2. cables
  3. 1071276890

Power Cords Snake Oil ??

Having been a long time audiophile living with countless high end compnents I have to wonder about the theory and practicality of high end power cords.

I have yet to hear the difference a power cord makes. Ive owned, synergistic, Shunyata, BMI and cardas. I in no way can detect any sonic signature or change. Give me a pair of interconnects and I imeadiately notice a difference somewhere in the sonic spectrum. Not the PC though. I have accomplished 4 blind tests with my friends. 3 out of the 4 they did not know their cord was replaced. All 4 were using a stock factory supplied cord. Each of the 4 tests were done on different components. Amp, CDP, Preamp & dac.

My electrical backround tells me that provided you supply the component with its required voltage bet 110vac or 220/240vac its happy. Now, change the incoming frequency from 60hz to say 53hz and watch how quickly your soundstage collapses.! This is often the case during the summer months when home air conditioners are in use and the utility company power output is taxed to the max. A really good power conditioner should however take care of the frequency fluctuations. But 110vac is still 110vac regardless of the conductor it passes through as long as its remains 110vac when it reaches the intended circuit. Does your 8k amp or preamp know the difference of the path the voltage took to reach it ? Many an audiophile will use a dedicated 20amp circut for their equipment.That is a good idea as voltage & frequency fluctuations will occur in the home circuit to to other loads on the main breaker panel but again, A power cord simply is the means of transporting the voltage from the wall to the component. IF there is a clean 110vac @ 60hz at the wall socket, no matter what the medium is to go from the socket to the component, it will still be 110vac @60hz.

Could somebody expand on this a bit more. I just dont understand it. ??
128x128jetmek
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Nrchy...Because cosmology and quantum physics are not fully understood this does not mean that we don't know how audio amplifiers work. You need to keep your skepticism within reasonable bounds.

There is a book which I enjoyed reading, and I think you would too. "The Big Bang never happened". Get it from your library.
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
Clueless: I bow down before your boffo-ness, and will henceforth only connect my soup cans with CryoThermionically-treated tiny jock straps. :-)

Nrchy: This is a minor, tangential point, but I have a compulsion to chasten any time I hear someone setting 'fact' and 'theory' in opposition to each other ("...much of what is taught as fact is theory, at best"). (A classic instance of this confusion concerns the biologically foundational theory of evolution.) A 'theory' is best understood as a model for reality, meaning that any useful theory will not be contradicted by the facts as they are known - even if that theory is itself not directly testable - and that the theory can explain (or can be modified to explain) the observable facts. To call an idea about how the universe works a theory is in no way to denigrate its validity, provided it is supported by all the available evidence. Indeed, some of the most predictive science is theory-based - maybe, someday, String Theory included.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Zaikesman...I think that the way it goes is that, first, someone comes up with a "Hypothesis". At this point it is pure conjecture. Then, the Hypothesis is tested by examination of data from tests that ought to be affected by the Hypothesis. If most of the data corresponds with what would be predicted by the Hypothesis, it becomes a "Theory". Not all theories are equally well supported by data. However, when there is a great deal of good supporting data, the theory is called a "Fact". Few people would argue that the theory that the earth is round is not a fact.

I consider power cord effects to be a hypothesis.
clueless
763 posts
 
said above >>Not all theories are equally well supported by data.

With regard to this thread string theory will never be subject to verification or data. It is almost pure mathematics, and will likely forever remain so, which has caused some physicists to call it metaphysics rather than science.

This was on of the reasons for my "buffo' above. The idea of going from string theory to hands on power cord conclusions is so silly, imho, as to make my posts look "normal."

Cheers
I remain
nrchy's avatar
nrchy
2,124 posts
 
Eldartford, I think there is a lot of correlation between the two points. Just because we understand some of how an amplifier works, doesn't mean we understand all the minute details. In that respect there are many similarities between cosmology, quantum physics, and amplifier design.

Zaikesman, the point was that there is a difference between fact and theory. If it is only a preponderance of evidence, the gap still exists. I am not denegrating theories. I am simply pointing out that theories do not have the preponderence of evidence that a fact does, so based on that they must be considered to less 'concrete' than fact.

All I'm trying to say is that what will all of these arguements that say "we can't measure the difference therefore there must not be a difference." will have to be reevaluated if/when someone brings the next advancement to the electrical sciences.

When the Catholic Church said the world was flat or that the earth was the center of the universe, those assertations did not change the facts. Exploration and science have not changed the universe, they have only verified it.

There is much more verification that can and will take place in regard to our knowledge of electricity.
More to discover