2. tech-talk
  3. 1406389858

The Fine Art of Doing Nothing By Roger Skoff

Roger Skoff just posted an article titled, The Fine Art of Doing Nothing." Here's the link:

http://audiophilereview.com/cables/the-fine-art-of-doing-nothing.html

I pass this along because Mr. Skoff speaks to many points that I, Al (Almarg), Roy Johnson (GMA) and others have been talking about.

For starters, in the controversial area of I/C and speaker cables, Mr. Skoff asserts, with some credibility IMO, that try as hard as one may, making so called perfect cables that "do nothing" is an exercise in futility. Ergo my experiment in testing 10 gauge solid core Romex wire. Been trying to find some cheap wire.

The same goes to speakers and other components. Btw, Mr. Skoff tips his "do nothing" hat to 1st order cross speakers. He implies that they "do less" than highly rigged gizmos.

I suspect that Mr. Skoff would scoff (pun intended) at my interest in the DEQX. As much as I hope it will correct my time incoherent speakers, the device may "do something" else.

Enjoy the read.

Bruce
bifwynne
roxy54's avatar
roxy54
7,674 posts
 
Bif,
I agree that perfect is more elusive than a fast moving target...it doesn't even exist. Even if it did, it would be defined differently by every individual.
That said, many of us experience very audible differences in cables of different designs, for the better or the worse. I have read before of members who use Romex or zip cord with results that really please them, and I don't doubt them. All ears and what those ears perceive are different.
Some don't worry about cable matters much at all, some (seem) to worry far too much. I try a few kinds within my financial means, stick with the wires I like best among those and stop fretting about it.
I find it interesting as many of us do to discuss the matter, but in the end, whether it's gold wire or solid core aluminum, it makes no difference if the listener thinks that it sounds good.
bifwynne OP
2,206 posts
 
Roxy54 ... of course I agree with you too. But Mr. Skoff also scoffs in general at using various artifacts that purport to only do good, but at no cost or adverse effect. this goes way beyond cables.

If I was in start-over mode, I would like to seriously listen to Roy Johnson's time coherent speakers. Problem is they are stone ugly to me ... look like Praying Mantises. LOL.

Most other tops brands are NOT time coherent. Some brands even reverse the polarity of drivers to achieve a modicum of phase coherency at the cross over points. I can't speak to the math and physics, but intuitively, reversing driver polarity just seems pretty wild to me. I like simple, elegant solutions to problems.

Cheers,

Bruce

Btw, IMO, Wilson speakers look like Dr. Who Dileks. LOL :)
jmcgrogan2's avatar
jmcgrogan2
6,346 posts
 
Nice link Bruce, thank you.
I do agree that everything affects the sound. There is no perfect cable or component, not to mention the differences in how we perceive the sound with our own instruments (ears). That is why making recommendations is an exercise in futility. Not only are there too many electrical variables in each system, but there are variations into how each individual will perceive these electrical variations and interpret them sonically.

Even if we like the sound of the change at first, many times with time we find out that the sound was just different, not better. For every yin there is a yang. Noticeable improvements in one area of sound help us overlook deficiencies in other areas....until we have lived with a component for a while. Then we almost always hear it's faults and start looking for the next change.

Just relax, do nothing but listen to the music.
mechans
3,048 posts
 
Indeed quantifying perceived audio pleasure is nearly impossible and unlikely to work a priori actual listening. That is- not checking to see if your mathematics do in fact predict the results intended without heavy tweaking and redesign. .
More to discover