Jump to content
IGNORED

Occam's razor in audio


Recommended Posts

So are you saying you have such a "real unbiased" observation? Also for most purposes there is no assumption the cables are physically (electrically) equivalent. As Maxwell's equations have been quite reliable this need not be an assumption.

 

Have you ever compared an unshielded RCA interconnect vs. shielded running across a high noise area? The picked up noise can be obvious. Does this count as different sound? You aren't suggesting that "science" says that this doesn't occur? This seems to me to be an obvious area where I hear a real difference (and the noise could be easily measured) and where "science" predicts this. But you probably don't disagree -- and so to be sure we are talking about the same thing -- what do you consider the null hypothesis to be?

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
Have you ever compared an unshielded RCA interconnect vs. shielded running across a high noise area? The picked up noise can be obvious. Does this count as different sound? You aren't suggesting that "science" says that this doesn't occur? This seems to me to be an obvious area where I hear a real difference (and the noise could be easily measured) and where "science" predicts this. But you probably don't disagree -- and so to be sure we are talking about the same thing -- what do you consider the null hypothesis to be?

 

If I put my amp in a bath full of water it is going to sound very different than in the audiorack. Very audible differences. And even more funny, it's the same amp that sounds so different.

Hope that helps you figure out the problem in your cable 'test'.

Link to comment
Have you ever compared an unshielded RCA interconnect vs. shielded running across a high noise area? The picked up noise can be obvious. Does this count as different sound? You aren't suggesting that "science" says that this doesn't occur? This seems to me to be an obvious area where I hear a real difference (and the noise could be easily measured) and where "science" predicts this. But you probably don't disagree -- and so to be sure we are talking about the same thing -- what do you consider the null hypothesis to be?

 

Actually, this test is easily supported and explained by the Maxwell equations.

 

"The function of music is to release us from the tyranny of conscious thought", Sir Thomas Beecham. 

 

 

Link to comment
If I put my amp in a bath full of water it is going to sound very different than in the audiorack. Very audible differences. And even more funny, it's the same amp that sounds so different.

Hope that helps you figure out the problem in your cable 'test'.

 

what has you electrocuting yourself in the bath got to do with his cable test ?

 

Oh, it's a trithio post, never mind.

There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for it is through these that new discoveries are made. Richard P Feynman

 

http://mqnplayer.blogspot.co.uk/

Link to comment
The null hypothesis is invalidated by by the "real unbiased" observation.

 

To clarify, when I say "real unbiased", I mean that the observation is not random, that it is statistically validated, and it is not there because the observer merely wants it to be there, or that the observer is inventing it for some or no purpose.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
If I put my amp in a bath full of water it is going to sound very different than in the audiorack. Very audible differences. And even more funny, it's the same amp that sounds so different.

Hope that helps you figure out the problem in your cable 'test'.

 

I should have said "real, unbiased and not foolish"

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
Have you ever compared an unshielded RCA interconnect vs. shielded running across a high noise area? The picked up noise can be obvious. Does this count as different sound? You aren't suggesting that "science" says that this doesn't occur? This seems to me to be an obvious area where I hear a real difference (and the noise could be easily measured) and where "science" predicts this. But you probably don't disagree -- and so to be sure we are talking about the same thing -- what do you consider the null hypothesis to be?

 

Indeed I have done exactly that test. By wrapping such an unshielded interconnect around a switching power supply of 500 watts. The measurements showed noise. By comparing signals of that versus the same signal separated from noise there was an audible difference. I wrapped a two meter cable right around the power supply box of a computer. I think I managed 3 wraps. Unwrapping it and merely running it right against it resulted in some very low level measurable noise. Not sure it was audible. Moving it 6 inches away left one little bit of noise above the noise floor of my equipment. Probably not an audible level.

 

Doing the same with shielded cable resulted in a measurable but lower level with a wrap. None I could hear or measure with a simple pass by. Nothing at 6 inches distance.

 

Just for good measure I repeated that with some inexpensive balanced cable. I had a good long piece and wrapped it 6 times around the switching power supply. I got nothing different from the usual noise floor of my equipment compared to having the cable well separated from the noise source.

 

Moral of the story if you will. Worried about noise then used balanced cables. Not surprisingly the solution used for years in pro audio.

 

Finally, I never said science said this effect didn't happen. I think it overblown as even small distances reduce the effect. Again if this were the issue with cables the solution should long ago have been obvious. Use balanced connection. As another poster said, Maxwell's equations would predict as much.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
If I put my amp in a bath full of water it is going to sound very different than in the audiorack. Very audible differences. And even more funny, it's the same amp that sounds so different.

Hope that helps you figure out the problem in your cable 'test'.

 

That's what killed Jim Morrison. ABX tests can be deadly.

Link to comment
Moral of the story if you will. Worried about noise then used balanced cables.

 

For the average consumer, it's far easier to simply space them apart as you said, and ensure that equipment mains cables cross signal leads at 90 degrees if possible.

 

How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file.

PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020

Link to comment
That's what killed Jim Morrison. ABX tests can be deadly.

 

Now now you are a skeptic that Jim Morrison is alive? Go listen to some Doors and tell me how you feel about it afterwards.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment

How about applying Occam's razor with a bit of a rewrite:

 

“All things being equal, the simplest setup is usually the best.”

 

As in, avoiding balanced circuitry configuration and instead use the money on fewer (roughly half) and better components (at least where better quality is actually attained through higher prices), not least to profit sonically from circuit simplicity; less complex cross-over filters (or even, perhaps better yet, via DSP); fewer cross-overs (preferably one, alternately a second for a sub; none with single dynamic drive units seems to bring with it compromises perhaps too severe); simpler cable geometry/build (what is really gained through shielding and vibration control that doesn't impede negatively on other areas by "virtue" of the mass of material, other than the conductors, used?); riddance, where possible, of connectors (again, in relation to the mass of material: less is more; connectors are often thought to infuse more sonic "flavor" than the cables they connect), which would be most practically implemented with speaker and power cables; acoustically via diffusion rather than heavily applied absorption; fewer hardware components through integrated solutions (as DAC/preamp, power amp/DAC/preamp [Devialet comes to mind], or all of those integrated in speakers with DSP filters), etc.

Source: Synology NAS > DIY Mediaserver • Software: JRiver MC31/Fidelizer Pro Optical output: ASUS Xonar AE 24/192 • DAC/preamp: Blue Cheese Audio Roquefort Digital cross-over: Xilica XP-3060 • Speakers: Electro-Voice TS9040D LX (for active config.)  Subwoofers: 2 x MicroWrecker Tapped Horns • EV horns amp: MC² Audio T2000 • EV bass amp: MC² Audio T1500 • Subs amp: MC² Audio T2000 • EV horns cables: Mundorf silver/gold 1mm solid-core • IC: Mundorf silver/gold XLR/Mogami 2549 XLR/Cordial CMK Road 250 XLR • Subs and EV bass cable: Cordial CLS 425 • Power cables: 15AWG Solid-core wire w/IeGo pure copper plugs (DIY)

 

Link to comment
How about applying Occam's razor with a bit of a rewrite:

 

“All things being equal, the simplest setup is usually the best.”

 

.

 

Doesnt look like a very good usage of Occam's but surely an almost foolproof rule of thumb. Simplest/Shortest audio path should be best. Less clutter, less cables, usually less money, less sources of headaches. But also less potential for tinkering fun which is a big part of audio. For some the biggest.

And practically the simplest known setup/audiopath is a full orchestra in front of you :)

Link to comment
Indeed I have done exactly that test. By wrapping such an unshielded interconnect around a switching power supply of 500 watts. The measurements showed noise. By comparing signals of that versus the same signal separated from noise there was an audible difference. I wrapped a two meter cable right around the power supply box of a computer. I think I managed 3 wraps. Unwrapping it and merely running it right against it resulted in some very low level measurable noise. Not sure it was audible. Moving it 6 inches away left one little bit of noise above the noise floor of my equipment. Probably not an audible level.

 

Doing the same with shielded cable resulted in a measurable but lower level with a wrap. None I could hear or measure with a simple pass by. Nothing at 6 inches distance.

 

I wish I had such a hard time finding noise :8

 

My workstation type machine has a 1200 watt PS and either/and nvidia 760 and amd 890 graphics cards with an ASUS 4k monitor. I'm getting nasty spikes of audible noise (i.e. clicks) as well as background noise at high gain with a headphone amp -- but not at highest output of the DAC without a headphone amp. So perfect place to test out RCA interconnects w.r.t. noise and indeed each cable: unshielded 4 conductor braided, shielded twisted pair and coax with good and really good shielding, also full metal jacket 40 Ghz microwave coax. Different types of shielding reduced the noise floor. The noise is clearly highest with the unshielded braided and even my 12 yo son could tell that "well the sound is grainier but not necessarily worse" (exact quote).

Just for good measure I repeated that with some inexpensive balanced cable. I had a good long piece and wrapped it 6 times around the switching power supply. I got nothing different from the usual noise floor of my equipment compared to having the cable well separated from the noise source.

 

Moral of the story if you will. Worried about noise then used balanced cables. Not surprisingly the solution used for years in pro audio.

 

For sure.

 

Well this area has very high noise as well as fans, so I then tried HQPlayer NAA and when I initially plugged in the NAA I got an awful hum from the DAC ... so now I'm getting a bit frustrated ... I plugged the NAA into the same outlet as the DAC and headphone Amp and still a hum (but less) on left channel ... and then I switched out the 12au7 tube and dead silence.

 

In any case I'm thinking that balanced power supplies and cables are indeed a way to go, but that noise effects may explain a good deal of what people might hear as differences in their own systems... just a thought

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
I wish I had such a hard time finding noise :8

 

My workstation type machine has a 1200 watt PS and either/and nvidia 760 and amd 890 graphics cards with an ASUS 4k monitor. I'm getting nasty spikes of audible noise (i.e. clicks) as well as background noise at high gain with a headphone amp -- but not at highest output of the DAC without a headphone amp. So perfect place to test out RCA interconnects w.r.t. noise and indeed each cable: unshielded 4 conductor braided, shielded twisted pair and coax with good and really good shielding, also full metal jacket 40 Ghz microwave coax. Different types of shielding reduced the noise floor. The noise is clearly highest with the unshielded braided and even my 12 yo son could tell that "well the sound is grainier but not necessarily worse" (exact quote).

 

 

For sure.

 

Well this area has very high noise as well as fans, so I then tried HQPlayer NAA and when I initially plugged in the NAA I got an awful hum from the DAC ... so now I'm getting a bit frustrated ... I plugged the NAA into the same outlet as the DAC and headphone Amp and still a hum (but less) on left channel ... and then I switched out the 12au7 tube and dead silence.

 

In any case I'm thinking that balanced power supplies and cables are indeed a way to go, but that noise effects may explain a good deal of what people might hear as differences in their own systems... just a thought

 

Well you can run into all sorts of things. Tube gear typically has much higher impedances in the circuits and pick up noise much worse than solid state. If I understand your description, you had no noise issue with the USBPre2 assuming that is what you have running (based upon your profile). Don't know if you are feeding it from the aux out. If so that has a 2k output impedance, you might benefit to use an adapter off the headphone jack itself or a balanced to single ended adapter off the XLR outs as these have lower output impedance. Most likely the issue in the tubed headphone unit though a lower output impedance would help.

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
Well you can run into all sorts of things. Tube gear typically has much higher impedances in the circuits and pick up noise much worse than solid state. If I understand your description, you had no noise issue with the USBPre2 assuming that is what you have running (based upon your profile).

 

Yes, at the time. But actually I had a noise issue all along it just wasn't as obvious in that the gain of the USBPre2 output not as high as will the Bottlehead Crack. Its a little more complicated because there's the noise floor of the DAC outputs -- I've tested this with the iFi iDSD Micro as well. The noise floor (gain turned up to max with no music playing) of both DACs is much much higher when connected to my workstation than through my NAA in another room.

 

At first I thought it might be the USB power and so tried the Aqvox, and also an iPurifier. Not as much help as I was hoping. In fact when the NAA was plugged into the wrong outlet, there was terrible noise which appeared to be sourced from the USB data lines (Aqvox plugged into the other outlet/power strip). This was entirely resolved by changing NAA outlets. This noise was audible without the tube amp. I'm not sure how this is happening -- noise being transmitted along the balanced USB data lines but I can imagine a scenario where such noise is amplified by certain characteristics of the USB cables.

 

My current working impression is that any audible differences between properly spec'd and constructed digital cables reflects some other systemic issue which should be corrected, including improperly designed DACs. I know that PeterSt states that his NOS1a DAC is less subject to USB cable "sound" and in the same way that async processing/reclocking can fix jitter issues I think that similar cable issues should ideally be fixed by fixing the underlying problem e.g. noise. That said balanced connections are used in pro gear for very good reason.

 

Don't know if you are feeding it from the aux out. If so that has a 2k output impedance, you might benefit to use an adapter off the headphone jack itself or a balanced to single ended adapter off the XLR outs as these have lower output impedance. Most likely the issue in the tubed headphone unit though a lower output impedance would help.

 

Yeah, I have some transformers with which I can create a balanced to single ended converter (and still may) but the iDSD micro doesn't have a balanced output like the USB Pre2.

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
Doesnt look like a very good usage of Occam's [...]

 

Actually I thought to counterbalance the "theoretical heaviness" with an outset of "keeping it simple" on the hardware front, and then let the ears do the talking, so to speak. The "simplest explanation conceivable is one that only relies on the set of known, established scientific knowledge" to me seems to lend itself to much in the direction of a rigid theoretical basis that would see limited to non-existent dialogue with listening impressions - i.e.: the former would/could dictate the latter, something we've seen the evidence of with certain software developers as of late..

 

... but surely an almost foolproof rule of thumb. Simplest/Shortest audio path should be best. Less clutter, less cables, usually less money, less sources of headaches. But also less potential for tinkering fun which is a big part of audio. For some the biggest. And practically the simplest known setup/audiopath is a full orchestra in front of you :)

 

The "tinkering for fun" is certainly a vital part for many on the audiophile journey, but it's also a path to loose oneself unnecessarily in the "thinginess;" like the love - more or less - for cables, connectors and other gadgets (and their looks), not least applied to the equipment in general, that is easily counter productive in the search for great sound.

 

But indeed, I tend to agree :)

Source: Synology NAS > DIY Mediaserver • Software: JRiver MC31/Fidelizer Pro Optical output: ASUS Xonar AE 24/192 • DAC/preamp: Blue Cheese Audio Roquefort Digital cross-over: Xilica XP-3060 • Speakers: Electro-Voice TS9040D LX (for active config.)  Subwoofers: 2 x MicroWrecker Tapped Horns • EV horns amp: MC² Audio T2000 • EV bass amp: MC² Audio T1500 • Subs amp: MC² Audio T2000 • EV horns cables: Mundorf silver/gold 1mm solid-core • IC: Mundorf silver/gold XLR/Mogami 2549 XLR/Cordial CMK Road 250 XLR • Subs and EV bass cable: Cordial CLS 425 • Power cables: 15AWG Solid-core wire w/IeGo pure copper plugs (DIY)

 

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...