Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Why do/don't "audiophile" cables improve sound?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do/don't "audiophile" cables improve sound? - Page 19

post #271 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan View Post
On the contrary, I would rather see the believers put stuff in front of non-believers and show them. It would be most productive to mingle in the real world.
Why don't the non-believers show themselves instead of reciting scientific truisms that approximate reality in trying to prove reality to be fiction?
post #272 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnGnome View Post

Otherwise the sound would just sound very noticeably wrong.
Could you provide a little more objective term than "wrong"? Or explain how "sound" can "sound" "wrong"??? Measurements would be helpful, I should think...

jeebus... You are a trip!!!
post #273 of 293
"wrong" = "inaccurate"

He's talking about the effects of synthesized ambiences using digital delays.

See ya
Steve
post #274 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
I don't know how he achieved it, but when I sit in the sweet spot and listen to Karajan's recording of Das Rheingold, the descent from Valhalla into Nibelheim actually has vertical movement. I suspect it has something to do with the way he's balancing the arrangement of the instruments, but I'm really not sure. I've always wondered about it, because I've never heard anything like that before, and considering the content of the scene, I'm sure it's a deliberate effect of some sort.

See ya
Steve
I just re-visited this thread again this morning. I have read where a certain frequencies (higher) can get be clued as having height to a sound presentation. Is it possible that the shifting vertical nature of the sound that you were hearing is more a relationship of the sound frequency over time changing? Some higher frequencies tend to be resolved in the mind as physically higher in location from what I have read.

Just a thought.
post #275 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
"wrong" = "inaccurate"

He's talking about the effects of synthesized ambiences using digital delays.

See ya
Steve
Ok. "inaccurate" with regards to what? The "original" signal? Using the original mic feed as the reference? Or the masters? Or the production CD with it's inherent limitations in absolute resolution, i.e. sampling rate, bit length?

Or are we talking about a "reference" 1khz sine wave? at what level?

And at what point is something "wrong"? Is it within +/- 1db (or 3db? .5db?) accurate over what frequency range?

The further you guys try and "run around your back hand," the more your posts entertain me... keep on tryin!
post #276 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by slwiser View Post
I just re-visited this thread again this morning. I have read where a certain frequencies (higher) can get be clued as having height to a sound presentation. Is it possible that the shifting vertical nature of the sound that you were hearing is more a relationship of the sound frequency over time changing? Some higher frequencies tend to be resolved in the mind as physically higher in location from what I have read.

Just a thought.
That's pretty much what it is. In the real world it's the outer ear that varies the freq of received sounds and provides cues for the vertical plane. This same effect can be recreated and trick the brain into hearing things on the vertical plane.
post #277 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by slwiser View Post
I have read where a certain frequencies (higher) can get be clued as having height to a sound presentation. Is it possible that the shifting vertical nature of the sound that you were hearing is more a relationship of the sound frequency over time changing? Some higher frequencies tend to be resolved in the mind as physically higher in location from what I have read
That could be it... The passage where it occurs is the descent into Nibelheim in Wagner's Das Rheingold. The orchestra is doing a circular, short staccato bit while percussionists hammer on tuned anvils, simulating the dwarfs pounding on the gold in their caves. It could be that the orchestra is holding in the same spot, while the anvils get brighter as they trail off. There also might be some sort of subtle phase shift in part of the sound too. It's eerie!

See ya
Steve
post #278 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by yotacowboy View Post
Ok. "inaccurate" with regards to what? The "original" signal? Using the original mic feed as the reference? Or the masters? Or the production CD with it's inherent limitations in absolute resolution, i.e. sampling rate, bit length?
All of the above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yotacowboy View Post
Or are we talking about a "reference" 1khz sine wave? at what level? And at what point is something "wrong"? Is it within +/- 1db (or 3db? .5db?) accurate over what frequency range?
It isn't a frequency or dynamic change... it's a time shift. On 5:1 A/V receivers you'll often find synthesized room ambiences (concert hall, stadium, etc.) They're created by shifting phase and adding digital delay reverberation to certain channels. Obviously, that sort of change is inaccurate compared to whatever reference you use.

The discussion was about how certain equipment added extra sound cues to emphasize the size and shape of the room. The only way I know to do that is through some sort of synthesized delay like this. I think most audiophiles would consider that sort of presentation to be "inaccurate".

Is that clearer?

See ya
Steve
post #279 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
All of the above.



It isn't a frequency or dynamic change... it's a time shift. On 5:1 A/V receivers you'll often find synthesized room ambiences (concert hall, stadium, etc.) They're created by shifting phase and adding digital delay reverberation to certain channels. Obviously, that sort of change is inaccurate compared to whatever reference you use.

The discussion was about how certain equipment added extra sound cues to emphasize the size and shape of the room. The only way I know to do that is through some sort of synthesized delay like this. I think most audiophiles would consider that sort of presentation to be "inaccurate".

Is that clearer?

See ya
Steve
But none of that silly-business is on the actual recording unless a recording engineer put it there. Those recording engineers think they know everything!

So getting back to the topic:

Is phase shift a result of the cable carrying the audio signal plausible or even possible?

Is it possible to subjectively interpret the audible spatial cues you claim to have heard (e.g. "ambience," "vertical soundstaging") as "increased detail" (that is, lower noise floor allowing for low level audio signal to be now "audible"? Further, is this lowered noise floor related to the shielding (or any other measurable attribute) of a signal cable?
post #280 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by yotacowboy View Post
But none of that silly-business is on the actual recording unless a recording engineer put it there.
Uh... yeah. That's what they were saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by yotacowboy View Post
Is phase shift a result of the cable carrying the audio signal plausible or even possible?
Sure. If one cable is defective, or perhaps if one channel's cable is two miles long and the other is six feet. Phase is relative, so one channel's cable would have to shift differently than the other channel's cable. It would sound weird though. It wouldn't "widen the soundstage" or anything like that.

Depth cues can be pretty tiny. It is possible that a lower noise floor would reveal them better. But it's unlikely that the cable would have as much to do with that than tape hiss or a really noisy amp. Unless they aren't functioning properly, cables don't affect the signal to noise.

See ya
Steve
post #281 of 293
Quote:
That could be it... The passage where it occurs is the descent into Nibelheim in Wagner's Das Rheingold. The orchestra is doing a circular, short staccato bit while percussionists hammer on tuned anvils, simulating the dwarfs pounding on the gold in their caves. It could be that the orchestra is holding in the same spot, while the anvils get brighter as they trail off. There also might be some sort of subtle phase shift in part of the sound too. It's eerie!
Bingo. The guy who described this phenomenon first was a person called "Jens Blauert". The frequencies with a critical influence on the felt direction of the sound are called "Blauert'sche Bänder" in german.
There's an interesting entry in wikipedia, unfortunately in german:

Blauertsche Bänder - Wikipedia

The graph tells the likeliness of a perception of a certain direction in % for an emphasis(x) in a specific frequency range (y). Green means "front", red "back", yellow equals "height".

BTW, the effect is known at least since 1970, as the publication linked in the wiki from Jens Blauert on the subject bears this date.
post #282 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by viggen View Post
Why don't the non-believers show themselves instead of reciting scientific truisms that approximate reality in trying to prove reality to be fiction?
Because those of us who believe in the scientific method are explicitly prohibited from posting honestly and openly in this forum as per the thread title, "no DBT." So instead of settling these debates through a process by which statistical trial can prove beyond reasonable doubt what scientific "truisms" already suggest, we have to couch the debate in foggy, theoretical explanations.

Happy arguing.

--Chris
post #283 of 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by hempcamp View Post
Because those of us who believe in the scientific method are explicitly prohibited from posting honestly and openly in this forum as per the thread title, "no DBT." So instead of settling these debates through a process by which statistical trial can prove beyond reasonable doubt what scientific "truisms" already suggest, we have to couch the debate in foggy, theoretical explanations.

Happy arguing.

--Chris
I enjoy that you can clearly and concisely explain your position - I applaud you. Too bad that the majority of "those who believe" rely on rhetorical rationalization devices such as "horse sense"... "believers" who post here wouldn't know a proper statistical trial if it bit them in the *****.

Bitter, grumpy closed-mindedness is largely confused with honest experience 'round these parts, I'm afraid.
post #284 of 293
Some people actually know what they're talking about and share their knowledge; and others resort to passive aggressive swipes as a substitute for discourse. Such is life.

See ya
Steve
post #285 of 293
Are you sure the scientific method is properly applied such as in the manner in which it is during this discourse?

Just saying you believe in scientific methodology doesn't mean you are are partaking in such nor does it mean you are applying it correctly.

Also, statistcs is numeric data that measures relevancy of two events. Both events are true with the relevancy being hypothetical. With no clear knowledge of testing procedures and METHODOLOGY of testing, it's useless to bring up statistics such as DBT. It's neither here nor there.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Why do/don't "audiophile" cables improve sound?