2. cables
  3. 166070-159469

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
andy2
1,555 posts
 
Of course if optimized then it may sound different.  During playback, the audio file has to be "decompressed" or if you will "processed" by the CPU.  Therefore it will have its own digital interference signature which will affect the DAC clock.

File formats such as .wave or .flac are all in compressed format.  They have to be decompressed by the CPU before the DAC can take the digital data and turn into analog.
anton_stepichev OP
150 posts
 
@endy2, You're talking nonsense. If everything were as you write, each digital copy would sound different in the same way that optimized and non-optimized files differ.
andy2
1,555 posts
 
^^^ I don't think you know what you're talking about.  You seem to be contradicting from what you wrote before.  I thought you were making sense in your previous post, but then you're saying something different so it's hard to argue with someone who seems to be schizophrenic.
anton_stepichev OP
150 posts
 
Andy2, there are no contradictions, I’m trying to explain to you a simple thing that is understandable even to a schoolboy. This is getting ridiculous, by God.

You wrote:
Of course if optimized then it may sound different. During playback, the audio file has to be "decompressed" or if you will "processed" by the CPU. Therefore it will have its own digital interference signature which will affect the DAC clock.

OK. Imagine that we have an original file (A), an optimized file (B) that is PHYSICALLY identical to A, and an ordinary digital copy of the file (C) that is PHYSICALLY identical to A, all located on the same disk. Then:

By the sound: A ≈ C ≠ B.
In the digit: A = C = B

At the same time, you claim that A sounds different from B because A is not physically equal to B since the files have "its own digital interference signature". This in itself is nonsense, but let’s assume that it is.

Then answer the question:

Why then is the sound A ≈ C? In other words, how can normal copying differ from optimization if in both cases we always have files with the same checksum at the output?

Keep in mind that if we do re-optimization (B1, B2, B3...) and re-copying (C1, C2, C3...), we have:

By sound: A ≈ C ≈ C1 ≈ C3 ≈ Cn ≠ B ≠ B1 ≠ B2 ≠ B3 ≠ Bn

In digit: A = C = C1 = C2 = C3 = Cn = B = B1 = B2 = B3 = Bn

So answer the question please, then we’ll see who is schizophrenic and who is just stupid.
andy2
1,555 posts
 
First of all you need to calm down.

OK. Imagine that we have an original file (A), an optimized file (B) that is PHYSICALLY identical to A, and an ordinary digital copy of the file (C) that is PHYSICALLY identical to A, all located on the same disk.

Could you explain how B is identical to A, if B is an optimized version of A?  Seems like an contradictory statement.












More to discover