Quote from: mfsoa on November 07, 2008, 03:54:33 pm
Since I am a chromatographer, (and can separate and analyze complex mixtures) does this give me any insight into what a certain vodka might taste like? No. Will I tell you that two vodkas taste alike because I cannot measure the difference between them? No. If I measure a difference between two vodkas, will I tell you that you can therefore taste a difference between them? No.
Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Let's say I have two vodka samples and run a GC-MS with good resolution. And the two vodka samples have identical peaks. That is, they contain exactly the same chemicals in the exact same proportions (i.e., you cannot measure the difference). Let's set aside for a moment that this is doubtless the same vodka from the same batch. It is not clear to me how these can actually taste different. Yes, the perception of taste may be different, or the variables affecting taste may be different (e.g., eating a sardine beforehand vs. eating a chocolate). If you are into perceived benefits, suggest you look at products by Peter Belt (who is at least honest enough to admit that's what he sells) or Machina Dynamica (who is not).
Moving back to wires, I think that it is a reasonable hypothesis that 2 wires manufactuerd by the same company from the same run in the same lengths will "sound" the same. By "sound" I mean any direct effect of the wire on the sound coming out of the speakers, or any indirect effect the wire may have on active components in the system resulting in an effect on the sound coming out of the speakers. I am not talking about perceived sound.
OK? Identical wires sound identical? Next, what real material characteristics can change the behaviour of a wire (assuming all external variables are identical). My short list of main variables are RCL. There are likely others, such as the much vaunted "skin effect" and crystal structure. But it is exceedingly difficult to see how these can manifest sufficient change to audibly alter engine performance, except as these variables are manifested as RCL. Speaker drivers are really best thought of as very simple, inefficient electric engines whose performance is based on EMF. They don't care about the pain and suffering electrons have passed through in getting to the wires in the driver; all they care about is that the electron moves through the wire and generates an electromagnetic field. So, there is no reason to believe that there is any characteristic other than RCL with the potential for a change in the sound. If people feel that there is something else, they should be prepared to demonstrate it; i.e., the burden of proof is on the proponent of a new hypothesis.
So wires with identical RCL should perform identically in an audio system. Changes in RCL "may" have an audible effect. (Not power cords, by the way, unless the power supply is poorly designed and/or poorly executed. An obvious example would be RCL way beyond the bounds of common sense, like a 500 ft 18 guage power cord.) All of these variables, and their direct effect on signal, can be measured. Their indirect effect, like high capacitance wires blowing unstable amps is an unknown, but it is probably not unreasonable to assume that minor changes will have negligible effects in well designed well executed equipment. Note that it is impossible to uniquely assign this effect to a wire, since it is the combination of a wire and specific pieces of equipment. Note also that such wires seem to be pushing the boundaries of good engineering.
There is little doubt that wires can change the sound of an audio system, though this probably decreases to the extent the componets are properly engineered and manufactured. The question is whether, within a relatively generous RCL range these changes are audible, and if so, whether the change is "better, "worse" or just plain old "different". The answers, I think, are "exceedingly unlikely" and "different".
Zheem,
The only way I'd say those two vodkas taste the same based on measurement is if a few conditions were true:
1) We have reached the pinnacle of analytical chemistry, and are absolutely positive that at no time in the future will we learn anything more about the science behind separation, detection, or even broader, organic chemistry.
2) We also know everything there is to know about the human taste process and how the nervous system and brain figure out what the heck something tastes like, and again are absolutely positive that in the future course of human activity that no new information will be learned about this subject.
3) Now that we know all there is to know about 1) and 2), we must also be absolutely sure that we know everything that will ever be known about the correlation between those measurements and how the mouth/nose/brain system uses the chemical information to produce a certain taste. Again, for the remainder of mankind's stay on this blue ball, we are certain that there will be no advances in this field.
4) We are sure that any molecules
not yet constructed will also follow the rules above.
I do not feel that we have reached the above goals, yet folks who say that it is not possible for a powercord to change the sound of a stereo are somehow convinced that no new information will ever be obtained by mankind regarding electricity, circuit design, human perception, the human nervous system, acoustics, electronic measurement etc. Since I see no evidence for this, I must conclude that it is an unsupportable position. Hmmm, interesting that the naysayars position of relying on measurement is rendered meaningless by the very fact that we don't know what the future of measurement will hold!!
My world view encompasses the possibility that maybe someday, something might be learned that wasn't known before. This may be shocking for those who feel that we had electricity all figgered' out a century ago.
And I must wonder why the naysayers are so afraid to just listen. C'mon, it won't hurt! Why do they have so little faith in their ears, rooms, systems, egos, whatever, that they can't just listen and decide for themselves.
Oh, that's right, they read in a text book somewhere that these equations are well known accurate.
Don't get sand in your ears, guys, if you ever decide to take your head out of it!!
Thanks for the discussion,
-Mike
