My Big Effin' Cables!!

madmax

PolkThug wrote: »

The music on a CD can be fully analyzed without the use of loudspeakers. All the various frequencies at their respective amplitudes can be seen at any given fraction of a second, the raw data doesn't change.

OK... So Maynard Ferguson is playing his MF trumpet and switches off to a Bach. Character is a little different but no one except a trumpet player would be able to determine any differences. What do I hook up to show me the difference between the two sounds?
madmax

PolkThug

If the harmonics are different between the two trumpets, it will also be in the data.

madmax

Yea, but how would you get it out? And if so, how can you tell what it is? Remember, its a cover all algorithm that transposes between the data and output, not a case by case basis. Not to mention, it may be wrong as well.

reeltrouble1

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

You're not it's all in your mind. Rip out all that cable, sell them, buy lamp cord. Copper is Copper that is all...

OK:rolleyes:

I'm a cable
your a cable
would'nt you like to be a cable too..........

be the cable

RT1

PolkThug

madmax wrote: »

Yea, but how would you get it out? And if so, how can you tell what it is?

Run an RTA directly against the CD. When the trumpet changes, the 'waterfall pattern' will change also, just like a waterfall chart of a C note on a piano looks different than a C note of a guitar because of the harmonics.

madmax

No way you can see such a change... You can't even see any harmonics, just the base frequency and amplitude.

PolkThug

madmax wrote: »

No way you can see such a change... You can't even see any harmonics, just the base frequency and amplitude.

lol, or are you not joking?

madmax

Actually its even worse than that. If you have multiple frequencies at one time you will only see the average of all the freqeuncies, not any particular one.

PolkThug

madmax wrote: »

Actually its even worse than that. If you have multiple frequencies at one time you will only see the average of all the freqeuncies, not any particular one.

You're making no sense. Google harmonics and timbre.

jdhdiggs

Hmmm, don't waterfalls show every frequency by intensity and time?

I know I've seen this in my brothers studio. His setup you can even subtract the two inputs against each other and only see/play the delta between the signals. Pretty damn cool.

NM: P-Thuggy got it... Just for reference folks, those are LOW res waterfalls. They can get into the million samples/second range if you want them to.

madmax

So how are you tracking one sound? (single freq plus harmonics?) For example, explain panel 1. Are we looking at the total spectrum or have we isolated a single sound? If we have then I will give in.
madmax

PolkThug

madmax wrote: »

So how are you tracking one sound? (single freq plus harmonics?) For example, explain panel 1. Are we looking at the total spectrum or have we isolated a single sound? If we have then I will give in.
madmax

You can look at as narrow or wide as you want. You can see single "sounds" or multiple at the same time.

PolkThug

If you could see a chart being generated at the same time you're listening to the music, it would probably make more sense. Also, a large monitor with a healthy sample rate makes it easier.

madmax

I'm still a little lost as I don't see the x/y designations. I'm guessing panel 1 & 2 are x time and y frequency, rolling in seconds or a single capture? What am I seeing? Talk to me.

Oh, and the amplitude, color?

reeltrouble1

they cannot hear, they will never be able to hear. nice colors though sort of like a mood ring, it would be fun to have a light show on some tracks.

Remember Pluto was once a planet, the earth was flat and Agent Orange was not really going to hurt you.

Me I am headed for some music time.

Rock on.

RT1

Midnite Mick

What? Pluto is not a planet anymore. When did this happen?

ben62670

Midnite Mick wrote: »

What? Pluto is not a planet anymore. When did this happen?

When Mickey caught Pluto trying to hump Minnie's leg;)

PolkThug

madmax wrote: »

I'm still a little lost as I don't see the x/y designations. I'm guessing panel 1 & 2 are x time and y frequency, rolling in seconds or a single capture? What am I seeing? Talk to me.

Oh, and the amplitude, color?

Yes, time, freq and amplitude. This is one style. There is also the 3D style without all the colors.

MacLeod

The reason you hear differences is that you know you just paid $300 for a set of RCA's and you know you just installed them and that theyre supposed to make a difference. Its the placebo effect. Thats why blind comparison tests never show anybody can hear a difference. The person taking the test has no idea what cable is being used.

Try the home version of an ABX test. Get a partner, wife, girlfriend whoever -best if they couldnt care less about audio - have them flip a coin 16 times and write down the results (with you out of the room). Then take 2 sets of power cables you think you know pretty well and assign one to "heads" and one to "tails".

Now you sit where you cant see your rig and put on some music you know well. Now have your partner use the list of heads/tails and hook up the cables in order. For each one you guess which one it is and they write down your guess. For optimum objectivity, use the same song for each try and since you cant really level match the best way is to start with the volume at 0 and turn it up to a reference level at the beginning of each test.

After all 16 tries, add up the ones you got correct.

If you can hear as dramatic a difference as is claimed, you should have 16 correct. Odd are you could get 6-10 correct just by guessing so those results would prove nothing. Although 16 out of 16 sounds demanding, you could pick between a pair of SDA's vs some Bose Lifestyle speaker 16 out of 16 times right?

tonyb

Just because one person hears a difference,doesn't mean everyone can.So 16 out of 16 is pushing it.Lets try an analogy.....If you have a dog,they obviously bark.To a stranger,that bark is the same no matter what.But to me,I can tell the difference in the barks.Bark to come in,bark to play,Bark when a stranger is around,bark when he wants something,Bark when he feels threatened, etc.Each bark is distictive,to me.To Joe Blow,not so much,just a barking dog.It's not in my mind,I didn't pay anything for it,so why can I hear it and others can't? Cables are the same,if I spent a boat load of dough on cables and didn't hear a difference from my ratshack top of the line ones,I'd send them back,sell them,and kick myself in the ****.I can't figure out why so many feel a need to prove this one way or the other.Some people may want to spend alot of coin on cables,so what,they'll figure it out for themselves if it was worth it or not.And to some it's not,and to some it is.......so big friggin' deal.Talk about beating a dead horse.......

MacLeod

The claims being made are drastic differences, not tiny little subtle ones that youll pick up on in a few years. Drastic differences should be able to be picked out every time.

Midnite Mick

MacLeod wrote: »

The reason you hear differences is that you know you just paid $300 for a set of RCA's and you know you just installed them and that theyre supposed to make a difference. Its the placebo effect. Thats why blind comparison tests never show anybody can hear a difference. The person taking the test has no idea what cable is being used.

This is soooo wrong.

I purchased a pair of Black Sand Silver MKV for my amps (retail 500 ish each) and did not like them at all vs. my stock cords on my amps. Yeah, the background was a little blacker but they totally killed my dynamics and collapsed the soundstage. I then sold them (one of them to Lonewolf over at the AC). If there was a placebo effect I should have preferred them, however this was not the case.

I recemtly demoed 2 different pairs of PC's from a local dealer in which I found them to sound quite different. One was overall warmer, more emotionally involving, sweeter, and the other was more dynamic and probably a little cleaner. With my system I preferred the warmer one at 375.00 Cdn each. The other ones I did not get a price on them but seeing as the Acrolink ends I seen were 800.00 US and they are a 7 strand per pole vs. the ones I preferred which was 4, I imagine they would be over 1000.00 ea. If dollar value was an indicator I would have preferred the more expensive ones.

I do not buy the placebo effect at all.

Thanks,
Mike

treitz3

MacLeod wrote:

The reason you hear differences is that you know you just paid $300 for a set of RCA's and you know you just installed them and that theyre supposed to make a difference. Its the placebo effect.

Incorrect.

When I auditioned an Analysis Plus copper PC at Sound Systems in Charlotte NC located on Monroe Road to be exact, I did the A/B thing without ever leaving the listening chair. If it didn't make a noticeable difference, I sure as hell would not have blown good, hard earned money. Before purchasing them, I had nothing to justify.

The reason we hear differences is because we hear differences. No placebo effect.

Try this. Go to a high end store in your area and experience the same thing I did. When I auditioned the PC, I auditioned it with this exact equipment....so I know you will hear the same thing I did. If you don't, you can't hear. This is a simple rig, with no power conditioners or power supplies, just straight up gear.

Rega Apollo CDP
Rega Miro III Int. Amp
Rega P1 TT
Sonas Faber Domas Speak's

That's it. Turn the volume to 11:30 and have the dealer adjust NOTHING on anything, changing out the stock power cords with the Analysis Plus copper cords. Listen to one song in it's entirety......listen to the highs, lows, quiet passages and crescendos. Now, have them put in the upgraded PC to.......let's say the CDP and listen to the same song with absolutely nothing else changed in the system. THEN you will know what I know without having to justify "your purchase", because you wouldn't have spent a cent just like I did.

MacLeod

Sitting in a chair while you watch a guy switch out cords isnt a blind AB test. You know when the different cords are being used. Thats the placebo affect. Try it blind. Try the test I outlined with the stock power cord and your new magic cord. If the difference is as dramatic as you say, you should have no problem getting 16 out of 16.

As for why it doesnt work, I guess the simplest explanation is that your amplifier is converting that AC power to DC power as soon as it gets into the amp. So even if the magic cord could somehow realign the electrons in the incoming current, it would be wiped out when it runs thru the transformer inside the amp converting it to DC.

treitz3

Allow me to quote a good friend of mine..........

"For those who don't know, don't know they don't know, and you don't know."

The difference is obvious enough to tell with or without a blindfold. Come to Polkfest and I'll prove it to you. Blindfolded or not. 16 times out of 16 times.:eek:

snow

MacLeod wrote: »

The reason you hear differences is that you know you just paid $300 for a set of RCA's and you know you just installed them and that theyre supposed to make a difference. Its the placebo effect. Thats why blind comparison tests never show anybody can hear a difference. The person taking the test has no idea what cable is being used.

Are you saying you cant hear a difference between rcas either?

REGARDS SNOW

Gaara

I will openly admit that I can't hear differences between interconnects. The only difference I have been able to hear is between stock cables and upgraded/sheilded ones. Same goes for PC, I upgrade to get better connections and sheilding. Speaker wire I have been able to pickup on slight differences, but nothing big past Canare 4S11.

I have been using the same interconnects from back when I had a Yamaha receiver and JVC dvd player, and the same speaker wire for the surrounds.

MacLeod

Assume youre right. Assume that RCA's, CDP's, amplifiers, pre-amps, extension cords, wall sockets, speaker stands and whatever else does drastically change the sound of your system. WHY WOULD YOU WANT THAT?!

I do NOT want any component in my system to change the sound. I want a completely transparant and neutral signal. Why would you want a component that changed and/or colored the signal?

The only thing I want with distinct sound characteristics is my speakers.

Wouldnt you want the signal to be as uncolored and unchanged as possible from the source all the way to the speakers?

treitz3

We get higher fidelity, not coloration. We want it and we listen to it because it improves the sound.

Though not always.

snow

MacLeod wrote: »

Assume youre right. Assume that RCA's, CDP's, amplifiers, pre-amps, extension cords, wall sockets, speaker stands and whatever else does drastically change the sound of your system. WHY WOULD YOU WANT THAT?!

I do NOT want any component in my system to change the sound. I want a completely transparant and neutral signal. Why would you want a component that changed and/or colored the signal?

The only thing I want with distinct sound characteristics is my speakers.

Wouldnt you want the signal to be as uncolored and unchanged as possible from the source all the way to the speakers?

LMAOOOO. Hopefully each (change) brings us closer to that goal.:D


REGARDS SNOW