Power cords

[Thad E Ginathom]

... Simply, "Yes."

 

[stevieboy]

Reminder: the initial question is not, "does it sound better/worse?" but, "Is there, in fact, an actual difference?"

Thad, if the question is measurable difference then fine. But if its 'actual' difference then it should also account for listening right? Unless you trust measurements more than you trust your ears and believe that measurements tell the whole story...

Regards

 

[stevieboy]

and pure technology has got to perfectly capable of measuring and analysing it.

the big question Thad. Technology barely scratches the surface of the tech of the human ear. Of course you could belong to the other camp and believe that manmade tech is capable.

Regards

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Thad, if the question is measurable difference then fine. But if its 'actual' difference then it should also account for listening right? Unless you trust measurements more than you trust your ears and believe that measurements tell the whole story...

Regards

Let us approach that from the other direction: if there is a real difference, that can be heard, it must be measurable. If not, then music could never have been recorded in the first place, and we wouldn't be here :lol:

Technology barely scratches the surface of the tech of the human ear. Of course you could belong to the other camp and believe that manmade tech is capable.

Am engineer, dealing with these matters, tells us in this thread that technology goes waaaay beyond the human ear. Why is this ignored? Can you hear subsonic/supersonic? By definition you can't: technology (and dogs ) can!

Even a good microphone might be capable of recording things we cannot actually hear. I do not understand this elevation of human hearing to mythical status. It does not deserve it. Dogs leave us way behind --- one audio fact that technology is able to measure

Whatever... We may set up the experiment, with no limit on budget for equipment and scientists, and, if it shows no difference, it will be claimed that it was a difference our equipment was "unable to resolve". It will remain a matter of faith, with the unbelievers having lesser ears and insufficient budgets.

 

[jls001]

Bring on the best measuring instruments! Let's hear what they hear.

Only request is there should be an explanation of the meaning of what is measured, and an explanation of the implication of a good/bad measurement by that metrics, so that lay folks can also appreciate.

My personal request is to include (among other things) measurements related to EMI/RF interferences as these are bandied about so often when talking of power cables.

 

[hifiashok]

there is a thread somewhere i have written something along these lines.....

why do we do what we do, for a living, other than for 'just living'!?!

if we were to break it down, what all do we actually need to survive?

however, when the question starts to veer toward 'quality' of living, a whole lot of subjectivity creeps in.

the same simile can go for stones (diamonds, etc.), single malts (etc.), specialty foods (fugue, matsutake, white truffles, etc.), watches, yachts and so on.....

 

[jls001]

...and audio bling

 

[hifiashok]

Let us approach that from the other direction: if there is a real difference, that can be heard, it must be measurable. If not, then music could never have been recorded in the first place, and we wouldn't be here :lol:
Am engineer, dealing with these matters, tells us in this thread that technology goes waaaay beyond the human ear. Why is this ignored? Can you hear subsonic/supersonic? By definition you can't: technology (and dogs ) can!

Even a good microphone might be capable of recording things we cannot actually hear. I do not understand this elevation of human hearing to mythical status. It does not deserve it. Dogs leave us way behind --- one audio fact that technology is able to measure

Whatever... We may set up the experiment, with no limit on budget for equipment and scientists, and, if it shows no difference, it will be claimed that it was a difference our equipment was "unable to resolve". It will remain a matter of faith, with the unbelievers having lesser ears and insufficient budgets.

another 'the other end' option would be, actually hear the difference and then let technology go fig! eh?! and if technology does not have the answer (yet), then!?

 

[hifiashok]

was an interesting episode someone narrated about a famous (and, for this point, well_to_do) person, i forget who (say, dhirubhai a for this). he was travelling with this person by rail. this person was also in the same 2nd class coach as the narrator. after a long time (owing to being in awe of the person) in the journey the narrator musters up the courage to enquire why the person, though well within his means to, is not travelling by the best class possible.

to this, the person responded, 'arrival times for both is same' (let's not nitpick here)!!

(i know i do not narrate this well, but hope all of us understood the drift)

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

if technology does not have the answer (yet), then!?

Outside of the hifi marketing catechism, that is just not likely.

Or, rather... then we must look inside the human head, not inside the sound system. That is the biggest variable in all of this.


... and the biggest mystery too


.

 

[hifiashok]

It's also the equivalent of saying Michelin's should now go around awarding stars to restaurants based on the temperature, colour and other various tests they administer to food in a laboratory rather than do it the old fashioned way and actually taste it

ajayji, being from the background would vouch for this. the michelin star evaluation would definitely take temperature and colour to be one of the variables!

(who's nitpicking now!)

 

[hifiashok]

Outside of the hifi marketing catechism, that is just not likely.

Or, rather... then we must look inside the human head, not inside the sound system. That is the biggest variable in all of this.


... and the biggest mystery too


.

no, no. what i am saying is that if the actual 'quality' of the two test subjects is appallingly different (and something even the nay sayers cannot disagree to) but surprisingly 'measure' the same (unless NASA eqpt. were needed to), then?

 

[hifiashok]

and the answer cannot read 'oh! we did not have NASA eqpt., so we could not conclude'!

 

[Hiten]

Are audiophiles only pursuing the holy grail of better sound and vision? Or are they also indulging in vanity buying of status symbols and useless trinkets? Like every other industry selling 'luxuries' to a select band of customers, the audiophile industry also has its share of trinkets and trifles. Are $$$$ power cords to men what Prada hand bags are to women

Ajay, that reminds me of (very) famous dialogue of Deewar.
Amitabh : mere paas gadi hai banglaw hai bank balance hai. Tumhare paas kya hai?
Sashi Kapoor : Mere paas Ma hai

Me : Mere paas Pioneer Amp hai.
:lol:

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

no, no. what i am saying is that if the actual 'quality' of the two test subjects is appallingly different (and something even the nay sayers cannot disagree to) but surprisingly 'measure' the same (unless NASA eqpt. were needed to), then?

I'm saying (or proposing in this debate, at least) that that cannot be. Sound is a physical phenomenon. If two sounds are different, they must be measurably different.

Whilst I always, in my head, imagine some super-sensitive microphone and recording gear for making this test (and for anyone who might claim that the power cord to the amplifier interacts, in some way, with the speaker, it will have to be this way) a piece of software was referenced, earlier in this thread, specifically for comparing waveforms, and designed for AB comparisons.

 

[stevieboy]

"If there is a real difference that can be heard, it must be measurable"

Thad, that's an unsound argument because it is biased towards the fact that every difference is measurable. That's the whole point of the disagreement!

You are taking a problem and jumping to a single conclusion without taking into account any other possible solution. Note, I do not say wrong conclusion. I simply say you are not accounting for every possible possibility.

If there is a difference that can be heard, there are two scenarios. One, you will be able to measure it with existing technology.

Or two, you will not be able to measure it and you will then be open minded and figure out what is this difference and try to analyse it and account for it.

We will agree to disagree on whether technology is the equivalent of the human senses and body

I am not dismissing our resident engineer's words but again it boils down to the above argument. Can you really measure everything we hear? You feel so. I feel no

Regards

 

[sidvee]

Guys my take on measuring equipment vs human ears:
1. How does one measure soundstage width?
2. or depth?
3. layering of instruments in a 3d space
4. Accuracy of imaging
5. timing of decay of a cymbal or hi hat or plucked string
6. Immediacy
7. Palpability
8. Sibilance
9. Midrange warmth
10. Clinical sound - and many, many more - subjective parameters. - if you think all these are just audiopool hyperbole, that really does not effect sound quality - then kindly ignore this post - it does not really matter either way.
Not sure about others but when I hear, I try to experience all of the above along with stuff like pace, rythm, timing (PRAT).
So just because all of this can't be measured and is subjective to an extent is it all hocus-pocus? It does not matter to good sound? Science has all the answers? People who try to listen for this are Pagans:lol:. Hi-Fi is just a huge conspiracy theory - even bigger than Morarji Desai being a CIA mole!!!
As I understand some of the more accomplished speaker/equipment designers voice their speakers/equipment subjectively after all objective testing is complete hearing for some of the above mentioned parameters. So these/guys-gals are nuts! Companies like Wilson audio/ krell/ Mark levinson etc. are just cheating people convincing them that they are hearing stuff that can't be measured and making them pay 10's of thousands of dollars.
Coming back to the original post, after my rant , all of this may or may not be impacted by the power cables but nevertheless an inadequate cable can cause some of the above subjective parameters to go askew, so just measuring will not resolve anything unless one hears.
Cheers,
Sid

 

[odyssey]

taking it one step further (and adding to what hifiashok said) - why we do rate tea, liquor/wine, etc on the basis of taste - why do we rely on the so called experts - why cant companies just look at chemical compositions of the so called best liquor and emulate it in a cheap fashion? Surely there must be equipment capable of breaking down the exact composition. Wouldn't it be much simpler to just look at the composition and go - hmmm...this is what I would like to have today
why only power cables - does everyone agree that ICs make a difference? what about speaker cables? what about CD transports - forget the theory in all this - can you hear it or not?

the measurements in the affordable audio magazine clearly show a couple of dB of change, why isn't this sufficient?

 

[stevieboy]

ajayji, being from the background would vouch for this. the michelin star evaluation would definitely take temperature and colour to be one of the variables!

(who's nitpicking now!)

One of the variables is indeed the point not sole to the exclusion of others.

Regards


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[manoj.p]

Although, I do not subscribe to the theory that power cords make a difference, I do subscribe to the theory of "taste of Pudding lies in eating" If one cable makes you happy, then you are happy. No other cable will give you the happiness and completeness of the system. That "completeness" is very important in Audio. Otherwise, every time you listen to music or anything, you are looking for that "missing" part and thinking "what if". Just to give an example, Few years back, my projector developed a dead pixel. It was very small, hard to notice and the projector was throwing an awesome picture. But all the time, my eyes were drawn to that tiny little red dot on the screen and it bothered me. Everyone who visited didn't notice it at all, until I told them about it and now all of a sudden, it was bothering to them as well. I ended up replacing the projector because it bothered me so much.

If one has to compare the power cords and one believes that measurements cannot bring out everything, then to find out if it does make a difference, only way is blind A/B testing. I saw someone saying the power cords need 1 hr of time to settle in, then so be it. Although, I do not believe in that as well. Does that mean our peak audio quality comes after 1 hr of listening? Thats also one more variable thrown in to scuttle the discussion. Its like how the car drives smooth after an oil change.

To carry the debate further, here is an article by the owner of Blue Jeans Cable. Audio Power Cables & Cords - Do they really make a difference? — Reviews and News from Audioholics