 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
65.64.26.209
In Reply to: Re: Ah, yes.... posted by Duster on September 25, 2005 at 14:05:40:
If we agree that cable break-in is an opinion rather than proven phonemena, then we just leave it at that. And everybody is entitled to their opining in this forum...right?
Follow Ups:
....I cannot agree to your first premise whatsoever. I manufacture a device that provides repeatable and consistent results, and hundreds of customers have confirmed them. But your last sentence is just fine....just stick to what you know.
Alan: ""I cannot agree to your first premise whatsoever. I manufacture a device that provides repeatable and consistent results, and hundreds of customers have confirmed them.""
Must be difficult, selling a device that you cannot provide proof of, and the explanation of operation requires violating all known scientific methods of test, material sciences, and human audibility capabilities..isn't this exactly like a photograph in a freezer??Al: "" But your last sentence is just fine....just stick to what you know. ""
Now, this sentence is the reason I provided the last response..you should be ashamed of yourself..you are better than this response. I apologize for the previous sentence..Tony is trying to respond nicely to your hostility, as well as that of Dusters...so now, your telling him he knows little, and he isn't a big boy, so he can't ask questions...
You, as well as Duster, are better than that..
The rules of this forum require no flames..and no denigration..Tony violated none, you both did..certainly in spirit.
Cheers, John
....the JNeutron that has come out of the woodwork in this thread is completely foreign to me. I've always given him great respect both on these forums and in private e-mails. Perhaps this JNeutron today was born on Bizarro world, the exact opposite of the real one.In any case:
Must be difficult, selling a device that you cannot provide proof of
That's quite a presumption on your part! Other than you today, who says I can't, and don't? You too, surprisingly, are falling in to the grease pit of requiring others to prove a negative. Not like the JNeutron I used to converse with.
and the explanation of operation requires violating all known scientific methods of test, material sciences, and human audibility capabilities
Actually, all the initial design work and testing of the device was done strictly with 'scopes and various digital test gear, ensuring the consistent and accurate input/output of the internal components pursuant to the design parameters. Of course, you are not privy to those, nor were you at the test bench over the many months of prototyping several years ago. And each and every unit is tested and calibrated on a rather expensive digital 'scope prior to its completion and shipment. Unless the professional test gear itself violated those "known scientific methods" (and was continually checked for calibration itself, I might add), your statement is, shall I say non-artfully....completely whack.
Material sciences? All known quantities, J....no foo-foo dust is used in the Cooker. All parts are sourced from non-foo foo companies such as Digikey and Mouser, among others.
As far as audibility, customers wouldn't be purchasing the unit, and would be returning it in droves if they couldn't audibly hear the improvements. And I might remind you that I offered you a unit for testing purposes perhaps a couple of years ago....you declined.
..isn't this exactly like a photograph in a freezer??
Uhh, don't know about that....the Cable Cooker doesn't require a photograph, nor does it operate in a freezer. Room temp all the way. But btw....have you attempted this comparison?
Alan: ""And I might remind you that I offered you a unit for testing purposes perhaps a couple of years ago....you declined.""I remembered your offer..and I recall I declined, because at the time, I could think of no clear test that would be of any use..I'm sure everybody has tried the low distortion methods of checking..so my just repeating those probably wouldn't find anything..
It would be better to learn the newer, more stringent criteria for differential localization capabilities, and then apply them to the various entities called "tweaks"...as I'm confident that many of them will rise to mainstream use once verifiable testing shows them as really working..really there..
I haven't changed, Alan...maybe I doesn't speaks too well, but I'z da same guy..
Cheers, John
Ya gotta read the posts just a taaaaad slower...Ya missed a part..I'll repeat it..
Now, this sentence is the reason I provided the last response..you should be ashamed of yourself..you are better than this response. I apologize for the previous sentenceOK, maybe I coulda been a bit clearer...I was apologizing for the previous sentences...plural..
What I was unhappy about was the way you really slapped tony..his questions seemed rather reasonable..
Ya should asked me first, as the bulk of your post was un-necessary...
The picture reference was this tweak about puttin a pic in your freezer, and the sound system will sound better...
As for your cooker, I know nothing about it's construction..I would assume you took great care in it's design...I didn't question that..
As for what it actually does to the cables, that is what I was referring to..no actual physical, test proof, just peoples listening. Have I pshawed people's listening?? No, in fact, I have listened specifically to other's views..
That's been my assertion all along..the test capability to date is terribly inadequate for finding what is heard in soundstage..anything that has the ability to change soundstage image in subtle ways WILL NOT be found using current standards...
Alan...ya read it wrong...hey, it happens...maybe I didn't spell it out clear enough...oops...sorry bout that, chief(lamenting Don Adams..)
Cheers, John
PS..Bizarro world..my kids do this saturday opposite game...drives me nuts..
I somehow doubt the Bored will blame us for our expressed frustrations. It's like being bugged by a pesty fly for so long, then suddenly flailing one's arms and shouting, "Get away from me!". Yes, the fly got the best of you, but it's better than keeping that frustration bottled-up. Neither you or TM will ever let go of your opposition here. You will never know how ridiculous and arrogant your opposition is. If your POV's were true, this forum's Mission Statement would be as pretentious as you are. That's not being rude, it's the plain truth.You are using a PA system to evaluate cables and think yourself qualified to challenge other's experiences? How absurd. At least evaluate cables within an audiophile sound system before you posture. You need to see things as they are, and not what you want them to be.
Duster: .""I somehow doubt the Bored will blame us for our expressed frustrations.""
In other words, you can flame anyone, and they will look the other way??Tony did not do that..only you and Al.. I point that out.
Duster" "" Neither you or TM will ever let go of your opposition here. You will never know how ridiculous and arrogant your opposition is. If your POV's were true, this forum's Mission Statement would be as pretentious as you are. That's not being rude, it's the plain truth. ""
What in the world are you talking about???What am I opposing?? I mean, besides your piss poor unprovoked, attacking attitude, what have I opposed?? Now, that is a truth..
Duster: ""You are using a PA system to evaluate cables and think yourself qualified to challenge other's experiences?""
STOP LYING, DUSTER. Please, cool off, you are not thinking correctly..I use a PA system to deliver sound and music support in a 450 seat venue, to 450 screaming and laughing kids and adults. The only criteria I evaluate using this system, is the durability of the neutrik connectors, the insulation integrity of the 12/3 wire, and the survivability of a 12 inch delta pro within 20 feet of a rather large hydrogen explosion.. I have never, ever, alluded to using a system of this type for the evaluation of any component...ever..
You knew that, but simply decided to LIE...that is not necessary..
Please do not lie in an attempt to support your behaviour..
Duster: ""
At least evaluate cables within an audiophile sound system before you posture. You need to see things as they are, and not what you want them to be. ""
I have had cables evaluated in that fashion. As a result of that evaluation and feedback, am working to change the criteria of audibility for soundstage generation...What I see is you behaving badly..please stop. I look forward to the end of your current tirade, and a return of the old Duster...I miss him..
Please cool down before posting again..thanks..
Cheers, John
Yes, I'm pissed and you are doing no good to calm that in calling me a lyer. You had told me via email that you do not own an audiophile quality home audio system, and that your interest as a listener is to your pro audio sound reinforcement system. Take that accusation back, John.
Duster: ""Yes, I'm pissed and you are doing no good to calm that in calling me a lyer. You had told me via email that you do not own an audiophile quality home audio system, and that your interest as a listener is to your pro audio sound reinforcement system. Take that accusation back, John.""
What word would you prefer??? Absent minded?? or forgetful?? Or, just downright creative?? I can use whichever phrase you prefer..I have never ever claimed to use a PA system to evaluate anything other than the system's capability at doing it's job..it does what I need, it doesn't weigh much, and I haven't been able to blow it up yet..(I try, though).
I have said that to you in e-mail, I've stated that since the inception of propheads..I've stated it at AR, at AH, DIY..everywhere..I do not pretend to use it for evaluation (as you so "incorrectly" claimed).
I do not have any system I would consider audiophile quality..I have sent cables to others who do indeed have good systems, and have listened and learned from them, what they hear..my my, they were cable believers, and I listened to their opinion, their feedback, and I learned..what is the world coming to?...go figure..
Re-think, dude..cool off before you post accusations..
Cheers, John
The concept of sending cables out to others as being the sole "evaluation tool" (other than as beta testers) who at least do indeed have audiophile systems is as absurd as it gets. It shows a pretense about your "cable interest" that goes beyond words. Why you don't value the home audio audiophile experience as being a part of your audio wants is beyond me. What is more absurd is that you think so highly of your opinions regarding home audio cables when it comes to other's audiophile cable interests. And you can't understand why you piss me off so much. While TM ignores high performance cables as used in his home system, you can't know if you wanted to.
Duster: ""The concept of sending cables out to others as being the sole "evaluation tool" (other than as beta testers) who at least do indeed have audiophile systems is as absurd as it gets. It shows a pretense about your "cable interest" that goes beyond words.""
It is??? How so?It allows some very smart individuals whom I trust, to detail what exactly a new cable does within their system.. Are you now of the mindset that all others, especially audiophiles, cannot be trusted to provide feedback on a part??
What kind of a world do you live in? I do not wish to live in such a closed world..I, unlike you, seem to value the opinions of others a great deal..and I will not change that stance..not for you, not for anyone..
Duster: ""Why you don't value the home audio audiophile experience as being a part of your audio wants is beyond me.""
Who said I do not value it??? Why do you put words in my mouth??I stated that I do not have a system..not that I do not value one, or the experience provided by such..
The largest room in my house is an attic, the 8 foot ceiling is exactly 14 inches wide (sloped ceiling)..do you suppose I should set a big system up there???""
Duster: ""What is more absurd is that you think so highly of your opinions regarding home audio cables when it comes to other's audiophile cable interests.""
I do?? Show me where I have EVER shown a preference of one cable vendor over another..when have I told YOU what cable to use...You are diverting dude..just like your previous posts..please stop.
Duster: "" And you can't understand why you piss me off so much. ""
I know exactly what is pissing you off..You want free reign to slap others upside the head..people like Tony, ones who do not agree with you, ones who question the technical explanations..you want free reign to explain to all who ask, the technical reasons cables make a difference, and to disparage those who actually ask questions of you, that you cannot support in a technical manner. You hide behind the forum intent, that of free exchange of ideas without the "prove it" mentality, and distort the intent to mean..."don't disagree with Duster"..
What pisses you off is the people who do not accept your bad behaviour, but instead, point it out and ask you nicely to please stop...
Ya gotta cool off for a while, Duster..you're posturing a world where either people accept your version of reality, or they are enemies..
That is not what this hobby is about..
Cheers, John
Again, one does not need to explain direct experience with technical support. This is a tall order to damand from the typical audiophile. This forum is mainly about what is heard, not what is proven by science. While science is a huge factor in what makes a cable sound great, it's not what makes a common finding of audiophiles a valid thing in it's own right.You would like to think my intent is one of personal ego, but you are far off the mark. I feel a duty to the audiophile community and defend it with passion. It's a shared effort that is past my own person. When I'm wrong about something, I tend to thank folks for setting me straight. That's how I learn other than doing the footwork on my own.
For a number of years I have been (and still am) a beta tester for audio products, so I'm fine with the notion of feedback. At least the makers listen, too (what a concept).
You have attacked me as person far more than I have you in this contention. While I'm defending mine and other's audiophile hobby, you are on a quest of which I can only see as being narcissistic.
That's all I have to say until I blow up again in a few months. Bye for now...
Duster: ""Again, one does not need to explain direct experience with technical support. This is a tall order to damand from the typical audiophile. This forum is mainly about what is heard, not what is proven by science. While science is a huge factor in what makes a cable sound great, it's not what makes a common finding of audiophiles a valid thing in it's own right. ""
I have not asked anyone to technically support their observations..this is another of your strawman arguments, mis-direction again.
Duster: ""You would like to think my intent is one of personal ego, but you are far off the mark. I feel a duty to the audiophile community and defend it with passion. It's a shared effort that is past my own person. When I'm wrong about something, I tend to thank folks for setting me straight. That's how I learn other than doing the footwork on my own. ""
From this thread, you are showing that you are carrying out your "duties" by attacking those who either ask questions, or do not entirely agree with you and your assertions.Do us all a favor, Duster..go to tweaks, and see how I dealt with tweakeng..he came in with an "it's all in your head" attitude, and I posted responses to that..I did not engage in a hatefest, as you have done here..I merely pointed out some of what he did not understand..
Duster: ""You have attacked me as person far more than I have you in this contention. While I'm defending mine and other's audiophile hobby, you are on a quest of which I can only see as being narcissistic. ""
No, that is incorrect. Pointing out bad behaviour is not attacking..it is providing feedback about socially unacceptable responses.
You have mischaracterized me, claimed I do things that I do not, attacked me..high horse, ignorant, yada yada, and now "narcissistic".....you have from the jump, made this a personal hatefest, with tony, and myself as the targets..that is why I asked you to sit back, re-think what you have been saying, and come back when you are not so emotional..
Duster: ""That's all I have to say until I blow up again in a few months. Bye for now... ""
Instead of blowing up, why not figure out what you can do to not blow up...it is never a good thing, this cyclic behaviour..Everything ok at the Duster end of the net?
E-mail if you wish to talk...I'm always available..
Cheers, John
JohnYou said:"It allows some very smart individuals whom I trust, to detail what exactly a new cable does within their system."
So did you get any feed back from these individuals about new cables in their system?
Thanks.
Tony: ""So did you get any feed back from these individuals about new cables in their system?""Yup..excellent feedback, actually. Ted Smith was the first, and opened the current intellectual path..
In describing how the images of the instruments varied, from my cable to his, he pointed out that one instrument, a washboard, was clearly behind the sax (I think), whereas, for my cable, it blended into the sax..and the image of both got muddy.
When he played my cable at low level, the image got better..so his overall impression was it was good but wimpy..
My take:
I was totally blown outta the water with his description of depth of image..so much so, that it required me returning back to the "lab" to figure out where I went so wrong.. (actually, it just made me consider what parameters are necessary to visualize a sound source in two dimensional space, as clearly, my cable did not support those parameters fully at high power levels.)
Then, I realized that absolutely nothing in human hearing capabilities as considered in the audio world with respect to this two dimensional presentation..distortion of the normal kind doesn't apply..
We find sounds in space by intensity difference between ears, and timing differences. But yet, I find no work has been done for that with two channel systems...why???
Then, in analysis..1 uSec and .06 dB????Holy crap...no wonder the EE type guys can't find any differences by test...they don't even know how to test that low...
Such a fertile ground for learning...what fun!!!
Had Ted not provided such a clear, organized, coherent explanation of what he heard, then Duster's "assertion that ya gotta hear for yourself" would most certainly be correct..Luckily, I asked Ted first, and received excellent feedback that I am not capable of hearing..
Cheers, John
You said:”In describing how the images of the instruments varied, from my cable to his, he pointed out that one instrument, a washboard, was clearly behind the sax (I think), whereas, for my cable, it blended into the sax..and the image of both got muddy.”Would you say that cable’s capacitance or inductance (phase shift) have any relation to the cable’s imaging in two channel setup. That is the principle behind creating “phantom” surround sound from two channel (or speaker) systems. By changing the phase relation shift, one can project imaging to come from sides or coming from behind a listener.
Would that explain at least partly what is happening here?
Thanks.
Tony: ""Would you say that cable’s capacitance or inductance (phase shift) have any relation to the cable’s imaging in two channel setup. That is the principle behind creating “phantom” surround sound from two channel (or speaker) systems. By changing the phase relation shift, one can project imaging to come from sides or coming from behind a listener.Would that explain at least partly what is happening here?""
The cable he tried had 10 nH inductance, and 288 pf per foot capacitance. It was very close to the speaker impedance..so it had the lowest energy storage possible for the insulation type..tefzel, with a DC of 2.7.To reduce the inductance or capacitive storage any more, I'd have to switch to a dielectric that had a lower DC..I have been considering one that is 1.05.
My thinking is that this is purely a resistive effect for these cables, as they were rather wimpy in terms of resistance..the equivalent resistance (I think) was in the 16 to 20 range, I never measured it.
I've been thinking about resistive losses as of late, and I am finding some strange things to think about..non linearities in a purely resistive circuit. I will be posting waveform pictures somewhere when I make some..maybe over at AH..DIY as a second possibility, although some of the posters there resist out of their "box" understandings, one guy insisted the speed of sound was 30 meters per second....AR is kinda out, as eric and terrence came in blastin, causing an exodus....shame, as some of the mods there are nice, like E-stat. It's too bad this forum doesn't allow pictures..AH would appear to be the best option..
I'da asked Steve Eddy to host the pics, as he has done so for me in the past, but he is banned here..
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
