I see glubson is sharp as a tack today. Better fasten your seatbelts. |
Did milk squirt out of your engineer friend’s nose? One wonders if engineers are inherently closed-minded sometimes or if they’re taught to be like that.
|
At least a week after cryo. When comparing cables at least two days.
|
OK, here’s what you should do after purchasing any cables for best results.
1. Send them off to cryo lab. While many high end cables are cryod by the manufacturer, Cryoing twice is better. Once you get them back from the cryo lab give them about a week to recover from thermal shock before critical eval.
2. Establish correct direction.
3. Burn in using burn in track or burn in device.
4. Suspend cables from ceiling using fishing line and eye hooks to escape vibration and static electric fields.
5. Apply the contact enhancer of your choice to all electrical contacts.
|
There seems to be quite a disparity between pro audio and high end audio these days. As lot of it has to do with attitude. Pro audio needs what we used to call a sanity check or attitude adjustment. As things stand pro audio isn’t really much of a force. No offense, Wolfie.
|
Thanks for reminding me why I never read your posts.
|
Understand. Thanks. You were told wrong. No offense to anyone.
|
Your cable guy must not have gotten the memo. Also, nothing wrong with maple blocks but I don’t think they are doing much vibration wise since the maple blocks provide a clear path for vibration.
|
Depends on what you mean by “directional.” All wire is directional.
|
jdub07
A signal is a signal, right? Cable burn-in, seriously? I have been listening to hi-fi longer than a lot of you have been alive. I have never heard cables that sound better after burn-in and I don;t spend lots of money on speaker wire. If I have money to spend I spend it on something that will make a difference like upgrading components.
>>>>>Wow, are you a vampire?
|
To be honest I don’t listen for cable burn in, contact enhancer burn in, system burn in CD results. Is that wrong?
|
Not very surprising as Monster Cable is crap. In fact, I’m surprised the Reynolds wrap was not judged better than Monster Cable. Now, if he had evaluated Reynolds wrap vs high end cable and got the same results, that would be news!
|
There is probably nothing more touching in the audio world than when one skeptic reaches out to comfort another skeptic. So sweet. |
What’s perhaps even more disturbing, to anyone but especially the skeptics is the use of home feeders for treating cables, CDs, LPs, CD players and all manner of audio related things. Obviously -20 degrees F is not nearly as low as cryogenic temperatures -300 F nor is it low enough to significantly change the physical characteristics of copper or silver wire or the cable jacket. Nevertheless...
You might recall HiFi Tuning data sheets showed differences in resistance between cryod fuses and uncryod fuses.
|
azbrd
@hifiman51 A few years ago i replaced my existing cables with some slightly longer ones of the EXACT same brand and gauge. The existing cables had >1000 hours of use the new ones had none and I could NOT hear ANY difference between the 2 sets. I had a few friends over so I could swap the 2 sets for them, Back and forth we went and none of us could hear any difference between the sets.
I guess my system is missing "dynamic swing?" so I was unable to hear what a "broken" in cable sounds like. Also, please define what "dynamic swing" is????
>>>>There are a whole bunch of reasons why cable comparisons oft fail. Many of these reasons explain why almost any test of any audio thing fails.
1. Unplugging a cable destroys the delicate electrical/mechanical connection that took a long time to establish. So, going back and forth between cables proves nothing.
2. The new cables were not properly broken in so you can’t really expect them to sound too good.
3. One or both cables were not connected in the correct direction.
4. As has been pointed out many times cables don’t get fully broken in without resorting to a burn in track on a test CD or a burn in device. Playing music through cables, even for years, is not sufficient.
5. Both cables in the test are not sufficient quality to reveal differences that might be there.
6. The system used for the test is not of sufficient quality to reveal differences.
7. There are errors in the system.
8. The test subjects’ hearing is not all it’s cracked up to be.
9. Differences were masked by “outside conditions” - weather, time of day, unknown causes.
10. Test subjects were drunk. |
It appears AudioKarma must have sent over some senior members. |
Whack a mole...the sport of kings. 🔨
|
AudioKarma? Now there’s bastion of backsliders and moss backs if ever there was one. I can certainly understand why you’d feel comfortable there. Ta, ta!
|
azbrd
@geoffkait
I forgot to ask, please provide us some actual (not from Audioquest) documentation on how wire directionality applies to an AC circuit?
>>>>Didn’t you get the memo? Maybe you were sleeping. You don’t need to be concerned with any signal travel in the “opposite direction,” only any signal travel toward your speakers, I.e., the correct direction. Follow?
|
azbrd
@geoffkait
I was waiting for you to chime in!
>>>>>I was waiting for your reaction.
1. Unplugging a cable destroys the delicate electrical/mechanical connection that took a long time to establish. So, going back and forth between cables proves nothing.
So now you are moving the new cable to old cable discussion to the electrical/mechanical connections? would this mean we need to unplug our wires every time to get to audio nirvana??
>>>>>I’m not sure we’re on the same page here. It means you can’t judge the new cables until they’ve been seated for a week.
2. The new cables were not properly broken in so you can’t really expect them to sound too good.
So >1000 of actual use is not enough to "break in" a cable???
>>>>>>>Read what I said again. The short answer is no.
Please provide us with the measurable, repeatable documentation on how to properly break in a wire!
>>>>Why, are you volunteering?
2. The new cables were not properly broken in so you can’t really expect them to sound too good.
this is my favorite geoffkait claim right up there with Dark Matter Optical Coating and his Teleportation Tweak! Just for fun I called several cable companies and asked them to sell me wires that were directional.
>>>>Sorry about that, there are quite a few backward cable companies around apparently.
ALL of them politely laughed and explained that wire does NOT have any directional property. I personally reversed the wires during our listening test and could not hear any differences.
>>>>If milk didn’t squirt out of their noses it doesn’t count. If you were the one conducting the test it certainly makes sense you couldn’t hear anything. Is there anything you can hear? Just curious. 😛
Look inside your speakers or amps, see if there is any wires in there with little arrows on them OR is there ANY documentation from these companies to advise one which direction your cables should be when connecting them??
>>>>That’s a shame since all wire is directional. Oh, well, whaddya gonna do? 😳
|
azbrd
@geoffkait
@hifiman51 A few years ago i replaced my existing cables with some slightly longer ones of the EXACT same brand and gauge. The existing cables had >1000 hours of use the new ones had none and I could NOT hear ANY difference between the 2 sets. I had a few friends over so I could swap the 2 sets for them, Back and forth we went and none of us could hear any difference between the sets.
I guess my system is missing "dynamic swing?" so I was unable to hear what a "broken" in cable sounds like. Also, please define what "dynamic swing" is????
>>>>There are a whole bunch of reasons why cable comparisons oft fail. Many of these reasons explain why almost any test of any audio thing fails.
1. Unplugging a cable destroys the delicate electrical/mechanical connection that took a long time to establish. So, going back and forth between cables proves nothing.
I thought you were pushing "contact enhancers" to fix this? Or maybe it was Machina Dynamica’s Brilliant Pebbles? I can’t remember.
>>>>>>>Try to keep up with the conversation. I do not push my products but I’m always happy to see someone else mention them.
2. The new cables were not properly broken in so you can’t really expect them to sound too good.
If the new cables where NOT broken in then we all should have been able to hear a huge difference between the new cables and the 1000 hour cables according to you. NONE of us heard ANY differences, no matter which direction we ran the cables!
>>>>You’re not following what I’m saying. It’s not black and white.
3. One or both cables were not connected in the correct direction.
4. As has been pointed out many times cables don’t get fully broken in without resorting to a burn in track on a test CD or a burn in device. Playing music through cables, even for years, is not sufficient.
5. Both cables in the test are not sufficient quality to reveal differences that might be there.
I’m using 10g wires with excellent resistance/capacitance/inductance specks. Please document what constitutes sufficient quality other than those metrics.
>>>>>I’m not saying all of those reasons apply to your test. But the more you talk the more I’m inclined to think most of then probably do apply.
6. The system used for the test is not of sufficient quality to reveal differences.
So now you are calling me out on the quality of my system???
>>>>>Maybe I am. It is one of the reasons why a test can go awry. You might be taking this just a tad too personally.
Well, you show me yours if I show you mine.
>>>>It’s not about me, it’s about you.
7. There are errors in the system.
What type of errors in a AC circuit
>>>>Errors can be anywhere in the system.
8. The test subjects’ hearing is not all it’s cracked up to be.
Two of use (sic) are engineers and one is a professional musician who has also mastered many CDs.
>>>>>That is an Appeal to Authority. One of the worst sounding systems I ever heard belonged to a musician. The second worst sounding system I ever heard belonged to an engineer. I am actually nit a big fan of mastering engineers, you know, due to all the dynamic range compression. If it were not a false argument then any engineer or musician in town could automatically win any argument by declaring, I’m an engineer or musician so therefore I am correct. Better luck next time.
9. Differences were masked by “outside conditions” - weather, time of day, unknown causes.
Yep, i checked. it was a high sun spot day!
>>>>>Funny. I figured you probably wouldn’t know what I was referring to. Especially unknown causes.
10. Test subjects were drunk.
you have got to be kidding????
>>>>I don’t know. Am I?
|
stevecham, The trouble with that theory is that electrons are not the signal. Electrons are simply the charge carriers. The signal itself is a horse of a different color and travels at near lightspeed in metal conductors. Which of course means the signal must be comprised of photons. So, it’s actually photons that navigate the wire better in one direction than the other.
|
Is there an echo in here? |
|
azbrd
@geoffkait
>>>>Didn’t you get the memo? Maybe you were sleeping. You don’t need to be concerned with any signal travel in the “opposite direction,” only any signal travel toward your speakers, I.e., the correct direction. Follow?
This is the pseudoscience I'm calling you on, an AC circuit (what connects a amp to a speaker) does NOT behave as you are implying! DC circuits DO behave as you describe. Please stop trying to push your Star Trek science on these forums!
>>>>There are only two possibilities.
1. You don’t know what directionality means.
2. You don’t know what AC means.
Beam yourself up, Scotty! |
stevecham
Do pistons in an internal combustion engine have directionality?
La meme chose.
>>>>Huh? How so? This I have to hear. |
Perhaps if you woke up you’d see the light?
|
That’s especially good advice for folks endowed with ten thumbs. 👍 |
azbrd
@geoffkait
Please explain to us minions how a particle of light, a photon, can be transferred over copper (or silver for that matter)??
>>>>I guess you would have to know that everything that’s in the electromagnetic spectrum, including visible light, which is actually an extremely small portion, is comprised of photons. It’s pretty obvious visible light cannot travel through most solid materials except transparent ones like water, polycarbonate, glass and clear plastic. The electrical signal and the audio signal, are also in the electromagnetic spectrum, but can travel through copper or silver. I bet you thought the signal was electrons, right?
|
bac2vinyl
it's copper, physics of copper doesn't change with the small current that runs through cables. It's your ears, your brain, that gets tailored to the sound...Pure BS! And a 3-foot piece of copper or silver isn't going to provide better current to your equipment either...That is just ridiculous to think one foot of anything at the end of a 100 foot run of romax is going to improve your electic supply somehow...but spend away..
>>>>If you get that upset over a 3-foot copper cable one wonders what would happen if someone pointed out the tiny 1/2” fuse where the current comes into the amp affects the sound quality. One imagines your head would explode.
|
Aluminum connectors? O-K, never heard of em but there’s a first time for everything, I guess.
|
I get it now. Aviation fuel fumes. That’s too bad. 😢
|
stevecham
GK: nice try :-) But man do you get ’em going!
Next we should talk about whether the composition of baryons in wire metals, such as protons (two up and one down quark) vs. neutrons (two down and one up quark) are what's really 1) being burned in and 2) account for directionality.
Because it ain't fermions such as photons, my friend.
>>>>>Name dropper. |
One thing is for sure. If the 10 meter inductor copper wire were controlled for directionality the speaker would sound better, dammit. And it wouldn’t cost anything. Think about it. 😳
|
It’s a two edged sword. Data dogma is what produced the Hubble telescope fiasco and data dogma is also what produced the Challenger explosion and the second space shuttle disaster when it disintegrated during reentry. Data dogma also resulted in the sales of all those horrible sounding solid state amps back in the 80s that boasted super low THD. Data dogma. Woof! woof! Bad dogma, bad! 🐕
|
The costliest thing is knowledge. Beauty is all around us. It’s free. Just like controlling directionality. For a fuse, you just try it both ways.
|
The quote is not mine, it’s Feynman’s. That’s why it’s in uh, quotes. Why would I say I won the Nobel prize? Obviously you have difficulty following technical arguments. These demands for proof of yours serve no purpose, especially given your inability to follow relatively simple technical arguments. This conversation can serve no purpose any more. ta, ta
|
Let me get this straight. When you say electrical engineering class do you mean the one you never went to?
|
Feynman’s contribution to the Challenger Disaster Final Report was disallowed until the very end when it was put into the Appendix as a sop. He was kind of a loose cannon. Not unlike some folks here. I’m not going to point fingers. 👉 👉
|
Az, what are you talking about? I explained it already. God gave you two ears and one mouth for a reason. If you’re pretending to be dense you’re doing an excellent job. |
|
Andy2, you’re overthinking it. The reason cables are directional is the same reason fuses are directional, the same reason HDMI cables are directional and why power cords are directional. It’s the wire itself that’s directional. I’m amazing that so many here don’t know what directionality is since its been discussed here, pros and cons, for like forever. Cut me some slack, Jack.
|
Andy2, but it’s all been said already. Not to mention we know why wire is directional. It’s not really a mystery. Well, maybe in the minds of some.
“You can’t stop what’s coming.” Audiophile expression |
|
Twas not I who dropped his name.
|
I hate to judge too harshly but it certainly appears aviation inhaling fuel fumes destroys brain cells.
This your brain 🧠
This is your brain after inhaling aviation fuel fumes 🍳
|
Audio is by and large a subjective hobby. If you want a hobby based on measurements go build houses or race cars. 🏎
|
|
It is *misreported* on the internet in what appear to be otherwise authoritative articles on the Challenger Disaster investigation with respect to Richard Feynman. The article I just read, for example, described a hostile relationship between Rogers, the Chairman of the Rogers Commision and Feynman during the investigation. But that is incorrect. The hostile relationship was actually between Dr. Alton Keel, Executive Director of the commission, and Feynman. William Rogers was not technical and shied away from ego battles, not so with Drs. Feynman and Keel. And it was Keel who kept Feynman’s portion of the Final Report relegated to the Appendix.
to whit,
”The chief conflict, according to several participants, was between Mr. Rogers and Dr. Richard P. Feynman, the Nobel Prize-winning physicist from the California Institute of Technology. They repeatedly clashed not only on how harshly to criticize NASA but also on how to conduct the investigation and deal with the press.
Indeed, only last week Dr. Feynman threatened to dissent from the commission's final report unless a section that he had written, which Mr. Rogers considered too harsh and emotional, was included as he had composed it. That last-minute fracas was resolved through the mediation of Maj. Gen. Donald J. Kutyna of the Air Force, a commission member who, through the course of the proceedings, became a close friend of Dr. Feynman. General Kutyna cautioned today that the issue involved only a few words and had been resolved to the satisfaction of all.
From the start, Dr. Feynman, known for his brilliant and original intellectual forays, was impatient with committee meetings, bureaucratic planning, formal hearings and detailed discussions of the best way to word reports. As far as he was concerned, the way to investigate a problem was to venture out as an individual and have long talks with the technical people who could explain everything they knew about the shuttle technology and its problems. |
And you do an excellent job of hiding it, I must say. 😬
I think there might possibly be some screws that need a little tightening. |
