Audiophile Vindication! - Cables Are Different And Now There's The Science

Aether Audio · « **on:** 20 Oct 2009, 11:27 pm »

Friends,

My research into the physics that led me to the development of the Black Box Technology has finally matured to the level of a complete new theory and model regarding cable performance and a new form of distortion. Specifically, this model is based on the most highly controversial aspect of cable design - the metallurgy involved. As far as I am aware, no other theory presently exists that explains how or why different metals sound different... from a solid, scientific standpoint anyway.

We all know the scientific community "pooh-poohs" the claims being made by audiophiles, and they have a lot of science to back them up. The poor audiophile that simply tries to share his observations gets raked over the coals as though he were some kind of nut. Believe me... I know. I used to be one of the guys that did the raking.

But... that "little voice" told me that so many people just can't be wrong... me being one of them.

After I heard the difference in cables clearly for myself, I haven't had a minute's rest.

While we have all heard about impedance and dielectric materials, the one area of greatest "mystery" has been the metals issue. Well, I twisted that mystery's arm until it cried "uncle" and gave up its secrets. Not to boast, but I believe the theory and model found at the link below is the most comprehesive analysis yet offered to the community. Just take your time and give it a while to digest. I tried to make it as simple as I could, but man... the physics behind this stuff is about as deep as it gets... the more you dig. Try doing a little research on your own regarding the topics covered in the paper. Do a Google search and be prepared to wade through more math and Solid State Physics than you could ever dream of. Believe me, your eyes will be as glossed over as mine are right now before you're done.

Anyway, just click on the paper called "Sub-Debye Phase Disortion In Conductors - A New Distortion-Source Model" In the end I may be proven wrong, but it's gonna take one real smart guy to do it. Regardless, I'm pretty sure were gonna see some sparks flying before this one is over with.

Enjoy!

-Bob

http://aetheraudio.com/Whitepapers.html

PS. Please forgive the typos. There's only a couple but I'm too toasted now to deal with them.

richidoo · « **Reply #1 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 12:21 am »

Hi Bob! I just finished reading the paper for the first time. It is very interesting, and very well written. Congratulations on a serious effort. I look forward to doing some listening tests to explore the concept. Thanks for your hard work.
Rich

konut · « **Reply #2 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 12:42 am »

As usual, a fascinating paper which I can only hope to understand partially. When you recover from this initial effort, could you comment on the effect the Smith Cell has on this phenomena? Thanks Bob!

ted_b · « **Reply #3 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 01:15 am »

Bob,
You are indeed living up to my "mad scientist" label of you.

You need to get together with Frank Tchang (ASI Liveline), the guy who pioneered the small metallic bowls as resonance control within the room treatment category. Frank's latest cables are incredible, and he espouses the use of various metals (I think 5 or 6 per cable) to form a synergy that, well, the proof is in the listening. With your empirical discoveries, and his recipe...who knows how great a cable can be made!

EDS_ · « **Reply #4 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 01:20 am »

Excellent. I need to read it again.

bhobba · « **Reply #5 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 01:30 am »

As usual Bob a great post. Dont worry about what the orthodoxy thinks - the orthodoxy never made progress. IMHO the thing that will make this stuff more 'acceptable' is double blind listening texts. They are very hard to ignore.

Thanks
Bill

TRADERXFAN · « **Reply #6 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 02:23 am »

Interesting stuff there Bob.

(Oh, you have brass listed in the class A materials twice)

Now who sells tin wires? aa

-Tony

*Scotty* · « **Reply #7 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 02:42 am »

Nevermind.
Scotty

rockadanny · « **Reply #8 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 11:30 am »

Does cryo treating the metal change its properties enough, therefore reducing its Debye point? In other words, for example, making copper wire more detailed than a non-cryo treated copper?

jwes · « **Reply #9 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 02:37 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 21 Oct 2009, 01:15 am

Bob,
You are indeed living up to my "mad scientist" label of you.

You need to get together with Frank Tchang (ASI Liveline), the guy who pioneered the small metallic bowls as resonance control within the room treatment category. Frank's latest cables are incredible, and he espouses the use of various metals (I think 5 or 6 per cable) to form a synergy that, well, the proof is in the listening. With your empirical discoveries, and his recipe...who knows how great a cable can be made!

Agreed - would be an interesting combination of the "alchemist" and the "scientist". I'm fully bought into the Liveline series and my guess it was obtained through a combination of golden ear and metallurgy, so adding the science could form an interesting duo.

JAMn Joe · « **Reply #10 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 03:00 pm »

jwes,

You're correct in your assessment of Franck's golden ears and metallurgy theory. Franck does seem to have golden ears but he's also a master jeweler and has a full knowledge of precious metals. His Resonators were his first foray into using combinations of precious metals to control room resonances and of course Franck being Franck can't leave well enough alone

Ted,

When Bob brought up his "Black Box" (without the box at the time) here for a weekend of relaxation and a little testing we used the Liveline cables for the test. I can tell you first hand it's a wonderful combination and I now use a finished version of the "Black Box" in combination with my Liveline speaker cables in the demo room

KBK · « **Reply #11 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 04:21 pm »

FYI:

Group C does exist - as an audio cable......

aa

Browntrout · « **Reply #12 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 05:06 pm »

Cool writing, please forgive me for questioning a couple of things. I ahve only read down to the below quote and shall post this now as it is fresh in my mind if that's ok?

"Nevertheless, one may suspect that the Debye temperature of a metal may have some effect upon conductor performance, but if so it is likely to be manifest at extremely low signal levels. At higher levels any such effect would likely be ?swamped? by the higher levels of charge carrier (electron current) flow. Under these conditions electron-electron collisions would be much more
frequent, even though thermal phonon scattering increases at a far greater rate and therefore dominates the resistance profile.
The key here is that thermal phonon vibrational rates are exceedingly high and reside just below optical frequencies in the infrared (heat) range. As such they represent a totally random scattering of electron ?mean free pathways? and therefore all such effects reside well beyond the audible range. Simply stated, this means that under all signal conditions no distortion artifacts can be generated within the conductor if electron-phonon scattering is solely the byproduct of thermal phonon vibrations."

From this I have two things to say, the higher signal level corresponds (if I understand the meaning correctly) to a higher swing in voltages which usually corresponds to a lower current for the signal so to state that there is more charge carriers in a higher strength signal would be incorrect there would be less charge carriers (per cross sectioanl area at any instance) but each one would possess more energy resulting in less collisions (in theory) and each collision changing the path of the electron less as it posseses more energy. This is not necessarily the case as we are (both you and I) applying a Newtonian model to things that do not adhere to this way of thinking. However for the sake of talking about it it works fine for me.
Secondly the vibrational rates of these 'phonons' being in the light spectrum is irrelevant as to whether they affect signals that are transmitted in the 'audio range'. The mechanism is not such that the vibrations within the metal become part of the oscilation that determines the frequency of the elctrical signal rather that the vibrations in the metal are in the THREE DEGREES OF FREEDOM which the atoms move in, this three dimensional oscillation interferes with the (for most intense and puposes to aid my explaination, please forgive.) two dimensional nature of the electrical signal. This therefore means that the vibrations of the metal do not have to be in any particular frequency range to affect an audio signal in a wire (or anything else) in fact the higher the frequency of vibration within the metal the more it will affect any signal.
I hope you don't mind me writing this, I shall continue to read the rest of the paper later and post further on this wicked topic which is really cool. Thanks.

jwes · « **Reply #13 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 05:18 pm »

Quote from: JAMn Joe on 21 Oct 2009, 03:00 pm

jwes,

You're correct in your assessment of Franck's golden ears and metallurgy theory. Franck does seem to have golden ears but he's also a master jeweler and has a full knowledge of precious metals. His Resonators were his first foray into using combinations of precious metals to control room resonances and of course Franck being Franck can't leave well enough alone

Ted,

When Bob brought up his "Black Box" (without the box at the time) here for a weekend of relaxation and a little testing we used the Liveline cables for the test. I can tell you first hand it's a wonderful combination and I now use a finished version of the "Black Box" in combination with my Liveline speaker cables in the demo room

Hey Joe,

So how does that work in implementation? Do I need an extra pair of speaker cables as the black box introduces another connection point between the amp and speaker, or does it come with it's own connectors? Also, I have two pairs of Livelines because I bi-wire out of monoblocks - would I have to buy four of these black boxes? Thanks for helping think through - also I didn't see the price on the website...

Jim

ted_b · « **Reply #14 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 05:23 pm »

Jim,
Yes, same as me (monoblock Spectrons), four black boxes. But no, the black boxes have, if ordered that way, dongles that will connect at the speaker or amp end, thereby eliminating a need for additional cabling.

Curly Woods · « **Reply #15 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 05:38 pm »

I love your response to those people on the DIYAudio forum Bob

They have no idea how to be civil with anyone and I loved the way that you handed them their heads

jwes · « **Reply #16 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 05:43 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 21 Oct 2009, 05:23 pm

Jim,
Yes, same as me (monoblock Spectrons), four black boxes. But no, the black boxes have, if ordered that way, dongles that will connect at the speaker or amp end, thereby eliminating a need for additional cabling.

Thanks very much Ted. Did you buy these after hearing? Also, I can't seem to find the list price - curious if you know.

Jim

JimJ · « **Reply #17 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 06:02 pm »

Quote

They have no idea how to be civil with anyone

Uh...

A lot of us here are also on DIY.

I have no comment about the original post, but...c'mon.

art · « **Reply #18 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 06:03 pm »

Interesting to see someone who is as interested in 1/f and phase noise as much as I am.

However..............

I would take issue with some of your explanations and conclusions about them. A minor quibble, though. For instance, I would not state that phase noise has been "vanquished" in modern designs. Merely lowered to a level that most are willing to accept. If you are not cencerned about 1/f noise, then you might conclude that it has been vanquished. But 1/f noise will always be there, and most designs tend to overlook it and its effect.

Pat

Curly Woods · « **Reply #19 on:** 21 Oct 2009, 06:47 pm »

Quote from: JimJ on 21 Oct 2009, 06:02 pm

Quote
They have no idea how to be civil with anyone

Uh...

A lot of us here are also on DIY.

I have no comment about the original post, but...c'mon.

Jim You must be familiar with Sy and his henchmen's attitude over there. They lack any degree of civility. Their idea of civility is figuring out how to belittle you in such a way as to not be construed as a personal attack. It is a game to them. You either agree with their views or be prepared to be skewered! No in between with them. I can honestly say that I have never been to site that has so many people that are purely hateful in my life.