How much does it cost to be an audiophile?

[sandyk]

12 minutes ago, esldude said:

Well optimally you'd switch at both ends.  But if not doing that is adequate for 90% of those doing this maybe that is still an okay suggestion.  Especially if you amended it to say unless your interconnects exceed 3 meters you'd be safe doing it as George suggests.  

 Dennis

 The graphs that I posted for the LM4562 clearly show that it doesn't like to see capacitive loads of loads of >100pFwithout a series output resistor. Not all output stages will have a series output resistor of adequate value to cope with much higher capacitive loads. Not so long back, designers often didn't think that they were even necessary !!!

 Constructors' feedback to Silicon Chip magazine re the schematic that I posted clearly demonstrated this problem.

 

Alex 

 

[kumakuma]

50 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 Are you E.Es too slack, and complacent in your blinkered views of what people can ,and can not hear,to do this properly ?

 

[Ralf11]

countdown to limbic system explosion....

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, kumakuma said:

 

Is that why you resort to such stupid images ?

There is a correct way to do things,

and switching both ends is the correct way.The other method is lazy and any conclusions reached would be rejected as scientific proof.

[kumakuma]

13 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Is that why you resort to such stupid images ?

There is a correct way to do things,

and switching both ends is the correct way.The other method is lazy and any conclusions reached would be rejected as scientific proof.

 

You're probably correct but you lost the argument as soon as you started slinging insults.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

27 minutes ago, sandyk said:

There is a correct way to do things,

and switching both ends is the correct way.The other method is lazy and any conclusions reached would be rejected as scientific proof.

 

Not referring to people or topics in particular but IMO some appear to rely on science up to a point. That point seems to be until such time as it becomes inconvenient to their held opinion.

[Ralf11]

no proof in science

 

did you mean disproof?

 

or poof?

[gmgraves]

5 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 2 in parallel, like you were suggesting, that would be quite a bit longer with the layouts of many members, is entirely different.

 

AGAIN : The cables should be switched at both ends !!!

 Are you E.Es too slack, and complacent in your blinkered views of what people can ,and can not hear,to do this properly ?

I can't speak for anyone else, and I won't. But I like to think that I'm practical. Practicality means that one only goes the extra mile when one thinks that the extra effort will yield different or better results. I would agree that cables would need to be switched at both ends if not doing that would change the (audible) results. Since it doesn't change the audible results, I see no reason to go to the extra trouble of complicating the setup. In fact, a passive switch on the other end would possibly add more circuit resistance and capacitance to the setup than just the two lengths of interconnects in parallel on one end! I hope you don't think that I haven't tried this approach of one source paralleled to two line-level inputs, because I have - several times.

And Alex, I have no views about what other people can or cannot hear. But I know what I can hear, and that's all that should matter to any of us - what we, individually, can hear!  From your emoticon, I get the general idea that you are angry. Is this stuff really so important to you that you get hot under the collar because of it? I certainly consider you to be a friend (we've been talking to each other here for more than a decade, after all) and I would not like to think that I have angered you over a difference in opinion on what is, after all a simple procedure. 

 

[gmgraves]

5 hours ago, sandyk said:

 Dennis

 The graphs that I posted for the LM4562 clearly show that it doesn't like to see capacitive loads of loads of >100pFwithout a series output resistor. Not all output stages will have a series output resistor of adequate value to cope with much higher capacitive loads. Not so long back, designers often didn't think that they were even necessary !!!

 Constructors' feedback to Silicon Chip magazine re the schematic that I posted clearly demonstrated this problem.

 

Alex 

 

Any audio component that wasn't designed to handle at least 20 ft of interconnect cable was incompetently designed. You know, you can put enough restrictions on anything to make an argument for almost any position. Any designer who doesn't design his products to drive the kinds of loads that are likely to exist in the types of domestic situations that the product is likely to encounter is not doing his job. Believe me most DACs, disc players, tuners, phono preamps, and the preamps themselves will be comfortable driving practically anything that those components are likely to be connected to. Especially preamps. placing mono blocks next to the speakers they're driving while the control preamp is 10-20 feet away is a common application. Don't tell me that the designers haven't designed them to do that! Also, I don't know about you, Alex, but I've never seen an owners manual that placed restrictions on either interconnect length or load capacitance!

[sandyk]

George 

Just because you personally can't hear differences between cables,or the effect of the extra capacitance on the output stage I.C. doesn't mean othat others are unable to. I would give a lengthier reply, but I am typing this on a small mobile.

[plissken]

On 5/30/2018 at 1:45 AM, AudioDoctor said:

 

I often wonder from what authority you make these pronouncements...

 

I believe it to be either ignorance or disassociation with reality. 

[AudioDoctor]

1 hour ago, plissken said:

 

I believe it to be either ignorance or disassociation with reality. 

 

 

[Ralf11]

the reason for the Bert Russell quote is "simple rules for simple minds"

 

very useful for robotics too

[GUTB]

Several really good systems at THE Show, which, BTW, is a much more luxury experience than AXPONA.

 

I ended up going for a beautiful Triangle Arts turntable and speed controller at decent show prices. Now I have to figure out a rack system to support 100 lbs of turntable gear. They were showing a really good sounding 12" arm and high-end cartridge, but $16k for that is a bridge to far for me; I’ll get a nice arm when I get my next bonus. Very good sound in that room — but damn, TA electronics are expensive...

[esldude]

Also I think we are mixing up engineering approaches with science.  There are some subtle differences. When enough is known dropping the last little bit of scientific rigor for engineering practicality is very reasonable and efficient.  The working of audio signal over cables certainly falls in this range. So much so any who disagree have the burden of proof.

[esldude]

1 minute ago, GUTB said:

Several really good systems at THE Show, which, BTW, is a much more luxury experience than AXPONA.

 

I ended up going for a beautiful Triangle Arts turntable and speed controller at decent show prices. Now I have to figure out a rack system to support 100 lbs of turntable gear. They were showing a really good sounding 12" arm and high-end cartridge, but $16k for that is a bridge to far for me; I’ll get a nice arm when I get my next bonus. Very good sound in that room — but damn, TA electronics are expensive...

Some cinder blocks and 2x4s will hold 100 lbs easy.

[semente]

34 minutes ago, GUTB said:

Several really good systems at THE Show, which, BTW, is a much more luxury experience than AXPONA.

 

I ended up going for a beautiful Triangle Arts turntable and speed controller at decent show prices. Now I have to figure out a rack system to support 100 lbs of turntable gear. They were showing a really good sounding 12" arm and high-end cartridge, but $16k for that is a bridge to far for me; I’ll get a nice arm when I get my next bonus. Very good sound in that room — but damn, TA electronics are expensive...

 

Did you buy the phono stage?

 

The vinyl record player that you listened to is a system. Without the phono stage it'll be incomplete and with not produce the performance that you believe it can achieve from listening to it at a show (with unknown amplification, speakers and room).

[mansr]

3 hours ago, esldude said:

Also I think we are mixing up engineering approaches with science.  There are some subtle differences. When enough is known dropping the last little bit of scientific rigor for engineering practicality is very reasonable and efficient.  The working of audio signal over cables certainly falls in this range. So much so any who disagree have the burden of proof.

Engineering is the art of knowing what to ignore.

[sandyk]

3 hours ago, esldude said:

Also I think we are mixing up engineering approaches with science.  There are some subtle differences. When enough is known dropping the last little bit of scientific rigor for engineering practicality is very reasonable and efficient.  The working of audio signal over cables certainly falls in this range. So much so any who disagree have the burden of proof.

Garbage. " Enough is known" is a copout !  It assumes far too much.

Your typical Audiophile simply does not feel the need to provide proof of any kind to others.  There are large numbers of C.A. members who hear differences between cables of various kinds etc. They are usually quite happy to pass their findings on to other Audiophiles to try. However, very few of them bother to frequent this area of the Forum where very little is added to the advancement of Computer Audio.

 Very few Audiophiles could care less if what they are reporting is accepted by E.E.s or not !

If there were no Subjective Reports  there wouldn't be the need for Objective Testing, and new product development would stagnate, other than perhaps adding a little " Bling" to ensure further sales.

[Jud]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

Engineering is the art of knowing what to ignore.

 

But not the science?  

 

A friend who won an award a few years ago for best civilian engineering project for the Department of Defense has many stories of fellow engineers who felt various factors could be safely ignored in their work, and were proved wrong when the end product failed.

 

Of course those make the best stories; I'm sure there are also  plenty of examples of people obsessing over things that ultimately don't matter.

[mansr]

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

But not the science?  

Science gives us the tools to calculate everything in minute detail. The trouble is that for real designs, such a detailed analysis is unpractical. Engineering is all about simplifying the science to make it practical while still resulting in a working product. For example, a complicated calculation can often be replaced with a much simpler approximation guaranteed to be greater (or smaller) than the exact value. Suppose the task at hand is to choose a wire capable of carrying the current required by some apparatus. Calculating the exact current might be hideously complicated, so instead we use an approximate value that is at least as large as the real one and pick a wire accordingly. If the wire gauge we arrive at is still practical from a mechanical (and cost) perspective, we're all good. It doesn't matter that a slightly smaller wire could have worked.

 

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

A friend who won an award a few years ago for best civilian engineering project for the Department of Defense has many stories of fellow engineers who felt various factors could be safely ignored in their work, and were proved wrong when the end product failed.

A famous case of ignoring the wrong thing is, of course, the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse of 1940:

 

Modern bridges include damping elements to prevent such uncontrolled oscillations.

 

7 minutes ago, Jud said:

Of course those make the best stories; I'm sure there are also  plenty of examples of people obsessing over things that ultimately don't matter.

Yes, this forum is full of them.

[Jud]

24 minutes ago, mansr said:

Science gives us the tools to calculate everything in minute detail. The trouble is that for real designs, such a detailed analysis is unpractical. Engineering is all about simplifying the science to make it practical while still resulting in a working product. For example, a complicated calculation can often be replaced with a much simpler approximation guaranteed to be greater (or smaller) than the exact value. Suppose the task at hand is to choose a wire capable of carrying the current required by some apparatus. Calculating the exact current might be hideously complicated, so instead we use an approximate value that is at least as large as the real one and pick a wire accordingly. If the wire gauge we arrive at is still practical from a mechanical (and cost) perspective, we're all good. It doesn't matter that a slightly smaller wire could have worked.

 

A famous case of ignoring the wrong thing is, of course, the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse of 1940:

 

Modern bridges include damping elements to prevent such uncontrolled oscillations.

 

Yes, this forum is full of them.

 

I was able to make a reasonable engineering approximation of your response.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

2 hours ago, mansr said:

Engineering is the art of knowing what to ignore.

 

Science is the art of knowing who to ignore.

[mav52]

6 hours ago, GUTB said:

Several really good systems at THE Show, which, BTW, is a much more luxury experience than AXPONA.

 

I ended up going for a beautiful Triangle Arts turntable and speed controller at decent show prices. Now I have to figure out a rack system to support 100 lbs of turntable gear. They were showing a really good sounding 12" arm and high-end cartridge, but $16k for that is a bridge to far for me; I’ll get a nice arm when I get my next bonus. Very good sound in that room — but damn, TA electronics are expensive...

You bought the Master Ref Turntable They were showing ?

[esldude]

3 hours ago, sandyk said:

Garbage. " Enough is known" is a copout !  It assumes far too much.

Your typical Audiophile simply does not feel the need to provide proof of any kind to others.  There are large numbers of C.A. members who hear differences between cables of various kinds etc. They are usually quite happy to pass their findings on to other Audiophiles to try. However, very few of them bother to frequent this area of the Forum where very little is added to the advancement of Computer Audio.

 Very few Audiophiles could care less if what they are reporting is accepted by E.E.s or not !

If there were no Subjective Reports  there wouldn't be the need for Objective Testing, and new product development would stagnate, other than perhaps adding a little " Bling" to ensure further sales.

 

These other parts of the forum wouldn't happen to be selling something would they?

 

Some E.E.'s are quite happy to share their knowledge and experience.  Some audiophiles seem reluctant to take advantage of that. 

 

You seem to have a habit of painting with a broad brush those who listen to EEs and EEs both as negative groups of people hindering others from advancing when there isn't any truth to it.