2. cables
  3. 166070-159469

What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?

Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: 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.

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?

Regards.
anton_stepichev
dletch2
455 posts
 

djones513,852 posts04-28-2021 7:36amYou read it again. You simply dismiss bias by waving your hand.

You’re missing the point the only way you can attribute any reported result to what is actually heard is through controlled, blind testing. Anything else is making up the results.



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.

clearthink
1,421 posts
 
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!
kob's avatar
kob
22 posts
 
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.
anton_stepichev OP
150 posts
 
dletch2
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.

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.




dletch2
455 posts
 

clearthink1,213 posts04-28-2021 12:45pm
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.

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.

More to discover