Heavy gauge speaker wire versus ACD technology
Comments
-
Jcandy... You have been judged by your peers to be the WEAKEST LINK!
Good bye...The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
You've made exactly 5 posts in this thread and not one was topical, relevant, useful, or polite.nooshinjohn wrote: »Jcandy... You have been judged by your peers to be the WEAKEST LINK!
Good bye... -
nooshinjohn wrote: »Jcandy... You have been judged by your peers to be the WEAKEST LINK!
Good bye...
have you ever reread your early posts when you first came aboard??:rolleyes: -
Some of the language used in this thread probably violates Polk Forum Rules.TO ERR IS HUMAN. TO FORGIVE IS CANINE.
-
Sure.Ok! Forget the C and L in the AC characteristics of a wire. I say forget not because it does not exhibit C and L characteristics, but the number is small so it's effects are negligible in your case. So, let's just say wire is purely resistive R nature and assume DC characteristics of wire.
That's not true. The resistance R (Ohms) of a wire, roughly speaking, isThe R of wire depends on the length of the wire x width of the wire so the R varies from wire to wire.
R = rho * L / A
where rho is the electrical resistivity (Ohm-m), L is the length of wire (m) and A is the cross-sectional area (m^2). But yes, R varies from wire to wire.
Agreed.So the power is lost occurs in the wire during the power transfer from an amp to the speakers. The power loss depends on the amount of R which varies with different type and length of wire. But it usually is small enough if you use the correct wire gauge and not longer length than you should so the power loss of wire is usually not considered in General.
Agreed.But it does not mean it didn't happen. And you measured exactly just that and prove different wire has different power losses and the difference in power losses is almost negligible if the correct wire size and wire length is used.
Now that I do not agree with. In this test situation, if the on-axis SPL does not change, then the pressure field which impinges on your ear (sound) does not change. Conversely, in this test, there is no way to change the sound coming from the speaker without altering the measured SPL/phase. You just can't do it.Your measurements does not prove anything other than that. SPL measurements in General does not say anything about Sound Quality. -
Regardless of what is posted when adults cant agree to disagree.........well we see what happens...........the gang mentality here is AS bad as on the other audio sites that all here are so quick to slam..................right or wrong or stupid all are entitled to their opinions....if you dont agree then so be it......maybe some actually do believe what they post......
-
In this test situation, if the on-axis SPL does not change, then the pressure field which impinges on your ear (sound) does not change. Conversely, in this test, there is no way to change the sound coming from the speaker without altering the measured SPL/phase. You just can't do it.
Why so dogmatic? There is a large population of people whose observations are that they can hear the differences in cable. Now if you rule out that they are all suffering delusions, then that fact might be taken as a clue that either the underlying assumptions (stated as facts here) or the measurement methods or both should be questioned.SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette -
jcandy, since distortion manifests itself as off broadcast frequencies, could you plot the magnitude of the off broadcast frequency signals in each transient relative to the magnitude of the broadcast frequency signal versus broadcast frequency to give a plot by which to directly compare the distortion patterns of the two wires?
-
I am not aware of any rigorous blind testing that shows people actually can hear a difference. There's a difference between saying you can hear a difference and hearing an actual difference. I may say I am a rich, and I may believe I am rich, but that isn't proof that I am rich.Jetmaker737 wrote: »Why so dogmatic? There is a large population of people whose observations are that they can hear the differences in cable. Now if you rule out that they are all suffering delusions, then that fact might be taken as a clue that either the underlying assumptions (stated as facts here) or the measurement methods or both should be questioned.
This is compounded by the fact that the scientific approach generally shows that cables only make a difference when the gauge/length violate certain minimum requirements. -
You need a cork (must be Algerian or Tunisian) coaster under the Pepsi can.
Coat hanger wire (from Fong's laundry) should be acetylene (never arc) welded (using very large heat sinks) directly to speaker binding posts and amp outputs for best results.VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
NAD SS rigs w/mods
GIK panels -
They haven't changed to this day.have you ever reread your early posts when you first came aboard??:rolleyes:"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
And what about capacitance?This is compounded by the fact that the scientific approach generally shows that cables only make a difference when the gauge/length violate certain minimum requirements."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
...... the effect of a new audio enhancement device I invented called the ACD, or aluminum cylindrical diffractor.
The ACD technology is not a new invention...
and comes in many varieties and sizes. -
For the AR 12 gauge wire,And what about capacitance?
L=2.13m
r=0.001m
The capacitance is
C = 2*pi*epsilon*L/Omega
Here, Omega=ln(L/r)=7.66 and epsilon=8.85e-12 F/m, so the wire capacitance is
C = 16pF = 0.01 uF
The tweeter filter on the ZMV5 uses a 8.2uF series capacitor, so the ratio is
C_wire/C_speaker = 0.01/8.2 = 0.0012
Thus, the capacitance of the AR wire is about 1000 times too small to affect the filter transfer functions. -
16pF = 0.000016uF, not 0.01uF."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
-
In what transient?intangible wrote: »jcandy, since distortion manifests itself as off broadcast frequencies, could you plot the magnitude of the off broadcast frequency signals in each transient
But you said it yourself: the distortion "manifests itself as off-broadcast frequencies". So, if a wire produced any sort of distortion, it would alter the shape of the SPL curve, producing excess or reduced SPL in the regions affected by distortion. Right?intangible wrote: »relative to the magnitude of the broadcast frequency signal versus broadcast frequency to give a plot by which to directly compare the distortion patterns of the two wires? -
Thanks. I'm trying to entertain guests and type at the same time. Wife is not happy. The wire capacitance is16pF = 0.000016uF, not 0.01uF.
C = 16pF
The tweeter filter on the ZMV5 uses a 8.2uF series capacitor, so the ratio is
C_wire/C_speaker = 16e-12/8.2e-6 = 2e-6
Thus, the capacitance of the AR wire is about a million times too small to affect the filter transfer functions. -
I am not aware of any rigorous blind testing that shows people actually can hear a difference. There's a difference between saying you can hear a difference and hearing an actual difference. I may say I am a rich, and I may believe I am rich, but that isn't proof that I am rich.
This is compounded by the fact that the scientific approach generally shows that cables only make a difference when the gauge/length violate certain minimum requirements.
Lack of testing, or even just a lack of proper testing, does not demonstrate lack of reality. You constrain yourself to SPL as the definition of reality in this case. Therefore you quite conveniently confirm the reality you've defined. However, it might be the case that the subtleties of the way humans perceive sound is beyond your measurement technique or encompasses variables other than just SPL.SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette -
That sums up his contributuions here.You've made exactly 5 posts in this thread and not one was topical, relevant, useful, or polite. -
HAHAHA, oh man. I'm on page one and this is too funny. I understand that it's a tongue in cheek approach, but man, if this pisses you off, you've got worse issues to deal with. Who cares? let him make his "tests." You guys are getting far too worked up about all this. It's a joke and you're all making yourselves the punchline. Life's too short to get all huffy; sit back and laugh, god knows I am.design is where science and art break even.
-
Or maybe, just maybe, the difference is only imagined.Jetmaker737 wrote: »Lack of testing, or even just a lack of proper testing, does not demonstrate lack of reality. You constrain yourself to SPL as the definition of reality in this case. Therefore you quite conveniently confirm the reality you've defined. However, it might be the case that the subtleties of the way humans perceive sound is beyond your measurement technique or encompasses variables other than just SPL. -
That's not true. The resistance R (Ohms) of a wire, roughly speaking, is
R = rho * L / A
where rho is the electrical resistivity (Ohm-m), L is the length of wire (m) and A is the cross-sectional area (m^2). But yes, R varies from wire to wire.
Ok! I stand corrected. But I absolutely have no idea why I put X in there (instead of the word "and / &") but I think Theraflu got a better half of me.
Anyway, you got the drift. It's what matters and I am glad it bring you back to the table with more research on the subject and the correct formula. :biggrin:
Now that I do not agree with. In this test situation, if the on-axis SPL does not change, then the pressure field which impinges on your ear (sound) does not change. Conversely, in this test, there is no way to change the sound coming from the speaker without altering the measured SPL/phase. You just can't do it.
Now, it's nothing to agreed or disagreed about. The test does not say anything other than the Frequency Response of the ZVM5 you built and the real sensitivity (SPL) of your speaker at 1M on axis measurement at presumably 1W. There is no phase measurement and also you are not measuring the XO phase in this graph also. From the XO design, both the tweeter and woofer are wired in phase but if you want to know the phase relationship, you need to measure the roll off / cut off Frequency Response curve for the woofer and the tweeter separately.
There is really nothing to discuss about the curve other than what I've already said. You need to check your XO parts (measure the resistors, caps and inductors for the tolerance with the spec). If the XO parts are correct, you may have a worse behaved tweeter than Zaph has anticipated in the design. Or the cabinet construction and damping and Port Tuning?
The only thing you really need to do is buy a nice pair of speakers and listen to them side by side with your ZVM5 and think for yourself.Also, let me remark that I have a Ph.D. in physics, so I can be precise about the theoretical foundations here.
You might not believe how well you can train your sensory perception. You just need to start practicing now.
I started training in sensory perceptions like 5 years ago, I can now even sense over the keyboard whom I am talking to at the other end. And I'll tell you, I've always known you to be another Professor coming to bless me with another page long lecture that's similar to something I've read before.
Now, don't tell me you don't believe in Kung Fu and inner Chi. It's important in the sensory training. A person who wants to hear need to have balanced chi (Yin and Yang) in the body.Trying out Different Audio Cables is a Religious Affair. You don't discuss it with anyone. :redface::biggrin: -
Other than the fact wire gauge can have an affect on the electrical signal, I still am not sure what is actually being proven or not proven here. And, I do not need a PhD in physics to understand that.
Anyway, in regard to the can on the top affecting the SPL measurements the answer was it is the same effect as a baffle on a tweeter. However, aren't tweeter baffles attached to tweeter itself? If so then one would expect them to affect the sound. Yet the can is 10cm above the tweeter, in the center of the speaker, and away from the sound waves being propagated from the tweeter.
In post 9 we see the can mitigates the swings of the SPL between 1K and 10K. However, how that is related to tweeter baffles has me baffled, so to speak. Personally, I would try to find an object of the same weight, but at least 70% smaller in height than the can, and see if it gives the same response.Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
. . . let me remark that I have a Ph.D. in physics . . .
May I be the first to ask if you could link to or post your thesis/dissertations/etc.?VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
NAD SS rigs w/mods
GIK panels -
wow, im surprised things finally calmed down.
jcandy, I admire your steadfast ability to stick to the issues. I actually learned a few interesting things in this thread. As I've said before, I appreciate your opinions in the forum, and I think many others do too. Currently, I believe audio lies half in the measurable world and half in the perceived. This being the case, it's nice to hear your perspective on issues.
I wonder your perspective on cable materials (?)design is where science and art break even. -
You might not believe how well you can train your sensory perception. You just need to start practicing now.
I started training in sensory perceptions like 5 years ago, I can now even sense over the keyboard whom I am talking to at the other end. And I'll tell you, I've always known you to be another Professor coming to bless me with another page long lecture that's similar to something I've read before.
Now, don't tell me you don't believe in Kung Fu and inner Chi. It's important in the sensory training. A person who wants to hear need to have balanced chi (Yin and Yang) in the body.
It was a joke in case you can't tell. I am just glad the meds are getting out of my system.
I am ready for round 2.Trying out Different Audio Cables is a Religious Affair. You don't discuss it with anyone. :redface::biggrin: -
Or maybe, just maybe, the difference is only imagined.
That's certainly a possibility, but as a scientist do you really think that it should just be assumed so? To not question your own assumptions is not a path to good science.
For instance a place to look for a discrepancy in the SPL definition of SQ is to look at whether the transducer used is a proper model of the human ear-brain system. Or even whether it's a proper model of the ear alone. To really study how sounds impact hearing perhaps some biological measure downstream of the ear would be more appropriate.SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette -
That sums up his contributuions here.
:biggrin::biggrin:
He is not peeking now, that's for sure. Even if he is, he is pretending like he is not.
Anyway, I recall you built mini TL speakers with Zaph Drivers? Is it one of the Zaph designed also?Trying out Different Audio Cables is a Religious Affair. You don't discuss it with anyone. :redface::biggrin: -
Nevermind, I fundamentally misunderstood how these charts are generated. To do what I suggested would require a completely different collection method.Jetmaker737 wrote: »That's certainly a possibility, but as a scientist do you really think that it should just be assumed so? To not question your own assumptions is not a path to good science.
What you are telling him to question is the fundamental principal that if a only a single variable is altered any changes observed in the results are tied to that variable. That's not an assumption - it's the basis for the whole scientific method. -
intangible wrote: »What you are telling him to question is the fundamental principal that if a only a single variable is altered any changes observed in the results are tied to that variable. That's not an assumption - it's the basis for the whole scientific method.
That's not what I'm telling him at all. :rolleyes: You obviously did not read the relevant posts.SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette
