Directionality of wire
Thank you for the excellent question. AudioQuest provided an NRG-10 AC cable for the evaluation. Like all AudioQuest cables, our AC cables use solid conductors that are carefully controlled for low-noise directionality. We see this as a benefit for all applications -- one that becomes especially important when discussing our Niagara units. Because our AC cables use conductors that have been properly controlled for low-noise directionality, they complement the Niagara System’s patented Ground-Noise Dissipation Technology. Other AC cables would work, but may or may not allow the Niagara to reach its full potential. If you'd like more information on our use of directionality to minimize the harmful effects of high-frequency noise, please visit http://www.audioquest.com/directionality-its-all-about-noise/ or the Niagara 1000's owner's manual (available on our website).
Thanks again.
Stephen Mejias
AudioQuest
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-15-audioquest-niagara-1000-hifiman-he1000-v2-p...
| Post removed |
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 |
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. ☕️ |
| Post removed |
