Ethan Winer Null Test For WIre

[Ralf11]

Another thing I don't understand is why some people have an innate compulsion to be unpleasant by continually posting ridiculous trash, poppycock, and balderdash by people who know absolutely nothing about the subject.

 

Spamming threads disrupts them, so maybe that is the point.

[jabbr]

18 hours ago, fas42 said:

why am I listening to this crap?!" thoughts - and decide to do something more interesting ...

 

Good point ...

[gmgraves]

16 hours ago, barrows said:

I never suggested one could not measure these things, my only point was that there is more to cable design than L, C, & R.

Really? And what might these things be? Because the aerospace industry, the SAE, the Military Electronics industry and the IEEE are all unaware of them. Only the boutique cable sector of the audio industry seems to be aware of what this "more to cable design than L, C, & R" consists of. And frankly, it wouldn't matter. Even if we didn't know all there is to know about cable design, the first time a pair of seemingly identical cables failed the null test, university labs all over the world would be on the phenomenon like flies on dog do to find out why. Nobody (except boutique cable makers in the audiophile market) seems to be doing this "research"*. You never see it mentioned in IEEE newsletters or in Scientific American, or even in the Journal of the Audio Engineering Society (except if somebody writes a paper debunking the notion). If a subject of scientific study is not being discussed with peer-reviewed papers, then it's not a subject of scientific study. 

 

* Much like no one except Creation "Scientists" are trying to make every natural phenomenon fit into the notion that the universe is only 6000 years old (October 23, 4004 BCE at 9:00 AM, to be exact. Was that by the Julian Calendar or the Gregorian Calendar? And was that 9:00AM Standard time? We know it couldn't have been Daylight Savings time because the Lord didn't create the sun until the third day. ‡  ).

 

‡ With apologies to Clarence Darrow

[gmgraves]

12 hours ago, STC said:

 

Ethan is right as far as measurement is concerned but spatial hearing encompasses interdisciplinary field that also involves psychology, engineering and physics among others. Most here only talks about engineering and physics but overlook the most important element of this hobby, i.e. we listen music for psychological reasons.

 

Agreed. However, psychology has nothing to do whether or not interconnects actually have a sound. That's probably the reason why most of us stick to the physics and engineering. I know that I'm not really all that sympathetic with what people here "think" they are hearing. 

[Ralf11]

speaking of the $6,000 year old universe...  I wonder if the Tricky God notion explains cable-ism?

[gmgraves]

2 hours ago, audiobomber said:

A 30-minute video to explain why all competently designed interconnects sound the same.... except they don't. Fail! ?

 

If they null-out completely, they have to sound the same because the in-phase and out-of-phase versions of the test signal cancel completely! That means that there simply is no difference. If there were, that difference would be detectable as a difference signal. IOW, there would be some signal left after combing the product of the two cables indicating that one (or both) of the cables altered the signal in some form. 

[Ralf11]

Sorry George, that is too rational.  You need to learn to Think Magically.

[gmgraves]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

speaking of the $6,000 year old universe...  I wonder if the Tricky God notion explains cable-ism?

No doubt....

[gmgraves]

45 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Sorry George, that is too rational.  You need to learn to Think Magically.

Sorry, It's just something my scientifically trained mind (such as it is! ?) never learned to do. I grieve about it constantly!

[fas42]

The lines are clearly drawn ... those who have decided they know what matters - well, because they do! - and those who remain always curious, and if they notice some unusual behaviour investigate it further, and experiment. I find it remarkable that some people who espouse rationality as being core repeatedly become very irrational and simplistic when they decide "something is nonsense!" - if people like this were responsible for safety in the airline industry I wouldn't consider ever going anywhere near an airport ...

 

Cable behaviours matter. And once you learn to be sensitive to the audible effects it's trivially easy to register the differences. Most systems always exhibit the disturbing anomalies resulting from these factors - which is why they never sound, err, convincing ... for many, it would take being exposed to a rig where this 'noise' is absent, and then deliberately adding it back in again, removing it, then reintroducing again, ad nauseum - to understand what's happening.

[fas42]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Another thing I don't understand is why some people have an innate compulsion to be unpleasant by continually posting ridiculous trash, poppycock, and balderdash by people who know absolutely nothing about the subject.

 

 

Some people think they know the subject, because they've read the Right Textbooks, and hang on to every word of the Best Authorities - others prefer to do their own investigations, and draw conclusions based on what the results are, for them.

[esldude]

So if people in the airline safety business took your approach how would that work?  Only planes Frank approved of could fly and any he didn't don't fly even if they do? And Frank can't tell us how it works, but he knows when he lands it was safe.  Your approach to all of this is untenable.  For airlines and for audio. 

[Ralf11]

Some people think they know a subject because they have done key research in the area, and then wrote the main review papers in the area.

 

Frank, you are not one of them in any area of study.  Your continued spamming of threads is either a mental problem or a deliberate attempt to disrupt the topics.

[fas42]

1 hour ago, esldude said:

So if people in the airline safety business took your approach how would that work?  Only planes Frank approved of could fly and any he didn't don't fly even if they do? And Frank can't tell us how it works, but he knows when he lands it was safe.  Your approach to all of this is untenable.  For airlines and for audio. 

 

Again, remarkable that some people can't join the dots .. air transport is extremely safe, because the accidents over the years each time taught the industry what was needed to be considered, in each tiny area of the overall system. Ignore some area, because the big boys decide it isn't important - and planes fall out of the sky ... statistics of number of accidents tell the industry whether it's doing well or not - and no jumping up and down by, say, Boeing, saying how safe their planes are is going to matter in the slightest, if more people die than usual.

 

My approach to audio is the same - if a rig sounds bad, then it's faulty in some area. Irrespective of money spent, the name plates, size of speakers, etc, etc - the sound is only "safe to listen to" if the system works correctly. For most, the major hurdle is to be aware of flawed sound - and not to make the usual excuses for that.

[fas42]

48 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

Frank, you are not one of them in any area of study.  Your continued spamming of threads is either a mental problem or a deliberate attempt to disrupt the topics.

 

My posting is a deliberate attempt to entice people to refocus on what matters, for achieving competent sound. If one is not interested in that, or merely wants some impressive room furniture, that's fine - but the approach over many decades by the audio industry is painfully slow in progressing the subjective quality of reproduction - from my POV, that's pretty irritating, .

[kumakuma]

7 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

My posting is a deliberate attempt to entice people to refocus on what matters, for achieving competent sound. If one is not interested in that, or merely wants some impressive room furniture, that's fine - but the approach over many decades by the audio industry is painfully slow in progressing the subjective quality of reproduction - from my POV, that's pretty irritating, .

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris

[STC]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

 

Agreed. However, psychology has nothing to do whether or not interconnects actually have a sound. That's probably the reason why most of us stick to the physics and engineering. I know that I'm not really all that sympathetic with what people here "think" they are hearing. 

 

It has everything to do how we perceive sound. The influence of price, reputation of the brand, looks and peer approval all these play a part in the subjective experience. Under a controlled experiment, there should not be any difference but reverse the experiment and see if the psychological effect plays a role.

[fas42]

Looking back, the strong reaction is to my proclaiming that one can hear the impact of tribolectric behaviour, in audio systems. If one takes the meanings of hubris to be extreme pride, overconfidence and arrogance, I see those qualities in the responses that declare that such must be nonsense ...

[barrows]

As an adjunct to this discussion I just recently made a simple, subjective test, which once again verifies to MY satisfaction that cables indeed sound different, and that some cables are better than others.  I have at hand a few quite good XLR cables, namely Nordost Frey (not Frey 2), Cardas Clear, and Kimber Select   Lately I have been using the Nordost Frey in my (simple, only a single pair of analog interconnects are used between various DACs and amps) system.  So I used the Frey as the "high end" example.  As I had a a set of Neutrik XLRs already at hand from projects which never happened, I decided to build a pair of XLR cables with some well regarded bulk cable from the pro audio filed.  I chose Grimm Audio TPR, which is relatively affordable ($2.10 a foot) and very well regarded by folks over ta gearslutz.  I made a 1 meter pair to compare to the Nordost Frey.  Both cables are pretty close to "proper" balanced/mic cable designs, the TPR having a twisted pair for pins 2, and 3, and the ground being shield, and the Nordost Frey having a twisted quad for pins 2, and 3 and the ground being shield.

I let the Grimm cables burn in on the cable cooker for a few days after soldering them up, before comparisons.

 

Then I listened to the Grimm cables for a few days, they sounded quite good, and they were musically satisfying, but over casual longish term listening it did seem like certain details I normally note were not quite fleshed out to the same degree as with my usual cables, but sound was still good, and satisfying.  Then I did a careful A/B test, sighted, as is the norm for me (and no there will not be discussion on blind vs. sighted etc, been there done that), with the same level and one track of well recorded music featuring acoustic and electric instruments and vocals.  The Frey cable was clearly better, the difference was enough to be noted within the first few seconds of playback.  How big was the delta of difference, well I always balk when people ask a question like this as quantifying differences like these is impossible, as well as system dependent.  Suffice it to say that any audiophile would recognize and prefer the Frey.  Price wise, I think the Frey used to retail around $800 for a 1 meter pair.  The Grimm cables cost me about $15.00 for the wire and around $24 for the connectors (prices would be plus shipping and tax), and of course about an hour of labor for building, not including ordering and research time.

 

Bottom line for me is that the audiophile cables are worth it; i was really hoping the Grimm would be a "giant killer" and they do sound good and I would recommend them for anyone looking for cables on a tight budget, but one does get more music with the Nordost Frey.

[mansr]

5 hours ago, barrows said:

As an adjunct to this discussion I just recently made a simple, subjective test, which once again verifies to MY satisfaction that cables indeed sound different, and that some cables are better than others.  I have at hand a few quite good XLR cables, namely Nordost Frey (not Frey 2), Cardas Clear, and Kimber Select   Lately I have been using the Nordost Frey in my (simple, only a single pair of analog interconnects are used between various DACs and amps) system.  So I used the Frey as the "high end" example.  As I had a a set of Neutrik XLRs already at hand from projects which never happened, I decided to build a pair of XLR cables with some well regarded bulk cable from the pro audio filed.  I chose Grimm Audio TPR, which is relatively affordable ($2.10 a foot) and very well regarded by folks over ta gearslutz.  I made a 1 meter pair to compare to the Nordost Frey.  Both cables are pretty close to "proper" balanced/mic cable designs, the TPR having a twisted pair for pins 2, and 3, and the ground being shield, and the Nordost Frey having a twisted quad for pins 2, and 3 and the ground being shield.

I let the Grimm cables burn in on the cable cooker for a few days after soldering them up, before comparisons.

 

Then I listened to the Grimm cables for a few days, they sounded quite good, and they were musically satisfying, but over casual longish term listening it did seem like certain details I normally note were not quite fleshed out to the same degree as with my usual cables, but sound was still good, and satisfying.  Then I did a careful A/B test, sighted, as is the norm for me (and no there will not be discussion on blind vs. sighted etc, been there done that), with the same level and one track of well recorded music featuring acoustic and electric instruments and vocals.  The Frey cable was clearly better, the difference was enough to be noted within the first few seconds of playback.  How big was the delta of difference, well I always balk when people ask a question like this as quantifying differences like these is impossible, as well as system dependent.  Suffice it to say that any audiophile would recognize and prefer the Frey.  Price wise, I think the Frey used to retail around $800 for a 1 meter pair.  The Grimm cables cost me about $15.00 for the wire and around $24 for the connectors (prices would be plus shipping and tax), and of course about an hour of labor for building, not including ordering and research time.

 

Bottom line for me is that the audiophile cables are worth it; i was really hoping the Grimm would be a "giant killer" and they do sound good and I would recommend them for anyone looking for cables on a tight budget, but one does get more music with the Nordost Frey.

Posts like this are so formulaic they don't even need a Markov chain generator.

[barrows]

3 hours ago, mansr said:

Posts like this are so formulaic they don't even need a Markov chain generator.

Just reporting actual experience rather than your rampant speculation.  I prefer to know for myself, rather than use a "belief system".

[Hugo9000]

@fas42  Is your system still "in limbo," with all of your expertise on these matters?  Or have you simply neglected to update your profile on CA, due to the understandable distraction of listening to music being reproduced gloriously on a well-sorted system?

[Archimago]

3 hours ago, barrows said:

Just reporting actual experience rather than your rampant speculation.  I prefer to know for myself, rather than use a "belief system".

 

Is it possible to subjectively assess something without an underlying "belief system"? Especially when you're not interested in removing psychological biases (I know, you've "been there done that" when it comes to blinding...)?

 

Is it not possible then that this "system", which might not be consciously expressible (ie. potentially subconscious), yet in fact it very much affects your subjective opinion?

 

"Know(ing) for myself" is fine... But that doesn't mean knowing the truth in a way that can be independently applied to others nor whether the physical phenomenon actually even exists.

[Sunflower_sutra]

On 11/13/2018 at 12:59 AM, esldude said:

Here is some tribo-electric noise I recorded.  This was with 75 db of gain.  All balanced cables. 

 

The AQ Diamond X3 was the worst.  I bent the wire slightly for this.  Monoprice Premium balanced was next worst as I bent the wire more.  The cheapo GLS balanced I had to wind in a coil and bend several layers at once. 

 

The AQ was worst because it is silver and teflon.  The worst combination for tribo effects. 

The Monoprice has multiple braided shield layers and a foil layer which is hwy I think it is fairly poor.  

The GLS is a twisted pair with a bit of shield and does very little.  

 

None of these would be heard at line level.  None would make this noise from soundwaves hitting the cable.  A non-issue unless you have the AQ or Monoprice on a microphone which a singer is carrying around while singing. 

 

 

 

Triboelectric sounds (1).zip

This is way above my understanding just curious but I have seen the effect that subsonics have on a speaker through vinyl.

 

Is it possible that inaudible noise can have an effect on audible noise? Either through hardware or room interactions? 

[barrows]

24 minutes ago, Archimago said:

Is it not possible then that this "system", which might not be consciously expressible (ie. potentially subconscious), yet in fact it very much affects your subjective opinion?

Nope!  What your point of view does not take into account is the many years of training associated with my use of listening tests.  The fact is, that biases, and "belief systems" can both be overcome by training.

I have been evaluating audio systems/components both through measures and by listening (and often correlating the two) for long enough to have learned of, and learned how to deal with these pitfalls.  Anyone can suggest that what I hear is in error, I know it is not (in this case).

Often I do listening tests and can discern no audible difference, often I do listening tests and can discern a difference, but cannot determine which (A or B) is actually better, and often there is a clear discernible improvement between A and B.

I do not report on differences which are too close to call.

In this case, the difference was of a level where one wire was audibly better without question, the difference was of a magnitude that only required a few seconds of playback to determine.  It did not require multiple repeats to discern (although I did repeat a few times, and switch up the order a bit to confuse things), or trying different sample tracks.

 

Considering differences, have you ever listened to the differences between digital filters?  I find those tests maddening as while there are differences, they are very subtle to me.  i find different filters do have meaningful differences, but they are very hard to evaluate, and rarely would I mention them on forums as they are so subtle to me, and I suspect, quite system dependent.

 

The differences between these two wires are not at all like the difference between digital filters, they are significant, easily repeatable, and anyone with ears would hear them right away given a decent system context.