AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Manufacturer Circles => P.I. audio group => Topic started by: dBe on 27 Jul 2015, 02:01 am
-
I though a curiously informative and fun topic would be the dichotomy between what we once thought and what we have learned to be a helluva lot more important than we believed to be true.
I'll start: power quality in general.
You go, people!!!
-
May I ask what is a "flat earther" in an audio context?
I used to think that the -type- of speaker or amp is what mattered most, whereas now I've learned that there are great examples of all the various types, if you seek them out.
-
I used to think that paying more than a $100 on a power cord was a waste of money.
-
Little known fact... Christopher Columbus said the first guy to refuse him funding thought the world was flat and he'd go over the edge or such... However for hundreds of years no one believed the earth was flat. To simply put it, it was an insult to say someone thought the earth flat.
I too have found cables make more of a difference than my wallet generates...
-
Little known fact... Christopher Columbus said the first guy to refuse him funding thought the world was flat and he'd go over the edge or such... However for hundreds of years no one believed the earth was flat. To simply put it, it was an insult to say someone thought the earth flat.
I too have found cables make more of a difference than my wallet generates...
My friend, there you have it!
I also used to think that a "capacitor is a capacitor and a resistor is a resistor". My ears are very happy I was wrong.
-
I used to think I could hear! :duh:
-
dbe,
Does this thread have anything to do with this thread? :wink: :shh:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=136240.msg1448367;topicseen#new
-
On planet Vietnam,
I use to think that I could drink almost a liter of 7-Up a day
without any consequences.... :duh:
The earth is flat, depending where/what direction you look ! 8)
Guy 13
Formerly from planet Vietnam.
-
dbe,
Does this thread have anything to do with this thread? :wink: :shh:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=136240.msg1448367;topicseen#new
Nope. Just about what we all have learned compared to what we used to think about audio.
-
This thread brings to mind how much ridicule that Enid Lumley faced for her pioneering work in system setup and tweaking more than 25 years ago in TAS. Yet, she persevered in writing about her adventures and experiments. She was assumed by probably half of the audiophiles in the world to be crazy as a loon for claiming to hear improvements when putting her cables on cups to get them off the floor, hanging interconnects from ribbons to keep them separate. Using VPI bricks, AC plug orientation and phase, high-quality power cords, hearing sonic differences in different plating metallurgy and taking the dustcover off the turntable when playing records all got her more and more ridicule, but she persevered. She stuck her head out of the foxhole back when the audio world was still debating if amplifiers with similar specs all sounded the same. I nominate Enid Lumley as the Patron Saint of tweakers.
-
This thread brings to mind how much ridicule that Enid Lumley faced for her pioneering work in system setup and tweaking more than 25 years ago in TAS. She stuck her head out of the foxhole back when the audio world was still debating if amplifiers with similar specs all sounded the same. I nominate Enid Lumley as the Patron Saint of tweakers.
+1 :thumb:
I was one of THOSE GUYS that thought all of this was crazy. I was using polyester caps for tweeter crossovers back in the 80s and a wise old guy gave me some caps that were only available to the nuclear industry at that time (teflon) and I tried them and was absolutely floored when teamed up with a visa D25AG aluminum dome. The brittleness in them was the polyester cap. I couldn't get teflon caps so he then said to try polypropylene and my road to perdition was set. I met George Short a few years later and he taught me that not all PP is the same, resistors sounded different and on and on and on and...
-
This thread brings to mind how much ridicule that Enid Lumley faced for her pioneering work in system setup and tweaking more than 25 years ago in TAS. Yet, she persevered in writing about her adventures and experiments. She was assumed by probably half of the audiophiles in the world to be crazy as a loon for claiming to hear improvements when putting her cables on cups to get them off the floor, hanging interconnects from ribbons to keep them separate. Using VPI bricks, AC plug orientation and phase, high-quality power cords, hearing sonic differences in different plating metallurgy and taking the dustcover off the turntable when playing records all got her more and more ridicule, but she persevered. She stuck her head out of the foxhole back when the audio world was still debating if amplifiers with similar specs all sounded the same. I nominate Enid Lumley as the Patron Saint of tweakers.
I remember Enid well. Thought she was part of the lunatic fringe at first, yet I found myself trying virtually anything suggested if I could. :thumb:
-
This thread brings to mind how much ridicule that Enid Lumley faced for her pioneering work in system setup and tweaking more than 25 years ago in TAS. Yet, she persevered in writing about her adventures and experiments. She was assumed by probably half of the audiophiles in the world to be crazy as a loon for claiming to hear improvements when putting her cables on cups to get them off the floor, hanging interconnects from ribbons to keep them separate. Using VPI bricks, AC plug orientation and phase, high-quality power cords, hearing sonic differences in different plating metallurgy and taking the dustcover off the turntable when playing records all got her more and more ridicule, but she persevered. She stuck her head out of the foxhole back when the audio world was still debating if amplifiers with similar specs all sounded the same. I nominate Enid Lumley as the Patron Saint of tweakers.
Indeed! I wonder how much of the vitriol against her was based her gender and if she was a he, would that person have received so much scorn?
On topic then...initially I thought that there was no way that a power cord could make much of a sonic difference, until I heard for myself. :?
-
RPM, I don't remember the criticism being any more sexist than today when she touched a nerve. In those days, I used to read TAS and Stereophile for the articles - not the pictures - and I was always fascinated with her reports. And, she didn't back down. She heard what she heard and that was that. For the younger readers in the crowd, in the time-frame of 25 to 35 years ago, there were no products on the market to address cable dressing. There were no fancy brass cones. Feet on most components were some kind of cheap rubber compound. There were a few lost voices in the wilderness claiming that different wire dielectrics changed the sound of AC cords. Racks were primarily furniture. Worst of all, it was common knowledge that CDs could reproduce "perfect sound forever." There were arguments that all CD players must sound identical since they all read identical data and so must have identical-sounding output. Some of the biggest legacy fan magazines at the time were written by experts who proved month after month that only measurable differences between components could influence sound. The audiophile media at the time were responsible for maintaining an attitude that upgrading one's equipment frequently was the only path to an improved stereo system. Components were king and Enid challenged all that conventional wisdom as well and she backed it up with evidence based primarily on her own subjective hearing. Fortunately for her, and all of us in modern times, TAS provided her a platform and sufficient editorial support to change the audiophile world and launch an industry to fill the need to maximize the gear we already own.
-
How could anyone know power cords made a difference when it was not possible (OK, not easy) to change them because they were captive? My McIntosh 6100 integrated amp had a captive power cord. It was a skinny thing with no ground. RCA inputs were not plated so they tarnished. They were the color of aluminum but I can't swear to what metal they were. Speaker terminals were pushpin plastic things that only accepted zip cord. Hard to argue which brand of zip cord was best. :duh: We've come a long way baby. :thumb:
RPM, I don't remember the criticism being any more sexist than today when she touched a nerve. In those days, I used to read TAS and Stereophile for the articles - not the pictures - and I was always fascinated with her reports. And, she didn't back down. She heard what she heard and that was that. For the younger readers in the crowd, in the time-frame of 25 to 35 years ago, there were no products on the market to address cable dressing. There were no fancy brass cones. Feet on most components were some kind of cheap rubber compound. There were a few lost voices in the wilderness claiming that different wire dielectrics changed the sound of AC cords. Racks were primarily furniture. Worst of all, it was common knowledge that CDs could reproduce "perfect sound forever." There were arguments that all CD players must sound identical since they all read identical data and so must have identical-sounding output. Some of the biggest legacy fan magazines at the time were written by experts who proved month after month that only measurable differences between components could influence sound. The audiophile media at the time were responsible for maintaining an attitude that upgrading one's equipment frequently was the only path to an improved stereo system. Components were king and Enid challenged all that conventional wisdom as well and she backed it up with evidence based primarily on her own subjective hearing. Fortunately for her, and all of us in modern times, TAS provided her a platform and sufficient editorial support to change the audiophile world and launch an industry to fill the need to maximize the gear we already own.
-
How could anyone know power cords made a difference when it was not possible (OK, not easy) to change them because they were captive? My McIntosh 6100 integrated amp had a captive power cord. It was a skinny thing with no ground. RCA inputs were not plated so they tarnished. They were the color of aluminum but I can't swear to what metal they were. Speaker terminals were pushpin plastic things that only accepted zip cord. Hard to argue which brand of zip cord was best. :duh: We've come a long way baby. :thumb:
Think about how many people that should know better still think a piece of zip cord is still a viable electrical connector to a piece of high performance audio gear :roll:
The plating on those RCAs was nickel.
My favorite zip cord was Carol cable :lol:
-
Some of the finest audio gear ever built had zip-cord for AC power.
"Flat Earth Society." What a silly-ass label to apply to some of your fellow audiophiles.
Pathetic.
Dave.
-
Some of the finest audio gear ever built had zip-cord for AC power.
"Flat Earth Society." What a silly-ass label to apply to some of your fellow audiophiles.
Pathetic.
Dave.
True, but they always sounded better with better cabling and parts upgrades.
My Circle is a place where we exchange knowledge and experience with others that seek the best SQ possible from our systems. Basically a place where experience trumps supposition.
Davey, you have been on this track for years and busted my balls at every opportunity. Please take it elsewhere before people that know turn this into a flame fest. We don't need this here.
Like you said: pathetic. :nono:
-
Dave.
I don't know what track you think I'm on, but I've never "busted your balls." That's just rhetorical nonsense.
I have always evaluated objectively AND subjectively. I've raised my eyebrow numerous times reading postings from various folks but I've never mocked them and/or called them silly names.
C'mon.
Dave.
-
Here we go again...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125407)
-
Dave.
I don't know what track you think I'm on, but I've never "busted your balls." That's just rhetorical nonsense.
I have always evaluated objectively AND subjectively. I've raised my eyebrow numerous times reading postings from various folks but I've never mocked them and/or called them silly names.
C'mon.
Dave.
I remember the Parts Express Tech forum. Perhaps you do not. Do not try to hijack this thread. Calling a topic that is meant in a fun way is not appreciated or welcomed here. If you will remember, my tag line at PE was:
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." - Hilmar von Campe.
That came at great expense, both financially and an admission that I did not know it all. What a shocker to me. Arrogance is often it's own simple reward. Took a lot of time and money to figure out that there is more to electronics than L/C/R.
Disagreeing is OK here. That is how we all expand our intellectual database. Calling a post "pathetic" is not acceptable. You shall reap what you sow. There are a bunch of folks that read this Circle and have differing ideas about what is "good". Personally I think the term audiophile is a misnomer in that most people that think they are live in their own worlds. I am a music lover as are those that read this Circle. Gear heads, too. They are the ones that will take great offense in the "everything sounds the same" crapola.
I made a point of explaining my migration from ego driven ignorance to persuing empirical evidence, both subjective and objective (measured). If you don't want to accept this, that's cool. Rhetoric is what it is. Facts are what they are. Please recognize the difference and understand that calling a post pathetic is an insult to the poster. That would be me. Like I asked before, please take it elsewhere. That would be a second warning about your approach to this topic that is supposed to poke fun at itself.
A little sensitive are we?
Again: like you said - C'mon.
-
I don't understand the logic that if you have a well designed system, with nothing but the lowest grade parts, that it wouldn't benefit from better parts. Obviously there's some things that only sounds good because they have some good parts, too.
-
My only suggestion is that you not call a portion of our fellow Audio Circle members part of a Flat Earth Society. THAT (the thread title) could be taken as an insult to some members. Is that suggestion not reasonable?
BTW, I've never actively participated (or even followed) the Parts Express Tech forum. However, I did spend much time on the Madisound forum in its hey day. That's probably what you're thinking of. My memory is still sharp and I certainly remember you and I disagreeing from time to time on that forum, but I guarantee I never called you an inappropriate name or insulted you.
Dave.
-
My only suggestion is that you not call a portion of our fellow Audio Circle members part of a Flat Earth Society. THAT (the thread title) could be taken as an insult to some members. Is that suggestion not reasonable?
BTW, I've never actively participated (or even followed) the Parts Express Tech forum. However, I did spend much time on the Madisound forum in its hey day. That's probably what you're thinking of. My memory is still sharp and I certainly remember you and I disagreeing from time to time on that forum, but I guarantee I never called you an inappropriate name or insulted you.
Dave.
I suppose that is the issue with common monikers, Davey. My apologies for making an assumption. That being said, if you had read and taken to heart the premise and self deprecating disclaimers in this thread, I would think that you "might" understand the light manner of what was supposed to be fun and educational to the readers. So much for that! There is always someone that is offended by whatever.
I just don't take myself that seriously I guess. Like I have said many times: I learn something new every day. My bad it seems. :scratch:
-
RPM, I don't remember the criticism being any more sexist than today when she touched a nerve. In those days, I used to read TAS and Stereophile for the articles - not the pictures - and I was always fascinated with her reports. And, she didn't back down. She heard what she heard and that was that. For the younger readers in the crowd, in the time-frame of 25 to 35 years ago, there were no products on the market to address cable dressing. There were no fancy brass cones. Feet on most components were some kind of cheap rubber compound. There were a few lost voices in the wilderness claiming that different wire dielectrics changed the sound of AC cords. Racks were primarily furniture. Worst of all, it was common knowledge that CDs could reproduce "perfect sound forever." There were arguments that all CD players must sound identical since they all read identical data and so must have identical-sounding output. Some of the biggest legacy fan magazines at the time were written by experts who proved month after month that only measurable differences between components could influence sound. The audiophile media at the time were responsible for maintaining an attitude that upgrading one's equipment frequently was the only path to an improved stereo system. Components were king and Enid challenged all that conventional wisdom as well and she backed it up with evidence based primarily on her own subjective hearing. Fortunately for her, and all of us in modern times, TAS provided her a platform and sufficient editorial support to change the audiophile world and launch an industry to fill the need to maximize the gear we already own.
Sexism is sexism, no matter in what era it exists.
-
My only suggestion is that you not call a portion of our fellow Audio Circle members part of a Flat Earth Society. THAT (the thread title) could be taken as an insult to some members. Is that suggestion not reasonable?
BTW, I've never actively participated (or even followed) the Parts Express Tech forum. However, I did spend much time on the Madisound forum in its hey day. That's probably what you're thinking of. My memory is still sharp and I certainly remember you and I disagreeing from time to time on that forum, but I guarantee I never called you an inappropriate name or insulted you.
Dave.
Sorry Dave, but that's some "right to comfort" silliness, really. The majority of long standing members don't mind a little fun poking, and certainly don't take offense so easily. Besides the title isn't implying everyone else.
I have disagreements constantly on here, but I actually retain a fairly good acquaintance to friend level with most of the people. Most everything isn't a big deal until you try to make it into one.
-
OK.
This is getting way off topic here, partially because of my reply to one of several (I guess) Daveys I have run into and around over the years.
There will be no posts by people that get their noses out of joint because they are offended. Leave that to the politicos and whiner generation. Let's all try to be adults here. That includes me.
Carry on and be good or this thread will be locked or deleted.
-
"Right to comfort" silliness. I like that. :)
It might be better if Dave actually attempted an answer to the (excellent) question posed in post #2 by rjbond3rd.
Heck, I might not even be a member of this Society. Whew! :)
Dave.
-
"Right to comfort" silliness. I like that. :)
It might be better if Dave actually attempted an answer to the (excellent) question posed in post #2 by rjbond3rd.
Heck, I might not even be a member of this Society. Whew! :)
Dave.
I did, or actually let someone else do it.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=136235.msg1448318#msg1448318
Unlike others I don't always have to drive.
-
Does the Christopher Columbus anecdote describe "flat earth" in the audio context? C'mon.
This is your Circle.....you ARE driving and can operate with impunity. :)
If you're interested I'll give you my outlook on this topic. I don't believe there are ANY audiophiles/AC-members/or any other persons interested in audio equipment/reproduction that are members of an audio "Flat Earth Society." Any person with a modicum of common sense has the ability to understand that he doesn't understand everything. I think it just makes some people feel better to designate some people as not under that umbrella. That's the sad part.
Anyways, when you start putting people into groups the gray area shrinks and black/white labels begin to be applied.
It's unfortunate that much of this labeling (in the audio world) is based on subjectivity vice objectivity. (Not that one should dominate the other....both are important.) Subjective evaluation is fine because it is, by definition, incontrovertible. But when subjective evaluation becomes empirical evidence, we have a bit of a problem on our hands. :)
Are those some good dichotomy's for you? :)
Dave.
-
I tried. Really.
If you feel offended, that is on you.
Davey, I guess you missed me basically admitting that I was a member of TFES or at very least ignorant and arrogant about what I thought I knew. I stated that subjective (SQ) and objective evidence comprise the empirical. Easy to argue by ignoring the written facts. Empiricism is observation in the scientific method.
Empiricism: A central concept in science and the scientific method is that it must be empirically based on the evidence of the senses. Both natural and social sciences use working hypotheses that are testable by observation and experiment. The term semi-empirical is sometimes used to describe theoretical methods that make use of basic axioms, established scientific laws, and previous experimental results in order to engage in reasoned model building and theoretical inquiry.
It helps when one understands the terms.
No one here operates with impunity, least of all me.
-
The Flat Earth Society... I know several members... It's those individuals, who are generally quite intelligent as well as opinionated, but who REFUSE to accept or EVEN TRY something since it does not make sense to them or they cannot calculate or measure it... They are "close-minded and definitely not "open-minded"...
Some quotes that I have heard from Flat Earth Society members;
- Wire and Cabling in a hi-fi system makes zero difference at all, especially power cables... How can it???
- Tube-based systems are full of distortion, sound warm and coloured.
- Solid-state systems are dry & analytical.
- Class D amplifiers have a long way to go sonic-wise and cannot compete with Class A designs
- Digital Reproduction is more accurate and sounds better than Analogue (Vinyl)
- Analogue Reproduction is more life-like and sounds better than Digital (CD's)
I could go on & on... The one thing I've learned over many years is that EVERYTHING makes a difference. "Everything" could mean different platings, different metallurgy, different geometries, different components (resistors, capacitors, tubes, dielectrics), different cables, different shielding techniques, cryogenics, "burn-in", etc.
Are theses differences subtle? Sometimes YES and sometimes NO... Are these differences an improvement in sound quality? Sometimes YES and sometimes NO...
It's the wonderful world of Audio... Enjoy the hobby!
My $0.02,
Pete
-
I don't know how to help you guys (Pete and Dave E) other than to point out the obvious: if you insult people, people will be insulted.
Surely you can do better. Focus on what's good, not on what's bad.
-
Here we go again...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=125407)
Tomy2Tone,
I LOVE this.
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
-
The Flat Earth Society... I know several members... It's those individuals, who are generally quite intelligent as well as opinionated, but who REFUSE to accept or EVEN TRY something since it does not make sense to them or they cannot calculate or measure it... They are "close-minded and definitely not "open-minded"...
Some quotes that I have heard from Flat Earth Society members;
- Wire and Cabling in a hi-fi system makes zero difference at all, especially power cables... How can it???
- Tube-based systems are full of distortion, sound warm and coloured.
- Solid-state systems are dry & analytical.
- Class D amplifiers have a long way to go sonic-wise and cannot compete with Class A designs
- Digital Reproduction is more accurate and sounds better than Analogue (Vinyl)
- Analogue Reproduction is more life-like and sounds better than Digital (CD's)
I could go on & on... The one thing I've learned over many years is that EVERYTHING makes a difference. "Everything" could mean different platings, different metallurgy, different geometries, different components (resistors, capacitors, tubes, dielectrics), different cables, different shielding techniques, cryogenics, "burn-in", etc.
Are theses differences subtle? Sometimes YES and sometimes NO... Are these differences an improvement in sound quality? Sometimes YES and sometimes NO...
It's the wonderful world of Audio... Enjoy the hobby!
My $0.02,
Pete
Well said. There will always be (always have been) those that are so closed minded that they can't appreciate difference: opinions; realities; anything that challenges their dogma. For those of us that do not really understand the word:
dogma
noun dog·ma \ˈdȯg-mə, ˈdäg-\
: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted
I'm just not cut that way. Call it scientific curiosity. The only things that I accept without question are physical laws. Imagine what would happen if someone threw the gravity switch! :lol: OTOH there are those who are so open minded that there brains have fallen out. It is times like this that lead me to believe that I must be one of them to keep this up.
sigh... Everyone take a deep breath and don't make this into what it isn't.
Back to the topic, but first, EVERYONE read this sticky: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=112461.msg1167359#msg1167359
Especially this: "The rules in these discussions are simple: use the same attitudes and words that you would use in a face to face discussion with someone that you respect and that you know respects you. If things get off the track, I will be watching as closely as time permits and will apply all of the Rules of Audio Circle as even handedly as possible. I am human and I expect all of you to keep me in line if need be. PM's will be used for arbitration as is the norm here at AC. Bottom line is that I expect these discussions to be self-policed by well intentioned, intelligent participants. If that is not you, then best not join into the dicussions"
I understand now that the 'Theater of the Absurd' that was intended by a self-deprecating inference to my membership in the the FES is just flat lost on some. Been there. Done that as a recovering unwavering objectivist. Wars have been fought over the lack of a sense of humor or self awareness. :slap: A sense of humor goes a loooooong way in civility among equals.
Pete, I loved the irony of A vs. D and D vs. A. I know one guy that has vacillated between those two positions for years. Can't seem to make his "ears" up. I believed it myself for about two weeks back in the 80's right after CDs came out. No noise, and sharply defined. It took a while for me to get the reality: digital over a 14 bit player was just wrong. I have come to appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of both formats as I have gotten older.
I held the position that wire is just wire until I was compelled to disprove a guy on the old Madison BB (back in the days of 2400 baud) and started listening to lengths of copper wire of the same gauge. That is when I discovered dielectric constants and dissipation factors of different insulators. Surprised was I! Me, wrong? Oh, yeah: wrong.
Now I can predict the change in R after cryo of 500' of wire within a few ohms. Yep: measured it many times with 8-1/2 digit Keithley meters when I worked in the semi industry. It was awesome to have access to gear that I could never justify when a lesser device works in the real world of day to day electronics.
Guitar guys have known the differences between caps for fifty or more years. Build matched circuits of a 5E3 Deluxe using matched values of orange drops vs astrons vs mustards and there are 3 different sounding amps. Measure different, too.
Like you, I know that everything makes a difference. Sometimes they are very small, sometimes large, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. It would be the same as saying that all humans are the same. It is obvious from this topic that just ain't so wouldn't you say?
-
Well, I am going to try to get back on what I consider a most interesting topic.
In order of my discovery:
1. NOS Tubes
I still don't quite understand why, but I have changed a single tube and the difference is immense.
2. Room Treatments
This I can understand logically, but again the difference is astounding.
3. Wires, Cabling, and Power Conditioning
My brain tells me that miles of wire should not be affected by what I use for the last six feet into my equipment,
but my ears tell me not only does my equipment sound better, I enjoy my music so much more.
This enjoyment is obtained by equipment from Dave and Pete, so thank you Gentlemen.
-
Thanks, Zac. That is the outcome of someone that that loves music and wants to get closer to it.
The quest.
My reformation of parts of my brain actually began back in the '80s and part of it was the capacitor revelation, another the wire. To remember back it ALL really started when we were trying to make our gear at Quincy Street Sound sound better than its' price point. We blew the wad on an MCI JH24/16 and began to try to fix the problems that 2" tape machine began to reveal. Low noise was what we were all about as well as leading edges of transients. John Bau turned us on to Panasonic Z low impedance capacitors and the hunt was on. He was another way ahead of his time...
-
I used to think I could hear! :duh:
Hi, Din. I meant to respond to this, but got tripped off into the sideshow. sorry.
At 67 I can say without a doubt that I don't hear as well as I used to, but am convinced that my acuity, the ability to really listen into the music, is better than ever. Like so many other aspects of audio it is a learned response and ability to differentiate between aspects of the experience.
No matter how we want to cut it musical enjoyment is an emotional, visceral experience. Microphones don't listen or hear. Ears do.
It is my hope that all is well with you and yours. :D