I am NOT going to deny what I heard and perceived so as not to "draw the
ridicule" of some propeller head quack such as yourself.


Don Pearce wrote:


No, I don't think so. The point is that it should have been clear to
you within a very few posts that you wee suggesting things that were
patently ridiculous.

You DO NOT know that for sure. No matter which hole you squeeze your
patronizing attitude out of, or how many ribs you injure.


Instead you persisted and
peopled got ****ed off with you.

What persistence? I just answered any questions that requested more detail.

Some propeller head quacks approached the whole issue with blaring
prejudice, belittling and anger from the very beginning.

Micro-perimeter, robotic, propeller head quacks such as yourself carry
the belief that anything you do not yet have knowledge of, or even
*familiar* of or how to measure *yet* simply does not exist. You are
completely closed to *anything* that might present an effort to you in
terms broadning your horisons. Pathetic.

So consider this a lesson learned ..

What do you see when you look in the mirror, a balding low-life
worthless propeller-head quack or some majestic bald eagle? Jeeesus,
"consider this a lesson learned" what a ****ing irritating patronizing
attitude fercrissakes you need to get your nose rubbed in the dirt,
would do you and this attitude problem of yours some good.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:56:00 +0300, Fella wrote:

I am NOT going to deny what I heard and perceived so as not to "draw the
ridicule" of some propeller head quack such as yourself.


Don Pearce wrote:


No, I don't think so. The point is that it should have been clear to
you within a very few posts that you wee suggesting things that were
patently ridiculous.

You DO NOT know that for sure. No matter which hole you squeeze your
patronizing attitude out of, or how many ribs you injure.


Instead you persisted and
peopled got ****ed off with you.

What persistence? I just answered any questions that requested more detail.

Some propeller head quacks approached the whole issue with blaring
prejudice, belittling and anger from the very beginning.

Micro-perimeter, robotic, propeller head quacks such as yourself carry
the belief that anything you do not yet have knowledge of, or even
*familiar* of or how to measure *yet* simply does not exist. You are
completely closed to *anything* that might present an effort to you in
terms broadning your horisons. Pathetic.

So consider this a lesson learned ..

What do you see when you look in the mirror, a balding low-life
worthless propeller-head quack or some majestic bald eagle? Jeeesus,
"consider this a lesson learned" what a ****ing irritating patronizing
attitude fercrissakes you need to get your nose rubbed in the dirt,
would do you and this attitude problem of yours some good.

What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:

What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.


Just ignore me, yes? Why can't you? For insytnace in the "ethnic"
newsgroups "soc.culture.turkish" etc, there these racists, bigots, that
spew for totally baseless, unprovoked, "white power" type racist
bull**** from time to time. And guess what reaction they get? .. Well,
nothing, zero, zilch, nada. In fact, I got a biiig fat kilfile full
of'em. So if to you I "appear to be typing words at random here" just
IIIIIIGNOOOOOOREEEEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!! fer
chrissakes, BE GONE!!!!!!! Put me in your kill****ingfile and be done
with it!

You robotic, nausieating little-soul quack. You have the attitude of
napolean, you funny funny funny little man.

I ALREADY got the answer from Jeff. I implemented it. I also put a
"galvanic separator" (direct translation from the language used in these
parts) on the TV antenna, (since the amp is taking an input also from
the TV) and yes I am hearing the difference, so there, eat your rotten
little inhuman heart out.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:23:17 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.


Just ignore me, yes? Why can't you? For insytnace in the "ethnic"
newsgroups "soc.culture.turkish" etc, there these racists, bigots, that
spew for totally baseless, unprovoked, "white power" type racist
bull**** from time to time. And guess what reaction they get? .. Well,
nothing, zero, zilch, nada. In fact, I got a biiig fat kilfile full
of'em. So if to you I "appear to be typing words at random here" just
IIIIIIGNOOOOOOREEEEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!! fer
chrissakes, BE GONE!!!!!!! Put me in your kill****ingfile and be done
with it!

You robotic, nausieating little-soul quack. You have the attitude of
napolean, you funny funny funny little man.

I ALREADY got the answer from Jeff. I implemented it. I also put a
"galvanic separator" (direct translation from the language used in these
parts) on the TV antenna, (since the amp is taking an input also from
the TV) and yes I am hearing the difference, so there, eat your rotten
little inhuman heart out.

So you don't know what "propeller head quacks" means, then. I guessed
as much.

And do you know what the size of your killfile says about you? Mine
has nobody in it.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Fella" wrote in message


Don Pearce wrote:

I am NOT going to deny what I heard and perceived so as not to "draw
the ridicule" of some propeller head quack such as yourself.

No Fella, but you might entertain that possibility for at least a few
microseconds in the interest of demonstrating some sings of introspection
and objectivity.

No, I don't think so. The point is that it should have been clear to
you within a very few posts that you wee suggesting things that were
patently ridiculous.

You DO NOT know that for sure.

Some yes, some no. However, this is one a heck of weak defense on your part,
Fella.

No matter which hole you squeeze your
patronizing attitude out of, or how many ribs you injure.

It's often quite difficult to explain something that is simple and obvious,
to someone who want to deny simple and obvious things, without sounding
patronizing.

Instead you persisted and peopled got ****ed off with you.

What persistence? I just answered any questions that requested more
detail.

Not to mention the bizarre claims, name-calling. and big doses of attitude.

BTW, I almost forgot the name-calling. How could I?

Some propeller head quacks approached the whole issue with blaring
prejudice, belittling and anger from the very beginning.

There's a difference between prejudice and valid, reliable real-world
experience.

Micro-perimeter, robotic, propeller head quacks such as yourself carry
the belief that anything you do not yet have knowledge of, or even
*familiar* of or how to measure *yet* simply does not exist.

There are those of us who are familiar with LOTS, and know how to measure
LOTS. I don't have to know a lot about a perpetual motion machine to know
that is it not what it has been purported to be. The odds that you
discovered a new law of physics when you bought that Audioquest cable, or
that Audioquest themselves have discovered something new about the laws of
physics are slim and none, mostly none.

You are
completely closed to *anything* that might present an effort to you in
terms broadening your horizons. Pathetic.

We don't need to have in our heads to be open-minded.

So consider this a lesson learned ..

What do you see when you look in the mirror, a balding low-life
worthless propeller-head quack or some majestic bald eagle?

In my case the balding would be factual, but the "...low-life worthless
propeller-head quack..." would indicate your unsuitability for polite
company, Fella.

Jeeesus, "consider this a lesson learned" what a ****ing irritating
patronizing attitude fercrissakes you need to get your nose rubbed in
the dirt, would do you and this attitude problem of yours some good.

So Fella, you want us to believe that you have no attitude problems of your
own?

LOL!

Don Pearce wrote:

What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.



Here you a

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

you wee-bit schmuck.

"Fella" wrote in message


I ALREADY got the answer from Jeff. I implemented it. I also put a
"galvanic separator" (direct translation from the language used in
these parts) on the TV antenna, (since the amp is taking an input
also from the TV) and yes I am hearing the difference, so there, eat
your rotten little inhuman heart out.

Which has exactly what to do with Audioquest cables?

"Don Pearce" wrote in message


And do you know what the size of your killfile says about you?

Obviously, it says that he is very broad minded and tolerant of a variety
of viewpoints.

NOT!!!!!

Mine has nobody in it.

As does mine. Life's more interesting that way!

Don Pearce wrote:

So you don't know what "propeller head quacks" means, then. I guessed
as much.



http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

for the propeller head bit, "quack" ... well, buy a dictionary.




And do you know what the size of your killfile says about you?

No. But I am sure if I "persist" you'll tell me. Make sure you write it
out in the format of some LAW as patronizing as you can muster it to be.


Mine
has nobody in it.


Well I killfile spam spewers, bigots, and all such whatnot. Now tell me,
o master, what-does-this-tell-me-about-me .. Jeesus, I should come
over there tell you a thing or two in person.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:35:35 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.



Here you a

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

you wee-bit schmuck.

Those long winter evenings must be a riot at your house.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Yea, Arny, lick it, he'll get there.


Arny Krueger wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message



And do you know what the size of your killfile says about you?


Obviously, it says that he is very broad minded and tolerant of a variety
of viewpoints.

NOT!!!!!


Mine has nobody in it.


As does mine. Life's more interesting that way!

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:41:51 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

So you don't know what "propeller head quacks" means, then. I guessed
as much.



http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

for the propeller head bit, "quack" ... well, buy a dictionary.




And do you know what the size of your killfile says about you?

No. But I am sure if I "persist" you'll tell me. Make sure you write it
out in the format of some LAW as patronizing as you can muster it to be.


Mine
has nobody in it.


Well I killfile spam spewers, bigots, and all such whatnot. Now tell me,
o master, what-does-this-tell-me-about-me .. Jeesus, I should come
over there tell you a thing or two in person.

My my, we are a crosspatch, aren't we.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Arny Krueger wrote:



Some yes, some no. However, this is one a heck of weak defense on your part,

I was not defending anything, simply pointing out an obvious fact,

Fella.

arny.



We don't need to have in our heads to be open-minded.


Yes, and I am the one "appear to write down words in random" ..



So Fella, you want us to believe that you have no attitude problems of your
own?

Just good'ol tit for tat, my dear watson, nothing else.

Damn you engineering tidbits of humanity are pretty good at demogogy, noted.


LOL!



You can fart even fart out loud for all I care.

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:35:35 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:


What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.



Here you a

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

you wee-bit schmuck.


Those long winter evenings must be a riot at your house.


Forget about my evenings, so what was a propeller head then?

And what about the quack part? Lemeseee, would spewing laws of physics
(or perhaps even spewing the CONSTITUTION of physics, like that, with
the back of your hand, as it were) have anything to do with it?

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:52:05 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:35:35 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:


What does "propeller head quacks" mean? You appear to be typing words
at random here.



Here you a

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/...s/flame_22.php

you wee-bit schmuck.


Those long winter evenings must be a riot at your house.


Forget about my evenings, so what was a propeller head then?

And what about the quack part? Lemeseee, would spewing laws of physics
(or perhaps even spewing the CONSTITUTION of physics, like that, with
the back of your hand, as it were) have anything to do with it?

Ah I see! SO much sounder of course to spew mythical nonsense. Hey!
Maybe you are a troll in BOTH senses of the world. Which bridge do you
live under?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:49:36 +0300, Fella wrote:

In anycase, I am happy to report that a heavy-duty, well shielded and
*grounded* extension cord strecthed in from a grounded outlet in kitchen
has made all the difference. I know the audiophile cord was not
mysteriously adding grounding to the equation but it no longer has an
audible effect on the system.

An excellent result!

Now, it would be fascinating to discover just WHAT the magic cable was
doing that had the same effect.

And I'm intrigued by your improved "timing". I see this mentioned
in hi-fi reviews. Is this increased audio clarity being perceived as
tighter rhythms? Or are you really hearing uneven rhythm (as in
analogue wow)?

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message



I ALREADY got the answer from Jeff. I implemented it. I also put a
"galvanic separator" (direct translation from the language used in
these parts) on the TV antenna, (since the amp is taking an input
also from the TV) and yes I am hearing the difference, so there, eat
your rotten little inhuman heart out.


Which has exactly what to do with Audioquest cables?



So is it called a "galvanic separator" in english?

In any case, what it has to do with that dretched cable is related quite
closely with Jeff's article on the subject. Try to read. Try to be able
to read.

He got almost everything right on the money.

Don Pearce wrote:


My my, we are a crosspatch, aren't we.


Oh my oh my, you dont want to find out just how much of a crosspatch.

So what was a propeller head? Did you LEARN you "scientific-meglomaniac"
you..

Oh my my my, I "appear to be writing random words again".

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Fella" wrote in message



I ALREADY got the answer from Jeff. I implemented it. I also put a
"galvanic separator" (direct translation from the language used in
these parts) on the TV antenna, (since the amp is taking an input
also from the TV) and yes I am hearing the difference, so there, eat
your rotten little inhuman heart out.

Which has exactly what to do with Audioquest cables?

So is it called a "galvanic separator" in english?

Sure, but a galvanic separator is a valid problem-solving tool.

Audioquest cable is snake oil.

So, again, what does a galvanic separator have to do with Audioquest cables?

Don Pearce wrote:


Ah I see! SO much sounder of course to spew mythical nonsense. Hey!
Maybe you are a troll in BOTH senses of the world. Which bridge do you
live under?


To be fair now, ("fair" now that must be *another* random word you are
not famaliar with!) I did not spew mythical nonesense, I merely *asked*
"I am perceiving this or that, how is it possible, it shouldn't be possible"

You claim to be the master propeller head of the universe, not me boy.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:59:04 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


My my, we are a crosspatch, aren't we.


Oh my oh my, you dont want to find out just how much of a crosspatch.

So what was a propeller head? Did you LEARN you "scientific-meglomaniac"
you..

Oh my my my, I "appear to be writing random words again".

I've always found that trying to win an argument by threatening the
other party is a sure winner. I'm sure the spectators to this thread
are nodding their heads sagely and saying, "Yup, Fella is clearly
right here - he wants to get violent". Lay off the koskenkorva in
future is my advice.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Arny Krueger wrote:

So, again, what does a galvanic separator have to do with Audioquest cables?

Gonna tell you for the last time, arny, Read Jeff's article.

"Fella" wrote in message


Arny Krueger wrote:

Fella" wrote in message


You DO NOT know that for sure.

Some yes, some no. However, this is one a heck of weak defense on
your part,

I was not defending anything, simply pointing out an obvious fact,

How sure does one need to be about obvious snake oil like Audioquest?


We don't need to have holes in our heads to be open-minded.

Yes, and I am the one "appear to write down words in random" ..

Want to try it again?

So Fella, you want us to believe that you have no attitude problems
of your own?

Just good'ol tit for tat, my dear watson, nothing else.

Wanna point out where Pearce started calling you names?

Damn you engineering tidbits of humanity are pretty good at demogogy,
noted.

Whatever that means.

LOL!

You can fart even fart out loud for all I care.

Whatever that means.

Steven Sullivan wrote:

lotsa good points deleted

With extrememly small and subtle
differences, yes, you need to deal with the phsychoacoustics of
the situation. That just doesn't seem to be the experience of the OP

Competent power cords are not expected from basic acoustic/electical
principles to sound different; speakers are.


I understand your point. Actually, part of my intent was to point
out that the weakness was not so much a power cord issue as a
SYSTEM weakness that (coincidentally) could be improved with a
power cord that had ferrite clamps and/or a better shielding type
on it.


As for the rest, the vast majority of audiophile forums,
led by the mainstream high-end press, are *hostile* to
the idea of controlled comparison...they consider a protocol
which has been scientifically vetted for decades in the field
of psychoacoustics, to be *suspect*.


This is also (unfortunately) true. I suppose it could be due in
part to the fact that many of those experienced in listening to
many high resolution systems do not have the technical background
to explain why they hear differences in areas where "basic
theory" says it shouldn't be happening. For that reason, they
just avoid the question--understandable but unfortunate.

On the other hand, the folks who have the technical background to
actually explain some of these differences won't even take the
opportunity to listen to some comparisons of components (on
systems that are actually capable of revealing differences)
simply because they have already convinced themselves that those
differences can't (and therefore don't) exist.

In the same sense that the technical person considers his
knowledge of theory in audio as absolute, the high-end audiophile
press reviewer considers his extensive experience with various
systems as absolute. The technical person won't try to figure out
how these things might exist and how to measure them so the
audiophile leans towards believing the ear is more sensitive than
any test instrument. The only argument for the technical folks is
then that the differences probably don't really exist and it is
all just a perceptual problem in the minds of the audiophile
(i.e., "you're crazy") which insults the audiophiles. The
audiophile argues that the techno guys sit out there without ever
having heard what the audio guys have experienced and are
"understanding" things using simplistic applications of BASIC
theory in an area that is inherently complicated.

Stalemate. It's no wonder there are continuous wars on these subjects.

It's too bad because as an engineer, I would love to understand
why changing a cord on a given high-end system can make a
difference where my own understanding of the theory says it
probably shouldn't. As an audiophile, I've heard these changes
that many times have been far too distinct (and have run contrary
to what I desired at that time) for me to accept an explanation
that it was "all in my head", especially by some tech who may
have never even sat down in front of such a system, let alone
have hours of listening and familiarity experience with them.

Audiophiles need to realize that many subtle differences may be
only perceptual, and real differences (even subtle ones) must be
based on some principle that should be measureable in some way.
Technophobs need to realize that although there may be a lot of
snake oil in the audio industry, many differences heard between
high end system components are NOT just perceptual and they need
to have personal experience listening to such comparisons so that
ultimately, we can have more technical people that understand
(and can measure) the physical properties that are contributing
to the audible differences.

Engineering types should always consider one of my favorite
quotes. I believe it was Einstien who said something like "Every
problem should be reduced to its simplest form, but NOT simpler".
Don't oversimplify an inherently complex problem, you will tend
to make mistakes.


- Jeff

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:02:08 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


Ah I see! SO much sounder of course to spew mythical nonsense. Hey!
Maybe you are a troll in BOTH senses of the world. Which bridge do you
live under?


To be fair now, ("fair" now that must be *another* random word you are
not famaliar with!) I did not spew mythical nonesense, I merely *asked*
"I am perceiving this or that, how is it possible, it shouldn't be possible"

You claim to be the master propeller head of the universe, not me boy.

Let me quote you:

"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up."

QED

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

So, again, what does a galvanic separator have to do with Audioquest
cables?

Gonna tell you for the last time, arny, Read Jeff's article.

Been there, done that, some time ago.

It's an interesting piece of work, one that sheds a lot less light than it
may seem to non-technical types.

But thanks for the condescending attitude...

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:02:08 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


Ah I see! SO much sounder of course to spew mythical nonsense. Hey!
Maybe you are a troll in BOTH senses of the world. Which bridge do
you live under?


To be fair now, ("fair" now that must be *another* random word you
are not famaliar with!) I did not spew mythical nonesense, I merely
*asked* "I am perceiving this or that, how is it possible, it
shouldn't be possible"

You claim to be the master propeller head of the universe, not me
boy.

Let me quote you:

"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up."

Agreed. Statements like that are worth at least a nomination for "Master
Propeller Head of the Universe".

Jeff, .... THANK YOU!

Now, teach them how to read too, yes?

I do not know all the governing LAWS on the subject, and neither do
these propeller heads.

It seems difficult to even AGREE TO DISAGREE with with these human
tidbits and part ways with them gracefully.


I'll quote your message AGAIN, to the full, perhaps they might read it
this time.

Jeff Wiseman wrote:



This is also (unfortunately) true. I suppose it could be due in
part to the fact that many of those experienced in listening to
many high resolution systems do not have the technical background
to explain why they hear differences in areas where "basic
theory" says it shouldn't be happening. For that reason, they
just avoid the question--understandable but unfortunate.

On the other hand, the folks who have the technical background to
actually explain some of these differences won't even take the
opportunity to listen to some comparisons of components (on
systems that are actually capable of revealing differences)
simply because they have already convinced themselves that those
differences can't (and therefore don't) exist.

In the same sense that the technical person considers his
knowledge of theory in audio as absolute, the high-end audiophile
press reviewer considers his extensive experience with various
systems as absolute. The technical person won't try to figure out
how these things might exist and how to measure them so the
audiophile leans towards believing the ear is more sensitive than
any test instrument. The only argument for the technical folks is
then that the differences probably don't really exist and it is
all just a perceptual problem in the minds of the audiophile
(i.e., "you're crazy") which insults the audiophiles. The
audiophile argues that the techno guys sit out there without ever
having heard what the audio guys have experienced and are
"understanding" things using simplistic applications of BASIC
theory in an area that is inherently complicated.

Stalemate. It's no wonder there are continuous wars on these subjects.

It's too bad because as an engineer, I would love to understand
why changing a cord on a given high-end system can make a
difference where my own understanding of the theory says it
probably shouldn't. As an audiophile, I've heard these changes
that many times have been far too distinct (and have run contrary
to what I desired at that time) for me to accept an explanation
that it was "all in my head", especially by some tech who may
have never even sat down in front of such a system, let alone
have hours of listening and familiarity experience with them.

Audiophiles need to realize that many subtle differences may be
only perceptual, and real differences (even subtle ones) must be
based on some principle that should be measureable in some way.
Technophobs need to realize that although there may be a lot of
snake oil in the audio industry, many differences heard between
high end system components are NOT just perceptual and they need
to have personal experience listening to such comparisons so that
ultimately, we can have more technical people that understand
(and can measure) the physical properties that are contributing
to the audible differences.

Engineering types should always consider one of my favorite
quotes. I believe it was Einstien who said something like "Every
problem should be reduced to its simplest form, but NOT simpler".
Don't oversimplify an inherently complex problem, you will tend
to make mistakes.


- Jeff

Don Pearce wrote:


I've always found that trying to win an argument by threatening the
other party is a sure winner.

Just this bad temper, not threat. Ok, hands down, I should NOT have
written that bit, I apoligize.

But beleive you me, you need to get that nose rubbed in dirt. Most
probably, with this attitude, at some time in your pathetic life someone
will do it for you.

Fella wrote:

I am in the process of
implementing a grounded extension (from the kitchen) to the living room
exclusively for the stereo system.

Remember in part that the issue has to do with ground loops.
plugging all of your components into the same outlet/power strip
so all of their gnds and neutrals are short will help. Keeping
wires close together might help eliminate antenna effect (i.e.,
"squash" the loop closed to reduce its inside areas).

And don't forget that loop currents can also be generated by
interchassis potentials due to slight imbalances in the power
supply transformers (a hard one to fix). Also, if your TV is tied
to your audio system and you have something like a cable or other
antenna lead that is grounded outside, be aware that it can also
form a large loop on your system and may need a ground isolator.

And if you are adding a power ground, make sure it is up to code
which means it needs to be grounded at the service entrance and
not somewhere else, etc.

- Jeff

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up."


Agreed. Statements like that are worth at least a nomination for "Master
Propeller Head of the Universe".

That "statement" is explained in more detail further on down, READ, or, TRY.

Arny Krueger wrote:



How sure does one need to be about obvious snake oil like Audioquest?

Ok, that's LAW number one: "Audioquest ist obvious snake oil". O master,
what's the next law?


Wanna point out where Pearce started calling you names?




His attitude well deserved them names.

Don Pearce wrote:


Let me quote you:

"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up."

Yup, another sure fire way to win an argument; quote out of context.
Congrats! You won, now I part this group with mytotal shame and defeat.

You majestic rooster you, you master of the universe you..

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten
up."


Agreed. Statements like that are worth at least a nomination for
"Master Propeller Head of the Universe".

That "statement" is explained in more detail further on down, READ,
or, TRY.

Been there, done that some time ago.

For other reader's benefit, here's the whole paragraph:

"As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests. My freind
changed the cables 7 times and left the audioquests where they were 3
times. He didin't say anything just started the sample songs with my
que. All other variables were the same (volume, speaker placement, etc).
I was able differentiate which cords were being used each time without
*any* hesitation."

Final diagnosis of the problem appears to be a ground loop. Solution appears
to be a "galvanic separator" which confirms the ground loop as being the
source of the problem.

Given what we expect from ground loops, this has to be one of the more
poetic descriptions of the effect of a ground loop, ever seen.

"Fella" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

How sure does one need to be about obvious snake oil like Audioquest?

Ok, that's LAW number one: "Audioquest it obvious snake oil". O
master, what's the next law?

"so are their competitors like Monster".

Wanna point out where Pearce started calling you names?

His attitude well deserved them names.

In other words, it was not a matter of tit for tat, but rather a matter of
escalating anger.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:30:26 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


Let me quote you:

"The timing of the songs change also from cable to cable, the beat
changes, with the audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up."

Yup, another sure fire way to win an argument; quote out of context.
Congrats! You won, now I part this group with mytotal shame and defeat.

You majestic rooster you, you master of the universe you..

Goodbye

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Jeff Wiseman wrote:


Fella wrote:


I am in the process of
implementing a grounded extension (from the kitchen) to the living room
exclusively for the stereo system.


Remember in part that the issue has to do with ground loops.
plugging all of your components into the same outlet/power strip
so all of their gnds and neutrals are short will help. Keeping
wires close together might help eliminate antenna effect (i.e.,
"squash" the loop closed to reduce its inside areas).

And don't forget that loop currents can also be generated by
interchassis potentials due to slight imbalances in the power
supply transformers (a hard one to fix). Also, if your TV is tied
to your audio system and you have something like a cable or other
antenna lead that is grounded outside, be aware that it can also
form a large loop on your system and may need a ground isolator.

And if you are adding a power ground, make sure it is up to code
which means it needs to be grounded at the service entrance and
not somewhere else, etc.

- Jeff

Thanks Jeff. Like I said, the extension is from a gnd outlet in the
kitchen. Though I did not open it up to see for myself, it does have the
gnd contacts. Coupled with the galvanic separator, the audioquest cables
have no discernable effect anymore. Compared with the preposterous and
silly price of the audioquest cables, I got away pretty cheaply, which
was nice.

Though I am going to try out those "ferrite rings" thingies also, as
soon as I figure out where to go to buy the such.

Don Pearce wrote in
:

I've always found that trying to win an argument by threatening the
other party is a sure winner. I'm sure the spectators to this thread
are nodding their heads sagely and saying, "Yup, Fella is clearly
right here - he wants to get violent".

He lost any credibility long before that, so sage nodding of heads isn't
even needed. When the usual "audiophile arguments" start coming up, I quit
listening; you know the ones -- "we don't know everything", "we don't
listen", "our system isn't good enough", etc.

They should just wander over to the RAHE group.

Somewhat associated question -- can anyone even stand to stay in an audio
"boutique" store for more than a few minutes any more? I find myself
unable to stand the rhetoric for more than a few minutes, especially when
everyone there starts nodding their heads in agreement with some patently
ridiculous statment.

Laurence Payne wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:15:44 +0300, Fella wrote:

I wonder how many people who claim results from magic power cables are
plugging into ungrounded power outlets? This is one area where some
simple circuitry might actually make a notable difference.

Yes Laurance, and in this case the difference was really made, thanks to
Jeff.

There *is* a lot of mythical and "feel'good factor" products associated
with high-end audio. But on the other hand, high end audio is pretty
much amazing in terms of the definitions, tonality, musicality one
*achieves* in ones own house, it's not just about re-producing music in
your house anymore, it is almost becoming a form of art, science, all on
its own terms.. (Damn, some propeller heads are aiming their guns now as
we speak ...

But like I said, there is a lot of mumbo-jumbo still floating around too
(well IMHO, anyways). For instance, the same friend that (now
unsuccesfully) tried to sell me the power cables has interconnects,
ve-ery expensive ones, rca to rca, that have *direction* pointed out on
them, as in arrows along the body of the cables, the signal should
travel *from* the source *to* the amp in that spec'd direction. Would
this make any sense?

Well obviously, I do not know.

Don Pearce wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:30:26 +0300, Fella wrote:


You majestic rooster you, you master of the universe you..


Goodbye


Boy, you need to brush up on a few concepts, as in irony, *saarcasm* ..
phew!