[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thousands of experienced, intelligent, serious people claim to have seen ghosts, been abducted by aliens, seen Elvis at a Burger King, and have the power to read minds.

That's a ridiculous statement -- the two situations are not comparable at all -- and you know it. That's why it is useless discussing these topics with people like you.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can quote me on that.

Uh, no, I can't. You never express that opinion. You always express the first one noted in my previous post. Jeez, it's like Imus saying "I've never made any insensitive or racist remark."

 

[Fitz]

This is getting quite humourous.

Subscribed.

 

[TheOnlyOne]

The problem is, and I don't know how many times that I have heard these words, "The different is like night and day". That is until the real testing begins......

TheOnlyOne

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Uh, no, I can't. You never express that opinion. You always express the first one noted in my previous post. Jeez, it's like Imus saying "I've never made any insensitive or racist remark."

Now that you've got the straw man, are you going to look for a Tin Woodsman and Cowardly Lion to go with him?

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's why it is useless discussing these topics with people like you.

People like me and my ilk!

See ya
Steve

 

[SamNOISE]

Steve999
Your comments:

Quote:

I don't really agree. I think the same sound will never sound exactly alike twice to the same person, for a variety of reasons. When people say they perceive a difference, they are quite often being perfectly honest. Also, performing a valid non-sighted test with anything other than data files can be frightfully difficult. Most of us are left to studying the data out there and exercising our personal judgment as to what's valid and credible. In the vast majority of cases neither our own senses nor our own empirical testing will give reliable results. My judgment tells me that the objectivist point of view of cables is correct. However, my perceptions would tell me otherwise, and any experiment I could concoct personally would not be valid from a statistical reliability point of view. So I don't think calling people on the "believer" side of the cable debate fabricators or wishful thinkers is justified. They are in most cases honestly acting and reporting on what they are experiencing first-hand, and the subject matter that allows one to get to the bottom of the situation is really quite difficult. However, my opinion of the people who sell expensive cables is usually not so kind. I imagine I could cut some slack for those few souls who sell them and honestly believe they improve sound quality.

...was well thought out and 'spoken': thank you very much for taking the time to discuss the issue. What might the Data Files you mentioned consist of? Steady-state test tones, a specific track or? The reason I ask is that I will be hosting several unsighted auditions this summer: one to determine the audibility of 'Golden Fuses' and another for 'special power cables' and seek as much input as possible from all parties. My intent was to use the 30-track (15 descriptive introductions and 15 musical tracks), Chesky Records 'Ultimate Demonstration Disk' for the auditions.

I can direct you to high-resolution samples of this disk if you are interested (email me via my www site) - its very instructive, educational and interesting!

http://www.chesky.com/core/details.c...ctcategoryid=1

Andrew D.
www.cdnav.com

[size=xx-small].[/size]

 

[evilking]

Remove my post.

Don't have time to discuss trivial nonsense.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's why it is useless discussing these topics with people like you.

My God, Phil, give it a rest. You've become everything that you claim to dislike about BigShot.

If it's useless to discuss it with him, don't.

 

[lowmagnet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilking /img/forum/go_quote.gif Remove my post. Don't have time to discuss trivial nonsense.

The phrase you're looking for is:

Quote:

.

 

[Chu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamNOISE /img/forum/go_quote.gif Steve999 What might the Data Files you mentioned consist of? Steady-state test tones, a specific track or?

I would suggest using a computer to generate a random waveform and record it (DVD-A media/player probably the most practical medium for this).

Simply put the media player on one end of the cable, and an extremely accurate oscilloscope on the other recording the data. Compare the output of different cables.

Creating the source DVD-A disc would be trivial. I'm sure we have some EE students around here who have access to oscilloscopes that are accurate in the GHz/pV range, which should be well past DVD-A's theoretical resolution.

If you have access to the equipment this is high school science fair stuff. Anyone out there have access to a lab willing and willing to do it?

 

[gotchaforce]

I think the biggest question here is, lets say tomorrow undeniable proof came out that cables didnt make any difference.

What happens to the people who said they heard a difference?

are they labeled insane?

i think its only fair.

 

[TheOnlyOne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotchaforce /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the biggest question here is, lets say tomorrow undeniable proof came out that cables didnt make any difference. What happens to the people who said they heard a difference?

First there is undeniable proof already, also there are people who say the earth is flat even today.

TheOnlyOne

 

[Chu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotchaforce /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the biggest question here is, lets say tomorrow undeniable proof came out that cables didnt make any difference. What happens to the people who said they heard a difference? are they labeled insane? i think its only fair.

There really isn't any undeniable proof, there is only proof to a certain degree. Luckily though because digital media is completely defined by sampling rate and bits per sample, we have a hard upper bound for how accurately a cable has to reproduce a waveform. Any additional resolution is moot -- it is beyond the capability of the media to accurately store and thus can't be reproduced.

So what will the people who say they can hear a difference do? Move to a medium that doesn't have such a well defined bound, like . . . vinyl

 

[TheOnlyOne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Move to a medium that doesn't have such a well defined bound, like . . . vinyl

But vinyl does....

Quote:

Let's look at LP. It has a dynamic range of about 70dB in the best of times and cases (must count surface noise, an unavoidable part, as well as rumble, etc). If it had two channels and the same bandwidth (and the same SNR at every frequency) that would work out to about 70/6 bits per Hz, that is to say about 12 bits/Hz (11 2/3). That by itself is inferior to the CD's 16 bits/Hz. However, it is argued, and with some meaning, although how much is actually present in any real recording can be debated, that LP's can go to 30 kHz. So, multiplying by frequency, you see (one sided spectrum, for various reasons at the end we have to double all of this, but we'll compare apples to apples) 20*16 vs. 30 *12. That would seem to put LP with more information, HOWEVER... Above 5-6 kHz, the SNR of an LP goes down rapidly, instead of being 70dB, the actual SNR is more like 20-30 dB. This is now 4-5 bits/Hz. This applies over at least half of the bandwidth, in reality, so now we can treat that as (I'm approximating, but not terribly harmfully so) LP bits = 12 * 5 +5*25 or about 185 compared to the CD's 320 (Note both measures are for one-sided spectrum and one channel) But that's not all. The LP has distortion. We can't send as much information at lower frequencies, so we'd better use 50dB (.3 % distortion) as an upper figure instead of 70dB. No, but wait, at high frequencies, channel independence goes to pot, and we only have 10-15dB of channel independence. So really at high frequencies (supra 15kHz for sure, maybe lower) we don't really have 5 bits/Hz/channel, we have more like (5+2,5) bits/Hz/2channels. In other words, the LP isn't close in terms of total information content. Point out to your friend that LP's do have some very euphonic kinds of distortion, i.e. distortions (l-r enhancement, noise floor, out of phase rumble, inter-channel intermodulation, etc) that often sound better than the linear system. Note: the above analysis is very, very rough. It is, however, not too far off the mark. You may hear people claim 90dB from turntables, ask them to turn off their A-weighting if they do. You will have people who claim less distortion at high frequencies, or higher frequencies, but then we can have several discussions if you'd like, on the realities of getting 30 kHz through either a new or old recording chain, as well as the atmosphere. James Johnston

TheOnlyOne