Moving cables around killed dynamics for days anyone else experience this?
I've been experimenting with different cables between components. Nothing sounds right since trying to improve sound with new mix of cables. There is no bass and boring, highs are okay but life is gone from system. So I flipped everything back the way it was still sound horrible. Ran everything 24/7 for a couple days still no go. Let it run a couple more days dynamics are back and bass is full big and has tone again and enjoyable to listen to. Can someone tell me why this happens. I've also moved just speaker cables around without unhooking them and seen this happen, I don't get it.
Last time I was in Toronto , which is nicer than any American city, it was on a very large body of water . erik is 1000% correct . I believe he lives in the only City in USA that could give Toronto a small run . Montreal as well, which has the Toronto water going bye at high speed .
WOW like it up there do you? I'm in the CA Bay Area, just a tad on the cool side for me up there. Warm summer, mild winters, and CRAZY PEOPLE. No place like the good ol US of A. The big Ts Truman and Trump..
There is no strange voodoo happening with cables moving. 1) changing antenna effect (rfi) 2) induction by magnetism off other cables (emi) 3) picked up leakage current from other cables. 4) dielectric absorption can change for a little while when you move cables 5) static interference. And all these effects are influential on your equipment's power supplies.
Very nice and IMO a very accurate, description of "what can and is" happening. ANTENNA effect. Turn off all the breakers, lest what you need. Works well, just NO domestic bliss when I pull this one. 90 on any interconnect that have to cross, and space. Certainly follows the Seymour Cray, idea that bundling cables, SLOWS and caused anomalies that could only be explained and STOPPED, by a random convergence of cabling. In other words, "looks like a spaghetti factory" nothing neat inside one of his SUPER COMPUTERS. The only thing that slowed down the processing power of a CRAY was the speed of light. Pretty quick indeed. Is this relative to quality sound reproduction? You be the judge, digital and analog signals just under the speed of light 185,999.999 MPS
So off the floor, spacing, cable routing, cabling covering, the neighbors HAM radio, poor shielding or INCORRECT shielding, the dog burying there dog treats in your cable nest.LOL All have effects, just some more apparent than other. It takes 45 min if I disconnect and reconnect a speaker terminal, 3-7 days if I replace a cable run, with a conditioned cable. Yup Yup..
If audio matters are way over the head of most of us already (myself included), and this is one of my discovery in my journey to create my own audio system low cost; imagine how over our head are economic matters and political one , if we want to figure out that for ourselves?
In audio matters and in economic matters, the best is to think first, and read, and takes the thing in our own hands by way of actual experiments in audio and "gedenken" experiment for economics and politics...
In audio matters and in economical matters slogan and cry are only indices about delusion and sheep behaviour...
Money tough is probably at first look easier to understand than sound.... :)
Money is only a symbolic concept manifested in the past in a perceived physical form, sound is a physical phenomenon sometimes transmuted in a perceived musical symbolic form...
Perhaps the first look is deceptive and money like sound are very complex subject after all.... :)
I apologize for my grain of sand and salt....
"Money always make music in my pocket" -Groucho Marx
Markets were 3 times more unstable when we were on the gold standard with more recurring recessions. Having finite monetary resources is just another way of saying there's nothing we can do to help you: you're on your own unless you can buy your local politician.
The History article about the gold standard is like all the others correct in the confiscation, the bank closures, and subsequent revaluation from $20.67 to $35. What it leaves out, what these sorts of articles always do is spread the narrative rather than inform. The truth they would tell if the article was truly intended to inform is the revaluation artificially inflated the money supply and devalued everyone's savings by over 60%. They don't tell you this because that would be saying the truth, that inflation is theft.
You know what’s hilarious about this? The implied "threat" of making the US more like Russia. Russia, where anyone can buy their pharmaceuticals without a doctors permission, health care is good and cheap, taxes are low, everyone has a month off every year, and the country is out of debt and instead has actual physical gold instead of paper receipts in its vaults. The people aren’t afraid to talk politics because they’re grown ups and nobody gets called racist over a political disagreement. This last one is what really frightens you to your bones, people being unafraid to speak the truth. Yes, nonoise, yes indeed Trump is taking us there. Deal with it.
Why would I care if you agree with my moves ? That superficial sentence alone is a sure sign of narcissism. I never compared Toronto to Montreal or Quebec City .Toronto was mentioned in the post. Narcissistic people read what they think it should have said .It is what they see .
Of course no narcissistic would like Sanders, he challenges their delusions .The people of Vermont have elected him time after time for decades .They see him as the soul of Vermont and if you disagree, you love the looks of Vermont, not Vermont itself . The people of Vermont are Vermont not the trees . I myself respect the man , he is not perfect , no man is .My sister-in -law lived next door to him in Burlington .He was then what he is now , a fighter for the common man.
IMO he is now too old , but it’s irrelevant ,With the antique voting system we allow , Trump can get 10 million votes less and still win . Election is over before it begins . As they say , every country gets the government it deserves sooner or later .
Toronto isn't a lovely city compared to Montreal or Quebec City. And if I got it right you moved there from Vermont. Don't agree with your moves, love Vermont, except for Bernie.
Last time I was in Toronto , which is nicer than any American city, it was on a very large body of water . erik is 1000% correct . I believe he lives in the only City in USA that could give Toronto a small run . Montreal as well, which has the Toronto water going bye at high speed .
"
But why does it need to settle in? That is the question.
" Have you ever opened a box of cereal and it is half full? When it settles you have all the same quantities of things but they take up less space. This relates to wires settling down and compacting atomic structure that was fluffed up during moving. It is an established fact that reduced space between atoms means better conductance and signal purity. I always take new cables and put them in a vibratory rock tumbler for a day and then with as little as possible additional movement place them in my system. The time reduction to achieve settled signal purity is cut way down doing this.
"
In most cases the difference is the amp adjusting to the wire .
" How does the AI in the amp know how to respond to external variances? Where can I get one of these amps?
It was not apparent to me that the original poster moved the cables back to the exact same spot. So it is still guessing what could have happened. I have only described a few technical possibilities that could have happened. Maybe the dynamics were killed by other possible symptoms like dc-offset on the grid. But I still don't believe in voodoo. I believe in an electrical explanation. Maybe Garth Powell or Cailin Gabriel can shine a light on this matter.
No, he blew it. His comment applies to re-routing cables. Of course we know all that. But the question is why disturbing them matters when they go back to where they were. He's talking about routing and spacing, when the question has nothing to do with that.
btw his tip is wrong too. The only way to know if its fine is to try and see if there's something better. Knowing it will sound worse for a while until it settles in.
But why does it need to settle in? That is the question.
There is no strange voodoo happening with cables moving. 1) changing antenna effect (rfi) 2) induction by magnetism off other cables (emi) 3) picked up leakage current from other cables. 4) dielectric absorption can change for a little while when you move cables 5) static interference. And all these effects are influential on your equipment's power supplies. That is also the reason why power cables have effect. Your equipment has less hard work to do when it converts AC to DC and they don't interfere as much with other cables.
Keep power & low-level cables separate (at least 3 inch), shield low-level cables & cross at 90 degrees and you're almost done. You can also check the voltage on the ground line of your power strip because it can fluctuate when you move cables.
Best tip: don't touch it when its fine ;)
Lol, this is actually the best answer to this whole thread. Probably is also one of the reasons why grounding works.
Nice one for someone who just created an account and posted their first response on this forum. Now if the poster can identify himself :)
There is no strange voodoo happening with cables moving. 1) changing antenna effect (rfi) 2) induction by magnetism off other cables (emi) 3) picked up leakage current from other cables. 4) dielectric absorption can change for a little while when you move cables 5) static interference. And all these effects are influential on your equipment's power supplies. That is also the reason why power cables have effect. Your equipment has less hard work to do when it converts AC to DC and they don't interfere as much with other cables.
Keep power & low-level cables separate (at least 3 inch), shield low-level cables & cross at 90 degrees and you're almost done. You can also check the voltage on the ground line of your power strip because it can fluctuate when you move cables.
Ludwig must be listening to something other than what is available to everyone else. What everyone else has does not sound like the original recording.
Yeah that is how and why he could make the comments he did.
Of course, he has a lot of money on the line to make such a pronouncement .
He also has had his hand in a vast catalogue of great sounding records/CDs.
Ludwig must be listening to something other than what is available to everyone else. What everyone else has does not sound like the original recording. That’s just the way things are. Of course, he has a lot of money on the line to make such a pronouncement. 🤗
Recently ran into a rather interesting article....( which btw pivots on a notion put forth by Robert Ludwig way back at the dawn of The Great Digital Delightenment...)
And in a voila thingee moment that Ludwig article kinda magically reappeared....
Yes I agree with
@dmac's friend. But, I am surprised by people who refuse to hear a change in sound (caused by some change in system) just because they don’t know how to explain this change scientifically. I think probably everything has to have scientifically explanation, but nobody from us has a full knowledge about the wold around us.
As Bob Dylan said when a disgruntled fan pointed out how crappy some of his more recent albums sounded, especially with respect to dynamic range but also generally speaking, “It sounded good when we recorded it.” Therein lies the rub, you can’t get there from here. It’s the playback system, stupid! Hint - it ain’t the converters.
Indeed. Perhaps a petition to the post production sound industry from audiophiles, as to how the pros ought to dress their cables, is the fix!
Recently ran into a rather interesting article....( which btw pivots on a notion put forth by Robert Ludwig way back at the dawn of The Great Digital Delightenment...)
Manufacturers in the Hi-Fi world were trying to figure out how to make those shiny discs sound good, or at least better. I credit all the developments in converter design in the Hi-Fi world for causing improvements to digital recording in the pro audio world.
Read, so maybe it would be a good idea for lowly audiophiles to bring some small level of improvement to the exalted world of pro sound ...sorta like bringing a higher grade of acoustics to sound stages which are generally tuned by some variation of hanging blacks...and after-all the audiophile perspective did inform Ludwig's work which was definitely not a catalog of sausage factory product...
I sent this thread to a Fellow Guru of High Audionic Praise... and the following reply (of great clarity) was returned: It’s
the disturbance of the aether that takes awhile to settle back. Many people
also don’t realize the gravimetric affects of slinging their cables about willy
nilly. With regard to graviton displacement and the attendant (who shall remain
nameless) subatomic particle spin state changes which can easily be measured
with a bowl of dried cereal and two sparrow feathers placed at right angular
momentum assuming (and this is key) a 10 dB drop across all barometric
frequencies, one can simply subtract the total amount of capacitive reactance
of all unconnected cables laying around within 1 meter per watt times pi minus
the degrees, minutes and seconds in latitude below the 33rd parallel. Then
place a hygrometer no further than 20 cm from the dried cereal, carefully
multiplying the percentage in hygrometric changes converted to picofarads
per graviton/hour.
This will yield a result in the number of hours
required for the aether to return to the previous undisturbed state - Those is
in the southern hemisphere need only invert the equation where applicable.
This has been tested and verified 29 times. So far.
To answer your question about my actual point Prof, I will say simply, that I cannot dismiss a priori any experience by some, because I lived one myself about cables touching one another ( mouse cable and dac cable in my case) and obstructing the clarity of the sound...
I had no other opinion, only curiosity for these facts, and some explanations; being a non subjectivist, non objectivist kind of audiophile, I will call myself a music lover sensible to sound and prone to working simple experiments to improve it...
Experiments that drives me to some simple discoveries, and low cost homemade solutions, that spare me a big amount of money in unnecessary upgrading urge and gives me something that some called "illusion" of pure musicality, placebo or not....:)
Ack-chew-ally, the quote oft attributed to PT Barnum was not said by him at all but most likely by some dour pseudo skeptic cluck. What PT Barnum in his infinite wisdom did say though is that, generally speaking, people would be much better off if they believed in too much rather than too little.
Knowledge is what’s left after you forgot all that rubbish you learned in school.
I have no position....Only some limited experience that I cannot deny with your argument...
You can say I have too much imagination for sure....
And by the way associating generally ridiculous claims (flat earther) or generally accepted non scientific one (anti vaxers) to some group of people,(audiophiles), and linking the 2 is certainly not neutral discourse...And absolutely not the same that appealing to a common ground neutral logical argument accepted by all...It is more akin to a universal appeal to all, to reject those who are associated with them (flat earthers, anti vax, subjectivist audiophiles, like you called them). There is a difference between the logical content of an argument and his rhetorical content...
And look Prof, someone just came in, send by God or his adversary, ( :) ) answering your unvolontary call (the preceding post)...It is instructive to read his post ( rhetorical all the way down!)....By the way the fact that I discuss with you prove to you that, even if we differ, I respect you and we can discuss; I dont think that I can or wanted to discuss with this poster before mine...
"
Sure: Among audiophiles, who have also discussed "for decades" the
"sonic effects" of a vast amount of pseudo-scientific "effects" (often
barely that).
" It's the PT Barnum effect or as it would be in plain words and not psychobabble. It goes thusly. Namely there is a sucker born every minute and alongside him is the guy who figures out how to part him from his money. The only other thing I have personally seen that eclipses this nonsense are those who think crystals and rocks will heal you. Used to know a rock hound who discovered how to sell quartz crystals to these nuts. He would stand there with a crystal on a string and rotate it one way. If the heely feely did not get excited he would reverse direction of rotation a couple of crystals later and they would buy them. We always had a good laugh over the gullibility of people that knew no bounds. I would set up at rock shows and there would be space cadets come by and ask me if I though various stones would be good for their altars. Altars to what I never inquired about with these flat Earthers.
Tourmaline for speakers comes to mind now that I think about it and I am happy to see someone profit off the gulls. The other thought I have, besides the one of some treating this as a serious topic, is how much fun it would be to come up with these topics for amusements sake and let them rip. Surely that can't happen here! The sad part is I can't figure out where the OP stands and that is kind of scary.
My remark about your mind set is not a more ad hominem act than your
assimilation of subjectivist audiophiles, who report something about
cables, to the flat earther, and anti-vaxing crowd ...
Are you unaware of how a principle of reason can be often be defended by deliberately choosing extreme examples on the assumption that both parties agree on that example, hence establishing the principle?
As in, the parent to the child "You tried smoking because Eddie told you to? WOULD YOU JUMP OFF A CLIFF IF EDDIE TOLD YOU TO?"
The extreme example is adduced not to show that two examples are the same, but that the PRINCIPLE applied to the two examples are the same.
That was my point about neutrality. You seemed to imply that merely being "not neutral" amounted to some critique of my position. My appeal to being "neutral" about flat or round earth was deliberately extreme so that you'd agree with the principle that "neutrality" is not in of itself some intrinsic virtue or indication of reasonableness.
Of course any argument has to be "neutral" in terms of not begging the question. You can't assume X is the case but have to produce the argument for it being the case.
But beyond that, it's hard to see what point you could have been making about "not being neutral."
By the way an argument can be perfectly rational and sound and used
in a non neutral way, motivated by an agenda. (examples abound: using
Darwinian science facts in a political agenda etc).
Er...yes. Of course. That's perfectly compatible with what I already wrote about arguments themselves not being neutral. Someone will have their motivations/reasons for defending a particular position. The motivations can vary wildly among people.
That doesn't tell us whether the arguments are reasonable or sound or not, so...again...it's often hard to find your point. How does any of that relate to audiophile claims? Should no one make claims? Should only one viewpoint (e.g. the purely subjectivist) be allowed to make claims?What is your actual point?
If the preceding did anything, besides creating the expected dust-storm, as well as providing a podium for some pro-level splainin’, it might have given some insight into why so many of the movies we see sound as bad as they do.
It is so sad that prof does not realize he sees himself as the incontrovertible authority.
It's sad that when faced with an alternative opinion some people can't be bothered to give reasons it's wrong, but will post strawman claim anyway so they can satisfy their desire diss someone without lifting a finger to justify it.
Of course, you can't actually show anywhere that I"ve claimed to be an "incontrovertible authority" and it's inconvenient for your strawman that my argument to mahgister pointed out that it makes no sense to consider ANYONE an "incontrovertible authority" and why dogmatism of that sort is a bad thing.
My remark about your mind set is not a more ad hominem act than your assimilation of " subjectivist audiophiles", who report something about cables, to the flat earther, and anti-vaxing crowd ...
By the way an argument can be perfectly rational and sound and used in a non neutral way, motivated by an agenda. (examples abound: using Darwinian science facts in a political agenda etc).
And now I am a troll in the thread... :)
My contribution is a simple testimony in my last post remark if you can read it... It is a simple fact that answered to the OP of this thread, and to you, about my own experience, without dismissing a priori his claims...And like the OP I think that it is a possible question in an audio thread not something akin to the anti-vaxing movement....Your contribution is a bunch of "rational" arguments to dismiss some very simple facts, or if you prefer illusory subjectivist experience, given by some "subjectivist audiophiles" as you called them , it remind me of some Jonathan Swift distinction in Gulliver... The subjectivist egg army against the objectivist egg league....This distinction between subjectivist and objectivist makes absolutely no sense at all except for those who feel necessary to makes it at all cost...
My best to you...
And I dont think that you are a troll by the way....I dont discuss with or about trolls...You are an intelligent mind and interesting guy, just a bit too extreme or hard in his conclusions and his self imposed mission...I wish you the best anyway...
I listen to your argument, and they are not neutral,
No argument is "neutral." An argument defends a certain position.And "neutrality" is not a cognate for "reasonable." If you take a "neutral" position between the claim of a flat or a round (oblate spheroid) earth, as if neither is more likely, you aren't doing much better than the flat-earther in terms of grappling with the evidence.
The question is whether the argument is reasonable/sound.
your agenda is
dismissing any " audiophile claims" … Audiophiles are a crowd akin to
anti-vaxing…Case closed... :)
No not all audiophile claims. I tend to challenge the grounds for certain claims when there are good reasons for skepticism (And I give the reasons). My "agenda" is trying to do this hobby while not being credulous in the face of every audiophile or audio-company's claim. If I find certain claims dubious, I'll explain why. And I've never done so dogmatically. I usually point out that it's not that I know the claimed phenomenon is false - it could be real - but rather I'm giving the reasons why I find the claim dubious or doubtful. Good argument/evidence could get me to believe in the claim.
And I'm usually careful to distinguish the audiophiles I'm talking about, which are "those who believe in the phenomenon in question" and/or the purely subjectivist audiophiles who think their hearing is the ultimate authority on sonic reality, and who reject the relevance of measurements, science etc in the discussion.
It is wrong to presume all audiophiles think that way. In fact, I see it as a problem that the purely subjectivist audiophiles seem to simply presume theirs is the correct approach and thus anyone entering an alternative opinion, skeptical of a subjectivist claim, is merely trolling or sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong.No! Plenty of audiophiles do not go in for every type of tweak purely on subjectivists grounds, and they want better evidence than that. There is a wide range of approaches to the hobby of hi-end audio, and the door ought to be left open not JUST for those who operate on the Golden Ear paradigm, but those who want to hold claims by manufacturers and audiophiles to more stringent standards before accepting claims.
I know perfectly well all there is to think about your vision of the
world: astrology, anti-vaxers, audiophiles, crystals users, etc. all the
same... Am I forget something ? oh yes, intelligent design, homeopathy,
tarot reader,...the list is too way longer to make, but you know it is
very easy to read your mind set...
How self-satisfying it clearly is for you to have pegged me so perfectly that you can dismiss my position without any actual arguments.
First, I don't think you could actually produce a cogent critique of my "mindset" based on what you've written. I can see the seams of strawmen and over-simplification already in what you've written.
More important, all you've produced is a sort of snide ad hominem: "You are so easy to read" instead of actually showing anything I've written to be unreasonable.
That's intellectually lazy and more in line with trolling. Don't you care to contribute better than that?
No one's forcing you to participate. But if you are going to, and think you can just drop in some ad hominem implications and job done, you should expect some pushback, right?
Pro audio rears is semi-handsome head. 🦸♂️ Can controlled blind test ranting be very far behind? Perhaps some of his patented sweet tweakaphobic pseudo-philosophy...
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
