Jump to content
IGNORED

Why!? Please Tell Me Why!


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

The rest of this tweaking business is, as I've said many times before in discussions with you, of only tertiary value. It might lower your noise floor a smidgen, but unless you have hum problems, caused by induction from mains leads, dressing cables will likely not do much of anything audible. No tweaks are going to make your mid-fi system sound like a high-end system, but buying the RIGHT components might! 

 

This is the crucial point ... unless you understand the following you will never grok how it seems to work for most listeners ...

 

What's happening is that the mind rejects the presentation of the recording as being realistic because it has obvious flaws - the magician that is the audio rig is hopelessly unskilled, and how he's trying fool you is quite transparent; you snigger at his ineptitude. But bring up a fully fluent, professional wizard, and everyone gasps - how did he do it??!! So, what were the differences between those two? Almost nothing in terms of what physically happened - the, yes, competent one hid all his manoeuvrings so skillfully no-one picked what had been done - and the illusion was complete.

 

Note again, the core of what the two magicians did was identical - one made you laugh, one made you gasp ... this is what the switch is when a rig does the job well enough, subjectively.

 

The difference was that the incompetent one fumbled enough, signaled his moves - and you weren't the slightest deceived ... the job of the person setting up the audio replay is to develop the "skill level" of the combo to the point where you're always deceived - and that's done by eliminating, one by one, the weaknesses that "give the game away".

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

But in interconnects the source is a fairly low impedance, and the destination is a relatively high impedance. That should be fairly proper termination for a coaxial interconnect. 

The floating shield isn't terminated.

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I would think that the cable manufacturers would at least get together on the arrow's direction. I wrote an article about star grounding technique about 20 years ago and made those drawings. I called Monster at the time and talked to one of their engineers. He told me that the convention was that the arrow pointed away from the end where the the shield was fixed tho show the direction that all connections went, AWAY from the common grounding point. I guess it could be either way pointing at the common termination or pointing away from it. I wonder why Audioquest decided to point away from it. It seems confusing especially since I've never noticed any mention on any cable's packaging referencing the arrow or what it's for!

 

I recall that at one time Audioquest indicated that the arrow should be oriented in the direction of signal flow. I think this was written on a label on the package.

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I would think that the cable manufacturers would at least get together on the arrow's direction. I wrote an article about star grounding technique about 20 years ago and made those drawings. I called Monster at the time and talked to one of their engineers. He told me that the convention was that the arrow pointed away from the end where the the shield was fixed tho show the direction that all connections went, AWAY from the common grounding point. I guess it could be either way pointing at the common termination or pointing away from it. I wonder why Audioquest decided to point away from it. It seems confusing especially since I've never noticed any mention on any cable's packaging referencing the arrow or what it's for!

The snake oil vendors sometimes say the arrow should point in the direction of the signal, that is from DAC to preamp or from preamp to amp, quite at odds with the star grounding idea.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, vmartell22 said:

 

 

That parody site is very funny ! :D

 

"If cables are left unused for a prolonged period of time they become stagnant"

 

that was a blast!  - like if Monty Python decided to sell cables !

 

Thnx!

 

v

 

Thanks.

 

Now I can't read that and not hear it in John Cleese's voice.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, GUTB said:

Everyone knows burn-in time for cables is needed. Anyone who has tested new cables know this by experiencing the phenomena. 

 

True! The stronger your belief, the stronger the effect. The only people who don’t know this or who haven’t experienced this are non believers. 

Custom room treatments for headphone users.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, fas42 said:

This is the crucial point ... unless you understand the following you will never grok how it seems to work for most listeners ...

You mean how it seems to work for you, because most listeners posting here think you are full of it, Frank!

 

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

What's happening is that the mind rejects the presentation of the recording as being realistic because it has obvious flaws - the magician that is the audio rig is hopelessly unskilled, and how he's trying fool you is quite transparent; you snigger at his ineptitude. But bring up a fully fluent, professional wizard, and everyone gasps - how did he do it??!! So, what were the differences between those two? Almost nothing in terms of what physically happened - the, yes, competent one hid all his manoeuvrings so skillfully no-one picked what had been done - and the illusion was complete.

I've rarely seen such expertly wielded nonsense or such beautifully constructed psychobabble.  Over 100 words and you have said exactly nothing! My hat's off to you, Frank You are truly The DR. Edwin Corey of audio!

 

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

Note again, the core of what the two magicians did was identical - one made you laugh, one made you gasp ... this is what the switch is when a rig does the job well enough, subjectively.

Keep going, Frank, This is very entertaining. 

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

The difference was that the incompetent one fumbled enough, signaled his moves - and you weren't the slightest deceived ... the job of the person setting up the audio replay is to develop the "skill level" of the combo to the point where you're always deceived - and that's done by eliminating, one by one, the weaknesses that "give the game away".

While you have certainly given the game away. It is still very entertaining. Keep up the good work!

George

Link to comment
2 hours ago, phosphorein said:

 

I recall that at one time Audioquest indicated that the arrow should be oriented in the direction of signal flow. I think this was written on a label on the package.

Could be, I've not seen it. Signal flow? In a piece of wire? Carrying an AC signal? I'm skeptical. 

George

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mansr said:

The snake oil vendors sometimes say the arrow should point in the direction of the signal, that is from DAC to preamp or from preamp to amp, quite at odds with the star grounding idea.

Yes it is isn't it? Yet star grounding is the only technical reason for a shield that doesn't carry the return of the signal!

George

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mansr said:

The floating shield isn't terminated.

The floating shield isn't carrying any current either. It's just a static Faraday shield. 

 

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

WHAT???  Don't say it!  You mean it....  floats?

 

O M G !!!

Yep, it's 99 and 44/100ths percent pure. Just like Ivory soap!

George

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

You mean how it seems to work for you, because most listeners posting here think you are full of it, Frank!

 

Most blokes work in the world of "I haven't experienced it! Therefore, it doesn't exist!!" - the history of science is full of embarassing 'mistakes', because the chap who swaggered most held sway for far too long.

 

I think a lot here would like to hear the SQ I describe, but the enormous power of tradition in thinking stops them allowing the thought that there may be alternative approaches.

 

8 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

I've rarely seen such expertly wielded nonsense or such beautifully constructed psychobabble.  Over 100 words and you have said exactly nothing! My hat's off to you, Frank You are truly The DR. Edwin Corey of audio!

 

Keep going, Frank, This is very entertaining. 

While you have certainly given the game away. It is still very entertaining. Keep up the good work!

 

I appreciate that the meds dispensed by Dr Bulver are doing their job ... ^_^

Link to comment

I thought directional control of signal cables had to do with the orientation of crystal boundaries formed during the drawing / annaeling process which manufacturers keep track of vs the direction wire comes off the factory spool.

 

There is definitely directional flow in conductors regardless of being AC or DC.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, GUTB said:

I thought directional control of signal cables had to do with the orientation of crystal boundaries formed during the drawing / annaeling process which manufacturers keep track of vs the direction wire comes off the factory spool.

 

There is definitely directional flow in conductors regardless of being AC or DC.

 

1st para. - sounds like you've listening to the ignorant posters on Audiogoon

 

2nd para. - No

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...