|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.227.245.192
Something I've been espousing for years. There is SO MUCH MORE going on than the textbook characteristics of L, C, and R, which are too often used to argue against phenomena occurring with sonic differences in cabling, computer audio playback, and various accessories that cannot be readily explained. In other words, to some, if it isn't in a textbook, it doesn't exist.
Some of the major problems....what do you test for? How does one create the test? And how does one test what cannot yet be measured? Writing off the phenomena in wholesale fashion, as so many naysayers regularly do, adds nothing to further scientific discovery.
This new discovery will open more doors, and add chapters to existing physics and electrical phenomena.
Follow Ups:
The quantum world is a hive of activity. Even in what we think of as a vacuum there are constantly particles created and annihilated.
However this activity gives rise to statistical certainties which conspire that for the case of cables for example L,C and R are the only characteristics which matter.
There are other laws of physics based on statistics like thermodynamics for example.
The chance that isolated quantum phenomena have a meaningful influence on cables and how they work is about the same as the likelihood of all air molecules in your room collecting in one corner and if they are not isolated the statistics kick back in and we are back to the observable L,C,R.
And I contend that there is a lot more going on than is observable. That is my overall point.
"The quantum world is a hive of activity."
Exactly. In our very small audio world, tests have not been designed, nor proper equipment readily available to get at the quantum activity. That, and the need for six-and-seven figure lab gear to do the testing. Just ask John Curl....he was willing to dive into this area a few years ago, as long as someone would purchase or acquire the ultra-expensive gear needed to take the initial stab. If anyone has clearance and a good friend at Brookhaven or Lawrence Livermore, please give him a call.
Exactly. In our very small audio world, tests have not been designed, nor proper equipment readily available to get at the quantum activity. That, and the need for six-and-seven figure lab gear to do the testing. Just ask John Curl....he was willing to dive into this area a few years ago, as long as someone would purchase or acquire the ultra-expensive gear needed to take the initial stab. If anyone has clearance and a good friend at Brookhaven or Lawrence Livermore, please give him a call.
What hypothesis is he going to test and what experimental design is he going to use to test it? Nobody is going to give the man access to exclusive research facilities to tinker around hoping he'll stumble into something interesting.
None.
He put his name on some item together with Jack Bybee and his "Quantum Purifiers" and in the process is diminishing his standing as an excellent designer of amplifiers.
You can find some interesting things on diyaudio.com if you search 'Bybee' including some poor attempts by John Curl to defend the man and his scam.
/nt
No doubt there is a lot going on.
The point is that it doesn't matter to audio.
No need for me to ask john Curl, he is over at diyaudio vainly trying to defend the indefensible from time to time.
At least he tries, I got to give him that. He fails but he tries...
.
would you care to elaborate on just what it is you are talking about?"There is SO MUCH MORE going on than the textbook characteristics of L, C, and R, which are too often used to argue against phenomena occurring with sonic differences in cabling, computer audio playback, and various accessories that cannot be readily explained. In other words, to some, if it isn't in a textbook, it doesn't exist."
Maybe it's not in the textbook because the distinctions, if any, are so trivial they don't matter?
"Some of the major problems....what do you test for? How does one create the test? And how does one test what cannot yet be measured? Writing off the phenomena in wholesale fashion, as so many naysayers regularly do, adds nothing to further scientific discovery."
The major issue with audio is that recordings are made by tiny microphones which are energized by sound waves only where the microphones are present. This is a thread bare record of the original event which you can prove to yourself by simply attending a concert and turning your head from side to side while enjoying the event. After obtaining this one dimensional representation of a three dimensional event, the resultant electrical signal is then played back through transducers that in no way energize the listening room the way the original instruments did.
Worrying about "quantum level" stuff is completely beside the point. The issue is how better to capture the original event and how to improve transducers to better represent it.
JE
Edits: 07/20/15
| "There is SO MUCH MORE going on than the textbook characteristics of L, C, and R, which are too often used to argue against phenomena occurring with sonic differences in cabling, computer audio playback, and various accessories that cannot be readily explained.How do you know that?
|"In other words, to some, if it isn't in a textbook, it doesn't exist."
To some others, if you think the textbook is wrong: bring data.
The Weyl fermion was in the textbook.
Edits: 07/21/15
"Worrying about the quantum level stuff" is not what Alan's post is about, although I can understand the sentiment behind some of the knee-jerk reactions around here.If we want to improve transducers and recordings it can't hurt to know about whatever is going on. Knowledge precedes measurement. Measuring precedes design and manufacture. The hope is to obtain a better understanding of tangible sonic phenomena that perhaps has not been adequately measured or explained yet.
Edits: 07/21/15 07/21/15 07/21/15 07/21/15
.
Edits: 07/21/15
Proof of activity is not evidence of significance. We are more thoroughly informed by Einstein but, in our mundane affairs, governed by Newton. And then there is the incontestable evidence of climate change which is not occurring. Scientific claims -- and their relevance -- should be considered with the skepticism that is essential to science.
The human sense of hearing is unremarkable compared to our household pets. While I am aware of changes in values of crossover components as small as 0.5 Ohm or 0.1 microfarad, I would suggest that if, while you are listening to music, you are concerned with effects at the quantum level, you might not be paying much attention to the music.
Climate change? Music? Feng shui? Really?
Sorry, good sir, but you continue to be off the mark.
Apparently I am off the mark. Perhaps you could help me by identifying it.
...Alan's original post is yet another attack on perfectionist audio naysayers (objectivists). Since the "discovery" of the Weyl fermion will most likely have no direct effect on the pursuit of perfectionist audio for the foreseeable future, his citation of it seems to be both a red herring and allegorical. The real intention of the post appears to be an attempt at increasing the legitimacy of the subjective and fringe aspects of perfectionist audio.
Personally I find attempts such as this to co opt real science into support for fringe audio concepts clumsy and unconvincing.
I agree with you. Despite his denial, this effectively is what he is doing, and he seems very serious about it.
If you are going to venture into this realm you should be prepared for a certain amount of skepticism. Lightening it with attempted humor may be a friendly gesture. That was my intent.
I can enjoy an article about particle physics in context, but on the whole would rather listen to Mozart without being concerned about what bosons and fermions might be doing in my system. My poor understanding of the activity of electrons seems to suffice.
Au contraire....I'm encouraging it. The fact of another discovery gives me hope that additional knowledge will lead to more testing that explains many of the nuances many of us experience with high-quality music playback.
Edits: 07/21/15
| The fact of another discovery gives me hope that additional knowledge will lead to more testing that explains many of the nuances many of us experience with high-quality music playback.
That's not the takeaway message.
The takeaway message was that predictions from theoretical physics about electronic systems are very advanced.
Therefore we should listen to those same predictions when they concern substantially more mundane and well-tested domains of experimental science.
I am optimistic, too, that our understanding of phenomena is still progressing and that, eventually, it will also help us understand and perfect audio technology as well.[Our understanding of brain science is also being revolutionized. So, I think DBT testing will be thoroughly discredited as well.]
Edits: 07/21/15
"The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." - Camus
So, I think DBT testing will be thoroughly validated as well. Could go either way dontcha think?
OTOH, the brutal reality is that perfectionist audio neither warrants nor attracts the level of basic research necessary to settle this issue. So what we're left with is faith .
...actually what we are left with is our observations.
Faith requires none.
...or experience and knowledge.Not necessarily universal - may just be for my own use.
What color is the border of this box while you are typing in it?
Edits: 07/21/15
No, I actually think that they will be able to wire electrodes to our brain and be able to identify all the variables at work in our subconscious.
...I can just see geoffkait promoting his next new Fermion Tweek.
Highly doubtful, but if it works??
he'll charge more.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
"the textbook characteristics of L, C, and R"...
Are not the least in conflict with any underlying mechanisms because they simply don't address them at all. They are useful characterizations that describe the nature of the beast adequately for general understanding and the initial levels of design.
The next level down in design and usage is given to fairly gross, measurable failures of "perfection". In other words all components are RLC networks despite being touted as just one of the preceeding. Component manufacturers have, over the years, refined designs and materials to where today's parts are far "purer" than ever, but they can never reach perfection as nature won't allow it.
AND THEN assuming that the parts are quite dominated by their desired characteristic, how do the attributes of that characteristic compare to the perfection that we desire? Is that resistor's noise voltage reeealy (4KTRB)^2 or does it have "excess" noise?
My (belabored?) point is that the level of detail provided by quantum mechanics, while crucial to understanding the actual physics of the beast, has little impact on design and implementation at the component level. At the semiconductor level however...
Rick
Given that quantum mechanics governs/models the fundamental actions of matter, there is "activity at the quantum level" in EVERYTHING.
The question is ... how does this activity affect what you and I observe in our macro world?
rlindsa
I don't see any proof whatsoever that substantiates what you are reaching for.
Here is an idea - put a thin layer of copper on all walls of listening room, place bowls of quantum rocks in middle of each wall, place a large Telsa Coil in the back of the room, and then sit in your sweet spot, place a coat hanger on your head, and there, you are done!
nt
Bang Shin method of furniture arrangement. walk around in the dark and......
Let's keep in mind that activity does not necessarily mean efficacy. There are simple, clear ways to build audio systems, some of which are far more reasonable and effective than others. While, to the scientifically curious, such physics experiments are fascinating, pursuit of "Quantum" products does not assure you are propelling an audio system's performance forward in any meaningful/significant way. :)
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
(nt)
Have you reviewed any "quantum products? How many quantum products are out there to your knowledge? Jack Bybee (whose products are said to operate on "the quantum mechanical level"), and even Geoffkait come to mind.
Edits: 07/20/15 07/20/15
I have the Wells Audio Innamorata amp, which contains some Bybee products, but I cannot tell you that they are the key to the amp's good sound. (Such would require removal and re-testing, and I'm not about to trash the value of the amp by doing so).
I have also been in demonstrations with Quantum devices, as well as other tweaks and they have failed my Law of Efficacy. I put my own "Quantum Rocks" (glass stones in a pretty bowl) in my room, and I even stir them occasionally, but to no effect. :)
Truth be known, I rather enjoy the shocked look on audiophiles' faces the first time when I look so serious about stirring the beads and discussing how important getting the Quantum field just right is.. before I burst out laughing and they get the joke.
The greatest impediment to advancing an audiophile system is the audiophile.
I read the Bybee White Pape referenced on the Wells Audio website and found it colorful.
.
But then, we might not agree what the target is.
Here is a more detailed explanation of what Weyl Fermions are. If anyone understands it, please let us know!
Anyway, we, humanity, are still unraveling the science of matter that you would think we already have a complete handle on as we know so much, but there is still more to learn, evidently.
Fascinating article, really! But when I finished, I had no idea what I had just read. Sometimes I'm so bummed out that I didn't achieve a higher level of education. I thought because I married an extremely intelligent (plus good looking & witty!) woman, that would be good enough. Sometimes I'm wrong. Dave
Everyone thinks I'm strange except my friends deep inside the earth
Another door to knowledge opens....that's one of the primary points I got from the article. That, and there is so much more to know and yet to discover.
Nt
I can't think of anyone who denies activity at the quantum level. I will be intrigued if this research comes up with anything with an audible effect in audio electronics.
Meanwhile, I look forward to controlled DBT results showing the audible effects, but I'm not holding my breath.
-----
"A fool and his money are soon parted." --- Thomas Tusser
Very cool stuff- Alan. Thanks! for sharing.
amazing
I have to start working on the implications of this for my first order series crossovers. They may provide explanations for some things that have eluded me.
Good one!
The recent "god" particle discovery must have been a big event for you.
After we figure out dark matter I say anyone who dares doubt cable differences be thrown in jail ... oh happy day ...
EMF and LCR are all aspects of quantum behavior. An electron is a quantum particle.
Those who elect to keep their minds and head buried in the sand will argue against quantum effects, but they do so out their own ignorance
... Don't pretend to understand them. Folks around here who offer "quantum effects" as an explanation of audiophile effects don't actually understand them either.
Until you can explain exactly how "quantum effects" improves the sound of your whatever, (say cables), you are selling snake oil.
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
What if a relationship is shown to exist between and intervention and an out come, even if the mechanism is not easily understood?
How strong would the evidence suggesting said relationship need to be for the intervention to be considered plausible, or worthy of further investigation, or causal (mildly, moderately, strongly)... considering that the means of the quantification may not yet exist (let alone how it might map to practical use) and qualification can be readily confounded by context and the methods of investigation... and subjectivity?
Just wonderin'.
Regards,
91
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Just because you post a hypothetical to the internet does not mean you have posted evidence of anything, much less demonstrated the straw man assumed in your hypothetical.
JE
I think you may have missed my point due to some semantic confusion.It is clear from the thread we are conversing in generalities, not scientific nomenclature. If you missed that or are capable only of literal interpretation, speaking in nomenclature and one-step-logic please substitute for the term "evidence" either "argument" or "finding" or "proposition" or some other relevant lay-term. Hopefully this clarifies the point and minimises any confusion.
Regards,
91.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Edits: 07/21/15
It sure does! You're just talking out of your ass then, aren't you?
JE
.
...because although I recognise that the relationships can be difficult to prove, I also understand that this can leave the door open for the unscrupulous to take advantage of people (i.e. there is little burden of proof).
Cheers,
91.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
nt
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
nt
I love the music of Dmitri Shostakovich
.
Alan: Thank you for bringing to my attention this facinating new discovery.
David Pritchard
that is my favorite statement in your post. Thank goodness many scientists didn't think that way or nothing new would be discovered. One of my favorite areas is wondering about fields around various wires; AC, Interconnect and speaker, and how moving conductors away from the other could potentially change things. It might take inches or it might take feet but I bet there would be changes. I've already formed opinions from lots of listening that I don't like shielded cables.
E
T
Edits: 07/19/15
As a once researcher and Research Manager, there are in "science" seekers of knowledge (researchers) and appliers of knowledge (practitioners); a person can be both.It is more often practitioners that fall into the habit of thinking "if it isn't in a textbook, it doesn't exist." When confronted with heavy workloads, information overload, fatigue... and ego one can readily develop beliefs and expectations that allow one to easily dismiss emerging or even established knowledge.
Researchers by nature and nurture tend not to accept that all is known - they have to, it is their life.
Regards,
91
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Edits: 07/20/15
In my experience, shielded cables close in the sound...is that what you get as well?
I do see the biggest improvement in image followed by HF but image the most.
E
T
early on on the 80's published a series of papers with various tweaks. One was to make interconnects or speaker wire and use glued together clothes pins to keep the conductors about 10 inches apart.
Why pay full price for a quantum experience when we can simply imagine having it, for much less money?
Edits: 07/19/15
I didn't comment on Quantum anything
E
T
Nothing personal. My post was not made in reference to you nor was it aimed *at* you in any way. This is a quantum subject in a quantum forum, that's all. You started talking about tweaks in general, so did I too.
Edits: 07/19/15 07/19/15
Actually I thought I was mostly talking about objective v subjective.........
E
T
I can see now that your mentioning of tweaks was merely incidental to the process. Sorry if I misunderstood. Have a great day.
Edits: 07/20/15
Perfect!
nt
We can only hope.
Nt
try it! you know you want to!
.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: