Attention Scientists, Engineers and Na-s


Isn't it funny how timing works. With all the different discussions on proving this, show me fact on that and the psycho acoustical potential of the other thing an article comes along with the same topics and some REAL potential answers. I received my newest copy of "The Audiophile Voice" Vol.7, Issue1 today and on page 16 is an article written by David Blair and Bill Eisen titled "In The Matter Of Noise". The article focuses on disturbance noise but has some reference to thermal noise, low frequency noise and shot noise, and our ability to measure these noises with the equipment of today. We have measured noise as low as 6x10 to the power of -5, or approximately a few cycles per day. We have also found through laboratory testing that the human brain is stimulated with frequencies from just above 0Hz to just below 50kHz. U.S. Department of Defense documents also show studies of low frequency activity below measurable levels and there various affects.
The article then begins to talk about out of band (hearing) noise and in band noise produced by our electronic equipment and the potential of these noises effecting our sound system. The assumptions are that "disturbance noises rob our systems of dynamics, low-level information, tonal purity and stage depth". These effects are for the most part overlooked and misunderstood by the scientific communities. They say they think that our speakers being hit with "massive quantities of R.F.I. are affected" A very good quote referring to power filters was "Effective noise control imposes no sonic tradeoffs or downside." How often have the discussions here on Audiogon focused on what they are doing? A very interesting comment was that Teflon is capable of carrying 40-Kilovolts static charge, and the industry is touting this as a great insulator for audio signals, that's scarey!
Now I bring this to light because I believe the view of the "Scientists and Engineers" here on Audiogon is so narrow that they are failing to see the exciting challenges in front of them. If all these noises do exist, which they do, and they can be transmitted and received through our systems, isn't possible, just maybe feasible that the insulation of our wires, the casing of our dedicated lines the size and shape of the conductor could, just maybe effect the sound? Isn't it even possible that forces set off by electrical components could be interfering in some so far unmeasured and inaudible way affecting the sound. Do you all test within the full spectrum of 0Hz to 50Khz for every possible situation? Or is it possible, just ever so small of a chance that you are overlooking a whole new science yet unexplored. Doesn't that, even slightly excite your little scientific fossils?
Man if I was younger, healthier and wanted a challenge. This is a career if you'd just climb out from behind you oscilloscopes and spectrum analyzer and see the world is indeed still spinning, and yes, it is 2001. Remember how 30 years ago 2001 was going to be so exciting. What the hell have the Scientist, Engineers and Na-sayers who tote there stuff here on Audiogon done for the advancement of science. Anyone, have any of you really broken through! J.D.
128x128jadem6
Philiphans: I do have that publication at home and will dig it out. However, I would caution you that the paper apparently deals with recognition of codec noise, which is far different from cabling effects that may or may not exist. For one thing, codec noise exists and can be repeatedly and reliably detected and measured to verify what the gifted listeners hear. My problem is with "gifted" listeners who claim to hear things that can't be verified, and only when they know what they're listening to.

Thanks for the test suggestion. I'll make a 9 AWG power cable, and when I get a chance, I'll do an ABX test between one of my power amps and another identical model.
702 ..I have a very basic and perhaps naive question: Would you maintain, that ALL highend cable manufacturers peddle in snake oil? If not, where would you draw the line, apart from basic considerations like resistance, capacitance etc? Would you then also say, that the insistence say of the Spectral people, that their gear be solely used with the MIT wires, reflects rather a commercial reality than a scientific one, based on design criteria? Also, since I am unfamiliar with all the literature, do practically all double blind tests which have been published go against the claims of the golden eared? And if yes, what would you say was the bias of the people, who undertook the testing and devised the procedures and last, were do you think I could best read up about it. Hope I'm not too much of a bother. But I suppose I am not the only one, who's interested. Regards,
702, the 9 AWG might be too large for the IEC unless its a specially built one. Please check again, the regular stock cord is usually 3x18AWG (0.75~0.8 mm2), so 3x14 or 3x12 AWGs would be fine for this experiment. Ensure their fitness with your stockist before he cuts the cable!
For the listen, if you're familiar with the sonics of yr poweramp, you can go straight to test it, skipping the AB'g. Live with it for a while...but please keep us posted. Regards.
Costrosk, thanks, you too made an excellent practical point of regular contact surface cleaning for ic's which many of us will overlook. Any gear would only be as good as its tarnished contact.
Like i said, it helps tremendously if you have a large circle of audiophile friends to swap and try out cables before deciding.
My attempt to try understand the price of a new pc is that a quarter of the money goes to materials; another quarter to marketing and the remaining half to skilled labor. If you ever have a chance to look inside one you might understand the skill required to handmake each, one at a time. Several pc maker cannot survive making just one product.
A gifted listener-audiophile is the worst combination for a person to be. He/she is hard to please for long. Because cables do sound differently with each equipment, such person's life can be a complicated one indeed! The blissfully "filtered" listener has far easier path leading to music enjoyment. Regards.
Detlof: For a good bibliography of the DBT field, check out www.oakland.edu/~djcarlst/abx.htm. Good DBTs are designed to maximize the likelihood of a positive result, although golden ears must deny this.