The Contour System – Directional Wiring of Audio Parts


Hi guys!

The topic is about subjective homemade research of conductors directivity. I know most people don't believe in such phenomena so probably the story is not for them but for those who find it unbearable to listen to imperfect sound of chaotically directed wires and components.
As for me, I hear direction difference distinctly. The matter started from interconnect cables quite long ago, after a while I added to my research inner wiring of loudspeakers, then discover the importance of mains cables direction. After all I decided to find the directions of all the wires and components of my pretty vintage DIY tube mono SE amp and after everything had been done I drew a resulting schematic and wrote the article. It was in 2005, I have translated it in English only now. Hope you will find the article useful or just enjoy it.
Here is the Link: https://www.backtomusic.ru/audio-engineering/theory/contour-system.
anton_stepichev
I doubt he understands anything, fully or otherwise. Your description was perfectly clear and irrefutably logical.

The part about feeling goes with the way you describe cassettes or old 78s. The one time I heard a 78 on a gramophone was some years ago but I still remember the feeling. In audiophile terms the sound was just as crappy as you would expect. But the way I have tried to describe it, it is like our systems when they are really good create the illusion of the singer being there in front of us in the room. When we do this with analog in particular the illusion can be tingly-real. With the gramophone it is more like the singer is in there. Listening to it is like, there's a person somewhere in there singing, and I'm hearing it through this metal and stuff. But she's in there!

Or if you ever did the can with string thing as a kid, you can totally tell it is a real person and not a recording on the other end. The old telephone calls were like that too. Not this cell phone BS we have today.  

Very hard to explain in terms of anything we can measure. Very easy to understand in terms of things we know and feel. Another example I like to use, if you see a trout in a brook the image of the fish is distorted by the water, by the waves, by sunlight glint and glare off the water, silt and whatever else might be in the water, but yet with all of that you know for sure you are looking at a trout. A real live trout.

As opposed to if you take a picture or video of a trout, and look at it the same way, there is no doubt which is which. The video however good is never gonna be confused with the fish. Probably no amount of pixel or wavelength counting will ever figure this out, but we do it with ease.

Something is going on, whether it is with tubes needles or the direction of wires or whatever, something somehow improves or shortens the link, the connection between things. Between us and them. Sorry, but it really is hard not to get metaphysical about it.
@millercarbon
The one time I heard a 78 on a gramophone was some years ago but I still remember the feeling.... With the gramophone it is more like the singer is in there. Listening to it is like, there's a person somewhere in there singing, and I'm hearing it through this metal and stuff. But she's in there!


I agree 100%. Successful 78 recordings sound extremely realistic on the gramophone, and I feel that no electrical system can so accurately copy the effect of a live presence during a performance as a mechanical gramophone. In this paradoxical situation, again, our misunderstanding of the properties of electricity and human perception can be traced.

Or if you ever did the can with string thing as a kid, you can totally tell it is a real person and not a recording on the other end. The old telephone calls were like that too. Not this cell phone BS we have today.  

When using old dial phones, it was possible to evaluate the sound of audio systems and determine which wire sounds better. This is despite the fact that the frequency response of the telephone line was 500-3000 Hz. To me the situation is similar to that of a gramophone and suggests that the presence effect is completely independent of the frequency response.
.....with all of that you know for sure you are looking at a trout. A real live trout. As opposed to if you take a picture or video of a trout, and look at it the same way, there is no doubt which is which...


Again, I agree with you. In my experience, visual perception determines whether an object is alive or inanimate by some principle similar to hearing. I spent several years researching the distinctive features of b/w analog photography which to me is by far more live than modern digital one, and found out a lot of interesting things. the main one is the lens elements and even simple glasses, have directivity.

The window glasses directivity can also be used in audio. After you choose the position of the window glass and fix it so as the picture outside the window is closest to the live one, then the sound of the system becomes more lively too, especially if the system is located next to the window. All our feelings are somehow connected. And probably there is no escape from metaphysics here.

The glass directionality experiment is easy to perform by looking in different ways through any little peace of glass.



In fact, the effect of gravity on the electrons flowing in the wire is also a huge factor on sound. I can hear the difference like day and night.

My setup on the moon sounds so much better since gravity is less. I had to also carry my own audiophile air there for the experiment since I could not have heard anything in a vacuum. It was at perfect nitrogen and oxygen concentrations for perfect sound.

However, I am sure there are members here whose ears are so sensitive they can even hear in a vacuum. Please let me know so we can plan an expedition together to a planet or an asteroid whose gravity is much less 🤣

In fact, I hear that music sounds better outside the solar system.  I need to investigate :-)
To me the situation is similar to that of a gramophone and suggests that the presence effect is completely independent of the frequency response.
Fascinating ideas and thread...

I am sure that Anton is on the right track...

Just a word about my own experience and listenings experiments in acoustic...

We dont listen first to frequency like a mic does with a tested frequency response...

We have 2 ears which are very different fom one anther , and i used this in my last acoustical device....

We listen not first to some frequency like assume those who use an electronic equalizer and a mic with a tested response frequency for a PRECISE ARTIFICIAL location...

We listen to some multi dimensional complex different wavefronts, a bunch of frequencies with a "relatively" large bandwidth,( like the voice timbre of a singer) coming from the tweeter, the bass drivers, and from early and late reflections in a PRECISE NATURAL time frame...

Human ears evoluted to locate real sound like voices in space and human timbre recognition is key to social relation...

I used this fact creating my H.M.E. (Helmoltz mechanical equalizer): imagine a snake with head and tail...

The HEAD begins a few centimeters from the tweeter of one of my speakers with 2 pipes near the tweeter and 2 bottles near the port hole; then going to my left on the first reflection point with 6 pipes; then to my rear with the MAIN BODY of the snake, 8 pipes ,one 8 feet high; and then goes to the second reflection point to my right, with 6 pipes and finally ends at the TAIL, with 3 pipes near the bass driver of this speaker, with one bottle near the port hole....Asymmetric distribution of pipes and bottles and differences between them are very important at the head and tail....


Then asymetrical "DIRECTIVITY" of the wavefronts coming from each speakers and their reflections in the room is paramount factor to recreate 3 dimensionality of the music with my H.M.E. ....All this is related to the serious studies about thresholds in timing perceptions experiments of some complementary acoustical factors like LEV and ASW....

Audio is acoustic experience first....

I think that analog is more resistant to negative impact of a lack in acoustic control.... This is the reason why analog appear superior to digital....Time is the most important factor in acoustic, and timing of bits is mathematically equivalent but not acoustically equal to the real timing of frontwaves for the 2 ears... We need good concrete acoustical settings to recreate the original acoustic live event where choices made by recording engineer are trade-off choices altering the timbre original  experience for example.... The information "cues" in the recorded cd or vinyl need to be activated in a room or in space... If  good acoustical controls  are not there  in our room the analog sound is more resistant in a destructive acoustical environment or in an not enough controlled one...