Flex,
The quoted portion of my previous post is an ANALOGY.
It's not meant as any type of proof - it's just an analogy.
You're pushing an analogy to an absurd degree. Of course
it is well recognized that humans are much better at
"pattern recognition" than current computer algorithms.
However, this is a non sequitur when it comes to how electrons
flow in cables - and the computational physics that can
currently be used to model such to a high degree of accuracy.
Gregory Greenman |
Dear Morb,
It's also a non-sequitur to discuss the JFK Jr problem, call it "fallible senses vs instrumenation", and then use that as a proof of the limits of hearing. In fact, your comparisons are apples-oranges.
You were comparing an optical sensor (eye) with, what, EM radiation sensors(?) under conditions where the optical sensor is severely disadvantaged. Had you compared optical to optical (e.g. eye to camera, telescope) you would have discovered that the instrumentation was no better than the eye under those fogged in conditions.
My point was to say that human sensory detection uses a wide variety of criteria in arriving at conclusions, and is subject to a high degree of training (yes, pattern recognition). Agreed, it has nothing to do with electron flow, and neither does your commentary. But my point actually does have a great deal to do with why audiophiles, as well as audio professionals, become skilled in hearing fine differences, and also with a discussion on the fallibilities of double blind tests. Lets not get into blind testing here; it's a long and heated argument.
It's a necessary and good exercise to look at audio "theories" in terms of well-established scientific knowledge, like phase diagrams and electron flow. But it's also a little dangerous to always infer from the text book situation to the engineering situation; the devil is in the details, and human ears need to be trusted at times to tell you that you haven't always got the explanation right. |
Perhaps you can explain: "Faulted Defects Generated by the Movement of Boundaries in Electron Microscope Specimens" pp314-325 'ELECTRON MICROSCOPY OF INTERFACES IN METALS IN ALLOYS' CT Forwood, LM Clarebrough.
Essentially: "A striking property of high-angle grain boundaries in pure polycrystalline copper (99.999%Cu) is that they are mobile in thin-foil electron microscope specimens at room temperature and rotate during observation, preferentially at the surface intersections. ... The defects observed consist of different types of stacking fault bend, and in addition , small twinned grains sometimes form by boundary dissociation ... "
Various microphotographs are presented over a period of days, and the electron microscope was turned off between measurements.
Now, IF copper formations can actually move on their own, what would happen if an electric current was applied over the same time period?
Perhaps your model of electron flow shows what happens to these copper atoms and why they won't stay where they were first put.
|
power cord burn-in...is there a DR. in the house ,you guys are giving me burn-out |
|
Thank you Mr Curl : ) Sean
> |
You guys must have money to burn. I suppose you drive one of those special Chevy Tahoe's they call HUMMER.
This is one of those " My stereo is better than your stereo" situations.
Give me one shred of evidence that this theory exsists.
Thanks, This is fun:) |
No money to burn in my house, Scottht. Just no debt, no kids, cheap rent, and a wife who can't wait to upgrade to the biggest, baddest pair of speakers she can find. In addition, we have an English Mastiff and a Jack Russell who regularly insist that Cesaria Evora could sound just a hair better as they ease into naptime. And when these guys are screaming "Dad, buy the Western Electric 300B's!!!" you don't go for the cheap stuff. |
Gosh, let me think about that just 1 minute. No kids, no mortgage and no debt. I don't know what I would do!
Most certainly the best stereo I could find. Enjoy it while you can. My oldest daughter is going into 10th grade. And my youngest is going into 8th grade. I have 15 years left on my mortgage.
I guess that is why I am using signal cable power cables :) |
It is true that 'quality' power cords cost more than Belden equivalents. Why they should sound 'better' is still a mystery. BUT, I know that Bob Crump, (my business partner in another company) INSISTS that his cords, both power and signal, MUST be broken in, to work at their best. He complains to me, all the time, that many people refuse to 'break in' his cables and this leads to rejection, or at least, disappointment. I have tried to understand this in physical terms, as I have a degree in physics as well. So far, I have only found 'interesting evidence' that points to a physical understanding. |
Scottht,
Many would say that with two daughters, you already have the best stereo you can find. My brother has three daughters...tri-amping at its finest.
All the best to you and your family,
Howard |
Does turning on my inter grated amp volume up and not playing any music break in the power cable |
Hi Willywonka620 For me as long as current is going through the power cord it is getting broken in. Using a Kill-A-Watt I've measured how much my equipment draws and then I use an IEC to plug converter (C14-5-15R) to then use my power cord as an extension cord. Here is one example from Mouser: http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/411/P002002-28453.pdfI've used power cords as extension cords for lamps, vacuum cleaners, irons, steamers etc. Pretty much any piece of electronics that would draw more than my equipment. After all that it gets installed on my audio gear and I sit back and relax. YMMV though |
In my experience, the connector ends are the primary reason for good sound |
