How fast does misinformation travel? It seems to defy physics sometimes!

bigshot said:

  How fast does misinformation travel? It seems to defy physics sometimes!

Click to expand...

When it comes to our friend it defies physics and travels faster than the speed of light. He cheats and uses a wormhole.

stand said:

  However, what travels in the cable is electrical and travels near the speed of light. Once it leaves the headphone/loudspeakers that's when the story changes. Your scenario is incorrect as it applies to cables.

Click to expand...

 
Ah yes, minor detail 

stand said:

  Even lamp (brown zip) cord will work, then again you did say that, "just about anything goes."......

Click to expand...

LOL - I actually have 14g brown lamp cord as my wires for my HT and that set-up is way more expensive than my headphone hobby (and more important to me as well). 7.2 Paradigm system. Nothing I have seen or heard has convinced me to change.

stand said:

 

odde said:

   
-More like at 60-70% of the speed of light in most practical cables, but I am splitting hairs here, a favourite pastime of mine. You are right; he's wrong. (And I love reading these cable threads - being an MSc who majored in RF engineering and an avid ham radio operator, I've done my fair share of both crunching the numbers on, building and testing transmission lines (fancy word for 'cable').
 
Short version: At baseband audio, there's no magic; just about anything goes.

Click to expand...

Even lamp (brown zip) cord will work, then again you did say that, "just about anything goes." I'm an EE and find a lot of the audio threads very amusing. I specialized in audio, instrumentation, process control and microprocessor/digital.
I dabbled in RF, me and a buddy did some bad things with a spark gap when we were 12, in a densly populated urban area, NYC. Lets just say that Radio and TV reception was compromised when we were messing around.

Click to expand...

...now its getting interesting

stand said:

 

bigshot said:

  How fast does misinformation travel? It seems to defy physics sometimes!

Click to expand...

When it comes to our friend it defies physics and travels faster than the speed of light. He cheats and uses a wormhole.

Click to expand...

...that's how fast...

Guys - you've really cracked me up with the past few replies.
 
So much so  I had to check your profiles - each and every one of the frequent posters - in hope they might ( a fairly low possibility ) reveal at least a hint of hope for at least a faint possibility that any one of you might - eventually - realize that what I said is not anywhere as far removed from audio frequencies as some of you have been trying to represent with math - which was correct. It is all WELL WITHIN  AUDIBLE RANGE - if you know what to look for.
 
Problem - there is LOTS of you with the
 
"It looks like Member X  hasn't added anything to their community profile yet."
 
not listing even at least some equipment used. I have found so far TWO members that just might be possibly capable of grasping what it is about cables - based on the equipment they , according to the profile, allegedly use.
 
None of you use any of the equipment that is the most sensitive to the cable (quality) - and it shows in the answers. Painfully so.
I had to laugh so hard at few posts that it actually - hurt.
 
Sorry, the lack of collective practical experience you as a group so amply manifested is downright shocking. And you can be quadruple PhDs - and still not being able to realize the problem laughing right in front of your face.
 
I am really sorry we live so far apart - a good old listening session, with ABX DBT if required, would be able to clear things up in one afternoon. Because hearing IS believing - and demonstrable by ABX DBT . 
 
I realize you probably all are quite decent guys in person - yet this internet thing can be quite "strange" - for the "lack" of better word. Let's leave it at that.

I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt. I know many audiophiles who have bought expensive cables and returned them, buy new things and don't update their profiles, etc. I've also auditioned lots of speaker equipment I can't remember the exact names of, and don't list.
 
Also, to suggest that you know more than a supposed 4x PhD I think is a bit presumptuous, though well intended. Let's all be careful in assuming backgrounds.

Honestly around here it won't matter what gear someone lists in their profile.  Someone or other will get around to blaming it for not be "resolving" enough eventually.
 
Someone with the exact same gear will instead blame you for having improper taste in music.

analogsurviver said:

   It is all WELL WITHIN  AUDIBLE RANGE - if you know what to look for.
 

Click to expand...

 
It seems silly to have to ask, but what do you define as being within audible range?

jodgey4 said:

  I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt. I know many audiophiles who have bought expensive cables and returned them, buy new things and don't update their profiles, etc. I've also auditioned lots of speaker equipment I can't remember the exact names of, and don't list.
 
Also, to suggest that you know more than a supposed 4x PhD I think is a bit presumptuous, though well intended. Let's all be careful in assuming backgrounds.

Click to expand...

That is a start - giving the benefit of a doubt . Most of the rest have categorically taken the stand "negate whatever he says". 
 
I did not list all of the equipment - or that auditioned. But I did list the most important pieces of equipment I use. There is not a SINGLE cable of any appreciable value used - because (good enough) quality does not have to be expensive - but YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH THAT CABLE IN THAT PARTICULAR APPLICATION. Going all the way unfortunately will cost you dearly. Although (somewhat) familiar with such cables, I do not go anywhere near - simply because I can not afford those prices and will ALWAYS find better way to spend the audio $ - which is not to say that I do not appreciate the audible differences cables, if used judiciously with discretion, can make in the final tuning of the overall system sound. A good dealer, worth his/her salt, should be capable of demonstrating to anybody the importance of the cables - with real gear, real rooms, real recordings. At practically every price range. Now - do not blame him or her - if it turns out the cable you are willing to die for - costs almost as much to be capable of - literally - killing you from starvation. 
 
I did NOT say that I know more than  quadruple PhDs - but there ARE PhDs that do not know hot side of the soldering iron from the cold. There is no more practical thing than a good theory - yet totally removed from practice, it is equally worthless. Having played with audio for some 4 decades now on an uninterupted quest for better sound does give a great deal of practical experience - which no theory on its own can possibly provide. 

sonitus mirus said:

   
It seems silly to have to ask, but what do you define as being within audible range?

Click to expand...

In this case, (16)20 Hz to 20 kHz.
 
Otherwise, the goal I am striving for is some five times that - to 100 kHz. Range that microphones and recorders are just beginning to make a reality.

100kHz isn't five times 20kHz. It's about two and a half octaves higher.

analogsurviver said:

  That is a start - giving the benefit of a doubt

. Most of the rest have categorically taken the stand "negate whatever he says". 

Click to expand...

No, it's more like 'negate everything which doesn't fit scientific understanding thus far.' That's kinda how 'science' works: ignore it until you can prove it. So far, you haven't proven anything except raising the ire of the entire Sound Science community. This isn't some anecdote you tell your awestruck friends: here, you're scutinised until we run out of things to say about you. The fact that you're employing strawmen arguments and arguing the logic rather than the argument for your claims is sufficient to most here that you're of no contribution to this thread.
 
If I talk to a mate about him buying cables, then I'll give him benefit of doubt. If I'm in a science conference talking about him buying cables, then I'll rip into him. Different scenarios, different responses. Get it through to that head of yours. We are under no obligation to be handing out benefits of doubts here.
 
Don't worry, they don't only negate what you say: they'll negate anyone who says anything stupid without any corroboration. I'll demonstrate:
 
A FULL MOON CAUSES THE SOUND TO BE BRIGHTER AND MORE CLEAR
 
Now wait while everyone reks me.
 
Oh, and: 
 

analogsurviver said:

 
I did NOT say that I know more than  quadruple PhDs - but there ARE PhDs that do not know hot side of the soldering iron from the cold. There is no more practical thing than a good theory - yet totally removed from practice, it is equally worthless. Having played with audio for some 4 decades now on an uninterupted quest for better sound does give a great deal of practical experience - which no theory on its own can possibly provide. 

Click to expand...

Conversely, there ARE practical guys who don't know the difference between inductance and capacitance. It works both ways here. Completely useless argument here: if you think you know better than them, then show them. Talking to them isn't going to convince them one way or another.

Our friend analogsurvivor is unable to provide valid technical reasons, properties and numbers to prove his odd cable theories. I have given him the only properties that are in context, concepts and some calculated numbers. So instead he invokes a mild insult or two and then throws some silly BS at the wall, hoping that it'll stick.
@analogsurviver Where's the beef?