1. Home
  2. tech-talk
  3. 130709-12450

Directionality of wire

I am a fan of Chris Sommovigo's Black Cat and Airwave interconnects. I hope he does not mind me quoting him or naming him on this subject, but Chris does not mark directionality of his IC's. I recently wrote him on the subject and he responded that absent shunting off to ground/dialectric designs, the idea of wire directionality is a complete myth. Same with resistors and fuses. My hunch is that 95% of IC "manufacturers", particularly the one man operations of under $500 IC's mark directionality because they think it lends the appearance of technical sophistication and legitimacy. But even among the "big boys", the myth gets thrown around like so much accepted common knowledge. Thoughts? Someone care to educate me on how a simple IC or PC or speaker cable or fuse without a special shunting scheme can possibly have directionality? It was this comment by Stephen Mejias (then of Audioquest and in the context of Herb Reichert's review of the AQ Niagra 1000) that prompts my question;

Thank you for the excellent question. AudioQuest provided an NRG-10 AC cable for the evaluation. Like all AudioQuest cables, our AC cables use solid conductors that are carefully controlled for low-noise directionality. We see this as a benefit for all applications -- one that becomes especially important when discussing our Niagara units. Because our AC cables use conductors that have been properly controlled for low-noise directionality, they complement the Niagara System’s patented Ground-Noise Dissipation Technology. Other AC cables would work, but may or may not allow the Niagara to reach its full potential. If you'd like more information on our use of directionality to minimize the harmful effects of high-frequency noise, please visit http://www.audioquest.com/directionality-its-all-about-noise/ or the Niagara 1000's owner's manual (available on our website).

Thanks again.

Stephen Mejias
AudioQuest


Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/gramophone-dreams-15-audioquest-niagara-1000-hifiman-he1000-v2-p...


fsonicsmith
stfoth
435 posts
 
Geoff--one of the other problems, here, is that, for a lot of these things, some folks do try them, including flipping cables, and don't find a difference.  they seem to often be immediately met with derision.

--you can't hear it, because you have ears of aluminum foil and candlewax.

--you can't hear it, because your gear and room are too crappy to pick up the details.

--you can't hear it, because you're doing it incorrectly.

--you can't hear it, because you're a skeptic and are biased.

--you can't hear it, because you obviously live on the edges of some quantum vortex that is affecting the tweak.

--oh, this stuff is real, every time, but it doesn't work for everyone.


Too funny, all this.  I guess I didn't quite realize this "debate" has been going on probably since my audio journey included a Scott integrated, some lit up equalizer, and, for my truck, a couple or more monster subwoofers and pissed off neighbors.


geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
14,147 posts
 
Never said it did work for everyone. That's the way the cookie crumbles. We've been over that already, ad nauseum. There are many reason why audiophiles sometimes don't get the results they were looking for. Because the thing under test is a hoax or a dud or any such thing is not one of those reasons, however. It's like just about anything, any cable, any tweak, in audio - you can always find someone who doesn't get good results. C'est la vie mon Cherie. You just keep your fingers crossed it's not the dude who is about to review your product for a major online audio publication. 😬

stfoth
435 posts
 
Geoff--Perhaps this has been adequately and succinctly discussed elsewhere, but, assuming all cables are inherently directional with sound differences from one way to the other, what might be some reasons someone, with a good trained ear with a highly resolving setup and with no skin in the game, wouldn’t be able to hear a difference?

--I'm not trying to bait you.  I may be a skeptic, but I'm genuinely interested.

terry9
931 posts
 
@nonoise 

My response was to your direct question about statistics.

As for your point about first hand observation, statistics has something to say about that too. It is very tempting to think that one is experimenting when one is just fiddling. Unfortunately, experimenting can be quite hard, especially when dealing with psychological phenomena, such as sensory perception. To do that right, one needs a lot of sophistication: mathematical, statistical, and psychological.

And then, after all that sophistication, one can still get it wrong, which is why professionals use peer review.

By all means, trust your ears. It's your system and your money.
ivan_nosnibor's avatar
ivan_nosnibor
782 posts
 
@shadorne 

"I don’t deny truth. However, before attaching strong beliefs to unsubstantiated claims I require something more solid than conjecture. This is why man-made global warming remains a remote and infinitesimally small possibility to me as nobody has successfully proven the main hypothesis is true in our atmosphere (which we know for certainty is influenced by other natural factors to a much larger degree than claims for man-made effects)"

"This is not paranoia it is actually just being reasonable and independent of thought rather than being a sheep and blindly believing everything one is told."  

I think I will just leave that lay.

@geoffkait 

no crystals.

"Well, actually, ironically enough, that expression caveat emptor does NOT apply to fuses as much as people think..."

"Hmmm, are they getting ready to release a new fuse?"

Like I said, caveat emptor.
More to discover