understanding of electricity (or your incorrect use of the word 'theory' in a scientific context; it doesn't mean what you think it means. A dictionary would be of help - as would a guide to typing. Multiple spaces to align text went out of fashion with typewriters, circa 1985).
@billpete In the end, the correct answer is to try your cable both ways. The way that sounds best to YOUR ears, is the correct direction. Regardless of how the cables are marked. Everything else is meaningless.
The brands of interconnects with directionality, as specified by the manufacturer, that I have, have all stated that the reason for the directionality is that the shield is grounded at the source end and is floating at the destination end.
@bimmerlover, Kimber Silver Streak isn't shielded and I get the impression that there is a suggested direction for it to be used in.
Jack Bybee’s first commercial products emerged from Cold War-era military-industrial research. The stealthy shadow contest of nuclear submarine detection, location and evasion demanded ever-quieter circuits, lower electronic noise and greater signal-to-noise ratios. Practitioners summed up the problem as: “reducing 1/f noise, from DC to 2000hz”.
Bybee’s technology involves exotic blends of rare-earth metals or their isotopes to reduce electronic noise in circuits. In the mid-1990s, Bybee’s AC filtering was among the first of its kind to use exotic doped materials instead of transformers or balanced power, which made it a novel concept at the time.
Jack’s science and physicist background gave him the understanding about negative effects of quantum noise. Link here.
From there, I earned my Electronics Engineering degree at Brescia University, and would later study Computer Science for almost two years at Westinghouse. Then I came to South Texas Nuclear, and studied what they’d call today nuclear physics. Link here.
Caelin Gabriel is a former US military research scientist with a background in research and design of ultra-sensitive data acquisition systems. These systems were designed to detect extremely low-level signals otherwise obscured by random noise, requiring years of intensive research into the sources and effects of signal and power-line noise interference. Link here.
CEO/Designer Jeffrey Smith is a Wyoming native and graduate of the United States Naval Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree in General Engineering. He also earned a Master of Science Degree, With Distinction, in Defense and Strategic Studies. Link here.
MIT Cables – Founded by Bruce Brisson – awarded 20 USPTO engineering patents.
MIT Cables founder Bruce Brisson began purposely designing audio cables in the 1970’s after encountering the sonic problems inherent in cables typical of the day. Link here.
Audioquest – Garth Powell - Sr. Director of Engineering
Formerly with Furman Power for 12 years.
Iconoclast Cables – Galen Gareis – Belden Engineering Center, retired.
Galen Gareis, a now-retired product development engineer working at the Belden Engineering Center in Richmond, Indiana, has decades of experience in designing practical precision cabling for a wide variety of professional applications - but at the same time is a high-end audio enthusiast. Link here.
FYI. In 1965 I got a 1st class honors degree (summa cum laude) in Mathematics, with Physics as a minor.
My dad was a physicist (and a fellow of the Institute of Physics) and my elder brother taught high school students who were going to read physics at University.
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction." (Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse , 1872)
"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon," (Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873)
"The super computer is technologically impossible. It would take all of the water that flows over Niagara Falls to cool the heat generated by the number of vacuum tubes required." (Professor of Electrical Engineering, New York University)
"There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom." (Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1923)
"Man will never reach the moon regardless of all future scientific advances." (Dr. Lee DeForest, Father of Radio & Grandfather of Television)
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible!" (Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895)
"The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives." (Admiral William Leahy, re: US Atomic Bomb Project)
When the steam locomotive came on the scene; the best (scientific) minds proclaimed, "The human body cannot survive speeds in excess of 35MPH."
Until recently (21st Century); and the advent of the relatively new science of Fluid Dynamics, the best (scientific) minds involved in Aerodynamics, could not fathom how a bumblebee stays aloft.
Often; Science has to catch up with the facts/phenomena of Nature and/or, "reality" (our universe).
I haven't been in school since the 60's, but- at Case Institute of Technology; the Physics Prof always emphasized what we were studying was, "Electrical THEORY." He strongly made a point of the fact that no one had yet actually observed electrons (how they behave on the quantum level) and that only some things can really be called, "LAWS." (ie: Ohm, Kirchoff, Faraday)
PERHAPS: that's changed in recent years and I missed it?
Inescapable FACT: No one understands exactly how electricity works.
That’s why there’s so much Electrical THEORY.
The number of Wiki-Scientists on these pages, attempting to win the IG-Nobel Prize in Pseudo-Physics, is always amusing.
Whenever some highly educated person actually does discover exactly how electricity functions, they’ll be lauded by the scientific community, will have solved some of the disparities between Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, receive a Nobel and we’ll hear about it.
Newton’s THEORIES were largely superseded by Einstein and Bohr's. Then came Feynman’s. For now; none of you can absolutely prove your statements (theories), regarding electricity, FUSES, wires, or anything else, as regards our systems.
The following articles, read in sequence, illustrate my point:
What about ones that do not have directionality in mind? Will they "learn" to be better in one direction than the other? This would mean that they physically changed over time.
No, they won't - there is no "direction" to an AC signal that would change the material to conduct preferentially in one sense rather than the other - and if there were, it would be a cause of significant distortion. Either the cable is manufactured asymmetrically (with different shielding or cable geometry) or it isn't - the asymmetry may cause differences in sound when the cable is plugged in one way rather than the other, but the asymmetry would not change because a signal is sent (from a human "teleological" perspective) from A to B instead of from B to A.
As simple a device as a fuse is: it still carries a sinusoidal signal/voltage, ALWAYS from source to load. NOT back and forth!
Also (as mentioned above): any fuse acts as an RLC circuit, the ’C’ of which will be determined by properties of its wave guide’s/conductor’s surroundings (ie: glass, air, bee’s wax, ceramic, end cap materials, etc).
Any commonly drawn wire will exhibit a chevron pattern in its crystal lattice, so: why not "directionality" and why Ohno Continuous Cast, single crystal wire sounds better, to so many?
Stated above are scientifically tested, measured and proven facts.
1) Your first statement above is completely incorrect. A fuse (to take your example) does not carry a voltage (whatever that means, since it is a meaningless statement in the first place). The idea of ’source’ and ’load’ are irrelevant in electrical theory; you can represent any part of a (linear-ized) circuit as a ’source’ with an ’impedance’ that is connected to the rest of the circuit ("load"). The fact that we as humans interested in hearing sound being reproduced interpret one component as a source and another as a load has nothing to do with the way in which electrical circuits behave.
2) All the parameters of an RLC representation of a real component will be influenced by the properties of the materials they are made and surrounded by. Not just capacitance.
3) The fact that a drawn wire will show a grain orientation does not imply your (or anybody else’s) opinion that there is any "directionality" or asymmetry in the way in which a non-DC waveform is transmitted through it.
4) Your "stated above" is not fact; it’s a mixture of poorly understood electrical theory/physics, and opinions. As is your idea that because materials with a high dielectric constant take longer to polarise therefore this justifies the phenomenon of burn-in.
5) Very little of what you have posted has anything to do with the topic of this thread, which is about the directionality of cables to audio signals.
Before continuing, kindly get a degree in electrical engineering (which I happen to have), rather than posting nonsense under the flag of "it’s new theory". No, it isn’t. The idea that electrical currents move as ping-pong balls in a tube is not based on "old theories"; it’s a (bad) analogy used today with high school students who start learning about electricity without having the mathematical background to understand different and more correct/complete representations. It’s neither more nor less than second grade students being told "you cannot do 2 minus 3" as they have not been introduced to negative numbers.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
