[Bostonears]

 

 
Alright, so there might be a mysterious, unknown force at work.  Now, how does that unknown force "work" without affecting part of Ohm's Law?

How does a phase shift, which is easily audible, affect Ohm's Law?

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

...I try to find a way to understand cables. I'm not joking - I would not mind having a patent in my name. I have a background and degrees in law and accounting; I can run a business. I would not at all minx running a *legitimate* cable company. I think I could pull down an easy seven figures a year or sell it for a tidy sum.

<snip>

I gotta take my hat off to you, dude.... all your posts.... well said, well thought out, well done! 

 
 
USG

 

[khaos974]

Quote:

How does a phase shift, which is easily audible, affect Ohm's Law?

Phase shift is happens when the phase of different frequencies is shifted at the output, it's perfectly described by impedance and capacitance which shift the phase backwards and forwards.
They are described by jLω and 1/jCω where j is the imaginary unit, L is the inductance, C is the capacitance, ω = 2πf is the angular frequency.

 

[Krav]

Not true, in my experience. Not only DBT, but any posts that may compromise commercial interests of the site owners or site sponsors are subject to "determination" by the moderators. This is akin to traditional hobby magazines supported by advertising - you can write all you want to the editor, but it is he who decides what to publish.
 
This is a normal practice and would be fine but the problem is that some of the sponsors (e.g. http://www.cryo-parts.com), as well as some of the members who do not disclose their ties with commercial interests, in my opinion, which does not constitute a legal advice, may be engaging in a good old retail fraud, now enriched by the Web and social features.
 
Being "too small a fish", they are not currently being pursued and prosecuted, yet they definitely may affect the reputation of this site very negatively in the eyes of people like me. Potentially, it can reach ridiculous levels if left unchecked (or is it reaching already?).
 
Not on this site, but on another major site discussing consumer items my investigation showed some time ago that about 80% of posts were coming from just a handful of marketers and sellers pretending they are either owners or potential buyers of the discussed items. Most of them used several identities. Basically, these guys were mostly trying to sell stuff to each other, but of course some of the 20% of the really interested people were bound to take their advice at face value. Once this fact was discovered and verified (it was not just my input), the site took quite drastic measures against the shills, and the problem subsided.
 
Quote:

Head-Fi is not controlled by some secret group who decides what is and what is not discussed.  We, for the most part, determine what gets discussed here.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Krav, this place is pretty straight. A few shills slip in now and then, but someone usually spots and outs them. I don't think the administration is complicit.

 

[mike1127]

 
Quote:

Now, the problem with cables is that there is nothing to start from. If you got weird readings of resistance, for example, you could start backing into an answer. You could conduct experiments with different types of cables and begin to predict what certain things do. Then you could start engineering them to perform certain tasks and provide specified benefits. However, no matter how you slice it, there's nothing detectable. Everything behaves as already understood and there's no change in the signal.

The problem you run into with that is that it is hard to believe that there is something that perceptively changes a signal without leaving any kind of trace of what it is.

 
I think your analysis is too pat.
 
I think that unknown factors exist and do push and pull at things already understand, but we don't have a general theory about how to measure them---two possible reasons why. The changes could be too small. Or more importantly, the changes are in the dynamic behavior of the system. Ohm's law, which you have referred to repeatedly, is only valid for linear-time-invariant systems. Nothing is truly an LTI system; everything's behavior changes as the input conditions change.
 
To generalize this, any measurement of a system invokes two models---our model of the system, and our model of the operation of the instrument.
 
For example, if you hook up an ohm meter to measure the value of a resistor, you are
 

1. modeling the resistor as a theoretically pure resistance
2. modeling the behavior of the ohm meter as well, using whatever theory applies to its design

 
That's two places that reality can diverge from your measurement.
 

 

[mike1127]

I noticed the question of "euphonic distortion" came up.
 
Some audiophiles prefer tube equipment. Engineers say it has more distortion than SS (not universally true, by the way) so that it can't possibly be more accurate. Therefore, it is the distortion itself some audiophiles admire.
 
This is nothing but a tautology that arises from the engineer's assumption that we are measuring the relevant behavior.
 
So: tubes---accurate or euphonic?
 
As a matter of philosophical curiosity, there is a third possibility.
 
First, what's so great about music? It's enjoyable, right? So it creates pleasant sensations. It is an aesthetic matter.
 
Contrast that with a technical document, which is not there for our enjoyment, but there to convey information and aid comprehension.
 
Seems like two different issues. Not really! Sometimes music can be described as information. A musical signal is packed with transients and sustained events, which exist in a relationships. A chord can be understood as frequencies organized in a certain way. Rhythm is conveyed by transient events with a certain pattern in time. My theory is that even beauty, like the lush sound of a violin, is made of many transient events in a certain pattern.
 
These patterns in sound are easily discernible in a live acoustic event. The job of audio is to make those same patterns discernible in your home. There's no theoretical reason why distortion could not aid in comprehensibility.
 
Let's take a visual example. You are trying to read a bad fax transmission with fuzzy words. Try running an edge-enhancement filter on the fax image and see if it's easier to read. Completely plausible.
 
My opinion is that tubes and analog are more musically accurate, and the best explanation is that they have low distortion where it counts. But it could be that their distortion is like an edge-enhancement algorithm. I don't think it's likely, but it's possible.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

 
 
I think your analysis is too pat.
 
I think that unknown factors exist and do push and pull at things already understand, but we don't have a general theory about how to measure them---two possible reasons why. The changes could be too small. Or more importantly, the changes are in the dynamic behavior of the system. Ohm's law, which you have referred to repeatedly, is only valid for linear-time-invariant systems. Nothing is truly an LTI system; everything's behavior changes as the input conditions change.
 
To generalize this, any measurement of a system invokes two models---our model of the system, and our model of the operation of the instrument.
 
For example, if you hook up an ohm meter to measure the value of a resistor, you are
 

1. modeling the resistor as a theoretically pure resistance
2. modeling the behavior of the ohm meter as well, using whatever theory applies to its design

 
That's two places that reality can diverge from your measurement.
 

If the changes were too small to detect, then you can count on your ears not detecting the undetectable...

 

[jbach]

Quote:

If the changes were too small to detect, then you can count on your ears not detecting the undetectable...

I think the ear can detect unmeasurable things.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

If measurements can show a difference, but DBT shows that such cannot be reliably differentiated between (or in another word, heard) then I think the measurement is not relevant in terms of hifi and music.
 
If we can hear a difference and that shows with numerous DBTs being passed, but cannot measure it, then I think it is relevant in terms of hifi and music.
 
If some say they can hear a difference but that does not show with numerous DBTs which are fails and there is no measurable difference, then I think it is a myth.

 

[Currawong]

krav: FYI: This is an example what happens when what you describe occurs here. I do recall someone describing a large sport-related site, possibly related to mountain biking or cycling, I forget which, having admins complicit in and/or taking secret kickbacks to promote a certain brand.  But basically, discussion that results in the forums being trashed is not allowed here. Politics and religion are out too.  I don't see how creating a forum where DBT can be discussed really works if the admins are really trying to prevent critical discussion of sponsors' products as some people think they are doing.
 
I do have trouble in my mind reconciling what digger945 posted about the sensitivity of the human ear verses the supposed limitations of our hearing in dB of determining the differences in sound.  What I'd be interested in more usefully, tall order that it is, would be clear indications of the measured degree of differences between different pieces of gear, so one can clearly say something like: Paying for this would be better value because it has a lower noise floor, which translates to XYZ, whereas your other choice makes less difference, so would be poorer value. Just like the basic thought of buying better headphones first, as the make the most difference.  People, I find, don't even have a basic understanding of frequency response and how changes affect their perception of music, for example, so "better" to the average person might be "more bass" or "more treble" or whatever, not more detail, wider soundstage etc. They might not care. It might not matter too!

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

If measurements can show a difference, but DBT shows that such cannot be reliably differentiated between (or in another word, heard) then I think the measurement is not relevant in terms of hifi and music.
 
If we can hear a difference and that shows with numerous DBTs being passed, but cannot measure it, then I think it is relevant in terms of hifi and music.
 
If some say they can hear a difference but that does not show with numerous DBTs which are fails and there is no measurable difference, then I think it is a myth.

Point and case ladies and gentlemen.
 
/end "debate"

 

[wavoman]

End of debate yes, but only if the blind tests are done on yourself, single-subject.  (BTW, the tests can be single blind if the test leader has no opinion or bias, or can't communicate to the listener in any way -- this makes single subject blind experiments on yourself much easier, since all you need is a friend and a physical set-up that works.  Of course you can do A/B/X test by yourself with the software, but I [strongly] prefer simple A/B difference or preference tests [with false swindle comparisons A/A and B/B thrown in] to classic A/B/X ... these A/B tests need an experiment leader).
 
Results of group DBT's may or may not have any meaning for me.  Others here have suggested that these experiments might be useful predictive guides, but doing your own tests (taking advantage of audition and/or return policies) is so much better.  Conducting personal blind testing in your own envirornment will save you a lot of money in the long run, and gives a lot of satisfaction (it helps reduce the need to upgrade all the time for no reason).

 

[wavoman]

Quote:

Let's take a visual example ...

Every pro photographer knows that a soft-focus, lower res shot of a beautiful face looks so much nicer than a revealing uber-detailed shot.  Vaseline on the lens, and all that.
 
Sheer stockings make legs look better -- less real-life.
 
One solution -- get a euphonic set-up and a dead-flat accurate set-up.  I have -- and indeed, after two years of auditioning and listening and optimizing, the former is tubes and the latter is ss.
 

 

[wavoman]

Quote:

... some of the sponsors (e.g. http://www.cryo-parts.com),...may be engaging in a good old retail fraud
 

 
Easy there sport.  I have no connection with cryo-parts, and I have no idea what the technology does or whether it makes any difference.  But I have met the owner at CanJam, and purchased other audio goods from him.  In no way is he a fraud.  He has given me honest advice on my system, even declining to sell me something at one point that I ordered, and my rig sounds very much the better for my interaction with him.  A fine and honest gentleman.
 
Now maybe you can prove that his cable treatments don't work, and maybe you think his cable prices are high.  Fine.  But I am sure he hears a difference -- he would not claim he does if he didn't!  Could be placebo, who knows.  Of course he is not alone, not by a long shot.
 
A friend of mine is a well-known trainer of bodybuilders.  He sells muscle-building supplements that have been proven not to work.  But he thinks they work, he really does.  He is not a fraud.  He is wrong and honest, like a lot of people.  In this case I know for a fact he is honest since our relationship goes back years, and I have the experience to know.
 
"Honest but wrong" does not equal "Fraud".  And maybe the cryo-parts guy is not wrong.  I just don't know.  I can't hear the difference in my own blind tests, but that's just me.  There is ample opportunity to listen, audition, decide.  No fraud here.