Directionality of wire


I am a fan of Chris Sommovigo's Black Cat and Airwave interconnects. I hope he does not mind me quoting him or naming him on this subject, but Chris does not mark directionality of his IC's. I recently wrote him on the subject and he responded that absent shunting off to ground/dialectric designs, the idea of wire directionality is a complete myth. Same with resistors and fuses. My hunch is that 95% of IC "manufacturers", particularly the one man operations of under $500 IC's mark directionality because they think it lends the appearance of technical sophistication and legitimacy. But even among the "big boys", the myth gets thrown around like so much accepted common knowledge. Thoughts? Someone care to educate me on how a simple IC or PC or speaker cable or fuse without a special shunting scheme can possibly have directionality? It was this comment by Stephen Mejias (then of Audioquest and in the context of Herb Reichert's review of the AQ Niagra 1000) that prompts my question;

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...


128x128fsonicsmith
@hifiman5 , I didn't take your remark as "me" being a dictator at all. 
No worries here, but I don't see myself as an authority on anything, truth be told. Just another one of many with an opinion, and hopefully a funny one at that. 😇

As for Cincinnatus being a role model for Washington, I can only wish that were a requirement for all succeeding presidents, written on some dusty old parchment, attached to the Constitution. 

All the best,
Nonoise
Post removed 
herman
So the whole idea of "energy" traveling outside the wire is pretty preposterous.
If that was true then the means we have for determining whether or not a wire is hot by placing a device near them would not work, like those little gizmos that you put near an AC line that beep when the line is hot. If all energy was contained inside the wire then transformers would not work. Radios would not exist. etcetera

I never said all the "energy" was traveling inside the wire. I posting earlier that components of the electromagnetic wave - such as the induced magnetic field B - are obviously outside the wire. Even the mathematical paper someone linked on this thread (in a failed attempt to prove the energy traveled outside the wire) described "energy" inside the wire. Please read what I say more carefully so as not to put words in my mouth. Obviously radio transmission is an entirely different subject. Like radio communications via satellite, which I also recently decribed. I.e., photons. You know, EIRP.

have a nice day


I never said all the "energy" was traveling inside the wire.
you most certainly did. I did not put words in your mouth. I quoted you like I quoted you below.

You stated here that the audio signal is traveling through the wire, "not outside."
This all means the audio signal electromagnetic waves must be traveling through the copper, not outside the copper, just like voltage and current.
BTW voltage does not travel. It is a difference of potential between 2 points. Current does flow if you define it correctly as the flow of charge. Unfortunately if you do a search you will find it more often than not incorrectly defined as the flow of electrons.


You state again "it doesn’t" travel outside the wire
How does that comport with the electromagnetic wave - the audio signal - traveling outside the conductor as you claim? Hint: it doesn’t.

Then at one point you contradict yourself in the same post by saying saying energy outside is preposterous, then contradict that by saying some does travel outside.
So the whole idea of "energy" traveling outside the wire is pretty preposterous. Obviously there can be some components such as induced magnetic field outside the wire per se.

The problem with "debating"  you is you are consistently inconsistent. This is very convenient for you since you can quote yourself from an opposing point of view when it is pointed out that something you stated was incorrect. If you are on both sides then you can always quote yourself as being correct. You can say again that you didn’t say it , but the quotes above prove that you did.

What that ultimately means is you are entertaining yourself by engaging us in a discussion that can never conclude because no matter what you say, you will deny you said it and twist your words to mean something else. It is all very clever in a way but ultimately a waste of everyone’s time.... good day
How convenient for you to cherry pick what I wrote. I wrote recently, as I just got through saying, that obviously some components of the "energy" are outside the cable. What don’t you understand by that statement? If you had read the technical paper from the physics journal as I did you would have seen that some energy is inside the cable and some energy is outside. Which makes more sense. Besides, you seem to be supporting the naysayers in this argument. Who knows why? You said yourself that "if you hear directionality it must be real." So, if you’re so smart how about sharing with us why you think directionality is real? I’m talking of course about wire per se, not shielded wire or single ended cables, whatever? Or, as I suspect, you just want to be on the side that eventually wins, so you’re leaving yourself some wiggle room, which is that same tactic Al uses, very wisely. And your argument that radios (which are obviously wireless) prove that energy travels outside wire is ridiculous.