Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default Stereophile & Cable Theory

Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at A
HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable"www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/A.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #2   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message
oups.com
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory
is posted today at A
HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable"www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/A.


That's just raw HTML from a web page. The correct URL is:

http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/

Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics
predict the opposite.



Publishing such an unecessarily math-intensive article in a
consumer publication has an obvious subtext - "It's all so
complex that you can't possibly understand it, so believe
whatever we say".

If you want to read a series of articles that is compentetly
written from a teaching/learning viewpoint, please check out
Jim Lesurf's:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...rt6/page1.html


http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...rt7/page1.html

and

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/...ect/page1.html


As I said in the HE2005 debate, one place where high end
audio journalism falls flat on its face is quantification.
the Hawksford article is obviously designed to raise a lot
of concerns without proceeding far enough along the line of
quantification. Had Hawksford carried the ideas he presented
to a reasonable, properly-quantified conclusion, he would
have had to print very un-Stereophile-like conclusion such
as:

"In practice it is questionable whether delays of the
magnitudes shown would ever be audible. If so, the general
advice would seem to be to choose reasonable large diameter
wires with a close spacing in order to minimise the effects
of resistance and inductance."







  #3   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message

snipped


Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics
predict the opposite.



Publishing such an unecessarily math-intensive article in a
consumer publication has an obvious subtext - "It's all so
complex that you can't possibly understand it, so believe
whatever we say".


That seems to be the plan: the article will "dazzle 'em with science",
than Atkinson, his minions and the snake oil merchants will swoop in
and "baffle 'em with bull****". IOW, a typical $tereopile ploy.

  #4   Report Post  
Don Pearce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 29 Aug 2005 04:46:39 -0700, wrote:

Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at A
HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable"www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/A.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile


Well, I have always stated that differences in cables exist at all
frequencies, and they are easily measurable. That article bears out my
thoughts, although it contains paragraphs thjat will be seen as heresy by
many here - and especially those over on r.a.p, namely relfections at
impedance discontinuities, which many have assured me are strictly an RF
phenomenon (nonsense, of course).

But if you actually cary the theoretical maths through to real, practical
cases, it is easy to see that provided you use a cable that is at least
competent in any situation, there can be no audible benefit from going to
high-end "boutique" cables, which when you look at them very clearly don't
have their design grounded anywhere near Maxwell's equations. That is what
the discussion is about, not whether a hundred yards of telephone wire is
different from 10 feet of twelve gauge for connecting speakers.

So, we are no further forwards here. Audibility of differences between
cables can only be ascertained by ear - nothing else will do.

DBT anybody?

d
  #5   Report Post  
Denis Sbragion
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hello Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in
:
....
"In practice it is questionable whether delays of the
magnitudes shown would ever be audible. If so, the general
advice would seem to be to choose reasonable large diameter
wires with a close spacing in order to minimise the effects
of resistance and inductance."


I agree. What that otherwise interesting article still misses is the
answer to the question: will the differences introduced by a
"suboptimal" cable be audible with respect to an optimal one? So far the
science answer to this question has been basicly a simple no.

Bye,

P.S. May I suggest that you spend less time explaining again and again
things like this and spend instead sometime organizing a bit better your
otherwise excellent pcabx web site? That site is a wonderful source of
many useful informations, but sometimes they are a bit difficult to find.
For example I searched for a long time for some data about the safety
limits for frequency response deviations audibility, and found only
recently that your web site has a nice graph reporting all that is
needed. BTW many thanks for writing and maintaining that site, even in
its current "not so friendly" form.

P.P.S. Another little question: do you know of a similar graph with the
limit of audibility of pre-echo (ore pre-ringing, or whathever it is
called)? Something like limit of audibility with respect to pre-delay vs
level and/or frequency? I searched for this kind of information for a
long time too, may be it is available in some "hidden" page of your site.

--
Denis Sbragion
InfoTecna
Tel: +39 0362 805396, Fax: +39 0362 805404
URL: http://www.infotecna.it


  #6   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Denis Sbragion" wrote in message
6.1

P.P.S. Another little question: do you know of a similar
graph with the limit of audibility of pre-echo (ore
pre-ringing, or whathever it is called)? Something like
limit of audibility with respect to pre-delay vs level
and/or frequency?


I believe that the phrase you are looking for is "temporal
masking".

Here's a fairly classic item about it:

http://www-ccrma.stanford.edu/~bosse/proj/node21.html

More specifics:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/enc...al_masking.htm

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...howtopic=23467



  #8   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Don Pearce said:

DBT anybody?


No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.

  #9   Report Post  
Don Pearce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 29 Aug 2005 07:44:08 -0700, George Middius wrote:

Don Pearce said:

DBT anybody?


No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


OK, who's talking about:

a) investing ANY money in a comparator
b) taking hundreds of hours, or
c) buying cables

Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.

d
  #10   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Don Pearce" wrote in message

On 29 Aug 2005 07:44:08 -0700, George Middius wrote:

Don Pearce said:

DBT anybody?


No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in
spending $400 or more on a comparator and investing
hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying $20
cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


Thus George reveals several tenets of the anti-scientific,
anti-intellectual religion he's been preaching on RAO for
years:

George Middius religious belief (1): To benefit from DBTs
you have to do the tests yourself.
George Middius religious belief (2): To do a DBT you have to
buy a switchbox.
George Middius religious belief (3): To do a DBT you have to
invest 100's of hours.
George Middius religious belief (4): The lowest cost usable
cables cost at least $20.
George Middius religious belief (5): The highest cost cables
cost no more than $60.

George has about 4 converts - Art Sackman,

We can quickly conclude that despite George's spirited
defense of Stereophile and John Atkinson, he never reads it.

OK, who's talking about:


a) investing ANY money in a comparator


George Middius

b) taking hundreds of hours, or


George Middius

c) buying cables


George Middius

Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying
cables.


George has a grip, its just not on anything that is
discussed in polite company.






  #11   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at A
HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable"www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/A.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

But naturally, there is not one single bias controlled comparison of cables
where anyone, ever, heard a difference between normal cables. In short wire
is wire.


  #12   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Don Pearce said:

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


OK, who's talking about:

a) investing ANY money in a comparator
b) taking hundreds of hours, or
c) buying cables

Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.


Oh, you wanna be a audio enjuhnear? Why dint ya say so. Want some help
applying for a job? I know several headhunters. Only thing is, junior
cable wonk jobs don't pay much. Just so you know what you're getting into.





  #13   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Arny Krueger wrote:
"Don Pearce" wrote in message

On 29 Aug 2005 07:44:08 -0700, George Middius wrote:

Don Pearce said:

DBT anybody?


No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in
spending $400 or more on a comparator and investing
hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying $20
cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


snipped


Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying
cables.


George has a grip, its just not on anything that is
discussed in polite company.


Pud pullers are Atkinson's favorite demographic; "George" is a natural.
;-)

  #14   Report Post  
Don Pearce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 13:37:55 -0400, George M. Middius wrote:

Don Pearce said:

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


OK, who's talking about:

a) investing ANY money in a comparator
b) taking hundreds of hours, or
c) buying cables

Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.


Oh, you wanna be a audio enjuhnear? Why dint ya say so. Want some help
applying for a job? I know several headhunters. Only thing is, junior
cable wonk jobs don't pay much. Just so you know what you're getting into.


Never mind, George. Better luck next time, huh?

d
  #17   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



The Krooborg is trying to muck up humanity again.

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in
spending $400 or more on a comparator and investing
hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying $20
cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


George Middius religious belief (1): To benefit from DBTs
you have to do the tests yourself.
George Middius religious belief (2): To do a DBT you have to
buy a switchbox.
George Middius religious belief (3): To do a DBT you have to
invest 100's[sic] of hours.
George Middius religious belief (4): The lowest cost usable
cables cost at least $20.
George Middius religious belief (5): The highest cost cables
cost no more than $60.


Arnii, are you attempting to argue audio with me? The last time you tried this,
they had to cart you off to a rest home for a few weeks. You might do better
with your mental problems if you didn't let your buttons get pushed so easily.


George has a grip, its just not on anything that is
discussed in polite company.


Phallic obsession noted. ;-)

  #18   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



The Bug Eater argues for Kroothanasia.

In short Arnii is feces and should be flushed.


Would you like to do the honors, Mickey?

  #19   Report Post  
Lionel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

George "Minus" Middius a écrit :

...Want some help applying for a job? I know several headhunters...


In fact George knows only dickhunters so if you are looking
for blowjobs... ;-)
  #20   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Middius" wrote in message
...


The Krooborg is trying to muck up humanity again.

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in
spending $400 or more on a comparator and investing
hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying $20
cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


George Middius religious belief (1): To benefit from DBTs
you have to do the tests yourself.
George Middius religious belief (2): To do a DBT you have to
buy a switchbox.
George Middius religious belief (3): To do a DBT you have to
invest 100's[sic] of hours.
George Middius religious belief (4): The lowest cost usable
cables cost at least $20.
George Middius religious belief (5): The highest cost cables
cost no more than $60.


Arnii, are you attempting to argue audio with me? The last time you tried
this,
they had to cart you off to a rest home for a few weeks. You might do
better
with your mental problems if you didn't let your buttons get pushed so
easily.


Why would anybody argue audio with you, you don't know anything.




  #21   Report Post  
Lionel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

George "Minus" Middius a écrit :

...Want some help applying for a job? I know several headhunters...


In fact George knows only dickhunters so if you are looking
for blowjobs... ;-)
  #22   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Middius" wrote in message
...


The Bug Eater argues for Kroothanasia.

In short Arnii is feces and should be flushed.


Would you like to do the honors, Mickey?

Yes George, I'd like to flush you, you are after all RAO's biggest turd.


  #23   Report Post  
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"George Middius" wrote in
message

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom
in spending $400 or more on a comparator and investing
hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying $20
cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


George Middius religious belief (1): To benefit from DBTs
you have to do the tests yourself.
George Middius religious belief (2): To do a DBT you
have to buy a switchbox.
George Middius religious belief (3): To do a DBT you
have to invest 100's[sic] of hours.
George Middius religious belief (4): The lowest cost
usable cables cost at least $20.
George Middius religious belief (5): The highest cost
cables cost no more than $60.


Arnii, are you attempting to argue audio with me? The
last time you tried this, they had to cart you off to a
rest home for a few weeks.


Externalizing again, Middius?

You might do better with your
mental problems if you didn't let your buttons get pushed
so easily.


Middus, what about all the buttons of yours that got pushed,
causing you to rise out of bed and make that
self-destructive OP?




  #24   Report Post  
George Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Oh dear. The Krooborg is rampaging and my raincoat is at the cleaner.

Arnii, are you attempting to argue audio with me? The
last time you tried this, they had to cart you off to a
rest home for a few weeks.


Externalizing again, Middius?


I notice you're still ducking the questionnaire about your public declarations
of dissolution. When they come for you, you can't say I didn't warn you.

You might do better with your
mental problems if you didn't let your buttons get pushed
so easily.


Middus, what about all the buttons of yours that got pushed,
causing you to rise out of bed and make that
self-destructive OP?


Hey, you scored another Kroopologist today. He actually parroted that "facts"
nonsense you spout all the time. Let's try out some actual facts. It's a fact
that you, Arnii Krooborg, are frequently compared to turds and overflowing
toilets. Coincidence? Hardly(tm). You are, after all, 98% pure feces. That's
probably a record, even for a 'borg. As Dr. Kroomacher once said with some
pride, "Zey haff not yet made a rrroll of toilet pepper zat I kannot overcome!"

  #25   Report Post  
George M. Middius
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Don Pearce said:

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.


Oh, you wanna be a audio enjuhnear? Why dint ya say so. Want some help
applying for a job? I know several headhunters. Only thing is, junior
cable wonk jobs don't pay much. Just so you know what you're getting into.


Never mind, George.


So you don't care about buying cables, and you don't care about designing
cables. I guess that leaves mental masturbation.

Better luck next time, huh?


Please spare us the details.







  #26   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Denis Sbragion" wrote in message
6.1...
Hello Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in
:
...
"In practice it is questionable whether delays of the
magnitudes shown would ever be audible. If so, the general
advice would seem to be to choose reasonable large diameter
wires with a close spacing in order to minimise the effects
of resistance and inductance."


I agree. What that otherwise interesting article still misses is the
answer to the question: will the differences introduced by a
"suboptimal" cable be audible with respect to an optimal one? So far the
science answer to this question has been basicly a simple no.

Bye,

P.S. May I suggest that you spend less time explaining again and again
things like this and spend instead sometime organizing a bit better your
otherwise excellent pcabx web site? That site is a wonderful source of
many useful informations, but sometimes they are a bit difficult to find.
For example I searched for a long time for some data about the safety
limits for frequency response deviations audibility, and found only
recently that your web site has a nice graph reporting all that is
needed. BTW many thanks for writing and maintaining that site, even in
its current "not so friendly" form.

P.P.S. Another little question: do you know of a similar graph with the
limit of audibility of pre-echo (ore pre-ringing, or whathever it is
called)? Something like limit of audibility with respect to pre-delay vs
level and/or frequency? I searched for this kind of information for a
long time too, may be it is available in some "hidden" page of your site.


Its an utterly abysmal web sight.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #27   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.


Stereophile is about buying cables, not cables.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #28   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

George has a grip, its just not on anything that is discussed in polite
company.


How nice of you to attend our little tea party.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #29   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


" wrote in message
ink.net...


But naturally, there is not one single bias controlled comparison of
cables where anyone, ever, heard a difference between normal cables. In
short wire is wire.


You hit the nail on the head!!!!
DBT is a 'single bias' controlled comparison.
That's what's wrong with it, it only controls one side of the biases.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #30   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...



Selling advertising contracts to the snake oil merchants by promising
them a place on the RCL..


Exactly what percent of all of their equipment advertisers get on the list?
Anyone?



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


  #31   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at
www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

But naturally, there is not one single bias controlled comparison
of cables where anyone, ever, heard a difference between normal
cables. In short wire is wire.


Actually, at the time Dan Dugan of the AES was doing cable tests
at the 1991 AES Convention, he subjected John Hunter of Sumiko
to a series of bias-controlled tests comparing the cables
distributed by Sumiko to others. John identified the cables to
a statistically significant degree. When Dan wrote up his 1991
cable tests for the JAES, he omitted Hunter's results.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #32   Report Post  
John Atkinson
 
Posts: n/a
Default


ScottW wrote:
I'm still trying to get past the claim that the speed of light is 100
times greater than typically stated. Where's an editor when you need one .


If that's true, I'll correct it. Errors can creep in when you are
transcoding from an ASCII text file to HMTL.

Thanks for the catch, ScottW. And thanks to everyone for increasing
our website traffic statistics. :-)

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #33   Report Post  
Robert Morein
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
oups.com
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory
is posted today at A

HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable"www.stereophile.com/re
ference/1095cable/A.

That's just raw HTML from a web page. The correct URL is:

http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable/

Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics
predict the opposite.



Publishing such an unecessarily math-intensive article in a
consumer publication has an obvious subtext - "It's all so
complex that you can't possibly understand it, so believe
whatever we say".

If you want to read a series of articles that is compentetly
written


No, I don't know what the hell "compentely" is, and I don't want to find
out. Competent is good enough for me.


  #34   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Art Sackman took a break from "choking the chicken" and wrote:


Stereophile is about buying cables, not cables.



Were you struck by lightning, Sack'O'****?

  #35   Report Post  
paul packer
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:49:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


George has about 4 converts - Art Sackman,


And? I'm still waiting for my name to be taken in vain again.



  #36   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Atkinson wrote:
wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at
www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

But naturally, there is not one single bias controlled comparison
of cables where anyone, ever, heard a difference between normal
cables. In short wire is wire.


Actually, at the time Dan Dugan of the AES was doing cable tests
at the 1991 AES Convention, he subjected John Hunter of Sumiko
to a series of bias-controlled tests comparing the cables
distributed by Sumiko to others. John identified the cables to
a statistically significant degree. When Dan wrote up his 1991
cable tests for the JAES, he omitted Hunter's results.


You wouldn't happen to have any evidence to support this allegation,
would you, slimeball? :-D

  #37   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...


Stereophile is about buying cables, not cables.



Were you struck by lightning, Sack'O'****?


This seems to be a problem for you.
Too bad.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #38   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Clyde Slick wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Stereophile is about buying cables, not cables.



Were you struck by lightning, Sack'O'****?


This seems to be a problem for you.


Only in that I wish the lightning bolt had more "juice".


Too bad.


Agreed.

  #39   Report Post  
ScottW
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Atkinson" wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Malcolm Omar Hawksford's seminal article on cable theory is
posted today at
www.stereophile.com/reference/1095cable.
Those who state that the "laws of physics" don't allow
for differences in cable performance at audio frequencies
might be surprised to learn that the laws of physics predict
the opposite.

But naturally, there is not one single bias controlled comparison
of cables where anyone, ever, heard a difference between normal
cables. In short wire is wire.


Actually, at the time Dan Dugan of the AES was doing cable tests
at the 1991 AES Convention, he subjected John Hunter of Sumiko
to a series of bias-controlled tests comparing the cables
distributed by Sumiko to others. John identified the cables to
a statistically significant degree. When Dan wrote up his 1991
cable tests for the JAES, he omitted Hunter's results.


What kind of cables? Interconnects or speaker?
What were the sources and loads?
Any MIT like networks in the cables?

There are lots of ways to make cables sound different.
Do any of them represent good audio engineering?

ScottW


  #40   Report Post  
Don Pearce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 17:38:44 -0400, George M. Middius wrote:

Don Pearce said:

No thank you. For some reason, I don't see the wisdom in spending $400 or more
on a comparator and investing hundreds of hours on "tests" to rationalize buying
$20 cables instead of $60 cables. YMMV of course.


Get a grip, George - this is about cables, not buying cables.


Oh, you wanna be a audio enjuhnear? Why dint ya say so. Want some help
applying for a job? I know several headhunters. Only thing is, junior
cable wonk jobs don't pay much. Just so you know what you're getting into.


Never mind, George.


So you don't care about buying cables, and you don't care about designing
cables. I guess that leaves mental masturbation.


Well, please enjoy that George. I don't buy cables - I have (like I'm
pretty sure everybody else here has) a box of cables collected over the
years that have accompanied various equipment purchasesas freebies. I use
them because I know they are perfect for my needs. I know that no other
cables at any price can sound any better.

I will leave the mental masturbation to you and anybody else who believes
otherwise.

Better luck next time, huh?


Please spare us the details.


Glad to.

d
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stereophile & Cable Theory [email protected] Audio Opinions 555 September 21st 05 09:08 PM
Cable Madness SALE at AudioWaves AudioWaves Marketplace 1 December 28th 04 08:09 AM
Does anyone know of this challenge? [email protected] High End Audio 453 June 28th 04 03:43 AM
Note to the Idiot George M. Middius Audio Opinions 222 January 8th 04 08:13 PM
Quad snake cable Justin Ulysses Morse Pro Audio 8 July 3rd 03 05:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:03 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"