IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
A collection of anti-hifi [ripoff] information, cables, tweaks, expensive equipment...
Auric
post Sep 7 2003, 16:10
Post #26





Group: Members
Posts: 45
Joined: 25-May 03
Member No.: 6808



I certainly think there's a difference, but only between the really cheap stuff and the low-level stuff. In other words, as long as long as the speaker wire is relatively pure stranded copper at a fairly large gauge, you're fine. The same thing applies for interconnects, but you also need gold-plated plugs that have a tight fit. That's really about it. While I do believe that high-end speaker cable makes a technical difference, I don't think you can hear it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Audible!
post Sep 7 2003, 21:41
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 28-June 03
From: CA, USA
Member No.: 7426



QUOTE
In other words, as long as long as the speaker wire is relatively pure stranded copper at a fairly large gauge, you're fine.


The gauge of the wire should be related to the length of wire used. For a twelve foot (~4 meter) speaker cable, 16 gauge should be more than sufficient for almost any amount of power a typical speaker would draw.

QUOTE
The same thing applies for interconnects, but you also need gold-plated plugs that have a tight fit.


Gold-plated plugs (all around) are undeniably more corrosion resistant in general than Ni-plated plugs, but no one I've ever heard of has been able to hear the difference between them in a blind testing scenario.

This implies that there is no audible difference, meaning "need" is far too strong a word in this case smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bongoboy
post Sep 8 2003, 01:34
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 10-August 03
From: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Member No.: 8279



QUOTE (Audible! @ Sep 7 2003, 02:03 AM)
The size of the difference in the index is somewhat irrelevant because I was contrasting it relative to monometallic couples, which by definition cannot constitue a galvanic 'cell' because electronegativity of the species is homogenous throughout.
No inherent potential difference means no cell.
No cell means no GALVANIC corrosion, yes?

Absolutely.
QUOTE
"Electroplating" is of course not the only thing that can happen to cause problems with dissimilar metals in direct proximity. Cu will diffuse into Au if in contact with it. This is thoroughly undesirable if you wish to disconnect them at a point in the future. In addition, Au with Cu mixed in can corrode. Hence, Cu-Au couplings in industry almost invariably have an intermediate plate layer.

Yup. BTW I only mentioned the term electroplating as a simple way of explaining to others what was being discussed. I know the term is really the wrong choice, and that plating and corrosion are a different effects from the same process...
QUOTE
QUOTE
Also, Gold does not naturally oxidise, whereas Nickel does

Yup, hence it's (Au) always going to be cathodic in any bimetallic 'cell'.

(Oops! I suppose i should have thought about it as which way round cathode/anode pairings will work.)

well, I have to agree, you are correct.

Note for others: If this is gibberish to you, it's fairly basic electrochemistry. If you have the time and never covered it, why not learn? If you're reading this forum, a grounding in electricity (and related subjects) may be interesting. The internet is full of porn, wild opinions AND highly technical information, after all! smile.gif


--------------------
Hip-hop looks like it's having more fun than you are - Chuck D
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bongoboy
post Sep 8 2003, 02:12
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 30
Joined: 10-August 03
From: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Member No.: 8279



QUOTE (Auric @ Sep 7 2003, 04:10 PM)
The same thing applies for interconnects, but you also need gold-plated plugs that have a tight fit.

The reasons for gold plated interconnects are purely physical - Gold's a (very) good conductor, (~3.5x less resistant than nickel, although at this thickness the difference is truly negligable) and neutral. Although personally I'd choose gold over others, etc. at the same price,you should only really concentrate on getting gold plated jack plugs if the sockets are gold too. (see earlier posts by Audible! and I)

Also, gold can actively be a bad choice if you frequently handle and unplug things. gold plating can wear off comparitively easily! (I have done this to a headphone jack)

IMO the main reason gold plating features so heavily is a purely aesthetic one. To most, gold is prettier than the silvery metals..


--------------------
Hip-hop looks like it's having more fun than you are - Chuck D
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Pio2001
post Sep 17 2003, 23:00
Post #30


Moderator


Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3936
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 73



Could someone post the equivalence between AVG and mm2 ? I've got 4 and 12 mm2 cable. How much gauge is this ? I remember that the 12mm2 must be below 10.

I've got a lot to post : 0.4 dB peak to peak difference in frequency response from speaker cables (in accordance with the impedance curve of the speakers and Ohm's law) with samples, samples of turntable on stone/table, not to forget the old thread with 5 meters line cable, not abxed by anyone, and the analog recording of the 450 € CD Player ABXed against the digital rip, while the 5x loopback of audiophile 2496 card could not be ABXed.

Bump this thread if I don't post within one week. I'm sooooooo busy
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Sep 18 2003, 00:58
Post #31





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (Bongoboy @ Sep 7 2003, 08:12 PM)
The reasons for gold plated interconnects are purely physical - Gold's a (very) good conductor, (~3.5x less resistant than nickel, although at this thickness the difference is truly negligable) and neutral.

Silver conducts better than gold, and is cheaper. While silver will tarnish, the kicker is that silver oxide conducts virtually as well as the shining clean stuff.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sthayashi
post Sep 18 2003, 05:38
Post #32





Group: Members
Posts: 494
Joined: 16-April 03
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Member No.: 5997



QUOTE (Pio2001 @ Sep 17 2003, 02:00 PM)
Could someone post the equivalence between AVG and  mm2 ? I've got 4 and 12 mm2 cable. How much gauge is this ? I remember that the 12mm2 must be below 10.

I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine...
Google's wire reference table has links to a convenient table

It indicates that your 12mm2 wire is between 6 and 7 gauge (closer to 6). Your 4mm2 wire is somewhere between 11 & 12 gauge (closer to 11).

This site has a more comprehensive table, but it makes less sense for non-metric conversions (at least to me).

Now if you (or someone else can help me). Most of my speaker hookups are using what I think is a copper/aluminum hybrid wire. One wire is silver in color (and I suspect it's aluminum), the other is copper. I got them because they were cheap and easy to make sure that the polarization of the speakers were correct (the +/- orientation). Now I'm getting concerned that I'm not getting the best use out of my setup. Should I drop the cash and get more expensive/better wire?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Audible!
post Sep 18 2003, 05:48
Post #33





Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 28-June 03
From: CA, USA
Member No.: 7426



QUOTE
Should I drop the cash and get more expensive/better wire?


I strongly doubt you will ever be able to A/B a difference unless your speaker wire travels a long distance. You probably would be able to measure it though, which of course is a different can of worms.

You could always purchase a single length of stranded 12-16gauge copper wire, have a friend substitute it in for one of the speakers (or not at all) and not tell you which one is which. Try A/Bing with mono material and the balance knob.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
monkeyboy
post Sep 18 2003, 16:31
Post #34





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 1-December 02
Member No.: 3934



Most copper is 99.9% Oxygen free. The main difference between audio cables is the quality of termination and the type of sheilding/coating/sleeve (call it what you will). Now, whilst the listener may not instantly perceive a quality difference between £10 and £80 interconnects, in a situation where lots of power cables and other strong signals are present, the difference would be very noticeable. Essentially, all you are paying for is for the signal to remain as pure as possible, under any circumstances.

Essentally, this is the same with the difference between separates (lost of space = less interference and more space for solid reliable componants) and intigrated systems, where everything is cramped and exposed to such interference. Lesser quality componants. Obviously the other advantage is the life expectancy of separates - I have good sounding kit that is 18 years old (though most is relatively new). Who do you know that has had a midi system last that long - I doubt anyone does!

It is investment and pound for pound, hifi sounds superior wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Audible!
post Sep 19 2003, 00:01
Post #35





Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 28-June 03
From: CA, USA
Member No.: 7426



QUOTE
Now, whilst the listener may not instantly perceive a quality difference between £10 and £80 interconnects, in a situation where lots of power cables and other strong signals are present, the difference would be very noticeable.


I would enjoy watching people A/B $15versus $90 speaker cables in their homes if they didn't know which was which.

Stereo Review did an expose' of so-called "golden" ears" who were sure they could A/B differences between speaker cable. The magazine editors rigged one system with identical components (excellent speakers, superb amplification) save speaker wire. One setup got 20 year old rusty 14gauge wire from someones garage and the other got the "highest quality" OFC availible ($100's per foot).
Surprise, Surprise, no one (including some of the editors of Audio and Stereophile, IIRC) could A/B the difference by ear.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jrbamford
post Sep 19 2003, 00:17
Post #36





Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 1-December 01
Member No.: 569



I plan to record some outputs from my DAC20 (with twin outputs) comparing different leads... sadly i can't find an adapter for twin phono female to single 3.5mm stereo male... so i am going to have to use an additional lead with this kind of setup (actually with twin male phono as thats all i could find, using some female to female connectors to bridge the gap) ... annoyingly this extra lead will contaminate the signal path (audible or not I'd prefer to not have to do it so only the leads in question were being recorded) .. I'll use my creative jukebox3 to record seeing as i only have a SB Live in my main machine i doubt the differences will be much (this may be worth another test sometime as if quality is better on my live i'll use it for my vinyl recordings)

Be interesting if anything is audible, i'll put samples online but i'm sans broadband at the moment sadly sad.gif


--------------------
Binaural recordings of mine: http://binaural.jimtreats.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post Sep 19 2003, 07:48
Post #37


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



At http://www.kikeg.arrakis.es/stest you have a test where I passed a piece of music through my Audiophile soundcard and a cheap (around $3) 1-meter interconnect, 3 times.

So far nobody has been able to tell reliabily the original file from the 3-times passed file. Not even people with so-called "audiophile" equipment that tried, reported being able.

This post has been edited by KikeG: Sep 19 2003, 07:54
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JeanLuc
post Sep 19 2003, 10:21
Post #38





Group: Members
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4-June 02
From: Cologne, Germany
Member No.: 2213



QUOTE (Auric @ Sep 7 2003, 03:10 PM)
The same thing applies for interconnects, but you also need gold-plated plugs that have a tight fit.

Hmm ... it is even more important to have plugs that have separated contact areas (no solid circle, but segments that can adjust themselves independently) on the outer "mass" ring ... a solid mass circle will have contact to the female connector at only two small points if you take into account that there is a deviation from the "real" circle on almost any machined round piece of metal ...

The way that some manufacturers go by outfitting their plugs with segmented mass rings (additionally, segmented or profiled "inner" plugs) is far more effective IMHO (regarding conductivity) than any plating or cable selection, because you do not gain anything with pure oxygen-free-copper of 99,9999% if all is lost in the adjacent mechanical connection.

Abdication of soldering in favor of cold welding is a good way to add some extra conductivity ... low-temp soft-soldered connections (using a lead/tin alloy) increase or create a transistion resistance of any connection.

These measures are not expensive and can be found even in the lower mid-price segment ... you just have to take a look at more "independent" electronics stores ... no need to go for Oehlbach, Monster Cable or Kimber ... biggrin.gif


--------------------
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ScorLibran
post Sep 19 2003, 10:40
Post #39





Group: Banned
Posts: 769
Joined: 1-July 03
Member No.: 7495



Out of curiosity, I am wondering what any (theoretical) audible difference between cabling could possibly be caused by. Whether it's speaker wire or component cables, they all carry a signal right? An electrical signal. Electricity. Electrons.

Now, I understand how poor shielding could enable interference problems, but let's assume for a moment that you have two very well-shielded cables of equal gauge...one for $5 per foot and the other for $25 per foot.

With the cheaper cable, are electrons falling out the sides of it? Do electrons not travel as quickly down the cheaper cables as they do down the pretty ones? Are the electrons not lined up as well in lower-quality cabling? I'm not an idiot, nor am I an electrical engineer either. But I notice that when I read about how great cabling makes a lot of difference, or even some difference, I'm not seeing exactly why this could be the case.

I *do* see references to "conductivity" quite often, but what would an example of conductive variance between different quality cables be? And, again, does poor conductivity mean fewer electrons being sent at once? Are electrons transferred in parallel or in series. If it's the latter, then there is no "at once". So it would then be a matter of only speed for determining conductivity?

If someone could explain how signal accuracy relates to a physical attribute of electron flow, I'd seriously appreciate it. And for reference, yes, I'm guilty of buying the "pretty wires". My car and home systems are all full of Monster reference-quality cabling, and I'd bet I couldn't ABX it from decent-grade (and cheaper) Radio Shack wires from most of what I've seen/heard over the years.

I just wonder whether the only thing that makes any real difference between wires of equal gauge is the quality of the plastic (or whatever material) they're wrapped in. Once you've got the right gauge, and solid shielding is achieved, what else is there?

Or is it all in the shielding? Is "enough" shielding really that much more expensive than "not enough" shielding?

Edit: Added "conductivity" questions, because you know, my post just didn't have enough questions in it. wink.gif Removed stupid joke.

This post has been edited by ScorLibran: Sep 19 2003, 11:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2Bdecided
post Sep 19 2003, 10:57
Post #40


ReplayGain developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 5147
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409



QUOTE (ScorLibran @ Sep 19 2003, 09:40 AM)
Or is it all in the shielding?  Is "enough" shielding really that much more expensive than "not enough" shielding?

For RF applications it certainly is.

But this is for frequencies of many MHz, not kHz. And the cost difference is approx £10/100 metres vs £50/100 metres.


However, the measurable resistance of any wire is never 0.


This is one of the most annoying areas of audio. There are often real and audible problems in connecting and interfacing equipment. They can be solved, too. But there's no real proffit in this, because the solutions aren't particularly expensive.

So, instead we have this massive cable industry making money from nonesense, and it's difficult for any normal person to know what to buy. We also have hi-fi components that are sensitive to differences in interconnect, even though these sensitivities are well understood, and easy to design out of the circuit.


The science behind all this (and it's well known science) is hidden by nonensense, and the only people who benefit are those who want to sell you expensive cable.


Cheers,
David.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post Sep 19 2003, 11:00
Post #41


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



QUOTE (ScorLibran @ Sep 19 2003, 10:40 AM)
Once you've got the right gauge, and solid shielding is achieved, what else is there?

Nothing, in most systems. On very long speaker cables, different inductance might make for slightly audible differences at high frequencies. Low inductance can be achieved using coaxial speaker cable, which shouldn't be expensive either.

QUOTE
Is "enough" shielding really that much more expensive than "not enough" shielding?

I don't think so. Brands such as Belden, Canare or Mogami sell inexpensive cables of just any kind of type you can imagine, and are widely used at recording studios.

All else about expensive cabling is marketing ripoff.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JeanLuc
post Sep 19 2003, 11:47
Post #42





Group: Members
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4-June 02
From: Cologne, Germany
Member No.: 2213



QUOTE (ScorLibran @ Sep 19 2003, 09:40 AM)
I *do* see references to "conductivity" quite often, but what would an example of conductive variance between different quality cables be?  And, again, does poor conductivity mean fewer electrons being sent at once?  Are electrons transferred in parallel or in series.  If it's the latter, then there is no "at once".  So it would then be a matter of only speed for determining conductivity?

1. conductivity is the reciproke value of electrical specific resistance biggrin.gif
2. "speed" is not a problem ... alternate currents travel without any significant time-shift

OK, serious ...

there is more to cable than simple electric (in terms of pure Ohm) resistance ... besides inductivity and capacity which can affect high and low frequencies by losses (if I & C are high enough - that's what impedance is all about), there are some other effects like e.g. the "skin-effect" (high frequency currents are pushed towards the surface of the cable, reducing effective conduction diameter) which can make cables sound "lower" (could be a good idea to use cable with a lower surface area, if your speakers sound a little too analytic biggrin.gif )

I agree with 2bdecided that any major manufacturer could easily produce devices with matching electric specifications of their in- and outputs which would make any cable discussion (regarding capacity, inductivity etc.) absolutely useless ... there would be one good standard cable for all circumstances ...

I also agree with you guys that most people are not able to seriously ABX a difference between normal cables and overpriced so-called High-End-stuff ... but modern HiFi magazines state that as well and point out that no cable can significantly affect your stereo system's tonal balance (like different loudspeakers can) ... that's why ultra-expensive cables never get a "best buy" recommendation whatsoever ... what these magazines state is that you can influence certain characteristics of a stereo system in a marginal way that might be determined if listened very closely and concentrated.

My point of view, regarding mechanical components (like plugs) is based on my personal opinion as well as my engineer knowledge ... good-old mechanical properties are too often regarded as negligible ... that's why I wanted to point out that a proper plug's connection (this concerns optical toslink cables as well) is far more important (regarding future stability/reliability as well) than slight differences in cable material.

Edit: removed some errors in orthography ... rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by JeanLuc: Sep 19 2003, 11:51


--------------------
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post Sep 19 2003, 12:27
Post #43


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



QUOTE (JeanLuc @ Sep 19 2003, 11:47 AM)
there is more to cable than simple electric (in terms of pure Ohm) resistance ... besides inductivity and capacity ... there are some other effects like e.g. the "skin-effect" (high frequency currents are pushed towards the surface of the cable, reducing effective conduction diameter) which can make cables sound "lower"

There are other effects, but they are negligible at audio frequencies and levels. Skin effect just increases resistance at high frequencies. Even in case of thick, very long cables, which would be the more affected from this effect, most speakers have greater impedance at high frequencies, so the loading effect due to resistive skin effect at high frequencies won't be important. Edit: even if there were audible problems in this respect in any strange case, the solution is inexpensive too: just run several inexpensive thinner cables, instead of a thick one.

QUOTE
I also agree with you guys that most people are not able to seriously ABX a difference between normal cables and overpriced so-called High-End-stuff

Not most people, but *any*. There's a pool from several years at the rec.audio.* groups of a few thousand dollars for anyone that can tell any competent inexpensive cable from an expensive, competent one (note that there are some incompetent expensive cables too, they color the sound on purpose) under blind conditions. So far nobody has even tried.

QUOTE
what these magazines state is that you can influence certain characteristics of a stereo system in a marginal way that might be determined if listened very closely and concentrated.

Then they could be ABXed.

Cable performance can be relatively easily measured. There's nothing that an expensive cable can do that an inexpensive cable can't.

QUOTE
... good-old mechanical properties are too often regarded as negligible...
I agree here, good connectors offer a more robust, less error-free connection. However, cheap connectors that are doing good contact (not that strange) won't sound worse.

This post has been edited by KikeG: Sep 19 2003, 12:37
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kennedyb4
post Sep 19 2003, 12:57
Post #44





Group: Members
Posts: 772
Joined: 3-October 01
Member No.: 180



This is a great thread. There have been many claims about various cables for a long time and a lot of money spent.

Personally I would like to see some blind testing done with bi-wiring.Some guys claim radical changes in sound and it's not hard to do usually if your speakers are set for it.

Me, I could not detect a change but I could not do abx effectively.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Sep 19 2003, 13:26
Post #45





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1471
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (KikeG @ Sep 19 2003, 06:27 AM)
Not most people, but *any*. There's a pool from several years at the rec.audio.* groups of a few thousand dollars for anyone that can tell any competent inexpensive cable from an expensive, competent one (note that there are some incompetent expensive cables too, they color the sound on purpose) under blind conditions. So far nobody has even tried.

The usual rec.audio excuse from those who claim differences is that blind testing doesn't work because there is too much pressure to perform. On the other hand many of the same folks say that they can easlily tell the difference between hearing cable A in one store and cable B in another store.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JeanLuc
post Sep 19 2003, 14:00
Post #46





Group: Members
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4-June 02
From: Cologne, Germany
Member No.: 2213



QUOTE (KikeG @ Sep 19 2003, 11:27 AM)
even if there were audible problems in this respect in any strange case, the solution is inexpensive too: just run several inexpensive thinner cables, instead of a thick one.

That's why some people use solid copper wire (like the one used for electrical installations) for loudspeaker connections ... to make their speakers sound with less treble ... although I would prefer to place absorbing elements like a thick carpet (great for absorbing high-frequencies, e.g. reflections) in line with the loudspeaker's listening axis ...

Edit:

Perhaps we should also be aware that most HiFi magazines test any piece of equipment under circumstances that are totally "unreal" for the normal home listener ... as an example, the german mag "AUDIO" uses a specially-designed, resonance-free (or low-resonating) listening room that looks like ... erm ... not worth living in it biggrin.gif ... with no or negligible disturbing resonances, differences between components will interfere with room resonances less severe and thus may be easier to determine ...

Maybe it should be suggested to perform a double blind test in addition to HiFi magazine's standard test procedures when testing components ...

This post has been edited by JeanLuc: Sep 19 2003, 14:07


--------------------
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post Sep 19 2003, 14:20
Post #47


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



QUOTE (JeanLuc @ Sep 19 2003, 02:00 PM)
That's why some people use solid copper wire (like the one used for electrical installations) for loudspeaker connections ... to make their speakers sound with less treble...

As I explained, I don't think skin effect can be audible in most situations, if any. Some measurements would be good to test the actual relevance of this effect.

QUOTE
Perhaps we should also be aware that most HiFi magazines test any piece of equipment under circumstances that are totally "unreal" for the normal home listener

If that is true, how relevant are their reviews for home listener? Why don't they try an ABX test?

QUOTE
... as an example, the german mag "AUDIO" uses a specially-designed, resonance-free (or low-resonating) listening room that looks like ... erm ... not worth living in it  ... with no or negligible disturbing resonances, differences between components will interfere with room resonances less severe and thus may be easier to determine ...

What about a good pair of headphones?

This post has been edited by KikeG: Sep 19 2003, 14:22
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bawjaws
post Sep 19 2003, 14:31
Post #48





Group: Members
Posts: 173
Joined: 10-December 02
Member No.: 4043



A condensed version of this thread and the information linked from it would make an excellent addition the new hydrogenaudio wiki (assuming it is considered relevant to the wiki's goals by those in change).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JeanLuc
post Sep 19 2003, 14:33
Post #49





Group: Members
Posts: 1311
Joined: 4-June 02
From: Cologne, Germany
Member No.: 2213



QUOTE (KikeG @ Sep 19 2003, 01:20 PM)
As I explained, I don't think skin effect can be audible in most situations, if any. Some measurements would be good to test the actual relevance of this effect.

If that is true, how relevant are their reviews for home listener? Why don't they try an ABX test?

What about a good pair of headphones?

1.

that would be very useful information, especially regarding different material's frequency and impulse response ...

2.

they claim that only a resonance-free listening environment will create equal conditions for e.g. every loudspeaker tested because some models suffer more from resonances than others ... from their point of view, this would not be a "fair" test ... and ABX is not a mean to determine sound quality (what hifi magazines claim to do), but pure differences in sound.

3.

heaphones are unbeaten when it comes to tonal music experience but they suffer when it comes to correct reproduction of staging (spatial information) ... if you ever heard how a carefully placed set of stereo speakers (the so-called stereo triangle) is able to create a virtual stage where you can pinpoint the location of different instruments (e.g. when listening to a philharmonic orchestra's recording), you will miss that information when using headphones ... the low distance between sound source and ear does not allow proper reproduction of "staging" in depth (this is negligible for pop/rock music, though, where Left/Right information is all you need in most cases)

This post has been edited by JeanLuc: Sep 19 2003, 14:34


--------------------
The name was Plex The Ripper, not Jack The Ripper
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
KikeG
post Sep 19 2003, 14:58
Post #50


WinABX developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1578
Joined: 1-October 01
Member No.: 137



QUOTE (JeanLuc @ Sep 19 2003, 02:33 PM)
they claim that only a resonance-free listening environment will create equal conditions for e.g. every loudspeaker tested because some models suffer more from resonances than others ... from their point of view, this would not be a "fair" test ...

Those speakers would then be worse under real-world listening conditions. won't they? I don't see why that would be unfair... if that is what you mean.

Also, only true anechoic chambers are totally resonance-free. Anechoic chambers are damn expensive and difficult to build. I seriously doubt any hi-fi magazine uses true anechoic chambers for their listening evaluations.

QUOTE
and ABX is not a mean to determine sound quality (what hifi magazines claim to do), but pure differences in sound.


If no differences can be found, then sound quality will be exactly the same.

QUOTE
3.

Could be. But for all other sound characteristics, they would work fine.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 30th September 2014 - 13:10