|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.32.160.56
In Reply to: RE: Not sure you got my point... posted by rick_m on June 18, 2010 at 15:23:36
"I agree with your statement about susceptibility but I think he's right and that some people DO think sensitivity to cables is indicative of a highly resolving system and not being one of them that he's trying to disabuse them of that notion."
Rick, he didn't say what you think he said. If he had, I'd have no real bones to pick with him. He said, "...some of us actually believe susceptability to external noise signifies a high resolution system."
Mote that he did NOT say "sensitivity to cables." He said "susceptibility to external noise." Those two things are hardly the same. One makes sense, the other is nonsense.
Follow Ups:
"Mote that he did NOT say "sensitivity to cables." He said "susceptibility to external noise." Those two things are hardly the same. One makes sense, the other is nonsense. "
OK. Look, I'm not currently (or voltagely) very knowledgeable about audiophile power cables. I haven't noticed much affect from power cables but haven't looked very hard either so my own experience is a null. However I've read enough on AA to know that there is much concern that they may radiate, receive or reflect noise and RFI both incoming and outgoing. I'm convinced that it's established in the minds of many that cable performance and 'noise' are correlated and so I see no conflict in Don's statements.
One of the things that I believe (and I believe that Don believes) is that in general issues of the power cables affecting equipment performance are best addressed at the equipment end with the exception of perhaps using shielded cables to reduce electrostatic coupling to signal cables.
When it comes right down to it, unless we start measuring what's going on the whole argument is bootless. In some systems power cables may be a factor due to their effect on noise coupling, in others they may be a factor due to their impedance interacting with the rectifiers, in others they may not be a significant factor at all as long as they get the AC to the device.
Stereo systems are SYSTEMS yet at the component level the interfaces are inadequately specified to insure them playing well together. Messing with the cables is unfortunately the main tool available to most users to try and make possibly disparate items into a whole. But they are an especially poor place to work on most power related issues in my book.
Rick
I agree with most of what you write. You need to step back from the technical conversation about systems and cables and noise and analyze the meaning of Don's statement again: "I mean let's get real some of us actually believe susceptability to external noise signifies a high resolution system..."
This sentence means: "Some people believe that a system is high-resolution IF that system is susceptible to external noise." That is pure nonsense. No one on this forum has made that claim. It has, however, been stated that resistance to external noise is not a prerequisite for a system to be high-resolution, as some system installations are not subject to external noise (for example, I have a battery-powered system in a cabin in Maine where there aren't any microwave ovens or cell phones. Not that it is "high-res," but there aren't external noise issues as part of the total system (equipment plus physical context).)
I have been laughing at the logical mash-up of Don's recent posts, not necessarily their implied content.
When it was said that to be considered high-res a system didn't have to be resistant to the effects of external noise, Don reinterpreted that to mean that a system HAD TO BE SUSCEPTIBLE to exterior noise to be high-res. Do you see that interpretive accident?
Don has constructed a strawman either through his neglect of the basics of logic, or through willfully twisting words to draw for himself an easier target. He does a great disservice to Tony with his falsely-based attacks below, and he does a great disservice to the value of the debate here, as he fabricates an opponent where there is none, and constructs an impediment to rational discussion where there should be none.
of two different amplifier brands: Bryston and Pass Labs. Bryston has always been known as cable insensitive given its pro leanings, but previously produced some typically lower resolution hard sounding AB amplifiers. With the latest batch of products like the 28B, however, they are beginning to get the resolution thing. Pass Labs and Nelson Pass in particular, has always focused on simple, high quality topologies known for producing high resolution output. Only recently, however, has his designs been more stringent in the power supply noise rejection issue caused by RFI.
The two products have converged from opposite priorities.
rw
Well, OK. I suspect what makes the logic tortured is the lack of shared understanding of what 'resolution' and 'noise' mean.
Guess it beats arguing about DBT's...
Rick
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: