What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?
No mahgister, really it is not stupid, arrogant, or otherwise.I am not knowledgeable in electronics or electricity, but only a slight reading of Anton site demonstrate some dedication and knowledge.... A big part of your strategy is dismissing ad hominem...then why are you here if we are all under you? The first one were Essien ....He is not a crook by all means but a very honest researcher... And he knows what he speak about, i cannot argue with you in electrical matter but you will not sell me fish for a piece of red meat in other fields... If you dont let the opponent argue his point perhaps no discussion will be possible... You are knowledgeable but the problem is that you listen to no one and understand not at all your own limitation, perspective and blindspot... I say that without any acrimony or anger against you on the contrary, i learn a lot arguing with you....Thanks to you....I am only sad that an interesting matter is dismissed with the back of the hand.... But there is more at stake here than cables matter.... It seems nobody see that or very few.... |
but only a slight reading of Anton site demonstrate some dedication and knowledge.... Science does not give out participation awards The first one were Essien ....He is not a crook by all means but a very honest researcher... And he knows what he speak about, i cannot argue with you in electrical matter but you will not sell me fish for a piece of red meat in other fields... It is cute that you think the depth of my knowledge is electronics. Essien knows what he made up. This is not a Ghostbusters movie. Real scientists either prove and peer review or find themselves in a 3rd rate college teaching those that could not get in anywhere else. |
Science does not give out participation awardstrue knowledge is not a race for Nobel prize...Save for children.... It is cute that you think the depth of my knowledge is electronics.If you read my post you must admit that i respect your knowledge.... but i am perfectly able to read most of the times where you are right and where your answer are debatable.... You are not Einstein by any means sorry.... You have dismissed all others opinion or experience in a rude way each time....Sometimes you were right for sure you know more in Audio than most.... But sorry you dont know all... And it is evident to see it even for me.... |
The whole basis of this thread is cables have a sound that is directional. There is only one thing missing. PROOF. I think you can agree with me here Mahgister that this is a case where unbiased, somewhat scientifically valid testing must occur to validate the claim. Otherwise it is just a lot of hot air. This thread is pointless as the whole basis is purely presumption. |
Real scientists either prove and peer review or find themselves in a 3rd rate college teaching those that could not get in anywhere else.Your arrogance is wonderful.... Do you know Nikolai Kozirev? Probably not.... and if you know him you will probably dismiss him , without even having the competence to dismiss his ideas... You are not a physicist then your dismissal will be based on a "belief" in the general scientific consensus... My point is some ideas of Kozirev are behind the inspiration source for the idea of the research group linked to Anton .... Am i right? Only Anton can say..... |
The whole basis of this thread is cables have a sound that is directional.Unlike you i want to understand... They are more than cable marketing war here... We must LISTEN to someone before imposing a test on him...Politeness is necessary....Especially for a Russian in an english audio site.... Anton is not here to market a cable...THIS IS CLEAR TO ANYONE LOOKING AT HIS SITE.... This is not about synergetic research cable test here....Are you able to see the difference? Anton is not an audiophile advocating about a branded name cable product.... You treat him like if he was one.... The Contour System – Directional Wiring of Audio Parts – Back To Music The title of the site is about direction wiring OF AUDIO PARTS , not marketting of cables.... You complety throw the baby ( wire direction/hearing process/ electronic and a deep question about that) with the muddy waters of cable marketing.... Are you a scientist or a debunker of cable sellers? i am not sure anymore..... This thread is pointless as the whole basis is purely presumption.The 2 threads of Anton are LINKED to His site where are discussed his ideas and experiments....Nobody is in the obligation to believe him, but it is evident that there is experiments behind his ideas.... Reducing him to be a cables sellers waiting to be put a test on insulting.... He is not Ted Denney....He is someone devoted to some years long research without anything to sell here.... Before texting his ideas here which are complex one we must discuss and listen his explanations... Is it not simple to understand? If you are a scientist you will understand.... If you are a cable debunker after retirement say it i will know.... But probably if you are able to dismiss Essien who wrote his doctorate and after that a book to be a crook, you will do the same for anyone? Essien is not a crook even if he is completely wrong.... My definition of a "crook" is not yours it seems.... I hope i am wrong and i hope you are the scientist you seem to be for me..... |
The very first post on this thread was by me. In the OP it was claimed there is only one conclusion. the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.I said there was another conclusion, bias. Now tell us what would be the "scientific" thing to do? Conduct a test to eliminate bias since it is another legitimate conclusion to his premise or continue on as if it's irrelevant? |
I am not interested at all by cables market... Nor by cables promoters.... Nor by cables debunkers... I am not interested by debates between these 2 categories of people... I am interested by dedicated researchers, nevermind if they are wrong or right....I like good faith and truth.... Then those who reduce any debate to their own pettyness are not welcome under my gaze.... I am interested by understanding, sound, hearing, audio and others scientific and philosophical matters exceeding my own competence and anyway the competence of most of us but very interesting for me anyway... |
Anton made his own test.... He does not sell cable... He come here to discuss his ideas... You reject him like a peddler of cable... You speak like a " sckeptic of the sunday club" ... A scientist is interested to understand idea BEFORE dismissing them... I already say that HIS SITE does not promote cable purchase... Are you able to read? He propose experiment any electrician with 2 ears coud do... Do you think he will send you a pair of cable to blindtest? He is not a seller of cable...You confuse him with a company of cable? It is very disturbing for me because you are intelligent.... Do you fake misunderstanding? |
Mahgister, you are just making excuses.It is not me ....it is you who are not interested by any discussion... You hide yourself behind this blindtest idea... HE DOES NOT SELL CABLE... Is it clear to read in big letters? He give all instruction to test his idea on his site... You insult him like a cable peddler... Maybe he is wrong, but this is not possible to say without understanding his motivation and recreate his experiment... Try his experiment dont insult him without listening or discussing... This is an interesting thread not about the usual trivialities or audiophile marketing ideas or stupid branded name product boasting.... I dont need audio product i am interested in ideas.... This is not ABOUT CABLES...... This about other ideas in audio and wiring.... And sound..... |
Then he shouldn't have asked for alternative options. If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?I wasn't questioning his cables but his conclusions drawn from his test. He asked for another option , I gave him one. Scientists don't take it personal they would do the testing to show my alternate conclusion is wrong. That's how it works. |
He is not here to satisfy your desire for a test on the spot....It is not Ted Denney to whom you could ask for a cable... By God! are you intelligent? test yourself his ideas are open there to be read by anybody... HE DOES NOT COME TO SELL BUT TO DISCUSS... with intelligent people not narrow mind who will assimilate him to a peddler... I am flabbergasted by, how can i call that respectfully? narrowness of mind..... Ok pass a good night i will go out before being out of my bound... |
I didn't make a claim I simply gave an alternate conclusion to the claim there wasn't one. It isn't incumbent on me to prove or disprove anything that's up to the claimant. I didn't claim at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questionedwhich is nonsense, if anything there's a resurgence. I didn't claim there's an unknown signal in the audio signal that humans perceive with a sixth sense. electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense. If this signal is unknown to science how does he know it's there? |
at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned Audioholics on Youtube has 150,000 followers There are probably 10x the posts on ASR as there are here, and way way more useful information for actual audiophiles. People actually refer to ASR. Many of the consumer audio companies sell as much stuff as the whole high end market. |
I love this as a conversation starter. It’s my belief that on a different day a certain cable or speaker may sound better than another. I think when it trickles down to these minuscule bits of perception and “quality” it can depend on your mood and wether or not you had a good breakfast. I’ve had this experience with certain recordings, wine or whiskey tasting, even the smell of my dish detergent. My point is there is no right and wrong. Like all art, it’s in the eye or “ear” in this case of the beholder. That being said I do love my new Martin Logan’s over my old crappy Polk Audio speaks. It’s the big changes in your signal that matter. |
dletch2 Finally, you recognized that, from the point of view of conventional physics, there can be no direction for a wire. This is an important admission, because as an opponent you put all your strength into refuting it. So we agree, there is no secret door or loophole here because the laws of electrical engineering are simple and unambiguous. Now we are in the following situation. You, as a representative of conventional physics, claim that NO ONE can hear the difference in sound when the wire is reversed. In the same way, the difference can not be heard when changing the power cable, you recognized this even earlier. If you are right, then it turns out that a huge number of people can not understand their feelings and are simply biased. However, if you are wrong and there is a subjective difference, then obviously you should look for it not in conventional electrical engineering and acoustics (we found out that there can be no difference within their framework), but somewhere else. Nevertheless, you persist in suggesting the use of blind tests developed by conventional physics to determine changes in the same conventional framework. How can such tests give the correct answer in our situation? |
mahgister I've heard about Kozyrev and his bold theory, but I don't know if his ideas can be used in audio. In any case, people like him do inspire the research practitioners that I am, so his influence is obvious. |
djones51 djones51, you have not expressed any meaningful option. You said that this is a bias, and it means the same thing as BS. Read the question again. "...those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense." |
djones51 thank you for drawing attention to the grammar error, I hope it will be clearer to you now: "choosing the position of the plug in the socket in which the music sounds better" Is the question settled? You read it again. You simply dismiss bias by waving your hand. In my opinion, it is you who constantly dismiss the essence of the matter, find fault with grammar and other irrelevant things. We'll get to the bias later, this is undoubtedly a difficult question, but it is not solved by the blunt methods that you suggest.. Now please go up three posts and answer the question I asked dletch2 about the blind test. |
Yup. He attempts to twist everything I say, I think we are up to at least 3, probably 4 things now where he claims I said things I did not. He would blame language. I blame it on a flawed understanding and/or lack of knowledge that does not allow one to understand the technical nuance in an answer. Yet another dumpster fire with someone who refuses to test their own bias, and justifies that by claiming blind tests are flawed, without being able to provide any evidence of this being the case. Nevertheless, you persist in suggesting the use of blind tests developed by conventional physics to determine changes in the same conventional framework. This post requires no comment. |
dletch2"Yet another dumpster fire with someone who refuses to test their own bias, and justifies that by claiming blind tests are flawed, without being able to provide any evidence of this being the case." You are being dishonest, deceptive, and misleading by requiring, demanding, and insisting on blind testing and stating that it is the only valid way to test claims here but then you dismiss completely the abundant data, research, and studies that reveal, highlight, and explain the errors and faults common to blind testing. As other's here have observed, noted, and acknowledged you "dltech2" have quite a history hear on the forum under other names so it seem you have something to hide! |
I understand the difference in cable direction is very much like the effect of sniffing glue. Or was that if you sniffed glue, you would claim a difference? Can’t remember. "Ringing of high frequencies" ... of a bare conductor. Okay. I won’t comment. I don’t see a point. Extra marks for creativity. There is no difference in tires. Put auto store aftermarket parts on your car. "There is no difference from OEM parts". Trust me when you have to have the repair done over and over you will believe there is a difference that you didn't perceive until you are on the side of the road. No A/B comparison needed. If you can't hear any differences in your system between components like wires, you either don't hear that well or you need a better system. Most likely you don't know what you are listening for. |
dletch2 To each of your similar statements, I responded with direct quotes and comments, to which you had NOTHING to object. Now you decided to accuse me of juggling of facts. Write down all four cases with accurate quotes and point at where and what exactly I have "twisted". Then we'll see what your words are worth. |
You have made this claim in what, 3 threads now in response to me. I have asked you now 3 times, to provide any valid evidence, since you claim there is abundant data, research, and studies that show blind tests have faults and errors. If there is so much abundant data, the give us links. Otherwise I will ask you nicely to stop posting this nonsense if you are not going to back it up. |
To each of your similar statements, I responded with direct quotes and comments, to which you had NOTHING to object. Now you decided to accuse me of juggling of facts. I have accused you quite clearly at least twice of misstating what I said, writing things you claimed I wrote, when that was not the case. I got tired of pointing it out. |
dletch2 Well well well.. Out of the four, there are already two left. I hope you understand that until you show where and how exactly i changed the meaning of your words, the accusation remain nothing more than libel. I'm waiting for proof. |
Gentlemen materialists, you have not yet answered the question about the reliability of blind tests. Let me remind you that at the moment we have found out that when the wire is reversed, there are absolutely no changes in the electrical signal occur. Thus, according to the laws of conventional physics, these changes are not present in the acoustic signal and we can not hear them. Next thing is all known subjective tests including blind tests are designed to detect audible differences in the acoustic signal, but we already know that these differences do not exist. So what else can we prove with blind tests in our situation? |
@OP Back to the blind test, as per your request. Not exactly a blind test, but this example is close enough. Been building a LOT of speakers during the past year with a friend. We tune them (damping/stuffing/crossover) first based on what we have noticed that worked well on previous speakers. The we live with them for a while before we listen critically. We look for problems, what is missing, what is too loud. Then, we put the two side by side and run a mono signal through. One is kept original, the other has the mods done. We alternate sitting and listening with standing and switching from L-R so we can A/B the speakers. Because the signal is in mono, and because the speakers are right next to each other, we are in a big room and sit far enough back so identifying which speaker is making the sound is difficult. Is it a blind test? No, does it allow us to listen for differences in the two speakers? Yes. This happens a couple of times until we feel we have the speakers sounding as best they can given the drivers being used. The very last A/B session, we are dealing with very tiny adjustments. Most would not be able to differentiate between the two if they were not told what to listen for at this point. We can hear it because we know what we are listening for, a specific tone or timbre to a particular part of music. Would these differences matter to most people at the end? No, probably not as the source, amp and room will over ride what we have done in the final steps. But the difference is there. I would like to think that if the same two speakers were side by each, in the same room, with me not having been part of the tuning, that I would be able to pint out the differences. Something I have in fact done with speakers he has worked on with me not being part of the process. Two speakers, mono, side by side being A/B'd with no knowledge of what was done to one or the other, I could tell the difference, and describe what the differences were and what was causing them. Not sure I am a believer of the full double triple extra secret super blind test. So, pull someone random off the street. Blindfold them. Take them into a listening room. Explain nothing, no context what they are there for. Play music. A/B the wires. Don't tell them what you did with the wires. Ask them to describe the differences. They couldn't. How could they? They wouldn't know what to listen for or have the vocabulary to describe. This is a simple enough exercise for anyone to do. Have a friend come over (when it is safe to do so...) and have them swap out cables on your own set up and see if you can hear a difference. Leave the room, swap the cables, come back and listen. Repeat. Same music, same volume, same seating position,same everything, just different wires. No one, is going to be able to prove anything to a naysayer with measurements or blind tests. It has to be tried in ones own system. But they will never try... And this of course requires that the system be good enough to reveal the subtle differences, otherwise, it's a waste of time. |
anton_stepichev OP98 posts 04-29-2021 5:49amdletch2 Let me rephrase it. I did not accuse you. I proved that you did. Yes you did libel. |
Next thing is all known subjective tests including blind tests are designed to detect audible differences in the acoustic signal, but we already know that these differences do not exist. Most people of normal functioning will make the leap that if you cannot identify an audible difference, then the audible difference does not exist. If that is not obvious, then there is no point in continuing. It is called placebo effect. You convince yourself there should be a change, so you find one (in your head). But there is no change. |
No one, is going to be able to prove anything to a naysayer with measurements or blind tests. It has to be tried in ones own system. But they will never try... Unless it's a proper controlled blind test the whole thing is a waste of time. I don't do blind tests on everything I buy but I don't make blanket statements that something definitely sounds better, especially cables. I have preferences for the sound I like it's why I use DSP and room treatments. What constitutes a "good enough " system? I am also amused by the claim , "But they never try...". How else do you think bias has been shown to affect decisions unless it's been tried? |
A " learned bias" like someone listening a musical instrument and learning how to hear it in his most subtle behaviour under the hand is not something to be put in the "placebo/ drawer... Someone designing a tube amp with "wiring" direction is in the potentially same situation not in the placebo drawer ... Then someone reducing all biases to the same category, all to be eliminated only, and explaining everything not there by the virtues of his numbers measuring tools to be placebo, create a childish simplification... It will be a pity if a so interesting thread would be put at rest by too stuffed ears/brain... I will not speak of your other accusations because anybody could read this thread and make his mind.. I don’t do blind tests on everything I buy but I don’t make blanket statements that something definitely sounds better, especially cables.You just disguise and distort his claim here to make your point...is it not evident for anyone to read? He claimed something about "wiring" direction in a tube amplifier experiment .... He does not sell cables and assimilating him to the pretense of any "cable" marketer is not fair at all.... It is evident that testing what he speak about has anything to do with " picking" some audiophiles to test the claims about cables on a theater.... Someone must do the experiment with the directed wiring of an amplifier before that and after that testing this "direction" differences with the same amplifier and learn how to characterise it... It is a learned bias experiment not something to be erased right on the spot with a placebo accusation.... All biases are not equals.... Some are beams and some other are only a speck of straw.... Read your classic.... |
" learned bias" like someone listening a musical instrument and learning how to hear it in his most subtle behaviour under the hand is not something to be put in the "placebo/ drawer... Everything is in the placebo drawer, everything to do with listening to music from where you listen to how and what you listen with is in the bias drawer. There is no one immune to bias, there is no getting around it, it's effects are ingrained into the human experience from conscious descions to subconscious desires. To use the words of one who seems to think he's a God above such mundane effects like bias are thinking like Children. |
To use the words of one who seems to think he’s a God above such mundane effects like bias are thinking like Children.Are you able to think without speaking accusation? He proposed himself a test and how to do it.... You cannot test wiring directions in a tube amplifier like a sold miraculous cables you just bought asking for someone in a crowd to test it... You must create the conditions of the listening axperience FIRST.... A test did not exist before that.... You cannot equate what he speak about to the Ted Denney cable situation....it is not the same context at all... it is insulting for him to do so....Why not quitting bad scientism faith and circus for experiments and thinking.... Unless the so call differences that are heard from the wire direction in his tube amp were done with a CONTROLLED BLIND LISTENING TEST then the result are WORTHLESS.It seems that you walk in circle: cables are worthless without being blind test, his wiring is a cable then without blidtest it is worthless.... Repeat it.... Like a chicken walking... He dont sell cable , his site is very detailed and interesting he proposed some other complex experiment with the way we wire an amplifier.... He come here to ciscuss this and how to hear and what to hear.... and more... And like a chiken brain you repeat the mantra that all he was doing ewas worthless from the beginning... Think about yourself and draw your own conclusion... i quit for now .... |
I am not talking about Ted Denney cable nonsense. HIS TEST IS FLAWED . Comprehend??are you a child? How can Ted Denney could pass a blindtest before creating his cable design first and TESTING for himself his cable.... Blindtest are public test AFTER the design is already created.... Anton only give us his design procedure... Accusing him on lying because blindtest is the only way is pure bad faith....He blindtest his own design for himself like Ted Denney did...Save if it is a pure fraud... But accusing someone of fraud before trying for ourself is also a fraud.... Blindtest comes AFTER that.... Not FIRST.... Anton dont sell cables... He explain how to create a wiring directed amplifier to TEST ourself what he speak about... He comes to discuss his own experiments not to be accused of lying before any further good faith communication and discussion.... How could you accuse him to speak non sense because he has not blindested his own design before his creation? Even God could not blindtested something before having created it.... After creating it God blindtested it in private like anton did... Accusing God of lying after his private blindtesting is illogical and impolite to say the least...Because you must try by oyourself before accusing someone.... Even Ted Denney could not be treated like that.... Believers of "science" asking for blindtest and accusing INSTEAD of discussing are only religious people here.... |
Proposing ideas are justifiable under ALL circonstances... It is the way i read his site and listening him... HE DOES NOT SELL CABLES... He is accused of lying here and assigned to a blindtest tribunal like a cables sellers...BEFORE ANYONE LISTEN HIM FIRST.... THAT IS MY POINT.... Blindtest dont replace politeness and civility and curiosity... Mahgister, some things are not justifiable under any circumstance. The way you accused an unknown researcher like Essien whitout even reading it and the way you treated an interesting stranger with unorthodox original complex ideas speak volume.... EVEN IF ANTON OR ESSIEN ARE WRONG.... Your behaviour is more wrong.... I will never mock someone BEFORE listening to him if he wrote a book or a site with in the 2 cases some experiments proposed .... I could stand stupidity, or even hate, but i had difficulty with injustice....Sorry.... |
1. The OP, anton, built a tube amp he used to check directionality of wire. 2. He said there was no electrical difference. 3. He said there was a difference in sound. 4. The question is how can there be a difference in sound, 5. His conclusions, there is an "unknown signal" in the wire and humans hear it with a "sixth sense ". There can be no other conclusion. 1. Me. Unless number 3. Of the test , sound difference , was conducted blind the test is flawed. 2. I am not attacking anton. 3. I am questioning his methodology for not using standard practice. |
