My Discussion got closed

tonyb

kevintomb wrote: »

[I feel no hatred, not feel I am totally right.

But I do realize I was there before, and moved into another view.

Well great then, if you feel you aren't totally right, why chastise those with opposing views ?

If you moved to another view, great for you, however others may move from your view in the opposite direction. Not so hard to understand is it ?

tonyb

Now...be nice Mike. It's not so much the opposing views I have a problem with, it's the way they follow cable threads like flys on a cows tail in the middle of summer. Hard to believe when they proclaim they may not be totally right and cable threads are boring. Still, in spite of their views, X uses Monster cable, a supposedly up grade to zip cord, Monoprice, and Home depot cable which for all intents and purposes, passes the signal correctly. I will still maintain that their views follow their wallets.

Which, is fine.....everybody in some cases mold their views to what they are exposed to. Same can be said for many things. Only when you haven't been exposed to better things in audio, your opinion on them means less than zero.

tonyb

Keiko wrote: »

I was being nice. Just call 'em like I see it. How long do we have to endure their bullspit and how many times does this need to be rehashed over and over with them; rhetorically speaking?

lmao !! Remind me to never get on your bad side then.

gudnoyez

http://freemontsoffice.com/2010/11/28/the-thing-that-wouldnt-leave/

Hee Hee Hee Arrrrrgh!!!!!

BlueFox

kevintomb wrote: »

I did a very extensive paper on this very subject years ago, and while it may not apply to all obviously, it seems none ever think that it CAN apply to them.

LOL. Okay, please provide a link to this very extensive paper.

DarqueKnight

kevintomb wrote: »

Starting dozens of thread about various cables, is kinda pointless also, cause by the very admission of many or most cable proponents, it is extremely subjective, only applies to the listener making the claim in their particular room and with their particular audio rig etc etc.
In other words, it does not apply to anyone else........

The arrogance and ignorance of your thinking is along the lines of "I'm not interested in this, so no one else should be interested in this either".

You never see me participating in the car audio section of this forum because I have very little interest in car audio. You never see me participating in discussions of tubed equipment because I have very little interest in tubed equipment.

I was in this hobby for a long time before I became interested in high performance audio cables. Once I did become interested, I was glad that there were a lot of articles and reviews, particularly from consumers, that offered some subjective and objective information on the performance improvements *I might* receive from higher performance audio components and higher performance cables.

The experiences that other people had with the same $1000 an hour hooker does not guarantee that I will have the same experience. Their reviews would just provide some insight into what *I might* expect.

BlueFox

LOL. This is hilarious. "Are you claiming." WTF! Where did that come from? LOL.

tonyb

Why on earth do you need a background in electronics, or science for that matter, to decide for yourself what sounds good to you or not ? How do you know if cable manufacturers claims are bogus....if you never tried the cable in question ?

This is why you need to experience some things for yourself and why we encourage others to do the same. Sometimes it may work out for you, sometimes not, but you'll never know until you get your feet wet.

polrbehr

kevintomb wrote: »

BlueFox wrote: »

LOL. This is hilarious. "Are you claiming." WTF! Where did that come from? LOL.

As of now, there is still no valid actual proof of most cable claims.

Maybe you need to step back and look at things a bit more objectively.

To your first sentence, I agree. But also must ask, what type of proof are you looking for? And exactly whose word would it take to convince you that the proof is valid?

Your second point should be directed inwardly, IMO.

tonyb

Kevin, the only proof needed is the proof one supplies to themselves. Translated...means experience it yourself. I know that's a concept unheard of in your circles, but it's the one most use to "prove it " to themselves.

tonyb

You have not said what cables, with what gear....as far as I can tell anyway unless I missed it.

I don't need to be a mechanic to know which car I like, but I do need to drive one.

F1nut

Heck I used to sale them even.

You must have been a lousy sellsman.

F1nut

BlueFox wrote: »

kevintomb wrote: »

I did a very extensive paper on this very subject years ago, and while it may not apply to all obviously, it seems none ever think that it CAN apply to them.

LOL. Okay, please provide a link to this very extensive paper.

As usual.......nothing but crickets.

Nightfall

F1nut wrote: »

Heck I used to sale them even.

You must have been a lousy sellsman.

Sometimes I sale things on Craigslist, which I post from the computer on my sell boat.

11tsteve

kevintomb wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

Kevin, the only proof needed is the proof one supplies to themselves. Translated...means experience it yourself. I know that's a concept unheard of in your circles, but it's the one most use to "prove it " to themselves.

But I have tried cables.
I told all of this before.
Heck I used to sale them even.
I have done a few "Blind" (informal) tests, with a handful of friends.

Even the best of them, two which were sure they could easily hear a big change were unable to when blind as to the cable being used.

But they easily could tell when they knew which was which.

Used my system and two systems they owned, but among us, none of us could tell them apart.

Do all of you guys really test cables blind?

see, this is what gets you in trouble.

Regardless of blind testing, you tried cables and heard nothing.

Other guys try cables and hear differences. But you don't accept the differences without further "scientific testing".

So because you say their results don't fit your model of proper testing, and you need some sort of measurable result, they are buying into audio myths.

Why can't you see that the problem is you and your blanket discounting of personal experiences which causes issues? You don't accept the measuring rod used here to gauge audio quality and it bugs you. It gnaws at your orderly sensibility of how you think electrons flow, but deep down, it bothers you others can perceive differences that your stunted "measurable" mind can't accept......

Because you and your special friends could hear nothing, that means the rest of the free world should also be able to hear nothing....

and yet, you can't understand why people call you arrogant....

tonyb

tonyb wrote: »

You have not said what cables, with what gear....as far as I can tell anyway unless I missed it.
.

Hate to quote myself Kevin, but this is important to your argument. If you say you've tried stuff, we want to hear about it. I believe I asked 4 times in another thread and this will make 5. Please name the cables, the associated gear and speakers.

If you can't do that....well, do I need to say more ?

BTW...I apologize if you already posted it, I just don't see it anywhere.

tonyb

No Mike, probably not. Even so....he tried once and that's it ? How unscientific is that ?

VSAT88

In Alabama we just use wire...Oh, and BTW..We use Deep fryers..A lot !

DarqueKnight

kevintomb wrote: »

Naw, not really. Not being arrogant at all, and I have sold and tried higher priced cables in my past. I moved past that phase is all.

kevintomb wrote: »

But I have tried cables.
I told all of this before.

Selling something does not equate to knowing how it works. The average car salesperson cannot explain how an internal combustion engine works, let alone explain how to design an automobile or even an automotive subsystem such as the brakes or electrical system.

kevintomb wrote: »

I think I have asked you this before, but did not get an actual answer.

I am sure you understand the concept of an active and passive device.

How does a passive conductor actively improve the sound to something better than a direct connection to the amp terminals?

I have talked about this many times, and really, if you knew 1/10000th about cable design as you think you do, you would not have asked such an elementary question.

That's the trouble with cable naysayers, you really have no concept of how electricity works, let alone how electrical signals which are converted to acoustical energy is perceived.

To answer your question, look up the term "twisted pair". It is the concept of twisting two wires together in such a way that their electromagnetic fields cancel one another out. That prevents one wire from inducing audible noise in another wire (crosstalk). There are different twist geometries that are used based on the type of audio signal to be carried. This is just one example of how a passive conductor can be configured to filter out one type of noise.

Do you know what a "ferrite choke" or "ferrite bead" is? It is a cylinder of ferrite material placed around some power cords to filter out some types of electrical noise. Taking the concept further, some audio power cables use ferrite impregnated jackets as a noise reduction system.

These are just two examples of passive cable performance improvement concepts.

kevintomb wrote: »

Are you claiming it does or does not, maybe would be a better question.

In other words, how can a multi thousand dollar cable improve upon a One foot 8 gauge conductor for instance? What losses are minimized, if the one foot 8 gauge has virtually no loss?

Or are you claiming that some "Unknown" science or electronics exists that is changing the sound?

What would differ, using nodal analysis from say Terminal A on the amp to Terminal B on the speaker?

Asking seriously as many have stated various things over many threads, are you claiming that higher priced conductors are doing more than conducting?

No, I am claiming, and I have posted many measured results on this forum, that higher performance cables have better electrical noise characteristics. What you seem to be incapable of comprehending is that conduction is not enough. In audio applications, CLEAN (low noise) conduction is the optimal thing. If a cable is a good conductor, but adds a lot of noise to the signal due to crosstalk, poor quality terminations, dielectric effects, or poor shielding, then a significant part of what will be conducted will be electrical noise.

Nodal analysis cannot tell you about the noise content in the signal. You would have to use a spectrum analyzer, oscilloscope or other similar measurement tool.

"kevintomb wrote: »

But I have tried cables.
I told all of this before.
I have done a few "Blind" (informal) tests, with a handful of friends.

Even the best of them, two which were sure they could easily hear a big change were unable to when blind as to the cable being used.

But they easily could tell when they knew which was which.

Used my system and two systems they owned, but among us, none of us could tell them apart.

Do all of you guys really test cables blind?

Tell us what the "big change" was and how that change relates to stereophonic performance.

Do you even know what "stereophonic performance" means?

When you tried cables, what performance goals did you have in mind? A test is supposed to prove or disprove something related to performance.

When drugs are tested, they are evaluated pertaining to how well they treat a medical condition.

When stereo gear is tested, it is supposed to be evaluated pertaining to how well it conveys a stereophonic illusion.

Please explain your testing methodology and which aspects of stereophonic performance are most important to you.

I have posted some recent reviews of digital cables. In some situations I heard differences in the cables and in some situations I did not. I listed the equipment used and I explained the stereophonic performance metrics I used. Where are your detailed test descriptions.

It is not scientifically valid to just say you, and others, tried something and it didn't work. you need to provide details of test methodology and testing goals. Do you have that?

The thread below is an example of how I discuss what I did or didn't hear in a cable test. A discussion of measurements is on pages 2 and 4.

digital-interconnect-cables-whats-your-experience

nooshinjohn

Keiko wrote: »

Like I said, I could give 2 cents as to what degrees they claim to have. Heck, give me a rope man, and I'm a cowboy. Yippie ki yay!

John McClain just popped into my head...

nooshinjohn

^^^this movie gets two LOL's up!

tonyb

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Do you even know what "stereophonic performance" means?

When you tried cables, what performance goals did you have in mind? A test is supposed to prove or disprove something related to performance.

When drugs are tested, they are evaluated pertaining to how well they treat a medical condition.

When stereo gear is tested, it is supposed to be evaluated pertaining to how well it conveys a stereophonic illusion.

Please explain your testing methodology and which aspects of stereophonic performance are most important to you.

Bingo and bingo....been asking for like forever so I doubt you'd get an answer Ray.

I think if we go back to the beginning, a few think that electrical properties are the only thing that will dictate how something sounds. They couldn't be more wrong, and I believe that coupled with their wallets is why they can't wrap their brain around this whole audio thing.

tophatjohnny

Cable threads should be fun?? Everyone has their opinion and not everyone will agree. It didn't take me long to find the right cable combo, but there was sure some work with going through different brands in order to find what worked for me. If someone has luck with junk cables...so be it! I wasn't that lucky. I got all top of the line ropes and love what they do for my modest set up. Cable threads need to remain friendly and fun..........just my thought!

mrbigbluelight

kevintomb wrote: »

I am sure you understand the concept of an active and passive device.

Or are you claiming that some "Unknown" science or electronics exists that is changing the sound?

What would differ, using nodal analysis from say Terminal A on the amp to Terminal B on the speaker?

The "Unknown" is what may be called "Thinking Outside the Box".

Here's an artist's rendition (Not done on AutoCad, btw, so this artist must be downright awesome !) of your basic setup.




You got your amp, you got your amp output (representing the first few notes of "Up With People"), you got your signal wire/cable, you got the output from the signal wire/cable going into the awesome looking speaker.

Now, INSIDE THE BOX thinking says, "Sure. Supply (amp) connecting via wire/cable to a load (speaker).

As shown in the awesome figure, the output signal of the amp is EXACTLY the same as the output of the signal leaving the wire/cable (using an advanced MS Paint COPY/PASTE algorithm).

Now, Mantis is STRAIGHT UP a learned person. He is, I believe, as are you, of the same INSIDE THE BOX group: "The wire/cable has transmitted to the load the EXACT input signal so it has done all it can do".

I would disagree. Here's why:

The signal goes to the load (speaker).
The speaker cone moves in response to the signal (got your magical magnetic stuff at work there).
The signal ends,

NOW: is the speaker still a load ? Or does it briefly act like something else ?
Maybe ..,,,,,, as a supply ? You have a coil, still moving however slightly (let's call it "ringing") through a magnetic field. What's that produce ? A signal.
Long story short: the speaker is both a load and a supply. How it is connected to the original supply (amp) will be affected by the characteristics of that connecting medium. When the original supply signal disappears and the reflective speaker signal shows up on the wire/cable, what happens next will, IMO, affect the long term sound.
Now, if you got yourself some lower end speakers, it's not going to make much difference. Slop is slop.
Move on up the ladder to some LsiM 703, 705, 707's you got a whole 'nother ball of wax,

Well, now that I've completely settled this issue, I suggest we all get together and assist Kevin in helping DK get his learn on.

mrbigbluelight

F1nut wrote: »

Heck I used to sale them even.

You must have been a lousy sellsman.

If I'm not mistaken, I think you have a saleboat ?

tonyb

xcapri79 wrote: »

[There is absolutely no reasonable justification for the multi-thousand dollar cost of short cables period. It doesn't take thousands of dollars to produce a properly working cable.
.

Maybe so, but we aren't talking about a "properly working cable". We are talking about a properly "sounding" one....and that aspect has too many variables .

On another note, are you telling me the cables you had before your Monster cables were not properly working cables, broken somehow ?

You won't find anyone who would disagree about snakeoil in audio in general, but you keep painting the whole industry with a broad brush without having any experience at anything above your level.

tonyb

Once again, do you think noise or lack of it is the only influence of how a cable will sound ?

BTW....still no answers to the questions posed to you ?

tonyb

That's about as telling as it gets folks. lol

gudnoyez

I am the one that uses Monster Cable!

I was given a big roll of it from this really cute Monster Cable Rep, way back when I sold stuff. I won it as a prize, and she was this really cute redhead, and she got paid to travel all around and give us stuff, and told us why Monster was a viable alternative to the really high priced cables we sold. [/quote]

There is your answer folks dude is in love with Monster Cables and the little redhead Monster Cable Rep. I can only imagine had she been the Rep for let's say Audioquest then in his opinion cables would matter.

It must be rough listening to tunes and thinking about how well those Monsters pass a signal, and the cute little red head Monster sales Rep, and how she probably smiled as she handed him the door prize. That's your answer folks we can all move along its unfortunate that this thread must now come to an end.

polrbehr

Now that the resident experts have chimed in to save us all from ourselves, I predict that mantis' next thread title will be something like this =>

"My discussion about my discussion getting closed got closed"


Not to poke at you Dan, I get where you're coming from, but these inevitably turn into
ugly messes. Every time.