Directionality of wire

almarg
Stfoth 8-2-2017
Perhaps this has been adequately and succinctly discussed elsewhere, but, assuming all cables are inherently directional with sound differences from one way to the other, what might be some reasons someone, with a good trained ear with a highly resolving setup and with no skin in the game, wouldn’t be able to hear a difference?

If we assume as your question posits that all cables are inherently directional, IMO the key to obtaining an answer would be obtaining an understanding of **why** such an effect may occur. And as I said in an earlier post, IMO the least implausible explanation I have seen is the one stated by Audioquest.

>>>>Rather than say someone’s explanation is not plausible how about telling us an explanation that is plausible.

I doubt that any of us are in a position to say conclusively one way or the other whether the effect claimed by Audioquest is likely to be great enough in degree to be audibly significant in some or many systems. But let’s assume that it is.

>>>>That’s mighty decent of you.

The explanation revolves around electrical noise. Sensitivity to electrical noise that may be present will be highly dependent on the specific designs of the components, cables, and system that are involved, on how AC power is distributed to the various components, on how the components and cables are physically arranged, and on the noise environment at the particular location. And it will be highly dependent on the spectral composition (frequency distribution) as well as the amplitudes of whatever noise may be present.

>>>>Well, if he had said noise plus distortion would you be on board?

As I said in one of my previous posts in this thread, noise effects tend to have little if any predictability, and tend to be highly system and even location dependent.

>>>>>But he’s not talking about random or Gaussian noise, he’s talking about noise (and distortion) produced by the wire in one direction moreso than the other direction. You’re quibbling.

It should be noted, finally, that none of these factors have any particular correlation with the sonic quality or musical resolution of the system, or with the hearing acuity of the particular listener.

>>>>>>None of what factors? Noise and distortion? Obviously what Audioquest means and what HiFi Tuning means is that the difference in sound quality IS PREDICTABLE and not random. You’re being uh, purposefully obtuse. Differences in noise plus distortion do actually correlate with what people report for cables and fuses in terms of directionality.

And as I said in an earlier post, IMO the least implausible explanation I have seen is the one stated by Audioquest. .

The first part Al regarding the shield only connected at one end and which end to dump the RF to ground, is plausible, but I agree, the rest is not, and is just voodoo without any technical fact just to suck in the gullible here.

Cheers George

@ivan_nosnibor 

No problem, Ivan. No offence taken. We all rant from time to time.

stfoth
Geoff--hasn’t a lot of this discussion, from both "sides," illustrated the lack of predictability, particularly with so many variables--some difficult or arguably impossible to control for?

>>>>>I think you might possibly be misunderstanding. No offense. There are variables associated with tests which explain negative results as I just got threw describing. There is no reason to second guess or explain positive results, however. Since there are, what, a thousand times more positive results than negative ones, at least, we can throw out the negative ones. Remember most skeptics never get down to brass tacks and try aftermarket fuses or ever try reversing cables. They would rather fight than switch. 😀
Fair enough?

Geoffkait: "With so many variables involved, you can see why I say, in the context of so many positive results, it’s probably best to just throw out the negative results. They are outliers."

One might argue just the opposite, as well.

>>>>>>It would be a bad argument, or an illogical one, since positive results are more *important* than negative ones since, you know, even if there were some obstacles in the way the results were still positive. not to mention there were SO MANY positive results. Nothing succeeds like success and failure is no success at all.

It seems that many of the skeptics won’t be convinced without scientific proof. If that proof materialized, I suspect many would "believe." Some, may still deny, find fault with the method, or raise the bar. For the "pro" directionality folks, what would it take to convince them that there isn’t actually

>>>>>I suspect, based on this debate and many others I have seen or been involved in, you cannot change the mind of the determined skeptic - no matter what you do. That’s why this thread has been laboring along for so long. Did you happen to catch my post where I defined pathological skepticism?

I suspect a lot of this is simply a case of, you know, people following the wrong sheep.

🐑 🐑 🐑 🐑 🚶

Wake up and smell the coffee. ☕️