Originally Posted by JerryLove
Originally Posted by myinitialsaredac
Out of phase with the original input. To explain further, the dielectric stores energy as a current passes, the problem is that if the dielectric does not re-release the energy at the same point in the waveform that it absorbed it, the energy will be released from the dielectric at a point that isn't where it was in the original current.
AC doesn't pass through a dielectric. ; only the polarities of the plates are changed every half cycle. If a.c. does pass, it is called dielectric breakdown. However, the dielectric does not respond well with an a.c.; its resistance to the "flow of current" decreases with increase in the frequency of a.c.
But absolute phase is irrelevant. The recoding was done days to years ago and so phase is gone. Only relative phase matters. This is pretty important when a waveform is split up (such as with a crossover), where phase inversions can cause cancelation, or where large phase shifts of part of the signal may cause the sound to break up; but phase shifts of an entire waveform would make no difference at all.
Is there a difference on the outbound waveform? Can I see it on an osciliscope?
Ah, I did some more reading and reread my interview with him, its not necessarily a passing of the current more of a current "lag" that results from the differing impedance of the dielectric. It seems that as current passes it does interact with the surroundings and could probably be explained by looking at the intermolecular dipoles and hysteresis. The magnitude could probably be solved with some nasty flux integrals if you took the time to map a vector field. You are correct in saying that it is only relative phase though I find that to be slightly ambiguous and I hope I clarified enough in the above statements to explain why. I do not know the difference on the outbound waveform, though I would assume if it is a problem it would be visible on a sensitive enough oscilloscope in a quiet enough environment.
That's not what I see. What I see is an electromagnet. If running current through a wire didn't make movement, then voicecoils wouldn't work. I don't see anything in the experiment that ties into speaker wire's ability to transmit an electromagnetic wave accurately. Can you tie this back into sound?
If running a current through a wire causes movement, why would it be different in interconnects? Sorry but I don't understand the question.
Is solder forming a chemical bond, i.e. is it forming molecular orbitals with whatever it is applied to? I don't actually know the answer to that question but I would say that I think it is more like forging alloys in a sense where there are discreet sections of different materials that form a circuit due to contact rather than forming a new compound.
Regardless: though there is a measurable effect of any connection (just like there's a measurable difference between a 2' cable and a 3' cable); there is nothing indicating any impact on the waveform remotely withing the threshold for sound.
To this, I can not comment as I have not conducted any experiments to test it, nor have I seen any "good" experiments (any actually) that show this. I have conducted an experiment that showed electrical differences though not restricted in the audio band, as I didn't specifically test in the audio band at that time.
Even in his actual description (on thermal conductivity) he indicates that there is only a difference when "the free electron supply dried up and conductivity was phonetic (vibrations directly through the contiguous crystalline structure)."
I don't doubt that different forging processes result in different physical properties. What I'm looking for are pertinent electrical properties.
The electrical properties I would say has to do with MOs...
It makes sense that impurities would change the MOs as I discussed previously. The effect thereby would have to be discussed in terms of how electricity actually passes. Essentially the energy in the current is absorbed by the electrons in the conductance band, the electron rises to the valence band, and then rereleases the energy as it falls into the conductance band. Yes there are multiple bands of different energy levels but that is too much for now. The energy that is rereleased is absorbed by the copper atoms/molecular structure conductance band MO that then repeats the process and the signal passes. Impurities in this crystal structure would alter the MOs thereby altering the way the current is transferred.
Ok, but to what effect? If, for example, we are simply slowing propigation, or changing impedance; then you've simply got the "copper vs silver" issue, where the threshold for distortion changes (you can use a slightly lower gauge of silver to get the same fidelity as a slightly higher gauge of copper).
The effect of impurities would vary on their physical properties. Oxygen for example is a terrible conductor, if you had oxygen impurities certain volumes in your cable may not even transfer electricity; albeit small. To what effect that has I actually can not comment, as I have not conducted or seen any studies that demonstrate or test for this.
I may be wrong but wouldn't PCI connectors be digital logic (i.e. 1s and 0s) that are error correcting? I think they also go into a buffer and are clocked out but truth be told I am not a computer expert.
Parallel buses are in danger of failure because of electrons not arriving together. Even in the event that error correction is added; the performance hit would be tremendous. The reason that traces are so precise on high-speed circuits, why distances are so low, and why PCI moved to serial (PCI-E) is because of the very low tolerance for error.
Seems like you are implying length of cable can provide a difference in the transfer of electricity? Thanks for the info though, I don't know much about the bus design but it makes sense.
Answered above to the first question. To the second question I actually have not been provided measurements and am working just off of a chemical explanation of the impact of impurities on the MOs. Though I personally think the superconductor applications are nifty
I do love me some superconductors (though the first non-super-conductor in the chain might blow because they look like shorts), and I have no trouble believing that there are applications where the difference in the copper wires being discussed matter. Thusfar I don't see an indication that audio is one of those applications.
The only differences I would say would be if the impurities cause differences to audio waveforms (explainable by MOs) and/or if the resonance of the cable itself affected the energy (imparted its own mechanical energy into electrical energy and caused its own sound), and/or if the dielectric lagging had an effect on the waveform.
To my knowledge none of the phenomena have really been tested for. I would venture to say that it would be a difficult experiment to conduct, and for the debate of whether or not cables make a difference there are far easier experiments to conduct that could lend decent conviction either way.