taras22
Responses from taras22
| The Science of Cables @prof e.g. capacitance Funny you mention that capacitance thingee. Maybe you should wander over and see how cable assemblies made according to the Schroeder Method are being reviewed. The users found the results fantastic, and this with a cable... | |
| The Science of Cables @prof Sound a bit familiar? Yeah in fact something about the thrust of that post does sound familiar, it sounds like a fundamentalist who is backstopping his dogmatic beliefs with a scientific version of truthiness. And speaking of the absolute... | |
| The Science of Cables @jhillsNot sure how gallium, indium and tin, a semi liquid goop, 1/15th the conductivity of oxygen free copper, is somehow superior to pure grade, oxygen free copper as a conductor for cables. I guess whatever makes a great sales pitch and you can... | |
| The Science of Cables @ defiantboomerang The OP spews nonsense. That is all there is to it. A sad waste of time. It is odd you say that because as that thread shows the response to using the method has been overwhelmingly positive ( and truth be known we have built ca... | |
| The Science of Cables @glupsonYou may well be right on that one cause haven't seen any reference to the eutectic alloy we use being found in nature. But I will stand by my contention concerning credibility that is strained, diced, mashed or otherwise. | |
| The Science of Cables There is one more bit I would like to add to this discussion. Written by a gentlemen named Bob Smith, a really bright guy who I think has written something that is equal parts brilliant and provocative. It is a wee bit long but in my humble opinio... | |
| 3 things I learned from using MANY interconnect cables @ rnabokov Sometimes, the pseudo-science on these forums is astounding ..."It had a wider frequency range..." Really? What exactly do you mean by this? Did you measure it using appropriate technology? Is a wider(r) frequency range actually a good... | |
| Doug Schroeder Method, Double ic @ celander Confirmed....with the caveat that the Red Dragon is a very well designed amp with proper care given to its power supply( please remember that our concerns with this cable technology that were voiced at the very birth of the Schroeder ... | |
| The Science of Cables @defiantboomerangSo you piled thru Jackson, congratulations....and solved all the problems, double congratulations. Tough sledding that.Could you please do us all a big favour and take a peak at the following thread....https://forum.audiogon.com/d... | |
| The Science of Cables @ ieales To claim "TEO’s Liquid Cable interconnect cables are best characterized by their absence of character. … etc." strains credibility.If the cables are not in fact a flowing material, then the "Liquid" moniker is just more marketing malark... | |
| The Science of Cables @ ieales Film?!?!?! go away! <vbg> Z-curve? Bleccchhh. I effing hated doing music for films and TV! Great music buried for a door slam or tire squeal. What a waste!Very sorry to hear that your experience with the great sausage making machi... | |
| The Science of Cables @stevecham You have no idea what you are saying and this is just lame regurgitation of some nonsensical mumbo jumbo speak that you read in some quasi-science comic book. Funny, I distinctly remember it as a graduate program at a university.And I ... | |
| The Science of Cables @mkgus Is this related to the fact that when you are in a large, noisy crowd you can “tune in” to your conversation and clearly hear the person you’re talking to? There is some sort of highly advanced filtration going on in the brain in that scen... | |
| The Science of Cables @mkgusGood luck putting those concepts in a formula. Your post nicely nailed that. Now if I could add something. The reason that the formulas are lacking and the ear/brain has a marked advantage is the ability of the ear/brain to hear into no... | |
| The Science of Cables @ chrissain Great post....yeah cables are in some weird way the audiophile's version of Keat's idea of negative capability ( or at least my most probably wrong understanding of same ). |