[kiteki]

Can you rephrase that I didn't catch on...
 
You mean discussion of the validity of a test is seperate from the outcome of the test?  If yes, this entails what exactly?

 

[jnjn]

Quote:

Can you rephrase that I didn't catch on...
 
You mean discussion of the validity of a test is seperate from the outcome of the test?  If yes, this entails what exactly?

My apologies for the confusion.
 
You stated:
Quote:

Lots of talk and no cigars, just link to these cable blind tests already... positive or negative.
 
If they're negative, we can discuss if the blind test was valid or not, how extensive it was, if it was fair, etc.

Your statement implies that if they are positive, the tests were valid and above discussion.  That cannot be the case.  If a test comes out positive, it is extremely important to subject it to even MORE scrutiny, as it is significantly diverges from a large body of negatives.
 
j

 

[proton007]

I guess a lot of us have exhausted our list of arguments. Too bad there's no agreement still. 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

My apologies for the confusion.
 
You stated:
Your statement implies that if they are positive, the tests were valid and above discussion.  That cannot be the case.  If a test comes out positive, it is extremely important to subject it to even MORE scrutiny, as it is significantly diverges from a large body of negatives.
 
j

 
As jj used to say, getting a positive result is EASY. It's negative results that are difficult.
 
By that he meant that there are many things which can conspire to give false positive results. Which is why as you say such results should be subject to even more scrutiny.
 
se

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

 
You're playing semantics. The cables themselves are not responsible for any audible difference. This is what the data shows. If people hear differences, it is some factor other than the material/construction/properties of the cable.

 
I have continually stated that there is no difference caused inherently by the cable. There is no difference caused by the way it is made, what it is made of or any of the electrical properties it has. But, a cable can still make an audible difference due to its brand, image, understanding of what is made of (such as sliver sounds brighter).
 
That is why I object to claims that "cables make no difference" as that is wrong, they do. I have been avoiding that phrase for ages now to try and move the debate on to having a greater understanding about how cables work.

 

[liamstrain]

I guess my problem is the use of the word audible. That is an objective measure. It either makes a measurable change, or does not. If the difference is not audible (objective) then I do not think we should use the term. 
 
Cable marketing/packaging/expectation makes a difference to the way some people process sound in their heads, but not to the actual sound. We should avoid confusion. 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Lots of talk and no cigars, just link to these cable blind tests already... positive or negative.
 
If they're negative, we can discuss if the blind test was valid or not, how extensive it was, if it was fair, etc.
 
 
......

 
 
Positive tests here http://www.head-fi.org/t/513481/are-blind-tests-bogus-examples-of-blind-tests-with-positive-results
 
Negative tests here http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 
The test of cables only appear in the negative list. I have been very careful to only include properly conducted tests.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

I guess my problem is the use of the word audible. That is an objective measure. It either makes a measurable change, or does not. If the difference is not audible (objective) then I do not think we should use the term. 
 
Cable marketing/packaging/expectation makes a difference to the way some people process sound in their heads, but not to the actual sound. We should avoid confusion. 

 
 
I understand and accept there are semantics involved. But I think that saying a cable difference is not audible causes confusion as to many they are. Hence the circular argument starts.

 

[jnjn]

Quote:

 
I have continually stated that there is no difference caused inherently by the cable. There is no difference caused by the way it is made, what it is made of or any of the electrical properties it has. But, a cable can still make an audible difference due to its brand, image, understanding of what is made of (such as sliver sounds brighter).
 
That is why I object to claims that "cables make no difference" as that is wrong, they do. I have been avoiding that phrase for ages now to try and move the debate on to having a greater understanding about how cables work.

For IC's and PC's this is entirely inaccurate.  For speaker wires, this may not be the case.
 
The electrical parameters of the speaker wire, the load characteristics, and the length of the wire will conspire to alter the transfer speed of information to the speaker.  For example, if a speaker wire is designed with a characteristic impedance of 8 ohms, and is delivering power to an 8 ohm load, the effective propagation velocity will be roughly half lightspeed, delays in the tens of nanoseconds..  If the cable is 100 to 150 ohms, like zip, the effective prop velocity will be roughly three orders of magnitude slower, especially if the speaker has 2 or 4 ohm dips in impedance.  This brings the cable delay into the realm of human localization capability.
 
I cannot state with confidence that speaker cables can make no difference, nor can I state that they do.  All I can state is that they are capable of altering the signal at levels which have been demonstrated to be audible by humans.
 
j

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

For IC's and PC's this is entirely inaccurate.  For speaker wires, this may not be the case.
 
The electrical parameters of the speaker wire, the load characteristics, and the length of the wire will conspire to alter the transfer speed of information to the speaker.  For example, if a speaker wire is designed with a characteristic impedance of 8 ohms, and is delivering power to an 8 ohm load, the effective propagation velocity will be roughly half lightspeed, delays in the tens of nanoseconds..  If the cable is 100 to 150 ohms, like zip, the effective prop velocity will be roughly three orders of magnitude slower, especially if the speaker has 2 or 4 ohm dips in impedance.  This brings the cable delay into the realm of human localization capability.
 
I cannot state with confidence that speaker cables can make no difference, nor can I state that they do.  All I can state is that they are capable of altering the signal at levels which have been demonstrated to be audible by humans.
 
j

 
 
I accept that extreme lengths may impact on cables. But it more do they work or not?
 
Please show examples of cables altering the signal at audible levels.

 

[jnjn]

Quote:

 
 
I accept that extreme lengths may impact on cables. But it more do they work or not?
 
Please show examples of cables altering the signal at audible levels.

I do not speak of extreme lengths.
 
When a cable has a characteristic impedance of 150 ohms, and the load drops to 2 ohms, there will be hundreds and hundreds of back and forth reflections in the system before the load has anywhere near the current level that the source wishes.  This brings the response into the ~10 microsecond range of delay even for reasonable cable lengths, which is within the realm of audible (nordmark demonstrated  1.2uS sensitivity back in 72.
 
The primary misconception everybody has, is that the propagation velocity of a cable defines the delay from one end of the cable to another.  In reality, the ONLY signal that can propagate down a cable at the cable's prop velocity, is a signal which has the voltage to current relationship of the cable.  If you send a 100 volt pulse down a 100 ohm cable, the signal that travels at prop speed is a signal of 100 volts and 1 ampere.  If the load is 2 ohms, at the end of the first pass, there will NOT be 100 volts across the load.  That takes many reflections.
 
As I have stated in previous posts...I can neither confirm nor deny the audibility of any particular cable, speaker, or amplifier combination.  What I can do is show how the level of effect of a speaker wire falls into the realm of human capability.  This is contrary to the generally held INCORRECT assumption that speaker wires cannot possibly impact audibility, and this is due to the erroneous understandings of transmission line theory and application on the part of, well, darn near everyone.
 
The lumped element analysis should lead to the same result if the number of elements is 10 or more, but it's not so good if you select 1 cap and 1 inductor.  Nor does the lumped element model portray accurately the reflection and charging sequence of the line.  T-line understandings provide far more useful realizations.
 
edit:  it must be noted, I have found NOBODY on the web, on any site, in any publication, who can even test speaker impedance level signals accurately enough to distinguish signal alterations in the 10 uSec domain buried within a musical signal.  The primary issue is the low impedance and high current slew rates.  They can't even buy a resistor capable of accurate measurement of currents at that speed, and they don't know how to make one.  (not hard, btw).
j

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnjn /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
....  This is contrary to the generally held INCORRECT assumption that speaker wires cannot possibly impact audibility, and this is due to the erroneous understandings of transmission line theory and application on the part of, well, darn near everyone.
 
........

 
So in theory the assumption is incorrect, but in practice.......what?
 
Sorry jnjn, but at the moment you are behaving like cable companies by suggesting audibility without proving such, let alone showing a direct link between a difference and sound quality.

 

[jnjn]

EDIT:  Please accept my apologies for coming in so strong.  It's not you exactly, but rather, a mindset which needs addressing.  For way too long, too many people have considered this topic as one of two "factions" separated by the fence.  I will not play by those rules..
 
Quote:

 
So in theory the assumption is incorrect, but in practice.......what?
 
Sorry jnjn, but at the moment you are behaving like cable companies by suggesting audibility without proving such, let alone showing a direct link between a difference and sound quality.

I have been very clear in my postings, you will find all this in the last two days on this particular thread.
 
1.  Should a positive result (cable makes a difference) be found, THAT test MUST be heavily scrutinized because the results contradict what is normally found.
 
2.  I do not believe the high cost justifiable to the end user.  While the cost of manufacture may be consistent with the tag price, I still do not consider it worth it.
 
3.  I do not consider manufacturer white papers science.  It is generally manufactured verbage used to sell product, many times with little or no scientific accuracy.
 
4.  The statement that a speaker cable CANNOT possibly alter the sound and physics proves it....is uncontestably WRONG.  Physics does not prove it.  MIS-application of physics may, but reality is a different ball game.
 
5.  I have explained how the electrical parameters of a cable can alter the signal delay to the speaker, and how that can arise to the levels humans are capable of discerning.
 
 
The fact that the correct application of physics may be inconsistent with what you have been "taught" is not my problem, but rather, yours.  I am not a cable vendor, I do not work for one, I do not recommend cables beyond the #12awg zip I've used (editr even the #24 awg I use) or the IC's and PC's that come with the equipment.
 
So to come out saying that I am acting like a cable vendor, is simply your way of attempting to discredit the message I've presented.  Which is:  GET THE SCIENCE RIGHT.
 
The chances of you (generic you, not specific) understanding the physics properly based on what you have read or been taught, while not zero, is not 100%.  You want to read all those websites created by all them ele guru's, that's fine.  But remember, they miss quite a lot, promote their own beliefs, and get a lot of it incorrect.  To add insult to injury, they position themselves such that they can never admit errors.
 
Now ask me about IC's and PC's.  Man, the misunderstandings out there...sheesh
 
j

 

[jcx]

the time delay argument is both missing the conditions of the tests, and failing to apply real world physics - the tests are done with headphones, special tone burst signals, not loudspeakers
 
the reason not to use loudspeakers for such subtle timing tests is that the air path difference corresponding to 10 us is 3 mm - no home listener has 3mm accurate/repeatable positioning in their "sweet spot", many loudspeakers have a zoo of early diffractions from driver design, radiating surface edges, mounting, baffle edges even before the room propagation issues are added
 
that said I have posted a link to Pass Labs speaker cable tests - the measured results do appear to be on the edge of conventional estimates of audible frequency response variations - "the no cable ever makes a difference" is an overstatement

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

that said I have posted a link to Pass Labs speaker cable tests - the measured results do appear to be on the edge of conventional estimates of audible frequency response variations - "the no cable ever makes a difference" is an overstatement

 
I only saw measurable differences from the Pass Labs data in the audible range was with the cables they indicated had abnormally high inductance, causing roll-off with the high frequencies (like a secondary high-pass crossover). Which is why I usually use the caveat - no "properly made" cable, should make an audible difference.