Cable Myths Continued

[Deang]

I agree, I wasn't really. disagreeing with you at all - power compression can steal 3dB to 6dB of amplifier power. 3dB would translate to half of the amplifier's power - and the effect is noticed most with the bass. I was just saying that the temperature of the wire would seem to play a very small part in that.

The industry wants to project this idea to the consumer that it simply can't get much better than this. Most consumers, and even those who should know better, buy into the absurdity wholesale (all "good" amplifiers sound the same").

I get what you're saying about a restrictive range of measurements being used to support the idea of near "perfect" platforms. This idea is exactly what I and many others have been arguing against around here for as long as I've been here (though many of the others have given up and left). With this in mind, are you aware that you also just reinforced the very point that Mark was trying to make with you. Think about it.

I'm still thinking about the equal loudness curves, I think you're probably right on that.

Edited February 28, 2014 by DeanG

[DrWho]

At 20W we're rising 50 degrees, which will be 75C for a normal room temp. Start pushing the level to 100W and now we're talking a 250 degree temp rise. At 0.4% per degree C for copper, that comes out to a 100% change in series impedance (250 * %0.4), or a 3dB reduction in power.

This will be true even if we're still within the linear mechanical limits of the driver. Doubling the impedance of the driver is enough to push passive xover filters by an octave....yikes. Thankfully the extra DCR lowers the Q of the loudspeaker, which will make it roll off more slowly: plus the passive xovers get hot at these levels and are probably sliding around on their own too.

Obviously we're not pushing things that hard in the home (I hope), but the effects happen as a gradient which means you're never getting rid of it completely. Mark's argument (which I completely agree with) is that some people will have different sensitivities to different behaviors....so the actual audible threshold changes from person to person.

I would be surprised if someone heard the heating effects in their speaker wire, but I brought it up because it would be one of the few areas where the speaker cable would introduce non-linearity - and in the most extreme case it shows up in speaker voice coils as something that is audible.

Edited February 28, 2014 by DrWho

[Don Richard]

I would be surprised if someone heard the heating effects in their speaker wire, but I brought it up because it would be one of the few areas where the speaker cable would introduce non-linearity - and in the most extreme case it shows up in speaker voice coils as something that is audible.

Seems like a good argument for large gauge speaker cable and efficient horn loaded speakers that don't take a lot of power to get loud.

[DrWho]

The industry wants to project this idea to the consumer that it simply can't get much better than this. Most consumers, and even those who should know better, buy into the absurdity wholesale (all "good" amplifiers sound the same").

I get what you're saying about a restrictive range of measurements being used to support the idea of near "perfect" platforms. This idea is exactly what I and many others have been arguing against around here for as long as I've been here (though many of the others have given up and left). With this in mind, are you aware that you also just reinforced the very point that Mark was trying to make with you. Think about it.

I've been meaning to ask, what's the point Mark was trying to make?

Also, what are your thoughts about the audiophile over exaggerating the extent to which the sound is 'already really good'? In other words, we agree the publicly available measurements are quite lacking, but at the same time I'd argue there's enough utility there to inform the choices that have the most significance. This is why the sanctioning bodies require those specs, and they intentionally try to make it as simple to understand as possible because our culture values entertainment over education and deeper understanding. And let's be real, these are all profit making entertainment machines.

[DrWho]

I've been meaning to ask, what's the point Mark was trying to make?

Very simple. Measurements are unable to predict much about subjective preferences of audiophiles.

So what's your response to a book like this?

http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092

...or any other published work on psychoacoustics? Is it all meaningless?

[Don Richard]

The other marketing is those who give few measurements and simply concentrated on describing the subjective qualities.

You mean companies like BoSe? You do realize that objective measurements are used specifically to remove any bias that exists due to the weaknesses inherent in human perception. Objective measurements do not always give a complete answer to the "What does it sound like?" question, but they rarely give a wrong answer the way subjective analysis often does. An example: when I was running live sound people would come to me and say, "It's too loud" when they really meant, "I don't like that kind of music". In that case the SPL meter told the truth.

[Zen Traveler]

I've been meaning to ask, what's the point Mark was trying to make?

Very simple. Measurements are unable to predict much about subjective preferences of audiophiles.

So what's your response to a book like this?

http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092

...or any other published work on psychoacoustics? Is it all meaningless?

Isn't Mark making the argument that psychoacoustics plays a major part in peoples buying decisions?

[DrWho]

Psychoacoustics is a science. I think it falls between the definitions of objective and subjective that have arisen in this thread. Its study shows that there is a normalcy to our subjective response.

I believe Mark is saying there can be no normalcy claim because our data is incomplete. I agree it is incomplete, but we can predict far more than what is being suggested here.

Is it the idea of individuality or maybe the belief in magic that makes the audiophile so resistant to the idea that they fall into subjective trends? It almost sounds like a child telling his dad it's not cold outside and therefore he doesn't need a coat - all the while it's 25F and snowing. That was totally my brother and I growing up. We absolutely felt cold, but we didn't want to call it cold because of our pride....plus we liked the sensory overload. Ignorant arrogance....it's running rampant in this hobby and is one of the biggest hurdles to the younger generations getting into the hobby. They aren't jaded by the same dogma and consequently get ousted for pointing out the lack of clothes on the emperor. Likewise, there is always the youthful ignorance that hasn't learned to appreciate the finer details....that should always be met with guidance, not this chest beating about how good your ears are, or how good your data is in comparison.

I dunno, I feel like I'm on my own island here in the middle. Maybe I'm jaded from the economics of catering to the 90th percentile?

[DrWho]

Btw,I was thinking about the point about the cost being irrelevant and I'm not sure I agree with that anymore. Money is a symbol of value, and I think it hurts that cultural value system to value the money itself more than the actual product or service. In other words, an incorrect valuation of performance has negative effects on culture. That happens when a crap cable is sold for a lot of money.

I've been talking to a lawyer friend about the philosophy behind class action lawsuits.....our society actually makes it criminal to misleadingly overcharge.

In a perfect world, there should be a much closer trend to monetary value and its resultant performance. I don't think we should be so quick to give up on that morality. I'm thinking specifically cables here....

I get your arguments Mark about freedom to charge whatever to the rich and getting that cash back into circulation, but there's a difference between a gold showerhead and a plastic showerhead that looks like gold. The product actually needs to be better to justify the increased cost. Any marketing overcoming the lack of performance increase is inherently fraudulent, no matter how you want to spin it.

[ClaudeJ1]

Btw,I was thinking about the point about the cost being irrelevant and I'm not sure I agree with that anymore. Money is a symbol of value, and I think it hurts that cultural value system to value the money itself more than the actual product or service. In other words, an incorrect valuation of performance has negative effects on culture. That happens when a crap cable is sold for a lot of money.

I've been talking to a lawyer friend about the philosophy behind class action lawsuits.....our society actually makes it criminal to misleadingly overcharge.

In a perfect world, there should be a much closer trend to monetary value and its resultant performance. I don't think we should be so quick to give up on that morality. I'm thinking specifically cables here....

I get your arguments Mark about freedom to charge whatever to the rich and getting that cash back into circulation, but there's a difference between a gold showerhead and a plastic showerhead that looks like gold. The product actually needs to be better to justify the increased cost. Any marketing overcoming the lack of performance increase is inherently fraudulent, no matter how you want to spin it.

The French refer to the term "niveau" which into English translates as "level." When connecting amps to speakers, the slight variations in the parasitics can't possible justify $15,000 for cables, but some people get away with it. It's a quasi-religious experience, which transcends economics, reason, and measurement. As fellow engineer who as served markets that, inherently, cannot be overpriced, I fully agree with your comments.

Edited March 15, 2014 by ClaudeJ1

[Islander]

Veblen goods. An extreme example is the I Am Rich smartphone app, which cost $1000 and had the sole function of reminding the user that he or she was rich.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Rich

Here's more on Veblen goods. Sometimes it's hard to sell a product to certain markets, regardless of its level of quality or performance, unless its price is high enough to be impressive. At that point, the higher price itself becomes a desirable feature.

Klipsch ran into this when trying to sell the Klipschorn in certain affluent markets. It simply was not expensive enough to be desirable, so they designed and produced the Palladium line, which does cost enough to make its speakers attractive to certain purchasers. In the case of the Palladium speakers, the performance and build quality does justify the price, but a lower price would make them harder to sell, unlike with most goods, where lower prices increase sales numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

[thebes]

Dr. Who,

I have to let you know that I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts on this page. Like many of your posts of late, they are thoughtful, reasoned, accurate, trenchant, and I could go on and on. Wonderful writing and more importantly, thinking.

Maybe I'll be lucky enough to shake your hand someday.

[joshnich]

Islander,

Yes, Veblen goods, aka status symbols, and so on. That's stuff is not much to do about audio performance or value. I really never concern myself with Wilson Speakers and Boulder amps and all that. I don't care how they are priced, how they perform or who buys them. I have directly heard many mega-dollar systems and I know that we get to diminishing returns very, very early in the game. What I do pay attention to is the segment of the market where most audiophiles live. The segment where two different amps costing $3000 can sound radically different from each other qualitatively and subjectively even though both will measure very similar. It's a market not driven by corporate accounting, but rather engineers who have personalities and opinions and preferences and they build all that into their products. It's a mix of art and engineering, and I think it gives the hobby all the pizazz that makes it interesting as a hobby. A Bill Johnson thing, or a John Curl thing, or a Nelson Pass thing, or a Bob Carver thing is interesting to hear, to own, to appreciate because they can be seen behind it. They have their pet theories, favorite topologies, and ideas about what things should sound like. The Instruments have not yet taken over in that segment of the market. For your basic big box HT receiver yes, it's all specs and only specs, but not in the higher end stereo market.

Bravo. I do not what is so hard to understand or hard to accept about your argument. If we purchased on specs we could all save a lot of money. I happen to enjoy the hobby because of the differences that I don't think can be explained with specs. I own a number of amplifiers that I move in and out of my system. Each sounds great and each sounds different. I enjoy rolling tubes . That's what I find interesting and fun in this hobby. I am no expert (surprise surprise) but what is the spec difference between a mullard and a amprex or a telefunkin tube? Is there a spec difference. There is a difference in sound. Just like there is a difference in the sound of cables. And it has nothing to do with people being able to spend more money and marketing - that is a red herring.

Jmho

Josh

[joshnich]

Oh and btw. I am loving this thread. So much more enjoyable and informative than is typical these days.

J

[DrWho]

I believe Mark is saying there can be no normalcy claim because our data is incomplete. I agree it is incomplete, but we can predict far more than what is being suggested here.

Normalcy?

No, I am saying the same thing I said last month, and the month before, and the year before that: Very simple. Measurements are unable to predict much about subjective preferences of audiophiles.

If you think they can, please demonstrate a measure that will rank amplifiers by grain, or clarity, or depth, or PRAT, or any of the many subjective qualities by which audiophiles make subjective choices. Quite honestly, I am tired of the old mantra that audiophiles are screaming babies or whatever silly analogies are being applied about wearing coats in winter. It's this simple: Some people discern differences in amplifiers or speakers that do not relate to any of the few measurements that are inevitably provided by manufacturers. Why is this hard to understand or accept?

There's a lot we don't know in this world. We know less than we don't know. So, I don't find it had to accept that we don't know enough about amplifiers to understand exactly why they sound so different while measuring so similar.

Did you miss this question from earlier?

So what's your response to a book like this?

http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/0240520092

...or any other published work on psychoacoustics? Is it all meaningless?

Not to get into an argument about the definition of "much", but I would propose your comments contradict the science available on this subject. There is quite a bit we do know that correlates to subjective preferences when efforts to remove non-auditory bias are employed.

[DrWho]

Dr. Who,

I have to let you know that I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts on this page. Like many of your posts of late, they are thoughtful, reasoned, accurate, trenchant, and I could go on and on. Wonderful writing and more importantly, thinking.

Maybe I'll be lucky enough to shake your hand someday.

Haha, thanks thebes....just promise you won't be holding any wires in your other hand? I'm not sure I could handle the excitement. []

[Islander]

It's a market not driven by corporate accounting, but rather engineers who have personalities and opinions and preferences and they build all that into their products. It's a mix of art and engineering, and I think it gives the hobby all the pizazz that makes it interesting as a hobby. A Bill Johnson thing, or a John Curl thing, or a Nelson Pass thing, or a Bob Carver thing is interesting to hear, to own, to appreciate because they can be seen behind it. They have their pet theories, favorite topologies, and ideas about what things should sound like. The Instruments have not yet taken over in that segment of the market. For your basic big box HT receiver yes, it's all specs and only specs, but not in the higher end stereo market.

Interestingly, I find that UK audio magazines will more often mention the names of Japanese designers as well as those in North America, while here we tend to hear the names you mentioned, but very few others.

There are good designers and engineers from all over the world, who express their preferences in the components they produce, but we don't hear the names of most of them.

[DrWho]

In regards to Veblen Goods.....I would suggest that philosophy doesn't apply to the average audiophile, and certainly not to the enthusiast purchasing a $500 HTIB system. There is a realm to which the morality behind class action lawsuits applies....and maybe it's a bit difficult to rigidly identify, but that is the arena where I think the cost should matter....and not so much in regards to protection of the idiot making the purchase, but more on maintaining the abstraction of money. For example, the $1500 HDMI cable at Best Buy:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olstemplatemapper.jsp?_dyncharset=UTF-8&_dynSessConf=-3703890151529536859&id=pcat17071&type=page&ks=960&st=categoryid%24abcat0107020&sc=Global&cp=1&sp=-currentprice+skuidsaas&qp=&list=n&usc=All+Categories&nrp=15&fs=saas&iht=n&seeAll=&browsedCategory=abcat0107020

Absolute stupid garbage - the data transmission ends up bit for bit perfect regardless of these insane features. And yes, I just double checked the physical layer description of the digital format to make sure that is absolutely true. And yet we have no shortage of people talking about better image quality when in fact nothing is different.....this is the deception of fraudulent marketing crap.

[DrWho]

I can hear certain people getting ready to say, "yeah, they are all colored." Careful. The exact same thing is true for BJTs or FETs. The difference is that people do not undertake to "roll BJTs" to compare a Hitachi MJE350 to a Fairchild. SS gear isn't set up to make that feasible. But, be sure, the differences are there.

And where there are sonic differences in SS gear (since I can speak to that), there will be corresponding technical reasons for those differences. We can predict behavior of a transistor 'almost' down to the individual electrons... It's not hard to see the effects with the right measurement techniques. It's rare that two engineers pick the same part for a given application, but at the same time I've never see them disagree about the audible differences: they just have different preferences as to what matters more.

[Deang]

Knowing the brand and/or price of the things being compared.

I'm still stuck on the temperature coefficients. That's crazy stuff.