I just want to report I took out all my good power cords and located the power cords supplied by the manufacturer for each piece of gear I had, and put them in. I then let them burn-in for three days. The sound was horrid - excruciating amounts of grain, hardness, thinness. If all you wanted from a high end system was power and attack then you might have liked it. But if you wanted Ella's voice to sound like Ella, you would stop listening and go out and listen to Josephine Bloggs at the local Jazz Joint. I put the good stuff back and there it shall stay. That is my sole contribution to this post. Since the object of our hobby is enjoyment of music, the only meaningful dialogue here for me is how to improve this enjoyment. All else is RHUBARB! |
Thanks for the advice guys. But Dekay, since it would invalidate the warranty if I fixed the incompetently designed power supplies in my components (no doubt mr702 could send me instructions, but not being of his stature I would no doubt fail to implement them competently anyhow), I intend to follow Fpeel's advice and have booked a session with a hypnotist. I am hoping said hypnotist can reinforce my deluded expectation that my system will improve every time I play a new disc (I shall call it the theory of infinite burn-in), but to also reinforce my expection that the system will sound worse whenever I try any piece of new equipment (which will of course be due to my expectation that it will never catch up with the burnt-in state of my existing components). If mr702's theories are correct then I should be enjoying musical and fiscal bliss very shortly. |
Just want to say thanks for all the negative votes for my last post, since it matched my expectation that only the voiceless weasels would respond. 702, you are right this expectation thing works! |
Jhunter, in response to your "honestly, honestly don't understand why people are reluctant to evaluate components in this fashion". I can only give you my reasons, but suspect that they may overlap with others'. I find ABX testing provides far too short a listening experience where the listeners are trying to discern differences in the equipment, not trying to enjoy music. It is my opinion that we all try to objectify too much when we describe how a component sounds, and that we are better to just try relaxing into the groove of the music when evaluating equipment. I have learnt when evaluating a component to just put it in place and then forget about it. After a few days, maybe a week (ignoring burn-in time) I get a sense of how much I am enjoying the music. When I am not enjoying it I start to get objective and try to identify what is going on. When I have developed a hypothesis I test it by swapping out the new item for its predecessor. Sometimes I get an overwhelming sense of relief from doing this, not always easy to objectively describe, but clearly the new product had been reducing my ability to relax into the groove of the music.
I don't think that what an individual needs in order to get enjoyment out of music is easy to objectify, much less measure. This is because electronically recorded and reproduced music is not the same as the naturalness of the real thing, and in order to recreate the feeling of the real thing the brain has to do a lot of work. Exactly which distortions tax the brain most, or distract the brain most from relaxing into the groove are not captured by measurements of THD in my experience.
I find that in ABX testing (which I have had some experience of), I can only readily identify what I perceive to be differences relating to tonal colorations, grain, dynamics and transparency. I often find that understanding the differences in PRAT, for example, or naturalness of the way sounds start and stop, as another example, take me longer. I theorise that this is because these issues only become meaningful when you are just trying to enjoy the music, not when you are trying to objectify the sound. And yet these two issues are critical requirements for me in a music system.
And by the way, I have reported elsewhere here the results of an ABX test I did with two other listeners with respect to power cables. The differences were readily discernable for me even in an ABX, because there were clear differences in that the stock cable imposed a grain on the sound and suffered some upper-midrange ringing. |
702, it sounds like you have played with as many power supplies as me. And yet unlike you I don't find exotic PCs silly. I did find them silly before I tried them though - which I guess is the difference between you and me. You illustrate this point even further when you comment about "exceptional quality systems that ... couldn't possibly be improved by adding any [PCs]." How can you know that if you didn't even try.
You see I think your mind misunderstands useful theory as completely explaining natural phenomena, and you simply deduce everything from that theory. This is not scientific at all, it is pompous and short-sighted. (I don't mean to be insulting because I am guilty of being pompous and short-sighted about things I am highly educated in - usually the ones I am most educated in).
Where I do agree with you is concerning the ludicrous claims of the marketers who are paid to sell audiophiles on manufacturers' product. Anyone that has a business with shareholders is obliged to do this. You tell them what is legal, but otherwise anything that will sell the product. Some of the advertisements and "piffle" on web sites is a hoot. But there is only one difference between the audiophiles that fall for it and yourself - the fact you are better educated in electronics theory. Otherwise they are just like you and deduce from a scientific theory whether something will be beneficial or not. You and they fall into the trap of believing in the completeness of a theory.
For example, there might hypothetically be unequivocal evidence to your satisfaction that a shielded interconnect cable will sound better than an identical unshielded cable. And so as the hypothetical pioneer of shielded interconnect cables I might write some convincing rubbish for the masses that gets them into a lather that they just have to have my cables. Both you and the ignorant masses would be wrong to conclude that my cable was better than all other cables, provided there was some other parameter that affected the performance of a cable. Hypothetically my cables might use steel conductors and a competitors' might use copper. The dilemna that you do not address is how do you decide whether the shielded steel cable will outperform the unshielded copper cable. The answer seems simple to me - you listen to them. For you it appears to me that you would prefer to see what a 'scope tells you than by listening. But how can the scope identify which form of distortion is most likely to reduce the listener's enjoyment?
Of course the example includes two issues (shielding and conductivity) that you probably accept as influential on the sound, and a dilemma that can be resolved - ie. get a shielded copper cable. But it is not always that simple. And where we have the problem incessantly in these argumentative posts, is where experienced audiophiles hear a difference, and you deny that report because of your pompous and short-sighted belief that you know everything that there is to know about reproducing music electronically. Frankly 702, that is just as much a "hoot" as some of the claims of the copywriters working for the cable manufacturers. |
Fpeel, we have three choices. First, engage with 702, arguably letting him get our goats, but possibly driving the debate to some conclusion (eg. Jostler). Second, ignore him completely, thereby causing new (and other)posters here to be intimidated from posting any of their opinions, in fear of unchallenged attacks from the likes of 702. Third, not reply to 702's posts but vote against him.
I agree that there are problems with the first alternative. But I am more concerned about the second alternative as I have seen this outcome eventuate elsewhere and this forum therefore degenerate into the closed-minded talking to the closed-minded, getting solace from being right. The third option may be preferred by some, but I see it as the weasle's way out. If I disagree or disapprove, then I do not intend to hide behind the voting system.
Therefore, regardless of 702's motives, I feel the necessity to react to his contradictory position. If he, as you suggest, continues to post asinine comments here purely to feed his immature need to get a reaction then I reckon he will get a reaction until he grows up or goes away. If this feeds his need for attention, he is one very sick puppy, and most certainly not one that should be left to intimidate posters here. |
Frap, I did not mean to imply I would react negatively if 702 surprised me by posting something of positive value, nor did I mean to imply I want to see him go the way of Jostler.
702 is what I call "on it". When people are "on it" they bang away repeating the same point ad nauseum and don't leave room for conversation and transfer of knowledge. I want 702 to get "off it" and contribute to conversations in a way that allows for others' views and new discoveries. I have no problem with 702 posting his thoughts, experiences, opinions or beliefs. But his style and derision for others here are "on it" to an extent that is highly detrimental to enlightened discussion.
Fpeel, I reserve RHUBARB for when I am too exasperated to continue to fight the good fight. I feel a RHUBARB phase approaching. |
Jhunter, if anyone criticises you for posting what you hear, then the RHUBARB cavalry will be on your side. |
I will try to help you Fpeel, but have no more real understanding than you of what is going on. Mmccoy, the scepticism in your question seems to spring from an assumption that the only purpose of a power cord is to transfer volts and current from the wall to the component. If that were so then I reckon I would be with you on this one, and a few years ago felt the same way. In much playing with power cords I have come to believe that you can tailor the sound to some degree with use of different geometry (at least) and seems to be through manipulating resonance of some sort. I have first-hand experience of making power cords perform this trick. Secondly, cable geometry and shielding can reduce noise. I theorise that we are talking about harmonics in the audio band, caused by high frequency noise getting onto the line. Neither the harmonic issue or the RF or EMI noise issue are controversial, but it appears that the nay-sayers believe that the components' power supplies will do this job much better than a few feet of cable will and so disbelieve that it happens. In the end, you need to listen to a few power cords and decide for yourself whether or not there is a difference. The majority of nay-sayers on this site with respect to this subject do not appear to have done that. |
Mmccoy. I cannot help thinking you are falling into a trap that many or perhaps all of us have fallen into from time to time, and that some here seem to be utterly captured by. It is important in any endeavour like ours to have some basis for guessing which direction might lead to progress with enjoying reproduced music. This means we naturally develop theories. The trap I refer to is believing that our prevailing theories are sufficient and complete that we need to do no more than deduce knowledge from them. My experience does not support your deductions that power supplies render power cord quality as redundant, nor your conclusions that the sound difference must be small, nor the conclusion that at 53 you would not hear the difference.
In the end you must decide whether the many here that agree with me have sufficient credibility with you to cause you to try some decent power cords. I was sceptical when I first tried a decent power cord but was open minded enough to give it a try and just listen - in my case, not expecting to hear anything at all different. What I have found is that the difference between different power cords is very similar to the difference between speaker cables in my system. Depending on your perspective this is either a lot, not much, or nothing at all. For me, it is a lot.
Therefore I am happy to spend a similar amount on power cords as I have spent on my speaker cables. If you think I am just deluded by marketing, then I would add that the first decent power cord I tried, was before I ever saw any advertisement or review or recommendation for esoteric power cords. My local dealer simply handed two to me and said "try these and tell me what you think". Believe me, I have tried lots of his suggestions and returned the kit later and told him what a load of junk they were. |
Hi Frap. Thanks for the help - I hope Mmccoy realises we are trying to help, not beat him into submission. Good PCs on electrostatic speakers do indeed have a significant effect, in my repeated experience. The standard cords sound as if detail has been smoothed over, there is an upper midrange ringing, and the soundstage shrinks. The ringing problem can be reduced by using RF blocking capsules on the power cord, but it does not improve the other issues. |
I find myself in general agreement Mmccoy. There are indeed diminishing returns beyond the competent cables such as Synergistic Research AC Master Coupler etc. But there are also different flavours of sound to be had. And these reasonably priced cables do have compromises - eg. some eliminate noise well but add warmth and diminish dynamics to some extent. We will never get the identical sound of the real thing at home, and we all have different values on the next small step along the way. |
I have had a psychologist friend of mine look at the posts made by 702 here. It is perhaps unfair of me to quote his diagnosis fully, particularly the bits about the kinds of events in his past that might have caused 702's dysfunctional interactions. Sadly we are likely to be the closest friends he has and he knows no other way to get our attention and love. You are right in one thing Albert - it is pity he deserves. |
