Talon: While cost may not be an object to Rsbeck, he refuses to listen for himself and draw his own conclusions, even if it costs him nothing to do so. Instead, he chooses to regurgitate the "hype" that he has been fed by various cable naysayers based on poorly conducted and less than thorough tests. In effect, his responses may come across as both sensible and reasonable in approach, but his actions speak louder than his words. Sean > http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1112250293&openfrom&1&4#1 |
I never asked you to trade in your cables or that i could hear the difference between -.1 dB down at 20 KHz and a flat response. Both of those are false statements that you use to divert attention away from the real facts of the matter.
I simply asked you to listen to some cables within the confines of your system and see if you heard a difference. If you can honestly hear a difference, those differences have to be measurable using the proper tools and test methodology. As i pointed out in that other thread and explained why, ABX tests are flawed. The same tools that could be used to demonstrate that ABX boxes alter the electrical signal that is fed into the speakers is the same device that will show that speaker cables alter the load that the amp responds to and that is fed into the speakers. The fact that you are afraid to perform such a simple test as swapping one high impedance speaker cable for another high impedance speaker cable while you continue to spout the same rhetoric only lessens your credibility.
Eldartford is both an engineer and a cable skeptic, yet he's open minded enough to try such a test. Are you afraid you might actually hear a difference and have to change your mind? If you have such faith in your "cable convictions", here's your chance to prove it to yourself. Sean
> |
Rsbeck: The only way that you could you have a frequency response chart for a speaker cable was if the speaker cable itself was the terminating load. Otherwise, the electrical characteristics of the speaker cable combine with the electrical characteristics of the individual speaker being used. It is this total load that the amplifier sees and responds to. Given that every amp has a different output impedance and a different level of stability, each amp / speaker cable / speaker load will be slightly different. This is also why i referenced Thevenin's Theory in another thread. If you want to see differences in transient and amplitude characteristics of various speaker cables connected to one specific amp and a specific set of speakers, please take a look at the article that Nelson Pass wrote about the subject 27 years ago.
Once again, i suggest you do some further research on the subject. Finding someone with a Network Analyzer that is willing to work with you will not only blow your mind, it will help you to better understand what you and the other "guru's" that you so dearly trust are currently lacking in understanding on the subject. The figures that you keep quoting are but a small piece of the puzzle and poorly interpreted at that. Sean
> |
"A speaker cable cannot deliver more detail than what it is given -- it cannot CREATE detail / to think otherwise is magical thinking. "
This is EXACTLY why i want Rsbeck to listen and compare some Nordost to his reference i.e. heavy gauge zip cord within the relaxed confines of his own system, that he's highly familiar with. If he can hear more detail with the Nordost than with the zip cord, that would mean that the zip cord was LOSING detail by his own definition. If it was losing detail, that would mean that the measurements that he keeps referencing either weren't accurate to begin with and / or weren't telling the whole story.
Then again, and as Yoda would say, "talking to a brick wall, i am". He'll talk the talk but he refuses to walk the walk. Sean
> |
Rsbeck:
I provided a link to a well referenced and more thorough test than anything that you've provided. These tests were conducted by Nelson Pass, an industry legend who doesn't nor has he ever marketed cables. They were independently confirmed by Matt Polk, another industry legend as they both came to similar conclusions. While Matt Polk did offer cabling to the public for sale, his research was conducted because the product that he was offering was causing a negative reaction with specific amplifier designs, which other cabling did not. This in itself should tell you that there is a difference in how an amplifier responds to different electrical stimuli in the form of a speaker cable and / or a loudspeaker / cable combination. After all, if you change the electrical characteristics of a loudspeaker, you would expect and ( even you ) probably accept that it could change the sonics of what you hear. Why is it so hard to believe that changing that same circuit elsewhere in that same signal path ( speaker cabling ) could achieve similar results?
The referenced article that was published 27 years ago demonstrates that as different speaker cables are connected between an amplifier and a speaker, the transient capacity and power delivery characteristics of the amplifier change too. Since transient response is directly related to both amplitude linearity and bandwidth, a cable chance can and should be both measurable and audible. In many cases, this is easily measurable ( as evidenced by that article ) and in some cases, the outcome is quite audible. There are many variables here that could effect the audibility of the specific situation i.e. the stability of the amp under load, the specific cables being used, the quantifiable differences in electrical characteristics of the cables themselves that are being compared, the combination of the cable / speaker and their individual electrical summing, the listening skills of the participants, etc...
In some cases, the difference between the amp being able to sustain high power into a reactive speaker load boils down to what speaker cable is used i.e. the speaker cable is used as an impedance transformer or "buffer". Not only is this effect measurable and audible, it is physically provable in the fact that the amplifier will turn itself off. This is mentioned in the same article as posted by Nelson Pass some 27 years ago. Using anything but a cable that was both high in series resistance, high in nominal impedance and limited in bandwidth would cause the amplifier to shut down into a specific loudspeaker load. While this was not the best sonic combination according to Nelson Pass, it was the only electrical solution with that given amplifier / speaker interface.
The problem here is that you've refused to listen to any form of logic, denied the existence of such repeatable testing in the referenced article as conducted by a well respected industry professional and keep referring to some inadequate test results as a point of reference. Bare in mind that these test results were done using a simulated loudspeaker load that maintains consistent electrical characteristics regardless of the amplitude, duration or bandwidth of the signal i.e. not a real loudspeaker that changes electrical characteristics as frequency, duration and amplitude are varied.
Since i've already provided links to demonstrate that cables can change the dynamics ( electrical operating parameters ) of an amplifier and you've refused to acknowledge this, what makes you think that i should go out of my way to perform any other testing. This is especially true when you won't even take the time to enjoy some music in the confines of your home using your familiar system and some different speaker cabling that i provide for your temporary use free of charge?
Even if i were to perform such tests, what would it take to lend my test results more credibility than the test results as made publicly available by Nelson Pass some 27 years ago? It is my belief and theory that not only would you refuse to acknowledge any test results that i would submit, regardless of how thorough and exhaustive the results were, but you would also continue to refuse to compare speaker cabling within your system.
As such, the bottom line comes down to this. I can't win this "debate" no matter what i do. The only thing that i could hope to do would be to have you experience enough of a difference in the sonics of a system with a speaker cable change that it would pique your curiosity. In doing so, it may cause a desire within you to make YOU want to do your own research and open your mind to other alternative theories to that of what you already cling to. You are the only one that is limiting both your own knowledge and level of experience in this matter.
Given that i'm willing to provide you with the resources to further your experience, which hopefully will further your knowledge base at the same time, i can only arrive at one logical point of conclusion. That is, i have to ask you this one question. If you can answer this question with a reasonable response, i'll be glad to drop any further interaction with you on this given subject.
What are you afraid of and / or the barriers that exist in terms of you listening to some different speaker cabling within the confines of your system at no expense to you? Sean
> |
Gregm: You're playing Rsbeck's game and will never win. You will only allow him to keep repeating the same techno-muck that he has been convinced is correct. In doing so, it only strengthens his beliefs and will make it harder to get through to him in the long run. Please refrain from doing so, as feeding a troll only makes them bigger and stronger : ) Sean
> |
Trelja: I think we share common vantage points and similar experiences. As such, i can understand why you agree with my last post to a large degree. Thanks for taking the time to acknowledge what i shared and the fact that you are of like mind. Many times, we only post alternative viewpoints when we should be supporting what we agree with. I'll keep that in mind and try to apply it to my own posts.
Like most others with an electronics background, i couldn't believe that anything less than a poorly constructed under-designed cable could alter the sonic performance of a system. After a few ear opening experiences, i had to open my eyes and mind to other factors that i had never taken into consideration.
After doing further research and testing on my own, i found that what i had based most of my previous assumptions on were true. That is, if everything in the system was "perfect" i.e. impedance matched and non-reactive in nature. As soon as one part of the system equation isn't impedance matched and / or reactance enters into the equation, all of those prior assumptions go out the window.
As i've stated many times before, cables act as impedance transformers when used between components of dis-similar impedances. In some situations, cables can improve these electrical interfaces and in other situations, cables can degrade these electrical interfaces. In some instances, the electrical interface remains unfazed, making little to do difference in either audible or electrical performance. The interface may remain consistent regardless of cabling used unless cabling that is highly reactive within itself is introduced into the system.
Until someone can understand all of the variables involved with cable selection, they can either sit on the sidelines and watch others or they can get into the game and learn along the way as they get beat up and bruised. I don't have a problem with either choice as i can understand someone wanting to do research before jumping in. At the same time, i can understand someone wanting to share and experience what others speak of, hence the desire to jump in with both feet. Having said that, there has to be a happy medium. That's why i've posted what i have about cabling in the past and tried to explain the how's & why's of impedance interactions, various electrical measurements and what to look for or avoid in specific situations. I think that anyone that has read a good quantity of my posts concerning cabling would come to realize that i don't recommend cables as a band aid so much as i recommend very specific cables as a means to potentially achieve a higher level of neutrality when interfaced with components of high quality. At the same time, i've also commented on various cables and explained why i would avoid them and what their sonic impact could be to a system or given component to component interface.
Tvad: What am i not acknowledging or willing to concede? I've always tried to promote "accurate musicality", but at the same time, i've always said that one should buy and use what they like. I've never been a fan of using cabling to flavour a system and have never recommended that. There are better ways that are both more effective and cost efficient to achieve effects that are more dramatic, more predictable and more versatile. In this respect, Rsbeck and i agree.
Rsbeck: Not all zip cord is built to the same specs. Not all zip cord has the same impedance. Not all zip cord uses the same types and grades of materials. Basing all of your argument on one set of measured responses is both foolish and anything but conclusive.
As i've stated above and you never refuted, the tests that you're basing your comments on are far from comprehensive in nature and anything but ill-informed at best. The fact that they went so far out of their way to belittle a manufacturer that produced the most neutral / widest bandwidth / most proper nominal impedance cable of the bunch because the cable "could potentially" cause ringing at or above several MHz in very specific types of amplifiers is silly at best.
Rather than berate the manufacturers of such amps for not building in proper ultrasonic protection, they use this against the cable manufacturer as if optimized design was a bad thing. By doing so, they only demonstrated their agenda. By tearing down those at the top of the heap and publicly chastising them, this psychologically conditions the uninformed reader to accept that all of the cables perform in a relatively even fashion and that the "fancy cables" have "flaws" that the cheaper cables don't. In doing so, they achieve their goals to prove their point of view i.e. the agenda that they had prior to even taking any measurements.
Other than that, you've never tried to refute let alone acknowledge the work that Nelson Pass did in this area. That could be because you have an agenda and paying any creedence to the opposing point of view that you can't refute would acknowledge that you could be wrong. The fact that you refuse to even do something that is so basic as actually listen and compare your cables tells me how closed minded you are on the subject.
As to blind listening test under controlled listening conditions, i don't have a problem with that. That is, so long as one is allowed ample time to familiarize themselves with both the system and the recording(s) that were to be used for the tests. Once other variables, such as an ABX box and / or additional cabling & connections are entered into the equation, blind listening tests actually lose their validity as far as i'm concerned. If you want to know why, read my above post about ABX boxes & associated cabling introducing their unwanted and unaccounted electrical characteristics into the equation. How can one compare the effects of impedance and loading characteristics when a device that alters the impedance and loading characteristics is used as a baseline for the tests being performed???
As far as "high frequency roll-off" goes, zip cord DOES roll off the treble response and it is audible. Not only in amplitude, but also in terms of transient response. Remember, i'm comparing this to a wide bandwidth, low inductance design.
Having said that, where would you recommend that i perform a blind listening test with others there to witness and confirm not only the results, but also that the tests were conducted fairly and honestly? I would prefer doing this someplace neutral i.e. in an unfamiliar listening room with unfamiliar equipment. I did this in a Best Buy using two different gauges of zip cord and an unfamiliar recording, so i should be able to do it someplace else just as well. That is, so long as i'm able to select the recording that i want to use AND am given ample time to familiarize myself with what the system sounds like with each the cable of my preference in the system.
If this is what it takes to get you to perform even a sighted listening test for your own edification, i'll do it. All i ask is that you post your honest opinion after listening to and comparing the two cables during normal listening sessions within the confines of your system.
Given the complexity of the test that you asked of me, i was willing to accept the simplicity of the test that i asked of you. Given that you refuse to perform such a task and refuse to answer why, my only guess is that you're not really interested in the outcome. You've made up your mind based on the extremely limited data that you're provided and aren't about to open your mind and / or ears to anything that could disturb that vantage point.
None the less, i extend to you one more time the offer to send you some Nordost cabling to compare to your zip cord. In all honesty, i'm not doing this to be a smart ass or to stick it in your face. I simply want you to hear the difference for yourself, which i'm hoping, will make you question what you've read and been preaching to others as fact. Sean
> |
Rsbeck: As i've mentioned in other threads, i was able to discern the audible differences between two different gauges of zip cord in a blind test. I did this using very low quality gear, music that i had never heard before and a listening area that all types of potential outside influences in it. Not only could i consistently tell the differences between Cable A and Cable B under such adverse conditons, i was able to specify which cable was the heavier gauge zip cord and which was the lighter gauge zip cord. If both of these cables measure well below the thresholds of audibility, like you claim and your statistics show, and i had all of the "negative factors" mentioned above going against me i.e. lack of familiarity in every conceivable category, how is it that i was able to do what i did in a matter of seconds???
As far as how far i'll go to "save face", am i supposed to have one point of view in one thread and a different point of view in another thread? From what i can tell, i'm the one that is willing to put my claims and listening skills to the test. You won't even listen to some cables at your leisure within the confines of your system with no expectations placed upon you. That doesn't seem to stop your from talking smack though.
As far as Nelson Pass goes, i surely didn't mention him to drop names. I mentioned an article that basically refutes your reference work that happened to be researched and written by Nelson Pass. Even though this article demonstrates the difference in amplifier loading characteristics, transient response, distortion and bandwidth, you still refuse to acknowledge it or comment on it. The fact that i had referenced that article at least a half dozen times prior to ever seeing your name in an Audiogon thread should also tell you something.
Why you keep quoting figures derived from the tests that have now been shown to be less than adequately researched and / or conducted is beyond me. The only thought that comes to mind in that area is that you will go to any lengths to save face. That is, except put your own beliefs and ideologies to the test. Obviously, it is easier to keep spouting the same rhetoric and appear to be consistent in hopes that nobody really realizes just how much dancing you're really doing.
With that in mind, i'll agree with you that you are consistent from thread to thread. Consistent in avoiding the issues and promoting an ideology that you're not willing to put to the test.
On top of being full of hot air, you sidetracked this thread by introducing your "anti-cable" agenda and i responded in return. While i may agree with some of the comments that you made in this thread, don't blame me for making a suggestion that ran contradictory to the specific request for help. You did that, not me. When i called you to task for doing such and pointing out your agenda and unwillingness to actually stand behind your beliefs, that's when the thread went sideways.
I think that anyone with half a brain and a reasonable amount of familiarity with these forums can figure out what the real deal is here. One of us does have their tail between their legs and it's not me. I've accepted your challenge, provided technical rebutall that refutes the data that you've used as a point of reference and all you can do is continue to repeat the same garbage, try to discredit me as an individual rather than respond to the data presented and completely ignore my request to simply listen to some speaker cables.
As such, i'm not going to waste any more time trying to convince you of anything. You've done a fine job yourself of convincing everyone exactly what you do / don't know and what you are / aren't capable of. The fact that you had the easier side of the bargain and refuse to even attempt to carry that out says more than i could ever type in a lifetime. Goodnight and goodbye. Sean
> |
12 gauge zip versus 16 gauge zip at 6 foot lengths. Same nominal impedances with less than .1 Ohm difference in series resistance on the round trip. According to even your own reference materials, these cables at these lengths are electrically equivalent. According to my ear / brain interface, there was both an audible and repeatable difference under even less than ideal listening conditions.
Post what you want after this. I said that i would have taken the tests that you proposed. The only thing that you did after that was chastise me while running away from all of the other info that i referenced and the in-home cable demo that i asked of you. I did more than meet you half-way, i went way out of my way to offer you the materials to conduct such tests of your own at my expense. I'll not bother responding back to you from this point forward. You are nothing less than a troll spreading manure with no willingness to put their own theories to test. GOODnight and GOODbye for real. Sean
> |
Tvad: How do you keep the noise from the low grade idler drive motor from interferring with your musical enjoyment? Are you coupling, isolating or doing both to the chassis of this "classic" piece of audiophilia??? : ) Sean
> |
A full grown man bouncing up and down on the bed while listening to "kiddie records". Nice mental image there Tvad. Good enough to cause me to laugh out loud : ) Sean
> |
