Speaker cable arrows???
| Post removed |
The signal energy travels down the cables in one direction >>>> from the source to the load, (amp to speakers), in the form of an electromagnetic wave.@jea48 dude, you really might want to take a remedial physics class. I will ask again: please explain to me exactly how to make a passive conductive cable with unequal impedance. |
I just love Audiogon. In my emails there is occasionally a thread I can’t resist. This one is a perfect example and it amazes me that someone would ask this and then others might entertain it as a serious topic. It’s kind of like driving down the road and seeing one of those little cars covered in SJW stickers. I always want to pull up next to them and see if they have three eyes or something. |
Glubson, Everyone and his brother knew there were reporting issues in April, way before the 22nd, especially from nursing homes. I pointed that out when the US reported 7,000 deaths on one day we’ll before the 22nd. By the way, that number 7,000 disappeared from chart the very next day. Furthermore, I suspect in your haste for recognition of something everyone already knew you missed the point of my post yesterday. |
| Post removed |
bob540117 Oh my! This question really gave me a start . . directional speaker cables?! I didn’t check for arrows — did I do this WRONG! Odds are good . . . Yes! I messed up, again! Then I remembered that my cables are for bi-wiring and there is only one way to connect them. That was a close one! >>>>Not so fast, Bob. All cables - including ones with dissimilar connectors like power cords, HDMI cables and bi-wiring cables - should be controlled for directionality during the manufacturing process, like Audioquest does, for example. Thus, when the dissimilar connectors are attached, the cable will be in the correct orientation directionality wise. It’s not rocket science. 🚀 |
The greatest mystery surrounding wire directionality has not been discussed on this forum. It is why all the posts made by the many of us who prefer our speaker cables inserted with the arrows pointing towards the amplifiers and our fuses inserted in the opposite direction of most have had our posts deleted? Which of you are reporting us to the mods? Is it too much to bare that we like our cables installed in the reverse direction? |
wolf_garcia My simple point that Kaitty can’t understand is that the component wires and traces will NEVER be checked for "directionality" because in that context it simply doesn’t matter...at all...dude! >>>>That’s about the twentieth time you said that. It’s still not true. I’m only referring to drawn wire when I say all wire is directional. Are traces directional? Are connectors directional? You decide. Besides the high end industry never got the memo on directionality so of course they won’t check for it. Duh! |
Total and complete BS. If you hear a difference it is all in your mind. Music is an AC signal. Electrons go back and forth. Show me a difference in impedance one way or the other. You can't even with the most sensitive instruments. Back in the 80s MIT and I think they were the first to start making directional interconnect cables, were supposed to be the best and they were really big and fat and had the nicest RCAs on them. So, I bought several pairs and dutifully oriented the arrows in the right direction. A computer nerd/ audiophile buddy of mine laughed. So I got blinded and he started swapping the preamp to amp cables back and forth haphazardly. In a notebook on each page I wrote a B for better and a W for worse. There was no correlation what so ever and I was really stretching to make out a difference anyway, never really sure. Yes, pulling wire changes the metal lattice structure and electrons could care less. So, as far as I am concerned it is a marketing scam. I would also bet that the manufacturer has no idea which way the wire is going. They just print arrows on the insulation to keep up with the Jones. If you go out and buy the absolute best bulk wire like a Canare product there is never little arrows on it. The problem for audiophiles is that most of us do not have an extended scientific background and usually do not hang out with those that do. It is not that we are dumb, we just don't speak that language. So, we hear something that seems to make sense, and usually there is a small element of truth in there, and buy it hook line and sinker. Then, 1/2 of us really do think we hear a difference and the myth gets wings. Many times when I really thought I could hear a difference I was just fooling myself. Blinded there was none. The mythologists may laugh at me which is fine. They are the ones who are the suckers. |
geoffkait, I have some odd feeling that I am not the only one missing points of your posts. It is cute watching you flapping around pretending that you are ahead of the game. In this case, you simply cannot be. It would reverse all the theories of time, space, and pretty much everything else. Quantum physics and wire directionality would be turned upside down. Or back and forth. Be careful with electrical statements, too. These guys seem to have read another book since 1950s. Maybe there was something new in 1970s. Keep it up. |
| Post removed |
Why not move from 19th century debate to 21st century technology? https://www.dynaudio.com/home-audio/xeo https://us.kef.com/ls50-wireless-music-system.html |
| Post removed |
And if you are late on a customer deliverable, they will travel anywhere but where you want them to be. In digital circuits the signal and energy travel in the ... but I digress. The energy travels primarily outside the conductors as that is where the fields are, but the fields are a function of the properties of the conductors and the dielectric. |
How much energy is outside the conductor and how much inside the conductor? If it 80% - 20%? Maybe 50% - 50%? 95% - 5%? If most of the “energy” travels outside the conductor please explain all the heartburn over skin effect, for which very high frequencies travel closer to the surface and lower frequencies travel deeper inside the conductor. Also, frequencies of what? Thanks in advance. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Wireless is both ways my tablet sends and receives the "signal energy" is traveling back and forth just like ethernet and AC in wires. No, the discussion would be the signal energy is not traveling back and forth from the transmitter to the receiver but rather the signal energy travels in one direction from the transmitter to the receiver. |
While Ralph Morrison is not the last word on electromagnetism, I am not questioning his expertise, because I did read your links (and have one of his books), and there is nothing in them that disagrees with what I wrote Jea48. I am not questioning Ralph Morrison's understanding, I am questioning yours. Why would I read the other thread you linked to. With the exception of almarg who always writes clearly, it is mainly a miss-mash of misconceptions and partial truths and I have better things that go through it in detail. How much energy is outside the conductor and how much inside the conductor? If it 80% - 20%? Maybe 50% - 50%? 95% - 5%? If most of the “energy” travels outside the conductor please explain all the heartburn over skin effect, for which very high frequencies travel closer to the surface and lower frequencies travel deeper inside the conductor. Also, frequencies of what? Thanks in advance. Almost all the energy is outside the conductor. The product of the electric field and magnetic field inside the conductor is near 0, assuming a good conductor. The E-field penetrates the conductor causing charge to move inducing the magnetic field, and with high frequency, that e-field does not penetrate much into the conductor, but in either case, almost all the energy is outside the conductor. |
Again, frequency of what? For that matter the energy of what, the “signal.” But what is the signal? Pardon the question. The audio waveform is not traveling down the wire or cable. If not the audio waveform, what else has frequency? Not current, not voltage, not the magnetic field, not the electric field. The alternating frequency? Also, the way I always see the skin effect stated, the “high frequencies” travel nearer to the surface - but not outside the conductor - whereas lower frequencies travel closer to the center of the conductor. Is that completely wrong? |
That's the way I have always read it. https://www.belden.com/blog/broadcast/understanding-skin-effect-and-frequency |
So, you believe the “audio signal” travels inside the conductor, right? Regardless of whether the skin effect applies or not. I’ll ask again, the frequency of what? It's moot where the "signal" moves, what matters is if the effects are relevant at the frequencies of interest in the system in which they are installed. All cables in a given system will have some directional aspects at high enough frequencies, but a 10 foot cable at 2/3 the speed of light means the signal takes 10 nanoseconds from the amp to the speakers, and neither the amplifier nor the speaker are a set impedance, and they certainly are not "matched". Any transmission line effects will be 100's of db below the signal. So what else could be "directional"? Pretty much all that is left, absent intentional directionality (i.e. added RLC elements), is differences in lumped bulk RLC parameters based on the direction. However, the bulk RLC of any half-decent cable should be such that frequency dependent impact on transmission is a fraction of a db, meaning also no detectable phase shift by any human on the planet (we are terrible at detecting phase-shift that is the same on both channels), and since directional changes in the bulk RLC are orders of magnitude less that the bulk RLC, that fraction of a db now becomes thousandths of a db .... obviously undetectable. It's fine to talk about single crystal copper (which improves by high temperature annealing, not cryogenic processing, but I digress), and it is recognized to have better conductivity at low frequency, there is no evidence of any frequency dependent effects that could impact audio transmission. |
Also, the way I always see the skin effect stated, the “high frequencies” travel nearer to the surface - but not outside the conductor - whereas lower frequencies travel closer to the center of the conductor.
Not wrong, but not accurate either. Electrical field penetrates conductor, moves charges, induces magnetic field, but the majority of the fields are outside the conductor, and the product of the fields, the power transfer is near 0 in the conductor. At high frequencies, the electrical field does not penetrate very far into the conductor and hence the charge only near the surface of the conductor moves. The fields are still mainly outside the conductor and again, the product of the two fields (power) is near 0. |
| Post removed |
You said at high frequencies. Frequencies of what? You also said audio transmission. What audio transmission are you referring to? The audio waveform? Current, voltage, Poynting vectors? Something else? You also said the conductor material (and purity, I assume) makes a difference in the signal transmission. Why wouldn’t the non-symmetrical crystal structure of drawn wire also make a difference in the signal transmission? Especially if the non symmetry was visible on the surface of the wire. Yes? No? |
heaudio123"Not wrong, but not accurate either. "Perhaps rather than dismiss, reject, and deny some one’s statement you will offer some day provide and offer you’re own meaningful, cogent, thoughtful reply, response, and explanation as to why something is "not accurate." |
Riddle me this one fellers, If the electromagnetic signal is carried almost exclusively outside a quality conductor, and electrons within do not actually move but vibrate, what does the signal care how the metal lattice is structured? My apologies if this was already covered, the sniping got old quickly..... |
I don’t wish to put words in anyone’s mouth but nobody said the electromagnetic signal travels outside the conductor. What heaudio123 has been saying is the *energy* travels mostly outside the conductor - I.e., the magnetic and electric fields, which are not the signal itself. So far we haven’t nailed down what the signal actually is, a current, a charge, a voltage, an electromagnetic wave, a frequency, etc. |
What difference? - If the difference is not frequency dependent, or at least the dependency on frequency is small within the audio frequency band, then the impact of crystal structure would be akin to changing wire size. - I am not aware of any non-linearities w.r.t. crystal structure either that could cause distortion, and there does not appear to be any energy storage mechanism of note either. Where I am aware of crystal structure being an issue is at extremely high current densities allowed when temperatures reach superconducting levels. Making a difference, and making a difference that is anywhere near the realm of audible, are the critical discussion points. I am not going to be able to tell the difference between a 1lb and a 1.001lb weight in my hand, though it can be easily measured. Why wouldn’t the non-symmetrical crystal structure of drawn wire also make a difference in the signal transmission? Especially if the non symmetry was visible on the surface of the wire. Yes? No? |
You now seem to suggest the signal comprises audio frequencies, I.e, the audio waveform. Is that what you’re saying? I don’t wish to put words in your mouth. The Non symmetrical crystal structure I’m referring to Is the deformation to the natural copper or silver crystal structure that occurs when the wire is drawn through a die, especially to the surface but also below the surface of the wire. “I am not going to be able to tell the difference between a 1lb and a 1.001lb weight in my hand, though it can be easily measured.” >>>>>>> I’m pretty sure that argument is a logical fallacy. |
