Jump to content
IGNORED

The Great Cable and Interconnect Swindle: An Etiology


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

The cockiness of those who have a half knowledge of things, and declare that such and such is sufficient, is driven by ego, and a desire to simplify that which they don't understand, and don't want to understand ... the end result: poor understanding of the subtleties, and very slow progress towards higher, and reliably so, standards of SQ.

Frank,

 

You got up and looked in the mirror. Bravo for you! ☺️

Link to comment
12 hours ago, fas42 said:

Just found a good bit, starting from a question at 29:00, in that video  - where Galen talks of people wanting to remain locked into a rut of thinking ... boy, have I come across a lot of that in the audiophile world !!! ... Not mentioning any names, of course ... 😄

Frank,

 

Are you swapping out optical cables for your Edifiers? Does the perceived sound change with optical? How do you know which one is correct? What's the proper length to reduce reflections? How much jitter does your low end DVD player introduce to the playback stream? Did Edifier use the best quality cables within the system? Per the above video, maybe the Edifiers are lacking? Those question don't seem like someone is locked into a rut by any means.. Go ahead and name names.

 

What we can all gather from this is to (per Frank):

A. Go buy a Edifier S2000Pro system

B. Purchase a long extension cord to filter the power source.

C. Get a stack of newspapers and load them on the top of the speaker cabinet. Roll the edges back of course!!

D. Get a cheap Kmart or Walmart DVD player and plug it in with a optical cable. (Could be mistaken, but Frank uses this)

E. Optical cable does not matter with galvanic isolation. (Frank can comment)

F. Get the worst sounding CD's and be in bliss with the playback. 

 

We can surmise the tweaks as:

 

Newspapers loading a cheap cabinet.

Extension cords to filter the power delivery.

Forget about the room, it does not matter.  

DSP does not matter, though the Edifiers use DSP ??? 

Cherry pick information which leads one to believe (you name it)... (Not a tweak)

Repeat the belief until kicked off of forums. (Not a tweak)

 

 

As a self contained unit, there is not much else to do with the Edifier internally unless butchered.   

 

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
7 minutes ago, MarkusBarkus said:

That's a clever and insightful post @Iving. I would add however, one person is hunting for tigers in the jungle, while another is hunting for tigers in Antarctica. They seem to both be enjoying the hunt, but one wonders about the potential success of their respective hunts...

In Franks world, it's 90 degrees outside and snowing. Both are water, but different forms. 

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, March Audio said:

Indeed.

 

What if I take a photo with 3 different cameras. Say the subject is say a Splendid Fairy Wren which we see in our garden.

 

image.png.80340843631cbc6b11ad3c4661c05001.png

 

Thex3cdifferent cameras will have different exposure and colour balance, saturation and gamma. 

 

You look at the photo on your computer monitor. It has a certain colour balance, saturation, gamma and light output.  The photos look a certain way.

 

You then look at the photo on your phone screen.  It now has a different look because all those parameters have changed.

 

So how do you know which photo is most realistic?  How do you know if your computer monitor or your phone screen is more accurate?

 

I can assure you that the attached photo shown on my screen does no justice to the vibrancy of the blue colour of the wren.   It will look different on all of your screens.

If your screen and mine are capable of rec. 709, and the LUT can correct the display properly, we will have a very similar view of the image. Each camera CCD may record a different image, but the calibrated monitors will deliver a consistent image on each. Correction with the I1Pro or other meter, and Calman will insure  proper output. If you want to get into specular highlights and Rec. 2020 color space I can elaborate, but I think you get my point. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, fas42 said:

So, if one cuts the BS completely out of the methods used to achieve accuracy in reproduced sound; and just uses cheap and easy ways to achieve some technical goal - the things that @Racerxnet wants to poke a stick at regularly, 🙂 - then the hunt can be very satisfying, in terms of treasures found, for the time, money and effort put into it.

 

Frank,

 

We all do just as you suggested above, and then some, for others on this journey. Some things can be corrected up to a point where there is nowhere else to go but an upgrade of some sort. It may be room boundary effects and need treatment, a better amplifier to match the speakers impedance curve, adding mass with lead shot, and others. You might relate... as above, that it is a BS method, but many thousands achieve great results with tools you balk at. So don't point a finger at me when I have quantifiable results from methods you don't believe in. 

 

Being cheap and cheerful with the Edifiers is great, but crapping on others choices for playback is not in your best interest. People don't throw their weight around as though they have all the answers like you. We have asked that you provide proof of improvement, and nothing comes forth. 

Link to comment
Just now, fas42 said:

There is nothing stopping you getting the same sort of results as I do, with the gear you have - which will turn out to give a better end result, simply because the raw ingredients are of higher quality. But you're not interested in discussing what could be done, because you don't believe in my approach.

 

I have listened to many systems along the way and believe the playback chain is well above average. The latest change being room treatments and measuring with REW. Comparing your Edifiers, to the system I have, is unfair to you, from my perspective. REW, Accourate, or Audiolense is something you do not believe in, and that's OK. I am not the only one who does not agree with how you approach the playback chain. Many examples have been shown in overcoming obstacles, some we all do, just like you. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

See what I mean? Is it possible for you listen to your setup playing and note that it's not getting some things sounding s good as as you have heard other system do it? At all?

 

If you can't or are not willing to do this, then you will never understand anything about how I go about improving SQ.

On this site in the DSP forum I have asked for advice on anything that might help while the new home is being built. I am willing to consider anything which will help me in achieving the best room response. That in it self, helps mitigate a lot of the sonic anomalies we chase our tail over.  

Link to comment
Just now, fas42 said:

 

Depends on the flaw. With current active speakers, a major one is sensitivity to mains noise. But you have already said that this is likely expectation bias at work - which means that everyone that uses any sort of mains conditioner, or separate audio mains feed, or similar devices should get rid of them ... since they are fooling themselves, 😉.

Show is the wave form of the feed, maybe there is DC on the line?? It's to much talk and not enough proof. Dedicated lines are so that there is no voltage sag from the equipment all plugged into 1 feed. Seems reasonable to everyone else... Same phase, 20 amp breakers, and 12 gauge wire. 

 

A fool might run extension cords as a filter!

Link to comment
5 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

The truth is something that many people disagree with at first, and some people simply are not able to understand until the very end. A general observation. 🙂

Yes, very general indeed. What is truth in this matter being discussed? Scientific principles applied to our problems, or vague circular statements that have not been supported.

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Right, it's well above average. So, it's not the very best you have ever heard - what specifically has another system done better at some time, compared to what you hear from your gear?

Frank,

 

This is not about my system and comparing to another. I am content with what I have. Right now I have bigger fish to catch, with the new home being built. 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Confused said:

Of course.  It stands to reason that we would all prefer good music over bad.

 

That said, Teresa was talking about sound, specifically the how the music sounds.

 

I shall offer a different example of what is being said here.

 

I recall being in a relatively small sized venue.  The first band was setting up on the stage.  They had a modest set up, a small PA for vocals, the lead and bass guitarists were using there own guitar amps, the drummer was "unplugged".

 

I was walking down the venue, away from the stage towards the main entrance.  The drummer was alone on stage and rhythmically hitting the kick drum as I walked down the room.  It was quite fascinating as I could clearly hear the perceived SPL of the drum rising and falling as I walked down the room.  The effect was stark, and consistent with the influence of the room causing resonance and nulling of whatever frequency the drum was producing, with the peaks and nulls dependent on location in the room.

 

The band were quite good musically, but how load the kick drum sounded was very much dependent on the room, and indeed where you happened to be stood in the room.

 

Some might argue that the room in not important for audio, which is fair enough as a personal view.  But to argue that the room has no influence on sound is incorrect.  How much it matters is a reasonable subject for debate, but if such an effect exists or not is proven by the laws of physics and is easily measurable, and indeed easily heard.

This relates to room gain function.

https://www.audio “science” review/forum/index.php?threads/analytical-analysis-room-gain.23211/

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, AnotherSpin said:

 

Of course, the room can have an effect on the sound, sometimes changing the perception quite a bit. I visited La Monte Young's Dream House in Tribeca, Manhattan some time ago. Just moving around the room, you could hear the sound(s) changing quite remarkably. In this particular case, though, that's just part of the story. Changes in body-mind states can also change our perception quite a bit. The influencing factors are innumerable, room is just a single one from many. Perhaps we should develop the ability to hear the main thing, i.e. the music, rather than focus attention on how the sound changes, subjectively for better or for worse.

We are in the objective forum, which asks the question of "why" does the sound change. All the crybabies on the subjective side didn't like the objective questions.

Link to comment
46 minutes ago, pkane2001 said:
1 hour ago, AnotherSpin said:

Perhaps we should develop the ability to hear the main thing, i.e. the music, rather than focus attention on how the sound changes, subjectively for better or for worse.

 

Interesting thought. I suspect that most music lovers who are not audiophiles do this automatically, without even trying :)

 

One is production, and the other reproduction..  I suppose the person manipulates the sound while playing an instrument, just as we manipulate the playback chain. 

Link to comment
1 minute ago, fas42 said:

 

Every setup has highly specific issues - you identify them, work out how to resolve, and implement. If you do this well enough, then the ear/brain hears enough information, clearly enough, to listen 'past' the remaining technical issues; and you get to enjoy the performance.

 

Now, what part of that is "nonsense"?

Frank,

 

We are applying the needed upgrades to the system before you and I came to this site. We have provided verifiable support to show there has been improvement. In 1 instance for me, the Berkeley Alpha USB has made a marked improvement for my Older DAC. Verified reduction in jitter. Amir has some plots. 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Which is all good. But it may not be enough to attenuate some audible artifacts, which are still too prominent. Unfortunately, some of the most important things to get right are impossible, or very difficult to measure. Which means you need to rely on your ears, currently, to tell you if you're making headway. As an example, I've mentioned many times that my active speakers are sensitive to mains noise - so, I could put a very expensive scope onto the mains - and see, noise! So, what have I gained? Well, nothing that stops the noise making an impact - I need to try various techniques to cut down the noise reaching the rig; my ears will tell me immediately whether it's working well enough - any measurements showing some attenuation of that noise are useless, if I can still tell that interference is getting through.

Then I suggest you buy or build a line conditioner based on your needs and be done with it. The scope provides the information to determine your needs. If you still feel there is noise, look elsewhere. I don't have a tendency to chase tail. If you don't want to use a scope then I would ponder that you have no clue what is on the feed. 

 

Essentially, see whats happening on the feed, fix it permenently, and move on. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...