The fallacy of ac treatment


I see a lot of threads related to managing and tweaking the ac powerout end of electronic systems. Much has been said about dedicated wiring, termination and even the right kind of extension cords to use. I work for an electric utility; and that's the extent of my credibilty here. The majority of you will no doubt be far more erudite wrt music hardware. Just a thought, though: domestic ac distribution goes thus: power station-step up-city-step down-subdivision-final step down. As far as the utility is concerned, you and all your neigbours are collectively the load for the step down tranformer. Any inductance/capacitance created by your neigbour running motors/tubelights, etc is felt by the lot of you. Additionally, the voltage frequency will almost always move around a tolerance from 50hz as the whole country turns on the air, off the lights - changes all the time as peaker plants ramp up etc. Nothing can change that- the frequency of the grid supplying your city is the frequency in the mains at your house. So what's my point? Well only that how much difference can the last 10 feet of cabling, etc make when the other hundreds of miles are outside of your control? And more importantly, frequency is one of the most imp parameters for measuring electricity quality (your expensive hand-coiled toroids are entirely subject to the f in the primaries) and nothing other than running an f generator can shield you from that. Methinks all the improvements you see from ac cord treatments are pyschosomatic. But that's cool.
snobgoblinf669

Showing 6 responses by redkiwi

Onhwy61, I agree that power cords around US$250 are very adequate for most systems. As to the ones costing 5 times more, I agree I would not buy them on 'spec and would probably not even try them - without a credible recommendation. I have always found it interesting that the US scene seems to be over-hyped on cables, yet the British scene is the reverse. A good example was the recent TAS that recommended systems where some included cable recommendations that rivalled the cost of the components. Whatjd - don't use the steel pins, you must get the Tubthumping Wakonda pure crystal pins dipped in virgin juniper oil, and only on the third sunday night of the new moon - check www.tubthumpingwakonda.con
After reading this forum for months now, I still cannot quite get over the fact that people seem to need an engineering explanation of why something makes a difference before they can believe there is a difference. There are two reasons for my incredulity. First, it seems to be paying homage to science, when the whole point of the scientific process is that reality drives theory not the other way around. That is to say, the scientific process is not about denying an experienced reality just because of a lack of theory. Second, an engineering explanation adds nothing of value, except to equipment designers. For example, if someone explains to me how a 24 bit DAC can outperform a 20 bit DAC, due to its ability to perform more dither or some other purpose, this proves nothing of practical benefit to me. It does not proove that all 24 bit DACs will outperform all 20 bit DACs, for example. It does not prove how much more money I should pay for a 24 bit DAC over a 20 bit one. In fact it tells me very little, if anything, about whether my musical enjoyment will be enhanced. So what is the point? For me - I have tried lots of power cords, and they all sound different. The nature of the difference is of a similar order of magnitude and musical significance as changing speaker cables. Anyone who spends large amounts on a speaker cable and then uses stock power cords has their priorities wrong IMO. This is what I hear, and this is all I need to know. Snobgoblin, you may choose to put your head in the sand and comfort yourself that those like me are all wrong. An alternative would be to listen to some cables and, who knows, you may remove all doubt. What is there to be afraid of?
Onhwy61, I am not sure I am understanding your point. You seem to be pooh-poohing specialty power cables and saying that the claimed beneficial effects defy "understood science". But surely the understood science would include such concepts as the effects of shielding and common mode rejection - two of the most common strategies used in specialty power cables. You don't mention whether you hold this view, not only because of understood science, but also by having tried specialty power cords. My experimentation with trying these various products tells me a $35,000 system ought to not be using stock cords, and that specialty power cords (for me at least) have a more beneficial effect than power conditioners and filters. I really don't care whether it is voodoo or understood science (neither concept do I trust) that makes this so.
Elizabeth - while current capability is an issue, one of the reasons why a dedicated feed works is that there are less connections on the line to pick up noise, and so one of the benefits of using the air conditioner's outlet is that it is the only outlet on that feed line. I am not implying you did not realise that - just clarifying.
Gmkowal - let us hope audio is an emotional issue for all of us. You may be right that we should not fix AC noise problems with better power cords, but only buy equipment that deals with these problems (more effectively) internally. But if having bought the best sounding component I can reasonably afford, and then I find that $400 on a power cord significantly improves the sound - what am I to do? Refuse to buy the power cord on the basis that I am pissed with the component designer for not designing his product competently? That seems to be self-defeating. Complain to the component's manufacturer? Somehow I don't think they would listen. Perhaps you believe I am deluded about what I hear with power cords? But I have many years of experience with this hobby, and so if I am deluded about power cords then I must be deluded about most other choices I have made in audio, since I apply the same listening tests to those other decisions too. Since the delusion has led to countless hours of joy through bringing me closer to the music, I will take my delusion any day over your apparent blind faith that your theory explains everything. It is one thing to wonder about the reason why people report hearing a difference, and another to state that there cannot be a difference because your belief in some theories is inconsistent with it. I am a scientist too, but more freely acknowledge that scientific theories are blunt instruments.
I think I see your point Gmkowal, that theory can help us in focussing on a remedy for the most appropriate source of a problem. But I have not come across any universal theory that works repeatedly in distinguishing between the many options we audiophiles must choose between. Without a reliable universal theory, then any individual theory tends to tell only part of the story. For example, I can postulate a theory that explains why using a sorbothane footer ought to be beneficial. But I can use another theory to postulate that using a cone ought to be beneficial too. Yet I know of no theory that tells me that a cone will be better than a sorbothane footer, that cannot be countered by a theory that tells the reverse story. Only listening removes the ambiguity, or reveals the nature of the trade-off. From listening I tend to develop my own theories of course - like, that if there are two compliant materials in a system the result is awful - therefore use only one, and use rigid coupling for any other support interfaces. Of course I can use conventional theory to explain that this is due to correlation effects, but only my ears can tell me whether the issue is relevant and significant. My ears tell me that the choice of power cord is very relevant and very beneficial - I have said it before, on a par with changing speaker cables.