2. tech-talk
  3. 130709-12450

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
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Come on, give me a break. It's not true at all.

almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
Jea48 8-16-2017
herman, and or Al, (almarg) any thoughts?
Jim (Jea48), thanks for providing the references, and the hypothesis about the possibility of the dielectric having directional properties to some degree, the dielectric being the medium through which the energy of an audio signal is transmitted.


My only thoughts about that hypothesis are general in nature. I note that one of the basic themes in the Cardas writeup on breakin seems to be that breakin involves change from a more uneven state of distribution of stored charge toward a more even state of distribution (as well as a reduction in stored charge). That would seem to me to imply that if anything a cable that is well broken in would be less likely, rather than more likely, to exhibit directional properties, if in fact the hypothesis is correct.

On the other hand, though, one doesn’t have to look far for examples of non-conducting materials that transmit certain forms of electromagnetic energy better in one direction than the other. Blacked out windows on automobiles, for example. And in the realm of electronics, there are of course devices based on semiconductors, namely diodes, that operate by having very low resistance in one direction and very high resistance in the other direction. Although in that case a junction between two different kinds of semiconductors is involved.

Even if the hypothesized phenomenon were to exist to some degree in the case of audio signal transmission, however, as with many explanations that are asserted in marketing literature and elsewhere for audio-related products and tweaks a fundamental problem is that the hypothesis does not lend itself to being analyzed (or measured) in a **quantitative** manner. And as I’ve said in various threads here, in the absence of any sort of quantitative perspective on a claimed explanation, whether or not it has a reasonable possibility of being great enough in degree to be audibly significant is unlikely to be either provable or disprovable with any conclusiveness. That, together with the ease with which extraneous variables can be overlooked when it comes to ascribing a cause to subtle sonic effects that may be perceived, are IMO major reasons why we see so many arguments about such things.

Best regards,
-- Al

P.S: To Analogluvr, thanks very much for the nice words you posted here a few days ago.


geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
almarg
And as I’ve said in various threads here, in the absence of any sort of quantitative perspective on a claimed explanation, whether or not it has a reasonable possibility of being great enough in degree to be audibly significant is unlikely to be either provable or disprovable with any conclusiveness.

Oh, brother! Here we go again with the legalese snow job. ☃ Gee whiz, could you possibly be any more condescending?
teo_audio
2,197 posts
 
Geoff, it’s one of those things where if you did not exist, the universe would have to invent you. One or the other or both. Thanks for putting up with all the crap.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Teo, maybe cut back on the coffee just a wee bit. 😀 What prompted all this anyway? Was it something I said? 😟

More to discover