Jump to content

DRB100

  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Retained

  • Member Title
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There are record labels that record music that is marketed and sold towards audiophiles. Look at Blue Coast Records, Chesky, 2L, B&W had their own music label, and then there are symphonic recordings. The average classical listener isn’t listening to music on a cheap stereo. I don’t see your verge teenager or young person in their 20’s listening to this music on cheap stereos. Most music is created and marketed towards specific demographics.
  2. There are recording studios and mastering studios that use high end cables that cater to the audiophile base.. Wouldn’t they be able to hear the difference in a cables?
  3. I have heard many audio equipment mfg’s suggest that one’s system may sound better late at night vs during the day due to the power being cleaner at night due to less construction equipment or other’s in your area simply aren’t using as much power thus reducing the noise that gets into the power llnes that might leach into one’s system. Another factor is in most populated areas, there is less ambient noise (cars, trucks, highway noise from the outside) thus your room’s ambient noise level will be lower allowing the listening to have a lower noise floor.
  4. I would think that an estute cable mfg. would examine how a cable “filters” the incoming signal and design a cable that does as litttle harm as possible. Are all of the frequencies, for example, used in music stored and released in the cable equally throughout the bandwidth? Some cable mfg’s actually conduct measurements that have proved that depending on the materials and design that they do not, and by changing the design of the cable, they can improve/change how the cable stores and releases energy at different “musical” frequencies. ‘if the cable is designed to not destroy the incoming signal as much, then shouldn’t that be audible? While some people and/or their system/room/ambient noise levels might or might not be able to hear such differences depending on which cables and which recordings one is listening to.
  5. Companies don't like publishing their data because they don't want their competitors to copy their designs and the way they measure the products. They aren't in business to teach someone how to make their products. The other problem is that they figured out that they need specialized equipment that had to be custom built by HP Measurement since they were consulting with HP when they first started to measure audio cables. One of the tools they had built was a special FFT Analyzer. I don't know if a similar FFT analyzer to what they have is even available for you or anyone else to duplicate their measurements. You can call Bruce and ask him about it. He did have some White Papers with some measurements posted. But the problem they run into (based on conversions I've had with them) was they have a lot of companies (some in China) that like to copy their products and the lest specific information they release makes it harder for others to copy, plus they are't in business to teach others how to make a cable like theirs. I know it's frustrating because I have asked for them to post their measurements. But what I was saying was that if they came up with an independent company where cables could be submitted and they post the measurement data would be great, the only problem is that it's a costly process and I don't know if people would pay enough to have them conduct the measurements. They take about 40 hours or so measuring 1 cable. THat's about how long it takes. Remember, they are looking at HUNDREDS of different specific frequencies. One for each fundamental of each musical note and their relative harmonics up to something like the 10th harmonic in some cases. if you want to have a discussion with them, give them a call and talk to Bruce directly if you are concerned enough. Plus, the majority of consumers don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars of measurement equipment at their disposal or even have the interest in buying measurement equipment just to test a cable.
  6. But wiring a filter in parallel doesn't affect the signal directly in cables or the same if the circuit is wired in series to the audio cable. They are applying principals stemming from Articulation measurements that Bell Labs created many decades ago, they are just applying the same principals to Audio cables.. that's why they won't call them EQ circuits. While they are LRC circuits, they have their own design that's different than a Zobel LCR circuit. But you share the same confusion as many others so don't feel bad. I thought the same thing as you until I found out how they are different. so to call them EQ circuits isn't correct, but I understand that people have to have something they are familiar with to wrap their heads around it.. That's why MIT does't call them EQ circuits, they call them Articulation poles since they are doing Articulation measurements and that's why they use that term for lack of another term that would be more appropriate. I know it gets confusing because we aren't used to this type of product since it's a new way of creating a "cable" or interface between audio equipment.
  7. Audio isn't in the Gigahertz range. With audio signals, they measured the rise time and decay time with various frequencies and they found that with audio cables, they don't have similar rise and decay times because that's critical to audio.. So if the cable needs to have a filter for specific frequencies they are measuring, they build the filter to "fix" those rise and decay rates so the cable is more linear. The frequencies they are most concerned with are the fundamentals and the relative harmonics of those fundamentals from 20hz on up and their super high end cables go down below 20hz because some people do listen to pipe organ music where the lowest note is below 20hz. That's essentially what some of the things they are doing. Not to mention, keeping phase consistent, etc. Stop trying to relate what you were doing in the medical field with audio. It's a totally different application. The goal for audio is to transfer the signal with as little damage to the incoming signal so the music doesn't get harmed in the process.
  8. I don't know which is more profitable. It all depends on the company and how much money they end up spending on R&D, Advertising, marketing, etc. Yes, there are some cable companies that have huge markup, some don't or they have to since they are limited in how much product they sell. They still have to pay the bills.
  9. Yeah, that kind of sucks. I would only buy products from people that actually do measurements. Gotta do both objective measurements AND subjective listening when it comes to audio gear.. The question is what measurement tools are they using and what measurement tests are they performing. Some cable mfg. only put a 1khz sine wave and that's the only thing they really test. The last time I checked, audio for music/speech is between 20hz and 20khz and if you aren't measuring the effects of the full bandwidth, then how good are your tests to begin with? That's why I don't particularly care about some of these companies that only test 1khz signals.
  10. You know van den Hul? I read a while ago he was experimenting with graphene cables. Know anything about those?
  11. The famous Chris Wiggles test is not empirical, it's anecdotal.
  12. Oh, so if you say that MIT doesn't make cables, then MIT is not part of the cable scam that you are referring to. OK. 🙂
  13. Blind fold tests aren't that reliable unless you can spend hours and hours of time over the course of many days, weeks, even months. I urge you to download that test because It will help you test and train your listening skills in a blind fold A/B environment. Go and see how far you get in how well you can tell in AB tests. I will bet any amount of money that you can not reach the highest level of any of the tests within a one day period. It's pretty much impossible, but there are people that have mastered all tests at all levels, it's just impossible to so at one sitting. To master that AB test, it can take MONTHS of using the app for an hour or two a day. So to figure out if one can reliably tell the difference in cables after many blind fold tests in one sitting is hard to do regardless of the gear being A/B'd. Yet give the listener a couple of months with each product and ask them after they have had a long time to get acclimated to each product and see which product they prefer... That's why blind fold tests are kind of silly for the average consumer..
  14. in the case of the Christ Wiggles test, he was. I don't know what you are trying to prove in a blind fold test other than putting the listener at a disadvantage to prove something. There were AB tests that were conducted at a high end audio show where a couple of the product reviewers for Stereophile could easily tell the difference in the cables being A/B'd, so what about that? They didn't know ahead of time, they were also in a "blind fold" test and they could tell the difference quickly and correctly.
  15. Do this. Go to this site. http://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com/2011/01/welcome-to-how-to-listen.html. download the app and see how far you get and how long it takes you to go through these different tests and what level you can reach in one sitting. I'll explain after you have downloaded it and told me how far you got in one sitting.
×
×
  • Create New...