I am trying to understand why power cords can make a difference.
It makes sense to me that interconnects and speaker cables make a difference. They are dealing with a complex signal that contains numerous frequencies at various phases and amplitudes. Any change in these parameters should affect the sound.
A power cord is ideally dealing with only a single frequency. If the explanation is RF rejection, then an AC regeneration device like PS Audio’s should make these cords unnecessary. I suppose it could be the capacitance of these cables offering some power factor correction since the transformer is an inductive load.
The purpose of my post is not to start a war between the “I hear what I hear so it must be so” camp and the “you’re crazy and wasting your money,” advocates. I am looking for reasons. I am hoping that someone can offer some valid scientific explanations or point me toward sources of this information. Thanks.
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, if you are married and I blindfold you, are you certain you can identify a kiss from your life long partner? It would make the experience even more difficult with a room full of people waiting on the outcome while you sat in darkness.
Maybe to make things even more difficult, you could put a clothes pin on your nose, and wear latex gloves. That way, you are so involved in the test and thinking about all the accoutrements, that you prove only that you are unaccustomed to this new experience in your failure. If you prefer testing the test, or enjoy proving that multiple confusing situations can make humans error, your method is great.
Judging your responses, you must not have auditioned any quality aftermarket cords in your own system. If you had, you would not be discussing tests, but rather contributing to this forum with your experiences and what worked for you.
I do not understand those who visit this site, primarily based on discussion of the tools needed to improve a stereo, then proceed to argue that the tools do not matter. Perhaps you cannot hear the difference in your system, and therefore find comfort in dismissing the experiences of others.
Therefore, I also issue a challenge. I would be pleased to host a session at my home, and I am willing for as many members of Audiogon to be included as will comfortably fit into my listening room. I can assure at least three members from the manufacturing side of the audio community to be here, as well as last years Grammy award winner for classical music.
Our test will be simply to first listen to my system with all Purist Audio Dominus cables for a few hours and acclimate everyone to the sound and become comfortable with the environment. Next, I remove all of the Purist Cables, and replace them with the factory supplied cords. If you can honestly say that the sound is the same in both situations, you will find yourself the only one in the room that comes to that conclusion.
No blindfold is needed, no switching back and forth required. It is a very simple test. Perhaps the money you put up for your test in CA could be used to purchase an economy ticket to Dallas via Southwest Airlines. I will gladly pick you up at the airport and buy dinner.
We're all suggestable to a very great degree. It's important to understand what purely AUDIBLE differences in components exist, and I really don't understand why people are so very reluctant to examine components in a sound-only context.
I proposed a listening challenge for power cords that was pretty much a win-only proposition for those willing to participate. So far, for whatever reason there are no takers although that likely is due to geographic constraints (I'm in the San Jose, CA area; some Southern CA folks indicated an interest and we're trying to set something up). Or it could be that people don't want to find out that the Emporer has no clothes.
That being said, if people enjoy their system better knowing that they have broken-in 4 gauge PCs, more power (!) to them, I guess.
R-kiwi, to follow up. I too have experienced numerous occasions of third parties commenting on audible difference --so, what can I say? I am suggestible, granted. What about the other persons?
Which brings me to the title question in this thread which, I think, hasn't been fully answered. I know of only one public acceptance of "differences" in conductors, both analogue & digital -- and explanation. This was made by the French PPC (I posted about that in another thread, a while back).
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.
Before someone else jumps on it, let me be the one to respond to Redkiwi with, "That's because you expected it to sound bad. There's no way power cords can make a difference." Not because I believe it, but because the responses have become so predictable. Maybe this way we can get a chuckle instead of an argument out of it. Thanks for the insight, RK.
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!
Steve, Thank-you for your fine critique of my writing, it means a lot to me. In answer to your question, no I believe Science and experimenting from hobbyists worked hand and hand to develop audio to where it is today. I also believe that is how it will grow beyond this point. To bad 702, and a few others choose not to work together with us to move forward, but have taken the tact of blank denial. As far as the rest of your post................... .......... any one who must try to pump up his chest feathers by letting us all know of his extensive professional experience so we accept his view, must in deed be a weak player. (Please see the past couple months of Mr. 702 postings This man has too often shoved his "knowledge" and "experience as ..." down my throat that yes, I am choking. The way he has chosen to separate himself from the hobbyist only strengthens my "attack". J.D.
Stevemj, I'm sure you know what you mean when you explained to us what you meant to say. That is you explained what 702 meant and that means exactly what you mean too, doesn't it? If you really did not mean what you say you said, and it does not apply to 702, then it is you that needs the spanking, and I will wager that 702 will apply same with some cheap interconnects and power cables. Or is that what you really came here for?
J.D. - Your logic about the development of audio is odd. If I understand what you are saying, electronics and acoustics did not exist before advances in audio were made. Theil and Small, for example, made their contributions before the existence of loudspeakers? And they did it by dusting off their high school math books and doing a little figuring. You honestly believe that scientific and engineering ability have only played a minor role in the advancement of audio?
More importantly your post to 702 is rude. It is a personal attack. You deserve a good spanking. It is also poorly constructed. You say,"I understand you have this image of yourself as a great mind in audio". Can you justifiy this statement? You clearly resent that he tries to pass some of the simpler things he understands along, but that does not imply that he thinks he is a great mind in audio. You are just being insulting. Then you say "you have no right to claim your knowledge in home audio brings you any closer to an understanding of components performance than I or others here at AudiogoN do." First, he doesn't say this. Second, if he did, you now need to explain why someone trained in electronics would not have the right to claim more understanding of electronic components than those without training. Your justification for saying this is that YOU have the right to claim to know more because of 40 years of "experience". You accuse him of arrogance and then suggest you are the one who knows the most. "Your delusions of grandeur", do you really believe that he has delusions of grandeur or are you just being deliberately offensive? Now you switch to goobledygook. The meaningless term "reality of audio reproduction" is supposed to be more significant than theory. Did you mean "music" but wanted something that sounded fancy? You finish off with an insult ("come down off your throne"), some nonsense (your ideas are only ideas with not practical application), sarcasm ("Thank you for your attempt to teach us") and some arrogance (he should learn from people who think like you).
Come on 702, the true pioneers in audio design "defined and created" electronics, acoustics, music, and psycho acoustics. For you to twist that fact and have these pioneers designing only after they learned yet undiscovered areas of electronics is, well just plan silly. I understand you have this image of yourself as a great mind in audio, that's fine we all have our delusions. But you have no right to claim your knowledge in home audio brings you any closer to an understanding of components performance than I or others here at AudiogoN do. It sounds to me that in my 40 years I've learned more with real life practical experience than your commercial experience has taught you regarding home audio. Your delusion of grandeur over this topic is sadly misplaced, if you for one moment would open your mind to the reality of audio reproduction rather than the theory, I think you would make a great addition to this discussion. Until you are able to come down off your throne and walk with us peasants, your ideas are just that, ideas with no practical application. Thank-you for your attempts to teach us, but maybe the teachers are the masses here, maybe the student should sit down and start to listen. J.D.
702, are you not also making a boastful claim when you are telling others that PCs do not make a difference. Thats a boastful claim to make about others that you know nothing about. I have no idea why one PC can sound different than another PC because unlike you I am technicality ignorant. Do you believe that Jcbtubes, myself and others are hearing things that are not really there? Do you believe that we like spending this kind of money for PCs that are no better than a standard Beldon PC? Am I really fooling myself? I would offer you a PC that IMO makes a huge difference but I get the feeling you have a need to be right more than a need to make your system sound better. If I am wrong just let me know and I will loan you a FIM PC for two weeks. BTW 702, I picked up a couple of CDs that you recommended. They were very good, thanks.
702,I mostly agree with your last paragraph to me, regarding the "creative process" and older tube cicuits. There is a falacy existant that in MODERN circuits,there still is this cookbook recipie, that tubes produce coloration and sweetness and SS cicuits produce accuracy and extention at frequency extremes. Tube circuitry today can achieve sonic nuetrality should the designer wish it that way. The human voice is the most difficult thing to accurately reproduce. I have yet to hear a SS circuit (amp or preamp) get the voice as accurate as the Tube units. How do I know? We used to do live vs. recorded tests on the Ampex ATR-100 . We used flamenco guitar and voice. The musicians themselves (amatuer) would always say when the ARC tube amps were in the chain, "Thats us". When Phase Linear, Stax, and Bryston were used (late 70s), the remarks were "thats not us anymore". Now I realize the gap has narrowed today, but not sure if it will ever be closed.And BTW, there were 3 different types of loudspeakers in the room. The results were consistant on all three. Regarding great audio pioneers, who in your mind were they?
Jcbtubes: Who are the losers musically speaking? That's a boastful claim to make about people you know nothing about.
Jadem6: The true pioneers in audio design made a point of understanding electronics, acoustics, music, and psychoacoustics. Without knowing these, you can't know what to do, why to do it, what to improve, and what the difference is between real and imagined. True audio pioneers learn the strengths and weaknesses of components, test equipment, and yes, the human ear. True audio pioneers aren't guys who got their hands on some fancy braided copper wire and simply proclaimed it "better" without any knowledge. True audio pioneers aren't guys who come up with flaky New-Age pseudoscience like power cords resonating and thereby altering room acoustics or strangling the bass and stuff like that.
Frap: Many people do like the distortion and coloration that tubes impart to the audio. That's your preference, and there's nothing wrong with that. My own playback preference is to be able to reproduce the recording as accurately as possible, with any intentional distortions left to the recording side because that is part of the creative process, where IMHO all's fair if it gets the artist and producer what they want.
A week ago I pulled the Absolute Power Cords out of my system and visiting my brother put these into his system. As I was installing them he asked how much they cost. I told him $40 each, he could not understand why someone would spend so much on power cords. My brother has a very nice system but is only nominally interested in the equipment involved. He has purchased all of his components based on my advice and has done no research of his own other than listening to some of these in my system.
Back to the power cords, after listening for a short while he was extremely impressed, describing the sound with the new power cords as "a lot cleaner" and stating "the difference is huge". After listening for an hour or so we left and as we did I pulled the cords out of his system. He asked me what I was doing and I told him I was going to let someone else audition them. When we dropped off the cables my brother found out that I was loaning these out for two weeks until I was scheduled to return to the area.
I was very surprised by my brothers reaction when he found out that these cables were not going back in his system that day (which he somehow got the impression was going to happen, and thinkig permanently as well). As we left I could see by his countenance and his comments that I had somehow betrayed him by not leaving the cables with him. I got the distinct impression that some "blood is thicker than water" type mindset was operating in him and it did not make a lot of sense for me to leave these with a non-family member, especially for two weeks. He got over it soon afterward, but it was really apparent how disappointed he really was.
Reading Trellja's and Albert Porter's last comments on this thread also brought to mind how I have felt about being without my cords for this period. I have hardly listened to my own system at all, and there has been no excitement when I have done so. Tonight (Thursday) is one of the few nights during the week that I am able to listen at length to my system and I have listened to anything yet. This is completely contrary to a principle that I choose to live by which is to try to be content in whatever circumstance I find myself in. My username, in fact, refers to this principle which is written about in the Bible. God bless.
Steve, The boombox example does not apply here. We are dealing with the top 3% of the market here. My amp distortion could approach 1 percent, and these differences will still be clearly audible. Ran old McIntosh MC-60s and PILOT tube gear from the 50s with distortion levels that were sky high. Same result. BTW. I have never said that expensive meant better, just that a change in sonic character occurs. As far as the 50 or 100 foot extention cord idea, get ready for huge losses in resolution and dynamics.
Steven: I cannot see that it does with my setup. I do not have the spec's for my amp, but have to guess that the distortion is fairly high considering the output tubes used and the sensativity of the speakers. With the right tubes the 300B amp also offers more detail (except in the bass) than my Musical Fidelity amp which is solid state. This again seems to go against the grain. The distortion spec's on the Musical Fidelity amp are outstanding as far as spec's go.
Frap and Dekay - The system distortion has to have something to do with the ability to hear the contribution of line cord doesn't it? I mean, if you put a killer line cord on a boom box, would that gain you something? Maybe I have it upside down. I used to manufacture power inverters. Most of them put out a modified squarewave - lots of harmonics. Cheap equipment would buzz. Good gear sounded OK.
Doug - Makes sense to me. Nothing wrong with well put together line cords.
stevemj, i'm sure all here will be innerested in yer li'l test. re: science, i'm not arguing that it hasn't gotten us this far, all i'm saying is it's *only* gotten us this far. it obviously hasn't gotten us far enuff to explain differences heard in cabling.
myself, i also don't have fancy powercords, except for the two that came w/my vansevers unlimiters, one currently (ha-ha!) used for my amps, the other for my sources. not that i don't tink fancy cords wood help my system, but it's not in my budget. until i get the other components where i want 'em (gettin' real close, now), i've felt i shoodn't spend the bucks on powercords. but, stimulated to do cable research, based upon the hoopla over the relatively cheap absolute powercord, i've recently come up w/the source of cabling that tek line uses (http://www.teklineaudio.com/). their powercords, which, at ~$400 retail for a 6' cord, are supposed to be excellent at the price, in their own right. well, i can buy the cabling @ $3.55/ft, get hospital-grade plugs-n-iec's for ~$10-$15 apiece, so i tink isle roll my own for my amps, pre, tuna, & fono-stage. if there's no earth-shattering improvement, i'm not gonna be upset about the minimal inwestment...
Dekay is correct that measured distortion has nothing to do with the changes you will or wont hear. I did the experiments 20 years ago before exotic PCs existed. Back then all we had were cords by giant commercial cable companys,(like Belden, Columbia, Woods etc.) Even with the off the shelf wire, some large gains were made by trial and error. Also different solid core lines from the breaker to the outlet made dramatic differences. Blindfolding is nonsense. The truth of the matter is evident with living with the changes you have made. If your change was positive, you will know it as you listen. If negative, you will want to turn the whole thing off, as fatigue sets in. I do not think the whole ABX crowd is really in tune with listening to music over extended periods, because there is little doubt in the changes being real once you listen long and hard.....Frank
Stevemj: I don't beleive that measured distortion has a lot to do with hearing the differences (in my setup anyway). I use a 300B tube SET amp which must rate rather high on the distortion scale and almost every piece of cable that I have tried has a different sonic signature. I have tried many commercial 12 gage and 14 gage extension cords (as you are about to do) in my setup and they all suck by adding a harshness to the sound (a 50 footer actually made the images smaller and the sound stage had less height. If you have used the cords as I do (outside with power tools) be sure and clean the contacts well (mine were filthy).
I disagree Steve. I think science followed audio design. The true pioneers in audio designer are DIY not text books! Audio has grown because kids built systems with Heath kit and the like, then tried other components, no science there, not in a 9 year old soldering with his dad!
Doug - I don't have any fancy line cords. I will try the following experiment. I do have a 100 foot very ordinary extention cord. I have heard people report that even changing a 6 ft cord to a 3 ft cord made a difference. So, I will run my system thru 100 ft of cheap cord and see what happens.
I suspect that if I hear a difference people here will belive me. If I don't hear a difference people will assume that my system is bad or my hearing is bad or that after 6 ft of cheap line cord it can't get any worse.
Which brings up a question. Just how low does the distorion of ones system have to be before it becomes possible to hear the additional problems caused by cheap line cords.
And, science is what makes the marvelous equipment we have possible. Scientists and engineers understand and design amplifiers, preamps, digital and analogy recording and play back technology. Non-scientists make line cords and speaker wire and can't explain how even they work.
Thank you for your comments Albert. You are quite correct. My friend was sceptical, and his bandmate had no idea at all about wire. His feeling was that there were no gains to be made via something like this. Now, both are not only believers, but unwilling to give up these gains. My friend has been opening his eyes to our hobby(and how to merge it into pro audio) to the point where he may just join me at the Hifi show in New York City this weekend. I call that a metamorphosis. I only wish the nonbelievers or "flatlanders"(I told you that they are anything but objective to me) would open their ears and minds to the differences brought about by wire(and analog, and electronics, and tubes...). Perhaps all they need to do is to go out and listen.
Doug will be pleased to know that JHunter did apologise, thank you JH. I understand why scientists get so excercised about attacks on their understanding of the physical world: at the trade schools like M.I.T and CalTech, they don't get any philosophy or literature to broaden their understanding of reality. Newton and Descartes called themselves "natural philosophers", an appelation more in line with attempting to find the causes of observed effects. The natural philosophers had a better grasp of their limitations. Today, "scientists" are trained to "believe" in "physical laws". If you can measure it, it's true. Textbooks discuss things like the "discovery" of the electron but no one's seen an electron, only the tracks they leave. But electron theory explains those tracks and so there is science until Schrodinger, Planck and Heisenberg come along and stumble across "quanta" which behave differently. So they invent quantum mechanics that explains that behavior within the confines of existing electron theory. The math works,the observable phenomena conform to the math and once again we have "science". What we don't have is fact, only theory. Now theory is a wonderful thing. Electron, or Quantum Theory is really good at predicting things that can't be seen or otherwise verified. But Theory by it's very nature is open-ended and that's why it's valuable. When theory becomes a belief system, that's when things get messy and natural philosophers become techies. Or as I like to call them, acolytes. Now, while us Audiogoners were slinging electrons at each other, 2 Israeli teenagers, a 4 month old Palestinian and lot's of others were killed over a belief system. That's cause for anger. Kinda puts power cords in perspective, yes? It also makes you wonder what this discussion would be like if we are all in a room instead of safely ensconced behind our keyboards? I do heavy, physical work all day. Anybody wanna fight?
Thank you Trelja for relating your experience. These musicians went into this test with healthy scepticism, and were drawn closer to the performance by the (unexpected) improvement.
This appears to be identical to what many of us experience with pre recorded media in our audio systems. In either case, getting closer to the music is an experience that you won't give up, once you have a taste.
stevemj, in yer second post to this thread, ewe say it all, & i'm sure everyone who feels power cords make a sonic difference wood agree w/ewe. you say:
"...If your Purist cord does improve the sound it is because of some phenomenon outside the known laws of science..."
NO KIDDING!!! so stop denying what others hear, yust cuz yer science is so INADEQUATE!!! is yer science's INADEQUACY why yure so afraid to listen yerself?
jordan, in yer recent post, ewe yump all over kitch29, saying:
"Your lack of knowledge of science, electronics, audio, the definition of a theory, EVERYTHING that you mention in your diatribe is so staggering as to be beyond comprehension. The number and magnitude of fundamental errors in your post is truly frightening"...."You'd be wise to take a beginning science or engineering course, and get at least a modicum of understanding (rather than just pretending to) before spewing forth as you just did. It's really quite embarrassing."
the only ting frightening or embarrassing is yer response to his post. basically, all he's saying is what stevemj said, only it took him a bit longer... ;~)
i suggest *ewe* wood be wise to go thru his post & refute each of his "fundemental errors" one-by-one, before condemning what he says in such an off-hand, non-descript, rhetorical & rude fashion.
Jordan, the musicians did not test the cords blindly. They knew exactly what they were using. Please see my post in this thread dated May 4th. My friend was using the cord, and was happy. A recording session went REALLY well. Later, he switched back to the stock cord and was playing and seemed to be in a funk for a few days. Something just didn't sound right. Was it his playing, did he need new strings, etc.? He decided to try the cord I gave him again. Instantly, everything snapped back to what he had grown accustomed to. He then tried the copper cord, and gave the silver one to his bandmate. Then, they switched. After a week or two, these two guys who belonged to the "wire is wire" philosophy were cable converts. Not only were they able to determine that the better cords bested their stock cords, they were able to describe in detail why they preferred the sound of the silver cord over the copper one. In fact, their descriptions completely mirrored those of us audiophiles who are partial to silver. It was superior to copper in terms of detail, microdynamics, immediacy, speed, and presence(the word they keep going back to). For these guys, the quality of silver more than offsets the quantity of copper. So, I am sorry but the improvement in a power cord over a stock cord is most definitely not just a function of larger conductors.
Bill Lowe, the founder of Audioquest explained it to me once. He said first, their power cable uses better quality copper, also a few solid core conductors shielded from each other instead of cheap skinny copper and many conductors laying on top of each other. The thicker copper made it easier to draw power and the aftermarket powercords have better shielding. All the rest of the stuff he told me went way over my head and therefore I don't remeber! It did make a big difference on my DC-1 though. The strangest tweak of them all is the sorbothane feet because both my collegue and myself noticed a difference but couldn't tell you what it was, although someone else who had them noticed a difference and was able to put the difference into words for me.
Elizabeth- I like your story, but... you may be confusing Apsaras with Asuras. Apsaras are more likely to be making the music that the Devas are appreciating. For power cords I understand that they prefer the Shunyata King Cobras, of course.
New update on musicians using power cords on their guitar amps. This evaluation was performed by two people in the same band, using different guitars and amps(their own equipment). The contenders were the stock power cords, and two I submitted to them. Each of the two I provided were from the same company, with the same construction geometry. They differed in both wire material and gauge. One was silver, using 13 gauge conductors. The other was copper, with 8 gauge conductors. I feel the timing of their comments is a Godsend, considering this thread. The following are their opinions, not mine. First of all, both feel that TREMENDOUS improvements were made to their sound over the stock cords. So, both are now converts to "audiophile" power cords. Previously, both thought this was all BS. Belonging to the "wire is wire" club. Both felt the silver cord to be significantly better than the copper, despite its featuring much smaller conductors. The copper sounded duller, more lifeless, and less real. The silver had a presence that they were not used to. A realness that they do not want to give up. The knock on the silver cable is it would not be roadworthy. They also asked about the possibility of making our own, which would stand up to the rigors of playing out. I have accepted the challenge, and feel that we will build our "ultimate power cord" within the next couple of months. I will build three. One for each of us. It will be silver, featuring a silver male end(if anyone is aware of a source of a silver IEC connector, I would be most appreciative). Guage should come in between 6 and 10 AWG. It will feature a rugged jacket and plugs. Possibly a braid. Yet, it will look very sedate. The reason being people steal stuff that looks interesting, and we don't want our cable to look interesting to anyone. I will evaluate this cable in my system, using both my CD player and integrated amplifier. If results are promising, I will start a thread regarding the cord. I now feel that anyone who doubts the sonic differences of a power cord to be anything but "objective", and will stop referring to such people as what they have traditionally been called.
I actually took the time to read every post in this thread and I conclude that there has been very little dialog. There's alot of chest pounding and pontificating, but little communication. To the people who "believe" in power cords, I don't question your ability to hear differences, but I question whether you have put your aural perception in its proper perspective. Are the changes you hear muscially important or are they just audiophile BS? To those who don't "understand" power cords, try the following test. Get two identical CD players and two of each test discs. Site each CD player on identical surfaces and connect them with identical interconnects. The only variable will be the power cords. Start up each CD at the same time and switch back and forth using the preamp input switch. See if you hear a difference. It's alright if you do -- it's alright if you don't.
Your lack of knowledge of science, electronics, audio, the definition of a theory, EVERYTHING that you mention in your diatribe is so staggering as to be beyond comprehension. The number and magnitude of fundamental errors in your post is truly frightening.
You'd be wise to take a beginning science or engineering course, and get at least a modicum of understanding (rather than just pretending to) before spewing forth as you just did. It's really quite embarrassing.
Stevemj. I am not opposed to ideas, only to comments that scientific evidence is necessary to prove that something works. I am very confident of my hearing and the results of my testing. I think that if those of you that disagree that power cords make a difference could hear a test on my system, you would understand. The differences are so dramatic, that even within a large group of listeners, there is no doubt as to the change.
I never claim that only one (certain) power cord or interconnect is the perfect answer. In fact, differences in power cords are sometime inconsistent between one piece of equipment and another. I have no explanation for this, I only know it that is audible, repeatable and difficult to explain. My wish is that those of you that are driven toward the scientific method could find instruments that measure what many of us are hearing. Both sides would have a better understanding and perhaps these methods could assist with design that current technology cannot address.
I don't expect to ever solve all the problems of reproduction of music as it is far too complex. However, the person who asserts that a particular product cannot possibly make a difference, has no chance of solving these problems, because they close their mind to the opportunity of learning something new.
My rejection of ABX or double blind testing, is not because I dismiss this testing procedure for all things, but rather because it is not applicable to a complicated music system. Power cables in my system (as a specific example) radically change sound simply by picking up a cable and letting it drop to the floor. The same disturbance occurs when I gently pick up my amp to change an isolation device under it.
No other mechanical or electrical change is required, the amp may simply be picked up and set back down with the same disruption of sound. The return to the original sound requires from five to fifteen minutes. Such strange behavior from wire is why I consider it impossible to do ABX testing. Humans cannot ignore this initial change (moving the equip) and confuse that first impression with (being) the final result. Worse, by switching multiple times in a single evening, to equalize the ABX test, the cable is disrupted so often, it is never totally correct.
I wish you and 702 lived close enough to do a relaxed listening session with me. It would be a slow process, because I am likewise convinced that we are all affected by the presence (and attitude) of a new visitor/listener as well. In the end, I am certain there would be little to disagree about, provided we stayed the course with the music and the possibility of learning.
I'm going to take a whack at this and would first like to establish my credentials. My experience with the scientific aspect of electronics is limited to the DYNA ST-40 amp I built back in the 70's. When I was done and put the cover on the box, I was struck by the little yellow label that said, "caution, no user serviceable parts inside". Truer for me than, I suspect, for many kit builders. However, I do know a few things about science and the philosophy of science. One of those is that there is something called "electron theory". No one, not any of us or any Nobel Laureate KNOWS what electrons do or if they even exist as the theory supposes. It is just that, a theory. I regard audio equipment designers, for that reason, as wizards in the true sense. They manipulate forces beyond their understanding to perform miraculous feats. Stevemj and 70242, on the other hand, are like the 14th generation of high priests who keep the scrolls that they can't read but you'd better not look directly into the eyes of the idol or you'll be struck down. Way back when, kids rolled paper into a cone, stuck a needle through the narrow end and held the needle to one of dad's 78's while it rotated on the Webcor. Sound ensued. How much difference is there between that and a Goldmund Reference? Only one of degree. One has a suspension based on theory, the cone doesn't. One has amplification of the vibrations based on theory, the cone doesn't. The child with the cone doesn't know why there is sound, but empirically, there is. The modern turntable designer likewise doesn't know, although he'll probably tell you he does. His work is the result of empirical observation and a "belief system" grounded in a theory, not in fact. We laugh at the notion of an 18th century Dutch scientist who believed a little person he called a "homonculous" bent the light through a prism. Everyone knows that Newton "proved" that the light was bent due to the refractive nature of the glass' shape. Yet, we don't know why that particular shape bends the light, only that it does. Electromagnetic theory "supposes" invisible, "sub-atomic" particles that have cause and effect. We can only observe the gross consequences of the theory. Where a finer understanding is desired, such as what is going on inside a power cord or a transformer, with impossibly tiny amounts of a theoretical concept called "current", we rely once again on empiricism, not objective truth. Ohm's Law is not a law. It is a mathematical formula that allows "theorists" to predict the behavior of current, which, once again, is part of a theoretical model. Heisenberg's "Uncertainty Principle", while elegant and brilliant, is more of an apology for the inability to observe energy than an attempt to explain it. When the so-called "objectivists" deride the notion of our tweaks, condescending to admit that perhaps any audible differences stem from something "outside of the LAWS of science, as we know them", that is the worst sort of hypocrisy and a telltale that they have no understanding of the true Science that lies at the foundation of rational thought.They are simply acolytes who guard a temple of their own creation to defend themselves against forces they do not understand.
Dear All, I've certainly read a number of interesting theories on why PCs make a difference. RF/EMI rejection, bigger guage "pipe" to supply electrical power, bandpass filter effects, various sound differences between metal types and purity, mechnical vibrational effects, soldering techniques, noise cancellation techniques and the dielectric content to name a few. Here's a thought. I've read about but never experienced the PS Audio PowerPlants. I've read that changing the output frequency can effect the sound. Sometimes better, sometimes worse. Perhaps the PC is merely removing certain frequencies from the incoming power or modifying the wavelength (or waveform) slightly. I know that adding Uninteruptable Power Supplies (UPS) to complex laboratory medical equipment makes them run better. Repair costs go down, system failures go down, mechanical irregularities go away and precision improves. D/A and A/D convertors certainly work more consistently. There are power supplies inside the equipment that should protect and clean up the power. I've noted times when the power monitors showed no spikes or brown-outs but the UPS aided equipment ran better. So what's up? Personally, I don't know (I was a chemist not an EE). I can usually hear differences between PCs. Sometimes I like them, sometimes I don't. Hey, enjoy the music. It's not worth fighting over.
Albert - This isn't personal. I like talking about hifi related things. I don't get upset if someone says that their line cord makes a huge difference. I find it interesting. I don't judge people by whether they use expensive line cords or not. I have friends with whom I disagree about important things. Like you, I am just expressing my opinion. I don't like fighting and I take care not to write anything that sounds personal. I state an opinion and try to back it up with some information. I thought you might find the line cord voltage numbers interesting. It wasn't written with the intent to agravating you or with the expectation that you were going to read it and cry out "MY GOD, how could I have been so wrong!?"... And, I'm sure that if I had a chance to hear your system I would agree that it sounded damn good.
Same here Elizabeth. A realist by nature (some might even say pessimist but I don't think the affliction is quit that advanced) I tried a "designer" cord on a whim. Fully expected to notice no difference. On the source (DAC or transport), where others claim the most benefit, there was no appreciable effect. Putting it on the preamp was another story. The sound was more "musical" and lively. On the amp the difference was VERY noticeable. Here it brought a considerable increase in the heft of the low end and at the same time the overall sound was less strained.
Bought another cord to put on the preamp. Ah, the best of both worlds. Eventually my anal retentive nature caught up and now everything has an upgraded cord. The source didn't really *need* it, but what the heck!
Ultimately it paid off that even as a doubting Thomas I was willing to try something new. If only that attitude could be bottled...
Jay, I always wash my brain with Kontak, and chase it with bleach. It helps me hear power cord differences better. Don't knock this tweak til you try it. It also helps clear up some of my other brain problems.
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.
