Which snake species?:lol:
10 Biggest Lies in Audio
- Thread starter matbhuvi
- Start date
Which snake species?:lol:
square_wave
Well-Known Member
I am extremely bored by these kinds of articles with extreme points of view. In audio both the extreme viewpoints are equally bad.
I undoubtedly believe that the middle ground is the ground of sanity and reality.
The middle ground seeks solutions with equal importance to known science and actual experience.
Just like the snake oil vendors have many wares to sell, so does the so called spec / science bandwagon.
Both vendors of these extreme wares rely on the naivety and inexperience of the buyer.
I undoubtedly believe that the middle ground is the ground of sanity and reality.
The middle ground seeks solutions with equal importance to known science and actual experience.
Just like the snake oil vendors have many wares to sell, so does the so called spec / science bandwagon.
Both vendors of these extreme wares rely on the naivety and inexperience of the buyer.
square_wave
Well-Known Member
Sarcastic comments like these are an example of extreme viewpoints based on the writers belief system.
The fact is that a well designed 8 watt SET amp has a place in high fidelity. If used in the correct system it will sound awesome. There are many such stellar examples. Check out the world of high efficiency horn speaker systems.
Art of listening lies here - The Audiophile's Wife
We must request this lady to write something on burn-in
We must request this lady to write something on burn-in
Last edited:
Exactly my thoughts.
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
entsurgeon
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2010
- Messages
- 591
- Points
- 43
exactly my point in post#3
i love you!Aren't there middle grounds in audio? This article reads like an extended rant, making clever use of language - over which the writer seems to have a great command - to bolster his points of view.
Joshua
A balanced and rational argument should be able to portray both sides of the picture. Unfortunately it rarely happens as our ego's and hardened opinions come in the way. It is so difficult to admit that we may be wrong about something.
This article is the personal opinion of the writer and not a universal truth. But readers tend to pick and highlight facts which coincide with their beliefs and ignore those which contradict them. I read the article and highlighted the writers 'opinion' that modern digital recordings are better than analogue recordings. Because I opted for compact discs. But folks who prefer vinyl would reject the writers opinion. Truth is subjective. It varies from person to person
and you too
hmmm okay, you too!!
At the outset, let me just say that I do not want any thanks for this post from any of you. If you have tried to make an honest effort to appreciate the scientific side, I will be happy.
These days I get deeply saddened by these threads, and of late there have been quite a few. I see quite a few members enjoy contributing to these threads and they do not hesitate using such words as "voodoo", "placebo effect" etc, without perhaps realizing that such strong words might hurt the feelings of a few while their own understanding of the situation is completely unsatisfactory.
I have written about some of these things before, but nobody perhaps bothers. I will try once again. I will pick the issue of passive elements like cables and capacitors and their burn-in. I'll not touch any other issues mentioned in the cited article by the OP.
The issue here with cables and capacitors is that of a material medium which is subject to an electromagnetic field. Now do we (the forum members) know how would a material behave microscopically when it is subjected to the EM field? If the answer to this question is a NO, then what makes us qualified to talk about cables, and on top of that criticise and demean other people? This is not a subject of engineering, this is a matter of basic research in condensed matter physics. Wild measurements will not answer this question, because I asked what happens to the medium microscopically (that is, at the electronic and atomic/molecular level). One has to have theoretical understanding of the situation.
The question is actually harder than one posed above, because the EM signal in the present context is not a simple signal, it is a signal which contains a spectrum of frequencies from 20 Hz to 20KHz or more.
In the case of cable I actually have answered the above question in a simplistic version in at least a few places in this forum. I am not a condensed matter physicist, but my answer was based my general understanding of all physics, myself being a theoretical high energy physicist. Recently I have discussed this further with a new condensed matter physicist we have just hired as a faculty member from UC, Santa Cruz. And she has agreed with my basic thinking and actually has refined it.
I will not repeat the answer here again, because as said, I have already talked about it in this forum. But let me ask a different question now: In a conductor, electrons are found in different energy bands, and the ones in the so-called conduction band are "free". If they are really free, why is there a resistance or impedance that the conductor has? The resistance should have been zero, isn't it? I have asked this question recently in another thread, just to make people aware that perhaps we should not be discussing some these issues , because they are quite technical. Of course, I did not get any answer to my question, and people carried on in their merry way pronouncing what they thought were correct.
Let me remind you that there was a time when people thought the world was flat, and the Sun moved periodically around the Earth. When scientists came up with a different view, some of them had to pay the price with their lives. People also believed, time and space were completely unrelated notions. Fortunately, when Einstein proposed his special theory of relativity where time and space are related concepts, he did not have go through any public torture or indignation. General perceptions can be very different from the underlying science.
Speakers are allowed to break in because there are moving parts, and cables and caps cannot burn in or break in because there are no moving parts - this is as naive a statement as there can be.
As in every other trade, in audio too, there are dishonest traders, and also very dishonest traders - and they will set traps for the uninitiated and sometimes even the most experienced. I for one always look for the best VFM whenever I have the luxury to be in the market for a new component, because I am seriously constrained in the money department, being a physicist. This is a completely different issue what one should buy. But, please please, do not make wrong and irresponsible comments based on superficial or no knowledge and just general perception. I know, all of you mean good for the fellow forum member, and that's why probably want to caution them. But propagation of absolutely wrong notions cannot be a good thing, irrespective of the intentions.
Some of you do not see any effects of a cable, some do; similarly some do not see them burn in, while some others do. I have no problem with any of these observations and comments. But when people start making prophetic comments without having any scientific basis, and do not hesitate offending others by calling them indulging in voodoo, that cannot be correct.
I am sorry for this long post. But these sort of threads seriously worry me and the number of them is increasing by the day, not to mention that this article has been discussed before.
Regards.
These days I get deeply saddened by these threads, and of late there have been quite a few. I see quite a few members enjoy contributing to these threads and they do not hesitate using such words as "voodoo", "placebo effect" etc, without perhaps realizing that such strong words might hurt the feelings of a few while their own understanding of the situation is completely unsatisfactory.
I have written about some of these things before, but nobody perhaps bothers. I will try once again. I will pick the issue of passive elements like cables and capacitors and their burn-in. I'll not touch any other issues mentioned in the cited article by the OP.
The issue here with cables and capacitors is that of a material medium which is subject to an electromagnetic field. Now do we (the forum members) know how would a material behave microscopically when it is subjected to the EM field? If the answer to this question is a NO, then what makes us qualified to talk about cables, and on top of that criticise and demean other people? This is not a subject of engineering, this is a matter of basic research in condensed matter physics. Wild measurements will not answer this question, because I asked what happens to the medium microscopically (that is, at the electronic and atomic/molecular level). One has to have theoretical understanding of the situation.
The question is actually harder than one posed above, because the EM signal in the present context is not a simple signal, it is a signal which contains a spectrum of frequencies from 20 Hz to 20KHz or more.
In the case of cable I actually have answered the above question in a simplistic version in at least a few places in this forum. I am not a condensed matter physicist, but my answer was based my general understanding of all physics, myself being a theoretical high energy physicist. Recently I have discussed this further with a new condensed matter physicist we have just hired as a faculty member from UC, Santa Cruz. And she has agreed with my basic thinking and actually has refined it.
I will not repeat the answer here again, because as said, I have already talked about it in this forum. But let me ask a different question now: In a conductor, electrons are found in different energy bands, and the ones in the so-called conduction band are "free". If they are really free, why is there a resistance or impedance that the conductor has? The resistance should have been zero, isn't it? I have asked this question recently in another thread, just to make people aware that perhaps we should not be discussing some these issues , because they are quite technical. Of course, I did not get any answer to my question, and people carried on in their merry way pronouncing what they thought were correct.
Let me remind you that there was a time when people thought the world was flat, and the Sun moved periodically around the Earth. When scientists came up with a different view, some of them had to pay the price with their lives. People also believed, time and space were completely unrelated notions. Fortunately, when Einstein proposed his special theory of relativity where time and space are related concepts, he did not have go through any public torture or indignation. General perceptions can be very different from the underlying science.
Speakers are allowed to break in because there are moving parts, and cables and caps cannot burn in or break in because there are no moving parts - this is as naive a statement as there can be.
As in every other trade, in audio too, there are dishonest traders, and also very dishonest traders - and they will set traps for the uninitiated and sometimes even the most experienced. I for one always look for the best VFM whenever I have the luxury to be in the market for a new component, because I am seriously constrained in the money department, being a physicist. This is a completely different issue what one should buy. But, please please, do not make wrong and irresponsible comments based on superficial or no knowledge and just general perception. I know, all of you mean good for the fellow forum member, and that's why probably want to caution them. But propagation of absolutely wrong notions cannot be a good thing, irrespective of the intentions.
Some of you do not see any effects of a cable, some do; similarly some do not see them burn in, while some others do. I have no problem with any of these observations and comments. But when people start making prophetic comments without having any scientific basis, and do not hesitate offending others by calling them indulging in voodoo, that cannot be correct.
I am sorry for this long post. But these sort of threads seriously worry me and the number of them is increasing by the day, not to mention that this article has been discussed before.
Regards.
reignofchaos
Well-Known Member
I choose to ignore such extreme viewpoints as the original post. I will believe, recommend and buy equipment based on what I hear and not its specs. There are many 8 watt amps that sound just right with the correct high efficiency speaker. Just ask our forum member Rajiv who has built his setup around this philosophy.
The fact that the author calls an 8W amp idiotic shows how idiotic he himself is really. He needs to open his ears and listen before name calling everything.
The fact that the author calls an 8W amp idiotic shows how idiotic he himself is really. He needs to open his ears and listen before name calling everything.
My gut feeling is telling me to not to mess around with a physicist, but..., well here it goes.
I agree that science cant properly explain these things yet (why people hear a diff with cables, and the cable burn in). And science has a notorious history of changing its stance time and again as more evidence pours in. I want to believe people who say they can hear a difference even though I cant and even though science doesnt agree so far (havent tried any expensive cables anyway).
Where my needle gets stuck is that nothing else in the world gets affected by cables (once they are above a certain threshold of decent quality). Launching rockets to the moon and mars, high end optics in satellites, high end MRI and other medical equipment, lights, fans, computers, telescopes that can almost see the far end of the universe etc etc etc. What makes our ears so special that we can hear a difference.
This is when we cant differentiate between variations in frequency response. Our ears like tubes over solid state when SS has much lower distortion. Speakers xo components are supposed to be within 10% tolerance and we cant hear the difference. Try changing a xo cap from 20mfd to 19.5 mfd and I bet most of us cant tell the difference, but we can hear a difference in cap that has run for 100 hrs without a value change. Beats me...
Let me phrase the question in other way.
Do the cable manufacturers know how would a material behave microscopically when it is subjected to the EM field? If the answer to this question is a NO, then what makes them qualified to claim exotic properties for the cables and sell them at 2000$?
Why is it always the costly cables are perceived to have "better behaviour around EM fields"?
If someone is making an end product claiming it has certain properties without knowing how he gave the product the characters in the first place, will you buy it?
What is the probability of such a person to have come up with the actual product with claimed properties?
Can a monkey write a poem?
Unfortunately ROC that is not a virtue practiced by most here - it is only comments based on hearsay (mostly from google searches and third party reviews) and a feeling of indignation when any mere mortal dare question their half baked knowledge. It is amazing how someone who has not experienced a piece of audio equipment has expert knowledge on how it sounds.
Cheers,
Sid
Last edited:
When a musician is singing and staying at a single note (let's say with fundamental freq of 300 Hz), there are actually many other frequencies that together make that single note. The answer to my question in my previous post is that the effect that an EM signal suffers (or experiences) in a material medium is that of scattering. I can also explain how this scattering takes place, but let me refrain from doing it. Now, what is the effect of this scattering? The scattering changes the relative presence of all the frequencies in the original musical note (just like scattering of white light in the sky makes the sky bluish - the sky is never purely white -we have all studied this in our school days). So what is the net result of the EM signal passing through a cable? because of scattering the quality of the sound (still with fundamental freq of 300 Hz, to follow up the example we started with) changes. Quality is determined by the relative presence of all the frequencies in a signal - this is what makes Lata sound sound like Lata and different from, for example, Asha even though they are singing the same note. This is what makes EM signals carrying musical signals different from everything else. In most of the examples you have described, the 'quality' of the signal is not crucial or they may have a certain tolerance ('quality' here is used in the technical sense, that is, given by the relative presence of all the frequencies present in a given signal). Unfortunately, for music, quality is a very important property, one that has ideally zero tolerance, because we do not want Lata sound like Asha. Of course usually the effect is not that large, but in music we try to get the tonality as correctly as possible. Cables always act as a graphic equalizer, effect may be large or small. This is an established fact of physics. Actually in my personal experience I do not think one needs to have any expensive gear to hear the difference with different cables, the effect can in principle clearly be heard with very budget gear.
One possible effect of cap burning is not necessarily to change its capacitance, but again the frequency distribution in a given musical note can change, as I have explained above, although the material is different here, in a IC cable it's a conductor (metals like copper, silver or aluminum), but in a cap the two plates are separated by an insulator (dielectric).
Regards.
Last edited:
@everyone.
here we go again. Relax guys. This has been debated before and will be debated even in 2050. (My painstacking subjective scientific research tells me these debates come up in audio forum in average 2.5 months i.e. appox. 75 days 
)
My advice is seek knowledge, listen as much as possible, take care of basic things and enjoy the music. Also would like to add there is no harm in having an open mind when seniors have different point of view. It will only refine your knowledge.
Baz Luhrmann - Everybody's Free (To Wear Sunscreen) - YouTube
enjoy and goodbye
here we go again. Relax guys. This has been debated before and will be debated even in 2050. (My painstacking subjective scientific research tells me these debates come up in audio forum in average 2.5 months i.e. appox. 75 days ) My advice is seek knowledge, listen as much as possible, take care of basic things and enjoy the music. Also would like to add there is no harm in having an open mind when seniors have different point of view. It will only refine your knowledge.
Baz Luhrmann - Everybody's Free (To Wear Sunscreen) - YouTube
enjoy and goodbye
I do not know if all cable manufacturers know, but some definitely know, if not theoretically but at least operationally. Have you heard of PCOCC cables? Of course this kind of copper cables were not made by a audio cable manufacturer, as far as I know, but they are now used in audio. What is this PCOCC? This is a special cable drawing method through which one can make a few hundred feet of copper cable made of a single crystal, meaning there are no crystal defects (gaps, impurities etc). That is good, because the crystal defects divide the copper cable into many small domains, and the domain walls (boundary between domains) are responsible for the scattering of signals I talked about in my previous post.
Most of these questions do not really concern me. I have never recommended any cable to anybody generally in this forum, let alone expensive or cheap. I, for one, can afford only relatively cheap ones. But, I see clearly that you are not interested in appreciating the scientific viewpoint that I wanted to bring in, rather than statements based on general perception.
In any audio equipment using some of the passive elements I described in my original post, there is in principle some equalization taking place, and also with time there is some settling effect with time. There is no way one can get around this, but the effect may be small for you so that you may not notice it. Since this is inevitable, there is no point worrying about it, and I think all good audio equipment manufacturer knows about and appreciates this. Of course this is not a huge effect. All everybody should be worried about is the final settled sound, and most manufacturers I think should know this.
Any way, as I said, I am not worrying about these aspects you have brought about. I am only talking about established facts of some basic science as applied to audio signals through a material medium.
Regards.
If I attach a high resolution oscilloscope or some other recording/measuring device on both ends of a cable and compare the two, there should be a significant difference in the signal (and this is after discounting the LCR values of the cable because if LCR is the reason, then whats the big deal right). If we can hear it, we should be able to see the difference too.
An integrated amplifier should be better than a preamp/poweramp combo (all else being equal) as the first will not need cables.
Considering the path the signal takes from the cd to the speaker driver, there should be a lot of scattering going on at all the stages of the system dac, preamp, amp crossover etc. everywhere there is signal getting transmitted through the wire/medium in some form, on the pcb, through the crappy wires being used in many of the high end gear, through the solder (that spool of solder costs what, about 50 bucks which many of the diyers use from SP road), cheap rca connectors used everywhere, standard copper being used in voice coils. All of this cumulatively should pretty much destroy the signal, atleast the impact should be much more than that of a cable.
Nope, this does not destroy the signal. I have already said that the effect of the scattering is to change the 'quality' of the sound, that means the tonality of the sound. But remember this is a tiny effect, as also stated before, because after all we are using a conductor. The fact that these conductors have impedance is because these scatterings are taking place, otherwise there is almost no other reason for any impedance developing in a conductor (remember the electrons in the conduction band of the conductor are 'free', but actually in addition to the scattering there is also some electron-electron interaction, but there is NO phonon-electron interaction as the Fermi level is pretty high). Your question is more about the quantity of this equalization effect.
An integrated amp can be better or worse than a pre-power. Remember, in an integrated, there is also a pre section and a power section and they are connected through a passive component. In a good design, there usually is shortest lengths of passive components used, you must have noticed.
Please keep in mind that, in my original post, the main message I wanted to give is that, based on physics as I know it, there is enough reason for a cable to make a difference in the soinics and also to burn in for the material to 'settle'.
Regards
An integrated amp can be better or worse than a pre-power. Remember, in an integrated, there is also a pre section and a power section and they are connected through a passive component. In a good design, there usually is shortest lengths of passive components used, you must have noticed.
Please keep in mind that, in my original post, the main message I wanted to give is that, based on physics as I know it, there is enough reason for a cable to make a difference in the soinics and also to burn in for the material to 'settle'.
Regards
Thad E Ginathom
Well-Known Member
Your points are fascinating and convincing.
Even though I may be one of the forum sceptics on some of these things, I don't actual argue about analogue cables making a difference. What I do find hard to accept is that anyone (with due respect to all, and without wishing to offend anyone I haven't already offended
) can remember a sound "[eg] a hundred hours" (over days, weeks, months) accurately and make an accurate comparison to today. It's my scepticism. I know there are people here who might say, "yes, I can..." I read their reviews of their own equipment. Of course, there are those who train a particular sense; I suppose a wine taster, or tea taster, or perfumer, can remember a taste or a smell, and musicians are capable of remembering music in a that actually allows them to perform it. That I don't have any of those skills does not mean that they do not exist or are not possible.
cricfansd
New Member
@Asit: What you are describing is theoretically true but hardly relevant for audio signals with 2V p-p and 20 KHz bandwidth. Even less effect for speaker cables where the amplitude is even higher. Few of these cable designers are the relics of cold war. At that time, the aim to make every element of the audio circuit transparent was essential. The task was perfect reproduction of hydrophone signals that was low amplitude and very noisy. So if you change the tonality of the signal then you may not identify whether a Soviet Akula class submarine left the harbor or a NATO Los Angeles class. Yes I do believe cables make a difference but in a very limited audio use case.
I somehow don't understand why the effect of cables/IC burn-in always changes the tonality towards good not the other way round. Few years back one of our respected Analog designer had designed a PLL (phase locked loop) circuit with band-gap reference voltage which had output voltage of 1.25V at the operating temperature of 50C instead of typical temp of 22C. His logic was that with all the modules running the chip's operating temp is 50C and the PLL works the best. Long story short, chip didn't passed the QC since silicon test is not done based on use cases and we had to redesign the chip which cost us few million dollars.
So my point is no respected circuit designer designs circuit hoping that burn-in will change the frequency response of the output of the amp/pre-amp/cd-player and make it better sounding.
OT: Of all the UCs that the state has built, you had to reference a Ph.D from the hippie-town
I somehow don't understand why the effect of cables/IC burn-in always changes the tonality towards good not the other way round. Few years back one of our respected Analog designer had designed a PLL (phase locked loop) circuit with band-gap reference voltage which had output voltage of 1.25V at the operating temperature of 50C instead of typical temp of 22C. His logic was that with all the modules running the chip's operating temp is 50C and the PLL works the best. Long story short, chip didn't passed the QC since silicon test is not done based on use cases and we had to redesign the chip which cost us few million dollars.
So my point is no respected circuit designer designs circuit hoping that burn-in will change the frequency response of the output of the amp/pre-amp/cd-player and make it better sounding.
OT: Of all the UCs that the state has built, you had to reference a Ph.D from the hippie-town
Last edited:
Get the Award Winning Diamond 12.3 Floorstanding Speakers on Special Offer
Similar threads
