In Reply to: Silver does indeed react to magnetic fields differently from copper... posted by Cleantimestream on August 12, 2014 at 14:47:54:
"and it's resistance to electron flow is 8% more efficient than copper {whether that could be heard in a DAC is anyone's guess}"
Certainly, it is true that the conductivity of silver is somewhat higher than copper, as you say. But now consider in practice what that might mean. Let's say the copper output lead in the DAC has a resistance of 0.1 ohms, and that the input impedance of the audio amplifier is 20K ohms. Now compare with a silver lead, where the resistance is say 0.09 ohms instead. Can anyone seriously imagine that the difference between the two cases is going to be audible?
Well yes, I can answer my own question; some people apparently can seriously imagine that the difference is audible. I was assured by DanL that he was being serious with his claims that "different wires have different sonic signatures," etc., etc. However, I think the emphasis here has to be on the word "imagine." Humans can very easily imagine that they experience all kinds of bogus phenomena. Not with any dishonest intent; it can all seem real enough to the subject. There are endless examples of this in the arena of optical illusions, and similarly there are lots of examples with aural illusions. The brain can easily be tricked, and it can easily interpolate with what it expects to see, or to hear.
In the face of such "unreliability" of the observer, one has to have more trustworthy ways of trying to establish whether a claimed perceived phenomenon is real or not. Only by such means can one distinguish real science from voodoo science. One way to gain insight is by measurements, with apparatus. Clearly in the case of a silver wire versus a copper wire, there will in principle be a tiny measurable difference between the two. We don't really need to make the actual measurement in this case, since we can calculate the effect of the change. The voltage divider is 0.1 ohms vs 20 Kohms in one case, and 0.09 ohms versus 20 Kohms in the other. Any effects will be utterly negligible, and way below the threshold of audibility.
Maybe, though, someone will dispute the assertion that this is below the threshold of audibility. In that case, there is one other way of objectively testing their claim; the double-blind test. It is useless to do anything other than a double-blind test. If the person knows which setup uses the copper wire and which uses the silver wire, then of course it is only too easy for them to convince themselves that they hear a difference, if they are so minded to believe such things. The only way to avoid the risk of confirmation bias inherent in "sighted" comparisons is to do a proper, rigorous, double-blind test.
The evidence from double-bind listening tests is that humans are remarkably bad at distinguishing between configurations that they claimed were obviously different when they had the benefit of knowing which was which.
In the case under discussion, I would be absolutely confident that no one would be able to distinguish between the copper wire and the silver wire in a double-blind listening test. I doubt that anyone has actually conducted such an experiment, and some people will be happy to continue with their beliefs that different wires have different sonic signatures, even in the DAC example under discussion. It would be a harmless (if somewhat expensive) delusion, but a delusion nonetheless.
Chris
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Silver does indeed react to magnetic fields differently from copper... - cpotl 19:50:26 08/12/14 (59)
- Perhaps if I stated in another way, copper HAS magnetic properties... surprised? 2 1/2 times More magnetic - Cleantimestream 20:17:17 08/12/14 (58)
- RE: Perhaps if I stated in another way, copper HAS magnetic properties... surprised? 2 1/2 times More magnetic - cpotl 20:21:54 08/12/14 (57)
- LOL !!!!! - unclestu 20:47:26 08/12/14 (56)
- RE: LOL !!!!! - cpotl 21:32:27 08/12/14 (55)
- RE: LOL !!!!! - Cleantimestream 06:15:53 08/13/14 (29)
- Documentation needed - Triode_Kingdom 10:43:04 08/13/14 (27)
- sigh, - Cleantimestream 12:46:52 08/13/14 (26)
- RE: sigh, - Triode_Kingdom 08:05:29 08/14/14 (1)
- RE: sigh, - Cleantimestream 12:28:20 08/14/14 (0)
- RE: sigh, - cpotl 13:19:23 08/13/14 (23)
- RE: sigh, - Cleantimestream 14:07:23 08/13/14 (22)
- RE: sigh, - cpotl 14:12:06 08/13/14 (21)
- RE: sigh, - Cleantimestream 14:20:00 08/13/14 (20)
- Speaking of rude, - The Bored 07:27:01 08/14/14 (0)
- RE: sigh, - cpotl 14:24:45 08/13/14 (18)
- You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 14:41:31 08/13/14 (17)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 14:48:09 08/13/14 (16)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Tre' 17:18:03 08/13/14 (5)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 18:02:29 08/13/14 (4)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Tre' 20:24:14 08/13/14 (0)
- RE: You poor man~nT - dave slagle 18:29:54 08/13/14 (2)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 18:45:03 08/13/14 (1)
- In a word... - op48no1 18:47:21 08/13/14 (0)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 14:54:18 08/13/14 (9)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 15:05:28 08/13/14 (8)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 15:10:58 08/13/14 (7)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 15:21:09 08/13/14 (6)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 15:34:23 08/13/14 (5)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 15:37:37 08/13/14 (4)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 15:56:28 08/13/14 (3)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 16:05:19 08/13/14 (2)
- RE: You poor man~nT - Cleantimestream 04:06:40 08/14/14 (1)
- RE: You poor man~nT - cpotl 05:34:41 08/14/14 (0)
- RE: LOL !!!!! - cpotl 06:32:54 08/13/14 (0)
- numbers - unclestu 22:00:28 08/12/14 (24)
- RE: numbers - cpotl 22:16:53 08/12/14 (23)
- more LOL - unclestu 23:29:46 08/12/14 (22)
- RE: more LOL - cpotl 01:24:20 08/13/14 (21)
- Changing your tune a bit - unclestu 13:54:16 08/13/14 (20)
- RE: Changing your tune a bit - cpotl 14:07:44 08/13/14 (19)
- RE: Changing your tune a bit - unclestu 15:06:32 08/13/14 (18)
- RE: Changing your tune a bit - cpotl 15:14:20 08/13/14 (17)
- AsI wrote earlier - unclestu 15:27:48 08/13/14 (16)
- Cpotl: - gusser 16:00:34 08/13/14 (15)
- Well - unclestu 18:30:49 08/13/14 (10)
- Yes, the old Kimber black wire story. - gusser 07:55:19 08/14/14 (3)
- RE: Yes, the old Kimber black wire story. - unclestu 23:36:36 08/15/14 (2)
- RE: Yes, the old Kimber black wire story. - gusser 14:13:50 08/16/14 (0)
- John Curl? - op48no1 08:53:30 08/16/14 (0)
- RE: Well - Tre' 21:27:47 08/13/14 (5)
- RE: Cpotl: - cpotl 17:28:53 08/13/14 (3)
- RE: Cpotl: - dave slagle 18:06:37 08/13/14 (2)
- RE: Cpotl: - cpotl 18:19:27 08/13/14 (1)
- RE: Cpotl: - Tre' 21:16:23 08/13/14 (0)