EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
General => General Technical Chat => Topic started by: onesixright on February 08, 2017, 08:29:54 pm
-
Maybe this is already done (youtube)?
We (well i assume most of us here) all know that very expensive speaker cable is kind of marketing BS. Together with interconnects.
Now, what woud be the best way to proof that it is indeed is utter BS? I mean, you should be able to see the "music" and conclude that the signal is hardly different? I''m not so keen to put my scope on to a amplified signal :P
Any thoughts what would be the best approach?
-
This has been done over and over and over, going back to at least the 1970s. One particular test I read about was a blind listening test between some expensive speaker wire and some wire coathangers straightened out and used as cables. No audible difference.
-
This has been done over and over and over, going back to at least the 1970s. One particular test I read about was a blind listening test between some expensive speaker wire and some wire coathangers straightened out and used as cables. No audible difference.
Yeah i read that stuff as-well. However i have never seen the difference. Up to a certain extend there should be a visible (and audible difference). I mean if you take a 26 AWG vs 14 AWG (4 ohm)? In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.
-
Sure, if a speaker cable is very inadequate then it will dissipate energy that you want going into the speaker but I'd challenge anyone to hear the difference between reasonably heavy lamp cord and the fanciest oxygen free audiophool speaker wire on the market.
-
In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.
That's not the case. If you look at the crosstalk between channels, and the full eye-diagram of the bits received at the downstream device, the $40 cable will likely show a much clearer and more open eye, as it uses much better shielding and thicker conductors.
Whether that has any effect on a 1m cable run is a separate question (hint - it won't) - but the quality of the received bits will be lower from a signal integrity point of view.
-
Price alone is not enough to judge cable quality though. I suspect that by the time you get to a reasonable quality $5-$10 cable you're not going to see any improvement going up to a $100 cable. The expensive cables do tend to look nicer though, if you spend time admiring your cables.
-
Only a double blind experiment with the world's best and most respected audiophools would do the job.
But they:
a) Won't do it (there was a $1M James Randi prize for this, and no one took it up)
and
b) When it fails will claim something was wrong with the experiment or conditions
-
Only a double blind experiment with the world's best and most respected audiophools would do the job.
But they:
a) Won't do it (there was a $1M James Randi prize for this, and no one took it up)
and
b) When it fails will claim something was wrong with the experiment or conditions
Thanks, good read (James Randi) :popcorn:
Even if you go with "respected audiophools", its still arbitrary. Maybe my ears are not that great :-)
I would think, take the human out of the equation. Just look at the signal? How much better is the signal before it "enters" the speaker? My thoughts is that as you ramp-up the cable "quality", at a certain point, you don't see it getting better anymore.
Now, how would you conduct a test like that?
-
Only a double blind experiment with the world's best and most respected audiophools would do the job.
But they:
a) Won't do it (there was a $1M James Randi prize for this, and no one took it up)
and
b) When it fails will claim something was wrong with the experiment or conditions
The title does say: (by measuring)
The two most influential electric parameters that could effect sound quality are resistance and impedance.
Both could be measured.
(defining high quality as as close to the original signal as possible)
-
Perhaps unsurprisingly, audiophile circles generally shun double-blind testing.
The curious part is, the problem is not so much the audiophiles themselves, but is also the people complaining who don't think the conditions matter. (But then, if they think the conditions don't matter, why would they insist on double-blind testing?) It's not about the product, it's about the experience.
It helps the experience, to have a good solid material, regardless of its electrical properties, so it's bound to be some sort of heavy cable. Beyond that, whether they use the materials they say they do, is a matter of marketing honesty, so if they're doing it legally, the profit margin on the more precious-metal-rich models won't be as amazing as the sticker price alone would lead you to believe.
So, is it dumb? Hell yeah it's dumb! Are people dumb? Well... I think you can figure it out. ;)
Tim
-
Instead of true double-blind testing, the usual procedure is to spend money on a new gadget/cable/capacitor install it in ones system, and think really hard about if it now sounds better.
-
Only a double blind experiment with the world's best and most respected audiophools would do the job.
But they:
a) Won't do it (there was a $1M James Randi prize for this, and no one took it up)
and
b) When it fails will claim something was wrong with the experiment or conditions
The title does say: (by measuring)
And that's my point, you can't debunk audiophile products by measuring. It's impossible, they just come back and say "you have to listen to it". And they are 100% correct, the high end audiophile industry is mostly psycho-acoustics.
-
Only a double blind experiment with the world's best and most respected audiophools would do the job.
But they:
a) Won't do it (there was a $1M James Randi prize for this, and no one took it up)
and
b) When it fails will claim something was wrong with the experiment or conditions
The title does say: (by measuring)
And that's my point, you can't debunk audiophile products by measuring. It's impossible, they just come back and say "you have to listen to it". And they are 100% correct, the high end audiophile industry is mostly psycho-acoustics.
But you can (not?) measure the quality of the signal (waveform), apposed to the interpretation of the listener?
-
Yea I've argued all this audiophoolery for years.
What it comes done to is how good the audiophool feels about the product they purchased. It has to look like a million dollars, and has to cost a shitload of money too. The rest of the job is done by the audiophool - they basically are delusional to begin with, with respect to these products anyway, and simply compartmentalize the logical side of their brain from the audiophool side of it, and thus make themselves believe that the thing works and adds value to their listening experience. It all works much like a religion really ...
Hopefully one or more of them will read this thread and join up to debate the topic. :popcorn:
-
Of course you can, but that's not the point.
The audiophiles we're talking about are not engineers. They don't understand how these things work on a fundamental basis, to them electricity may as well be a supernatural force. You could show them the measurements and they will still claim there is some aspect that somehow cannot be measured, and in a sense there is, but it's inside their head. Anyway it's a waste of effort to try to convince them otherwise, it's like trying to convince a conspiracy theorist that they are wrong or convince a devoutly religious person that their religion is phony. It won't work, it's a waste of time, let them spend their money if it makes them happy.
-
In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.
That's not the case. If you look at the crosstalk between channels, and the full eye-diagram of the bits received at the downstream device, the $40 cable will likely show a much clearer and more open eye, as it uses much better shielding and thicker conductors.
Whether that has any effect on a 1m cable run is a separate question (hint - it won't) - but the quality of the received bits will be lower from a signal integrity point of view.
And the "digital is digital it works or it doesn't" is also untrue for HDMI, visible artefacts become visible well before the video drops out:
http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf (http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf)
Its a nightmare trying to find the magic combination of discount products that will work reliably together, cheaper to get something quality in the first place.
-
In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.
That's not the case. If you look at the crosstalk between channels, and the full eye-diagram of the bits received at the downstream device, the $40 cable will likely show a much clearer and more open eye, as it uses much better shielding and thicker conductors.
Whether that has any effect on a 1m cable run is a separate question (hint - it won't) - but the quality of the received bits will be lower from a signal integrity point of view.
And the "digital is digital it works or it doesn't" is also untrue for HDMI, visible artefacts become visible well before the video drops out:
http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf (http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf)
Its a nightmare trying to find the magic combination of discount products that will work reliably together, cheaper to get something quality in the first place.
There is quality and there is absurdity. Sure, you might want to avoid the $1 cables, but there are loads of <$10 cables that are quite good. Spending big bucks on a cable doesn't guarantee it will perform any better on any metric than a modestly priced cable. Some even have side effects. I don't remember how many things I fixed years ago that had RCA jacks ripped out by ridiculously stiff and heavy Monster cables.
-
And the "digital is digital it works or it doesn't" is also untrue for HDMI, visible artefacts become visible well before the video drops out:
http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf (http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf)
Its a nightmare trying to find the magic combination of discount products that will work reliably together, cheaper to get something quality in the first place.
Someone (no pun intended) busted the HDMI one by capturing the output frames and comparing every pixel with the source.
-
But you can (not?) measure the quality of the signal (waveform), apposed to the interpretation of the listener?
Of course you can measure it, but that's not the point. It will never convince the audiophools.
-
Of course you can, but that's not the point.
:wtf:, thats is my point ;) Im not trying to convince anymore. I would like to see it with my eyes, not my ears :)
Obviously there is a difference between a 100 USD, 2500 USD and 5000 USD speaker. But the more expensive they get, the less likely you will be able to hear it. Now expensive speakers, needs expensive cables. Well, thats what most claim.
I'm after a visualisation, which show at which point it simply doesn't matter any more. If i take a 28 AWG wire on a 2500 USD speaker, im pretty sure you can hear (and thus see?) the difference, compared to a 16 AWG cable. Now how do you visualise that?
-
Yea I've argued all this audiophoolery for years.
What it comes done to is how good the audiophool feels about the product they purchased. It has to look like a million dollars, and has to cost a shitload of money too. The rest of the job is done by the audiophool - they basically are delusional to begin with, with respect to these products anyway, and simply compartmentalize the logical side of their brain from the audiophool side of it, and thus make themselves believe that the thing works and adds value to their listening experience. It all works much like a religion really ...
And just like religion they really do believe it, and they really can hear things in their head. Either god talking to them, or the greater "ambience depth" in the sound, it's a similar psychology at play. The mind is the most powerful instrument.
-
I'm after a visualisation, which show at which point it simply doesn't matter any more. If i take a 28 AWG wire on a 2500 USD speaker, im pretty sure you can hear (and thus see?) the difference, compared to a 16 AWG cable. Now how do you visualise that?
Probably. But that's not comparing apples with apples because they are not the same electrically.
Two otherwise identical 16AWG in all electrical parameters will perform exactly the same within the error limits of the experiment. Cryogenicly freezing one and having a nude virgin rub it with snake oil won't change that.
-
Probably. But that's not comparing apples with apples because they are not the same electrically.
Two otherwise identical 16AWG in all electrical parameters will perform exactly the same within the error limits of the experiment. Cryogenicly freezing one and having a nude virgin rub it with snake oil won't change that.
One might well be more visually pleasing than the other though.
-
One of my favorite quotes from another forum (GearSlutz):
A $200 cable is better than a $2 cable. But not better than a $5 cable.
Yes, there are really horrible cables made from shoddy materials and assembled haphazardly with zero quality control.
But once you exceed "sensible" pricing, you get into the esoteric and self-induced realm of audiophools.
To make matters worse, many audiophools believe that you must "break-in" cables and listen to them for hours before discovering how much better they are. Of course, by the time you have listened to anything for several hours, you whole perception has shifted to accommodate the "ambient".
Just as your eyes automatically adjust between widely varying color temperature (indoor candle-lit <3000°K to glaring outdoor sunlight >5000°K) You can watch a video camera "auto-tracking white balance" between indoors and outdoors, but you never perceive your eye-brain system doing it.
-
If I had less of a conscience and a better ability to write testimonials dripping with glowing bullshit, I'd go into designing audiophile gear. The engineering is simple enough, it just has to look exotic and use esoteric components. Most of the effort goes into marketing the gear.
-
Many years ago - we built pro-audio (and TV) studios using good quality cable & connectors (e.g. Belden and Canare at the time).
These were a mix of analog and digital technologies - with the results usually going to digital masters.
Send it home on any media you like, and it won't sound better than the analog paths it took to get there through the production process!
-
And the "digital is digital it works or it doesn't" is also untrue for HDMI, visible artefacts become visible well before the video drops out:
http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf (http://www.audioquest.com/resource_tools/downloads/literature/technical_papers/HDMI_eyepattern_BER_and_cliff_effect.pdf)
Its a nightmare trying to find the magic combination of discount products that will work reliably together, cheaper to get something quality in the first place.
Someone (no pun intended) busted the HDMI one by capturing the output frames and comparing every pixel with the source.
I've captured frames to measure the bit error rate also like in the above document, there is a real difference between off brand cheap cables and a mid priced brand name option not just in the theoretical numbers measured by test equipment but also by looking critically at the image and it doesnt need 5m or 10m cables to show up. Not all consumers care about single pixel errors so the majority don't even notice it and just repeat the wrong assumption that digital is digital and if you see any picture then its perfect. Going further you can buy outrageously expensive HDMI cables that will produce an even lower error signal, at some point the result is sufficient for purpose and different people and situations will expect different levels of quality.
One of my favorite quotes from another forum (GearSlutz):
A $200 cable is better than a $2 cable. But not better than a $5 cable.
Yes, there are really horrible cables made from shoddy materials and assembled haphazardly with zero quality control.
But once you exceed "sensible" pricing, you get into the esoteric and self-induced realm of audiophools.
There can be more "quality" or value beyond the mid priced cables, but we should be highlighting the "fool" products that add cost (or just price) for no additional benefit, rather than making sweeping statements on price.
Being just sufficient for a digital link is a bad way to start as any changes in the environment, cable, or equipment and you could then be back to inadequate. There needs to be a significant overhead beyond visually acceptable to ensure it remains that way in use. Another reputable source shows some extreme examples of BER in HDMI/DVI signalling:
http://www.extron.com.au/company/article.aspx?id=digitaldesigntc (http://www.extron.com.au/company/article.aspx?id=digitaldesigntc)
I didn't like it at the cinema when they had some stains on the projection screen, no-one else noticed or could even see it during the showing when prompted. At another cinema the audio tracks were swapped left to right. Neither would entertain a refund. Whats considered acceptable varies wildly and there are products providing a range of levels of quality, please point out the charlatans but most of whats on this forum is just as ignorant of the world of high quality reproduction.
-
Maybe this is already done (youtube)?
We (well i assume most of us here) all know that very expensive speaker cable is kind of marketing BS. Together with interconnects.
Now, what woud be the best way to proof that it is indeed is utter BS? I mean, you should be able to see the "music" and conclude that the signal is hardly different? I''m not so keen to put my scope on to a amplified signal :P
Any thoughts what would be the best approach?
This thread and the motivation for creating it ---> |O :palm:
-
Just as your eyes automatically adjust between widely varying color temperature (indoor candle-lit <3000°K to glaring outdoor sunlight >5000°K) You can watch a video camera "auto-tracking white balance" between indoors and outdoors, but you never perceive your eye-brain system doing it.
Special case of course, but after near two decades of doing photography and cinematography (mostly on film, with no automatic white balance), I find that I'm very consciously aware of color temperature. Sometimes gaps in the spectrum as well (i.e. leading to poor color rendition), but more in a way that something looks "off" with colors rather than anything I'd be able to quantify. Most people seem completely oblivious to color temperature and color rendition though!
Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm (http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm)
"Makes digital sound analog"
-
Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm (http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm)
"Makes digital sound analog"
I had no idea that they also sell high end power cables?
But for $ 1499 ?
Some people just have too much money, I guess
-
having a nude virgin rub it with snake oil won't change that.
You know, every time i hear the claim about "X by naked virgins" They almost never say female, so for all you know to meet the claim some 20 year old guy could be flossing his but cheeks with the cable prior to shipping.
-
Since this thread, entertaining as it was, quickly took the turn towards "snake oil" and $$$. Its safe to say we all agree (=BS).
Unfortunately, this is no what i was after. Maybe i phrased the question wrongly :-// So, let me try to rephrase it:
If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?
-
Personally, I think there is (and isn't) a difference at the same time.
And what I mean by that is, the material of which the cable is made of (copper, silver, silver and copper combo, copper clad aluminum), shielding and wire gauge can definitely make an audible difference in sound quality. But if you take two cables that are identical in that regards (material and gauge) then wouldn't be any difference between em. Expensive cables are definitely a rip off (and I wouldn't buy/recommend those to anyone!), but there's absolutely is a difference among different cables due to the reasons stated above.
-
You would use a spectum analyser with a frequency sweep function / VNA to catagorise phase and gain of the cable across the desired frequency range, and depending on the equipment either directly or with a distortion meter measure the distortion added to the signal,
Next up shielding, build something that can pulse out large EMI spikes at broadband frequencies, measure the spectrum on the wire with the other end connected to a dummy load of the standard speaker resistances (not a speaker but a resistor) this is common mode immunity,
And finally if its multiple pairs in the same wire, inject those pulses down one pair while testing the other, this is crosstalk immunity,
There are a few more things you can worm out, but the VNA option gives you impedance, phase and gain (loss) across a frequency band of your choosing, which i would say is one of the most definitive ways to describe a cable,
-
If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?
A vector network analyzer might be a good place to start. I think they go down into the audio frequencies although I don't know if you even see transmission line effects down there. The wavelength of audio frequency stuff is so large in comparison to your average speaker cable length (15km for 20kHz).
Otherwise you could quantify the LCR-type parameters of the cable. Shielding can be measured "inside out" which is easier than "outside in" -- that is to say, you can put a signal on one end of the cable, terminate the other end, and measure the leakage, maybe inductively?
-
I'm definitely a "young player" and am fascinated by threads like this and learn a lot .. and for this I thank you all.
However, coupled with the expensive cables are invariably the claims regarding the sockets and connectors.
Just how important are those solid gold connectors that have been rubbed in snake oil by vestal virgins for reproducing that angelically perfect sound?
And closely linked(new topic?), how much marketing rubbish is involved in the connectors for test leads?
-
It seems a bit like water sold at the supermarket. Some bottles cost up to 5 times the cost of petrol. I don't doubt there is a perceptible taste difference between brands but people don't buy $8/liter water for the taste. It is a lifestyle and status statement.
All I know is I can neither afford it nor taste a difference. Although Someone has told me I was gullible and I believed them.
Sad to say but there are definitely flavour differences between brands of water, you're not dealing with pure water after all's said and done so it's not as ridiculous as it may sound (my palate can tell the difference, what it can't do repeatably is tell me which is more pleasing so I just buy the cheapest when I have to buy it at all)
Where I would agree with you entirely is that it's absolutely not worth the money they expect you to pay and it is, as you say, a brand loyalty/status choice.
I am lucky though, in the NW of England we have very pleasant, soft tap water which tastes good and makes excellent tea :)
-
In comparison, if you look at HDMI which is digital, you can see that the bits send over a 1 USD cable are exactly same as that of a 40 USD cable.
Not really. Dishonest vendors exist, and you can find poor quality cables that suffer a significant signal degradation.
Never underestimate the ability of some manufacturers to make, for example, laughable clones of well known connectors. I have a good sample of toy N connectors here.
Of course, what I say doesn't mean that HDMI cables not costing a fortune are crap. But cables below a reasonable price will probably be of poor quality. Can they cause trouble? Depends on the length, etc. A friend bought a long HDMI cable for 2 euro or so and the signal degradation was really visible. A 10 euro cable of the same length worked perfectly.
-
Anyway, my favourite audiophoolery regarding cables is not the cables itself, but the cable stands to prevent them touching the floor!
(http://www.hifi-advice.com/images/cable%20elevators%20IMG_3259%202.jpg)
-
If I had 2 exact same length speaker cables (but different AWG, insulation, shielding, etc), and I wanted to test which one is better, how would you test this (without using your ears!)?
A vector network analyzer might be a good place to start. I think they go down into the audio frequencies although I don't know if you even see transmission line effects down there. The wavelength of audio frequency stuff is so large in comparison to your average speaker cable length (15km for 20kHz).
Otherwise you could quantify the LCR-type parameters of the cable. Shielding can be measured "inside out" which is easier than "outside in" -- that is to say, you can put a signal on one end of the cable, terminate the other end, and measure the leakage, maybe inductively?
You'll be hard put to find anything measurable except the cable resistance, which is in series with the source impedance of the amplifier and directly affects the damping of a moving coil driver.
The saner and more technical end of the 'golden ears' brigade will claim that cable inductance and capacitance are also important, but if you do the maths, you will find that for any practical cable not designed to be pathologically bad, driving commercially available moving coil speakers (or even ones with pizeoelectric tweeters), the effects of cable capacitance and inductance are several orders of magnitude below the effect of the changing drive unit parameters as the coil moves in the gap, working against the forces of its suspension and its coupling to the air in the cabinet and room.
There's also the problem of correlating measurable electrical parameters with sound 'quality'. Even if you set up a randomised double blind trial, with an automatic switching device, that at the press of a button by the listener, momentarily mutes the audio and randomly selects one of two cables, logging the selection, when presented with the expected result that cables with the same resistance and closely similar other parameters are indistinguishable, the audiophool market pundits will claim your test methodology has compromised the performance of the supposedly superior cable - maybe it hasn't 'bedded in' or 'equilibrated' or 'harmonised' or some other unquantifiable woo-woo property that can only be satisfied by some lengthy ritual process that usually involves its undisturbed connection while playing particular types of music for an extended period - all carefully designed by the cynics who produce this s--t to make it impossible to conduct an A-B comparison!
-
My x-x-x Father in Law was the lead engineer/designer for Peerless Speakers in Denmark. One of his favourite stories was when they DID do a double blind test study with all the Audio/Hi-Fi magazines and geeks.
They borrowed B&O's sound-dead room - set everything up - played the music requested by the Hifi guys with all kinds of cables. They Journalists then voted on the sound quality in each instance. And the winner was "220v Electrical Wire" from an extension cord....
None of them ever published that test despite they had agreements with all the journalists that they HAD to publish it. The journalists had many excuses....
-
Anyway, my favourite audiophoolery regarding cables is not the cables itself, but the cable stands to prevent them touching the floor!
That is classic. Where can I get those? Will Lego stands work as well? Lego has the disadvantage that it hurts like buggery when you stand on it.
I am pretty sure that Lego would not be appropiate. Look at the sharp corner of lego blocks. I am sure they will diffract electrons like crazy and completely smear the phase and timing of the sound, making it less articulate and out of focus. :-DD :-DD :-DD
You need to use proper smooth ceramic pieces. Be gentle to your travelling electrons, dude!!
-
Noncorroding interconnects has audible benefits after the corroding ones stop working.
Psycho-acoustics is a real science and has nothing to do with confirmation bias or placebo.
I never shy away from a short and entertaining discussion with an audiophool. Likewise I take up those who become phools the other way around and disregard anything beyond what they can hear while being totally satisfied with Dr.Dre Beats and their iPhone. Phoolery is never good.
-
Unfortunately, there is no way by either measurements or by a blind testing ("double" or not) to "objectively" evaluate the perceived sound quality beyond very simple and easily sensed differences (loudness, noise, large amounts of distortion etc). Blind testing in audio has very low sensitivity - and it is well known but not widely advertised fact :palm:, as in the vast majority of documented and properly performed DBTs the statistically valid positive results are only obtained for this kind of differences. The usual claim is that any other differences we think we hear do exist only in our imagination. It is about the same as to measure 5mV DC voltage with a 3.5 digits meter set at 1kV range, and to claim there is no voltage present. A blind test is not a suitable instrument in this situation, but in the absence of anything better it is used to "prove" that there is no difference. There might be a difference or might be not but with that tool we wouldn't know, it is that simple. And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.
A couple of side notes - 1) I am not using any expensive cables in my home audio system ;) . 2) I did design hi-fi audio equipment for number of years and my designs did received a number of awards. One of my amplifier designs was rated as Class A by Stereophile magazine (about 2002 IIRC). So I am not exactly a novice in that field.
Cheers
Alex
-
And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.
Although not applicable to fairy tale cables, I understand that an important difference in audio gear is distortion. Most people will consider it something deletereous to music but, actually, it's heavily used either on purpose or more or less unknowingly as part of the creative process when producing music.
What's the appeal of many vintage microphones with a valve preamplifier? Its distortion sounds "beautiful", "rich" in a certain way. What makes you choose a preamplifier or mixer over another one? More than the particular curve of its equalizers, it's the way it distorts.
I own a very good audio interface made by Metric Halo. And one of the options it offers is several flavors of digitally modeled analog distortion for the input channels. I don't use that option because I prefer to use that kind of trickery when mixing (and the result is the same of course, bits are bits) but I certainly do use some distortion plugins that emulate old analog circuitry. You select a distortion model and the amount of overdrive you can apply (which is the equivalent of inserting an analog amplifier and overdriving it). Doing it in a very subtle way really does add some "sparkle" to the mix.
This is an example of an intentional "saturator" to add distortion.
http://www.pspaudioware.com/plugins/dynamic_processors/psp_mixsaturator2/ (http://www.pspaudioware.com/plugins/dynamic_processors/psp_mixsaturator2/)
Some studios or audio engineers will do it blatantly, using digital distortion, and others will do it in a more "covert" way, by inserting "nice sounding" old analog gear. The end result is similar anyway.
-
Unfortunately, there is no way by either measurements or by a blind testing ("double" or not) to "objectively" evaluate the perceived sound quality beyond very simple and easily sensed differences (loudness, noise, large amounts of distortion etc). Blind testing in audio has very low sensitivity - and it is well known but not widely advertised fact :palm:, as in the vast majority of documented and properly performed DBTs the statistically valid positive results are only obtained for this kind of differences. The usual claim is that any other differences we think we hear do exist only in our imagination. It is about the same as to measure 5mV DC voltage with a 3.5 digits meter set at 1kV range, and to claim there is no voltage present. A blind test is not a suitable instrument in this situation, but in the absence of anything better it is used to "prove" that there is no difference. There might be a difference or might be not but with that tool we wouldn't know, it is that simple. And as for the measurements - it is possible to measure many things, but it is not easy to measure the emotional effect of music on a person, and that is the actual goal of a music reproduction by electronic means. There is a measurable difference even between two pieces of the same wire with the same length - the problem with electrical measurements in audio is the interpretation - we don't always know what makes (or even could make) an audible difference.
A couple of side notes - 1) I am not using any expensive cables in my home audio system ;) . 2) I did design hi-fi audio equipment for number of years and my designs did received a number of awards. One of my amplifier designs was rated as Class A by Stereophile magazine (about 2002 IIRC). So I am not exactly a novice in that field.
Cheers
Alex
So how would you ratify the divide between pro audio and consumer audio? Are pro audio not interested in the emotional aspects of music?
It is the spending pattern that is different.
They spend a ton on their mixing consoles and speakers and room treatment. A bit less on amplification and recorders and equalization. Even less on Mogami microphone wire and Neutrik connectors for interconnects.
Meanwhile home audio - equalization is out (never understood that - even baxendall controls, let alone parametric, are out), room treatment is rare (WTF), loudspeakers are small, highly compromised, and WAF targeted, and then the spend is amplifiers and sources and wires and racks and remote controls.
-
Regarding the "audiophile" stuff, I always thought the power cables were the best: http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm (http://www.essentialsound.com/essence-power-cord.htm)
Beyond awesome. And beyond this 2m cryogenic awesomeness, there's miles and miles of crappy cables, lowest cost transformers, your neighbours hairdryer and everything else injecting noise onto the lines. "produced the most analog and realistic sound I've yet to hear from digital" Who makes that shit up??
-
Playing devil's advocate here (only to some extent, because I do not have silly money to waste)
For anyone that wants measurements, here is an article by N. Pass with measurements. It dates back to 1980.
http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_spkr_cable.pdf (http://www.firstwatt.com/pdf/art_spkr_cable.pdf)
The question is, are such differences audible?
Perhaps we are just spotlight measuring stuff and not the whole picture.
I won't try to guess anymore. I am as ignorant as anyone else in the industry (and I am not even part of it).
I try to keep an open mind. Not spending silly money though :D
-
Since everybody went off topic. ;D
How about a 2.000 USD speaker (pair) vs a 20.000 USD speaker (pair)? Any snake oil there?
-
How about a 2.000 USD speaker (pair) vs a 20.000 USD speaker (pair)? Any snake oil there?
I don't know about $2 vs $20, but $2 vs $200 or $2000 -- like a cheap boombox speaker vs. a quality PA speaker or line array setup -- has immediately measurable, quantifiable differences just in terms of basic things like frequency response. That at least is also obvious enough to be directly audible!
Whether or not high end "boutique" or professional audio manufacturers charge too much for their equipment is another question, though.
-
I think that the easiest way to visualze the difference in the cables, if any exists, is to connect both cables to the output of an amplifier, feed the amplifier wide band white of pink noise, terminate each cable into a 8ohm power resistor, and then look at each cable on a multichannel scope. Using the math function on the scope, subtract one signal from the other and then you can see the differences in the signal. The accuracy will be limited by the accuracy of the scope of course.
If you want to eliminate the error of the scope inputs, then sample the outputs from the cables with an op amp in differential mode. Make it so you can short the inputs and null adjust the op amp first, then look at the difference between the cables as a difference signal on a scope.If nothing can be seen within the audio spectrum of human hearing, well that would basically prove that no difference exists for practical purposes.
The problem is that cables don't supply their current to passive and non-reactive loads. They are connected to rather complex and dynamically changing speaker loads. You will never get two speakers with the exact same characteristics, so the audiophiles with golden ears will tell you a non-reactive load is not showing you the difference in the cables.
Perhaps the solution to the latter problem is to set up a test configuration where you record the speaker output in an an-echoic chamber with a sample rate and bit depth beyond needed for even the wildest claims of audiophile hearing, and then a change the cables. Take the two audio recordings and subtract them in an audio editor whilst making sure to get the files aligned perfectly time wise. The resulting waveform will display any differences between the cables.
Audiophiles will always find a way to disbelieve the results just religious people always find a away to reinterpret their holy books or twist words to explain away contradictions.
-
How about a 2.000 USD speaker (pair) vs a 20.000 USD speaker (pair)? Any snake oil there?
I don't know about $2 vs $20, but $2 vs $200 or $2000 -- like a cheap boombox speaker vs. a quality PA speaker or line array setup -- has immediately measurable, quantifiable differences just in terms of basic things like frequency response. That at least is also obvious enough to be directly audible!
Whether or not high end "boutique" or professional audio manufacturers charge too much for their equipment is another question, though.
Sometimes the high end equipment just looks cool, and that I suppose has value in itself. I mean people spend crazy money on artwork that has no function at all beyond looking cool.
-
I believe I have acquired about 5ft of "speaker" wire, however I have other plans for it, other plans indeed HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
-
I have an audiophool friend who just would not listen to reason about stupid expensive speaker cables until I pointed out the most (in)obvious thing to him -
I'm paraphrasing, but it went something like this
"rob, you do realise that no matter how thick, pure and well insulated your cables are, you don't have any cables even remotely like that a) inside the speaker) and b) actually wound around the magnet driver coil which at best is some thinly enamel insulated solid copper thin brittle stuff soldered to a plated braided cable to the tabs"
he thought about that for a while, then stopped buying stupid speaker cables
-
So he was convinced that an issue exists but he decides not to fix it when you point out that it might exist in other places too?
That's like saying I will not fix my car's cracked headlight because it also has a cracked back stop light.
-
Easy.
One stereo amplifier, with the same audio signal fed into both channels.
Two identical speakers.
A 2ch 'scope with maths mode (Ch1 - Ch2)
-
So he was convinced that an issue exists but he decides not to fix it when you point out that it might exist in other places too?
That's like saying I will not fix my car's cracked headlight because it also has a cracked back stop light.
There is only so much improvement you can make by applying (dubious at best) sticking plasters to a system that isn't good enough to take advantage of them.
To use a car analogy, you could possibly, if you wanted, fit a wound Kevlar driveshaft from a Bugatti Veyron to a Chevy Voyager.
It'd make not one jot of difference to the performance because the original drive shaft was perfectly adequate for the job and the 'system' it's fitted to isn't capable of better performance so there comes a point where such 'upgrades' are just not worth the time, effort and money they cost.
A lot of the audiophool equipment out there is like gold plating the badge on your car, very pretty if that's your 'thing' but utterly pointless for any practical purpose other than the transfer of money from your wallet to the wallet of the person who owns the gold plating machine.
-
There is only so much improvement you can make by applying (dubious at best) sticking plasters to a system that isn't good enough to take advantage of them.
And yet your friend did perceive a significant change, and he was ready to spend his hard earned money on it.
To use a car analogy, you could possibly, if you wanted, fit a wound Kevlar driveshaft from a Bugatti Veyron to a Chevy Voyager.
It'd make not one jot of difference to the performance because the original drive shaft was perfectly adequate for the job and the 'system' it's fitted to isn't capable of better performance so there comes a point where such 'upgrades' are just not worth the time, effort and money they cost.
A lot of the audiophool equipment out there is like gold plating the badge on your car, very pretty if that's your 'thing' but utterly pointless for any practical purpose other than the transfer of money from your wallet to the wallet of the person who owns the gold plating machine.
That's an opinion.
If you want to argue with an opinion, then your friend's is as valid.
If you want to argue with facts, then you have a difficult job because you will have to prove that the measured and heard differences are not audible by anyone.
PS. Again, I am not arguing that it is worth to spend silly money.
-
If your cables are <1% of the inductance and DC resistance of what's inside the speaker cabinet + what's between the amp's output stage active devices and its terminals, then throwing more money at the cables is foolish as further improvements will be vanishingly small and increasingly more expensive. Its better spent on other components of your system or dare I say it - Acoustic tile to disperse unwanted room reflections.
-
"rob, you do realise that no matter how thick, pure and well insulated your cables are, you don't have any cables even remotely like that a) inside the speaker) and b) actually wound around the magnet driver coil which at best is some thinly enamel insulated solid copper thin brittle stuff soldered to a plated braided cable to the tabs"
Same for the power strips they spend thousands of dollars on. All it could effect is the last few few of AC power wiring. But what's behind the wall outlet, and all inside the wall all the way to the breaker box, tacked together with old wire nuts, probably has a few nicks in it due to rats chewing on it? Same old simple romex wire we all have, but seemingly plugging in a $3000 outlet strip on shock absorbers and made out of specially treated oak with braided AC wires fixes everything so much they claim you can hear the difference. Hahaha ...
"There's a sucker born every minute" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There's_a_sucker_born_every_minute)
Walker Audio Velocitor S Quantum Resonance power strip - $3500 -
(http://images.oobject.com/thumbdir/thumbnails/2/86/28699136decd7ad75b4d6e159e5f1354-orig)
-
Out of topic but.... Earth in a box anyone? :-DD
http://www.entreq.com/products/ground-boxes-17667704 (http://www.entreq.com/products/ground-boxes-17667704)
Some people were actually surprised when the measurements emerged that there was no current flow towards it and it was just introducing new noise as an antenna :D
It even has imitators because as it seems it is a commercial success :D (probably because people don't really understand how ground works...)
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Aucharm-Audio-Grounding-Box-with-Crocodile-lip-Ground-Wire-/322387741958?hash=item4b0fce8d06:g:DOEAAOSwXeJYLbl6 (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Aucharm-Audio-Grounding-Box-with-Crocodile-lip-Ground-Wire-/322387741958?hash=item4b0fce8d06:g:DOEAAOSwXeJYLbl6)
-
Out of topic but.... Earth in a box anyone? :-DD
http://www.entreq.com/products/ground-boxes-17667704 (http://www.entreq.com/products/ground-boxes-17667704)
Some people were actually surprised when the measurements emerged that there was no current flow towards it and it was just introducing new noise as an antenna :D
Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to simply stick a bare wire in a potted plant?
I need to start an IndieGoGo page... Ground Pots! You will get an improvement in dynamic's, a lower noise floor and more natural flow in the sound, all while growing your favorite house plant!
[edit]
Oooohhh! I could market it to the health conscience audiophool! The plant will increase the amount of "free oxygen" in the air, while giving off "free radicals" that will... I'm stumped! A little help here!
-
I'm stumped! A little help here!
Needs more secret ingredients
-
I'm stumped! A little help here!
Needs more secret ingredients
Special "growth medium" and "miracle vitamin elixir with electrolytes" to ensure proper growth and health of the plant while increasing ground conductivity... Again, stumped. I need new age health jargon...
-
Special "growth medium" and "miracle vitamin elixir" to ensure... Again, stumped. I need new age health jargon...
Make that gluten free something. It sells nicely these days, even to people without celiac disease
(and we 've gone too far with the joke... )
back on topic :D
-
Special "growth medium" and "miracle vitamin elixir" to ensure... Again, stumped. I need new age health jargon...
Make that gluten free something. It sells nicely these days, even to people without celiac disease
True. True. And it MUST be certified organic.
(and we 've gone too far with the joke... )
back on topic :D
BAH! The topic is absurd. Let's have some fun and think of ways to help me retire before I'm 50.
-
BAH! The topic is absurd. Let's have some fun and think of ways to help me retire before I'm 50.
Nothing absurd about discussing measurements and empirical observations.
Again, silly prices aside.
About retirement, still working on it myself...
-
Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to simply stick a bare wire in a potted plant?
I need to start an IndieGoGo page... Ground Pots! You will get an improvement in dynamic's, a lower noise floor and more natural flow in the sound, all while growing your favorite house plant!
[edit]
Oooohhh! I could market it to the health conscience audiophool! The plant will increase the amount of "free oxygen" in the air, while giving off "free radicals" that will... I'm stumped! A little help here!
Noise floor is a bit of a dodgy one, it's something that can be measured so you'd want to avoid that, maybe 'harmonises the timbral serenity of the audio range' and offer different selections of 'ground', one from each recording studio or perhaps from the artist's home town to truly 'capture and ensonify the true recording influences'?
-
Same for the power strips they spend thousands of dollars on. All it could effect is the last few few of AC power wiring. But what's behind the wall outlet, and all inside the wall all the way to the breaker box, tacked together with old wire nuts, probably has a few nicks in it due to rats chewing on it? Same old simple romex wire we all have, but seemingly plugging in a $3000 outlet strip on shock absorbers and made out of specially treated oak with braided AC wires fixes everything so much they claim you can hear the difference. Hahaha ...
"There's a sucker born every minute" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There's_a_sucker_born_every_minute)
Walker Audio Velocitor S Quantum Resonance power strip - $3500 -
(http://images.oobject.com/thumbdir/thumbnails/2/86/28699136decd7ad75b4d6e159e5f1354-orig)
:palm: :-DD :wtf: If I walked into someone's room and saw this, I think I'd just lose it. What's the most ridiculous piece of pure audiophool gear you've actually seen in someone's apartment?
-
:palm: :-DD :wtf: If I walked into someone's room and saw this, I think I'd just lose it. What's the most ridiculous piece of pure audiophool gear you've actually seen in someone's apartment?
But you can't plug your $10000 power cables straight into the wall!
That is an ECONOMIC matching "balun" transformer.
Which side is "balanced" and which side is "unbalanced" is left as an exercise for the reader.
(http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/walker5/1.jpg)
-
They are going at it hot and heavy over on: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/connectors-cables-stands-accessories/1124376-expensive-speaker-cables-better-than-cheap-ones-sorry-guys-ia-m-changing-team.html (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/connectors-cables-stands-accessories/1124376-expensive-speaker-cables-better-than-cheap-ones-sorry-guys-ia-m-changing-team.html)
Including several posts from "frenzy" who claims to be a "Sound on Sound contributor" making a fool (phool?) of himself in public.
-
The only really relevant parameter for speaker cables is resistance, which is not that hard to measure. :-DMM
At audio frequencies, this has much more effect than other measurable properties of the cable. To see this, perform a transmission-line analysis using the velocity factor, capacitance, and inductance of the cable, and find the wavelength of the signal in the cable. As long as the cable is shorter than around 1/4 wavelength, capacitance and inductance are not very important; but you will find that they are very low anyway.
-
When hearing the "directional" audio cable, as most of them are custom wrapped for the bling, will a mix of plain copper wires AND diode will affect the "direction" ?
Say for example the whole big cable has 10 big strands, take few of them (not all), cut and soldered with diodes, then wrap them neatly to look seamless, hidden under the bling-bling jacket.
Again, just a wild thought. :-//
-
There should be no DC component to an audio signal, so using diodes will mess things up badly. From what I understand, the line-level cables marked with a "direction" have a shield connected at only one end. This is pretty stupid, since it can't solve any ground loop problems in this unbalanced configuration. It just adds "shielding" that won't do much in practice.
-
There should be no DC component to an audio signal, so using diodes will mess things up badly.
:-+
From what I understand, the line-level cables marked with a "direction" have a shield connected at only one end. This is pretty stupid, since it can't solve any ground loop problems in this unbalanced configuration. It just adds "shielding" that won't do much in practice.
Nobody with an IQ approaching their body temperature (Farenheit) would sell or buy an unbalanced audio cable with dis-continuous shield. That would be congenitally broken.
However, it is not unusual to see balanced audio interconnections with shield connected only at one end. Not to say that there doesn't remain some debate whether to connect the shield at the source or the destination end.
OTOH, the audiophool cables with arrows designating "direction" are complete bollocks. Clearly aimed at the technically ignorant who don't understand what AC is.
-
Clearly aimed at the technically ignorant who don't understand what AC is.
Which is most of the general population really. I have to remind myself regularly that to most people electricity is virtually indistinguishable from magic.