What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?


Douglas Self wrote a devastating article about audio anomalies back in 1988. With all the necessary knowledge and measuring tools, he did not detect any supposedly audible changes in the electrical signal. Self and his colleagues were sure that they had proved the absence of anomalies in audio, but over the past 30 years, audio anomalies have not disappeared anywhere, at the same time the authority of science in the field of audio has increasingly become questioned. It's hard to believe, but science still cannot clearly answer the question of what electricity is and what sound is! (see article by A.J.Essien).

For your information: to make sure that no potentially audible changes in the electrical signal occur when we apply any "audio magic" to our gear, no super equipment is needed. The smallest step-change in amplitude that can be detected by ear is about 0.3dB for a pure tone. In more realistic situations it is 0.5 to 1.0dB'". This is about a 10% change. (Harris J.D.). At medium volume, the voltage amplitude at the output of the amplifier is approximately 10 volts, which means that the smallest audible difference in sound will be noticeable when the output voltage changes to 1 volt. Such an error is impossible not to notice even using a conventional voltmeter, but Self and his colleagues performed much more accurate measurements, including ones made directly on the music signal using Baxandall subtraction technique - they found no error even at this highest level.

As a result, we are faced with an apparently unsolvable problem: those of us who do not hear the sound of wires, relying on the authority of scientists, claim that audio anomalies are BS. However, people who confidently perceive this component of sound are forced to make another, the only possible conclusion in this situation: the electrical and acoustic signals contain some additional signal(s) that are still unknown to science, and which we perceive with a certain sixth sense.

If there are no electrical changes in the signal, then there are no acoustic changes, respectively, hearing does not participate in the perception of anomalies. What other options can there be?

Regards.
anton_stepichev
The ops word salad argument is a straw man. Plus the article referenced as described has nothing to do with wire direction. Just a setup to suggest that anything is possible.


A total waste of time. I’m sorry I even read it and bothered to post. That’s all. 
The ops argument is a straw man. The article reference as described has nothing to do with wire direction. Just saying.
The main experiment of the writer is about mechanical constraint on string and the difference between pitch perception and frequency...

There is no direct link...

But you are quick to qualify someone of rethorical abuse without knowing all that matter here...

No direct link does not means no link....

Why did you like to oppose without any arguments save qualifying an interesting book not worth reading ...

The book being a complete redifinition of the sound hearing experience, how do you know that no link exist at all?

A total waste of time.
Why do you think always that your  expressed opinion  about a book you dont know and dont plan to read is not a waste of times for us?

Especially if the writer pretense is redefining the hearing problem...He is right or wrong nothing between the 2....

How it is easy to always  think by binary modes... It is black and white... Subjectivist versus objectivist... Like condioned Pavlov dogs reacting....

You even LEND intentions to the OP which are not his own... The OP think and dont pretend to have answers....

i will LEND to you some intention that are probably more truthful than your own lending attibution to the OP: you like trolling....I prefer thinking....


Are you born with innate knowledge?
@mahgister
what have you read of Essien to this day? Which articles?

I am afraid, nothing except the BITS. Still have no time to reed them thoroughly.

I think that perhaps in Essien experiences with string internal variable force of tension is the beginning of an answer.... If pitch is not reducible to frequency because of this mechanical invariant linked to tension perhaps a string like a cable react differently affecting the sound result when the orientation of his constituants fiber are twisted in one direction or the other....

I haven't read about his string experiences yet, but I have my own personal experience on the subject. I was restoring an old broken violin ten years ago, doing this to get an idea of the direction of the parts of musical instruments. Here is the article, but unfortunately it is not translated. After the violin was restored, I experimented with various violin accessories, including different strings.

The most surprising discovery then turned out to be that the metal string E has not only a conventionally "electric" directivity, like all other wires, but also a "mechanical" one! The violin sounds more precise and reach when the beginning of the string is on the side of the pegs. At the same time, the advantages and disadvantages of the sound of the string could be evaluated both by playing the violin and using the string as a wire.

I had one Chinese string with a disgusting, rough sound, its screaming was very noticeable in both electric and acoustic variants, especially live right on the violin. Seems everything around us is connected in some cunning way.

"But thanks to Ted Denney we have what it sounds like."

Thank me, too. I know what it sounds like. I tried it. Never sold it so maybe a little less of a conflict of interest than people who make living from selling cables.
To understand speech and music and the principle of the auditory system, we must return to those primitive aspects of music and speech production in nature to determine and isolate mechanical features that underlie each auditory sensation. Any other procedure, by the terms of the body-image theory of sound, is an illusion. They have not worked, they do not work, and will never work.



A very weak conclusion, not at all supported by evidence in the paper which is mainly just a bunch of ramblings to support statements/conclusions attributed in general and specifically that are not even factual. I am guessing they were desperate for papers for the 2nd International Conference on Acoustics in Nigeria. Beautiful country, nice people, not well known for academic regour (note author is listed as independent researcher and no indication of peer review, which, is not uncommon at these conferences.) 


I must admire his conclusion which does not even recognize that he could be wrong, which, without establishing any evolutionary influence for music negates his conclusion.  Frankly, the whole work basically implies that everyone has a super simplistic view when pretty obviously we understand there are complex mechanisms right from physical detection up to interpretation. The whole thing is a mess. I am with Mapman, I am sorry I wasted any time reading it.