[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

So much for anonymity..

 
Dude, I'm sorry. I've deleted the post.
 
se
 
 

 

[jnjn]

Quote:

 
Dude, I'm sorry. I've deleted the post.
 
se
 
 

No problemo.  I never stated preferences.
 
Thank you.
 
Cheers, jn
 
 

 

[wudai_e]

Quote:

Again, can you feel a pea under ten mattresses? Just as measurements are limited by the resolution of the measuring equipment, so too are cables limited by the resolution of the headphones or speakers. If you're connecting a $50 DVD player to a $150 A/V receiver and some cheap bookshelf speakers, don't waste any money on cables. I'd be the first to tell you that. You could spend tens of thousands of dollars on Siltech Royal Signature for that system, and you'd hear no difference. The equipment simply couldn't take advantage of it. It would be the same as strapping a $2K piece of Canon L glass to a cellphone camera. Kind of dumb.
 
Though I don't always follow it, generally I think the "20% rule" for cables is sound advice. Spend 20% of the price of the equipment on cables for that piece of equipment. Thousand dollar amp? Spend $200 on interconnects. Where you put that $200 of course makes a lot of difference. Signal Cable's $100 Silver Resolution will beat up $200 cables from most of the big brands. One should always spend wisely.
 
If you have a $60 MDR-V6 and you follow the rule, that leaves $12 for a headphone cable. So.. don't bother.

 

[size=10pt]How can you draw an analogy between cable, headphones, and mattresses is beyond me! I still yet to find any mattress on the market that can transmit AC signal on the mV level, can you point me where to find one? Plus and why everything you post in this discussion sounds so authoritive, or trying to be? Should I take your opinion with a grain of salt? From the way you word everything there is absolutely no room for that. Why? Is it so important to be right on a topic that can't be proven either way? [/size]
 

 

[wudai_e]

Quote:

.... Let me use YET ANOTHER analogy to see maybe if it seeps in this time. Let's say you're trying to judge differences between pro grade Canon L or Nikkor FX lenses...
 
Do you understand what I'm saying here?.
 

 
No, and please stop coming up with false analogies to prove whatever you are trying to prove. Lens construction vs. Cable making?? Are you serious?? And yes, I'm done quoting you. 

 

[jnjn]

Quote:

I know how to calculate electron drift velocity, that's not the problem. I just remembered it as centimeters per second instead of hour.

Not a problem.  Sorry if it looked like I was dissin you, that was not my intent.  You said you were looking towards starting your physics ScB, so I figured I'd post a link to that site so everybody knew what we were talking about....  That is one really cool site.
 
In his paper, Hawksford derived the equations for prop velocity of an E/M wave into copper..he wrote at the time that this energy driving in had to come out again, so had this residual thing going.  He put an experiment together, and lo and behold, what he expected to show up....did.
 
Unfortunately, he was not accurate in the derivations nor design.  Specifically how they applied to the system.  From the paper, he did not appear to have any experience in the correct design of the test setup, it looks like his test was not accurate enough for a low impedance measurement.(and accurate measurements of a low impedance system are a bit...ch).  He also neglected the permeability of the steel wire he used in lieu of copper(John Curl stated that Malcolm told him the wire had a relative permeability of 100).  Bottom line, he mis-interpreted the test results, because the results were consistent with his expected outcome..He thought he found a "residual", but what he found actually, was inductance that was not accounted for in the derivations.
 
Such is life.  I've read other, more current papers from Malcolm Hawksford on other subjects, and consider him one of the best in what he understands.  .
 
Cheers, jn

 
 

 

[OPrwtos]

has anyone used the stock cable of a headphone, taken the frequency response, then used a really bad cable and then tested the frequency response and then an expensive cable and check the frequency response??? 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

has anyone used the stock cable of a headphone, taken the frequency response, then used a really bad cable and then tested the frequency response and then an expensive cable and check the frequency response??? 

cheapskateaudio did a measurement of stock vs. silver aftermarket cables with his HD650 that showed differences, but he never reciprocated to requests for repeated tests.
 
"reciprocated to requests for repeated tests" say that 10 times fast.

 

[OPrwtos]

Quote:

cheapskateaudio did a measurement of stock vs. silver aftermarket cables with his HD650 that showed differences, but he never reciprocated to requests for repeated tests.
 
"reciprocated to requests for repeated tests" say that 10 times fast.

lol not so much of a tongue twister really.
 
Also yeh, i really want people to do proper frequency tests, that would be good. But other than using just the stock and silver after market cable, i want to see someone use a really bad cable just so we can really see how much the cable effects the outcome.
 
I just saw his tests, but i would have liked it if he used proper equipment other than a mic, also trying various wires. Plus different types of drivers.
 
 

 

[NA Blur]

I find it interested that we use the term "high end" when what we really mean is more expensive.  How many times do we claim that a less expensive cable sounds better when our hard earned money is up for grabs.  Just like a more expensive set of headphones we often expect it to be better, but I have had so many poor sounding expensive headphones that I use words like frequency response, harmonic distortion, and square wave response rather than using the words better or high end.
 
Take a look at the review for the Ultrasone Edition 10:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/ultrasone-edition-10
 
Did high end make it better?  I think not.

 

[pcf]

Quote:

I find it interested that we use the term "high end" when what we really mean is more expensive. 

 
There has been enough discussion about that already but the term "high end" still make me think of good, expensive stuff, not cheap giant killers.

 

[bmiamihk]

Better material does help and so better material will cost you more then yarn.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Better material does help and so better material will cost you more then yarn.

How does it help?

 

[bmiamihk]

Read in this web site. I myself have bought many earphones ranging from $150 to a little over $1,000 dollars and when I replaced the stock earphones it did make an improvement. Also there are some users on here who has spent over $8,000 Dollars of just In earphones who have also tried the better material (Silver) cables and they also agreed.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Read in this web site. I myself have bought many earphones ranging from $150 to a little over $1,000 dollars and when I replaced the stock earphones it did make an improvement. Also there are some users on here who has spent over $8,000 Dollars of just In earphones who have also tried the better material (Silver) cables and they also agreed.

So it doesn't help the signal, just makes you feel better?

 

[bmiamihk]

I guess by your "trying to feel your are smarter then others" remark you are saying that what ever I believe or feel better means that using any material makes no difference? Well I did not only think it I bought it after trying it out for free from a store and a friend. If it didnt improve I would just use a portable amp. We learn more by doing then thinking.