Cable Directionality - do you want proof

[cheeseboy]

You've explained nothing. What you did was try and concoct silly reasoning to dismiss the point being made.

on the contrary, I've explained why I felt there was no proof as there was no testing, and I explained the resons why I felt it wasn't a test (something which ellis has agreed with - it wasn't a test) therefore no proof can be obtained. It's no more silly than linking to a youtube video of a demo and declaring it proof of something. I could like to a youtube video that says there is a ghost. Does that mean ghosts exists because of one random youtube video?

A more simple test you couldn't ask for. If you want the why - then by all means set up your scientific tests.

? It's not a test. It's a demo. Again for the reasons explained. If you feel it is a test, please can you point out the controls, references and methodolgy they used in order to rule out any of the mitigating factors that happen?

The science is already done in this demo - what you get is the end product and the results, what they were trying to achieve.

there is no science in the demo. The part we are talking about is a guy taking a bit of wire, and putting it in somewhere. That's not science.

You only need to listen and decide if they have achieved what they set out to achieve......that's it.

No, I was responding to Ellis' thread title.

Listening to the remarks alone on the vid suggest the thing works.

really? really really? Is that the best proof you can come up with. Seriously, if you think that I have said something you don't agree with, please feel free to point out and give some counter points, as I have said. If you can't do that, then it's pretty obvious, again, you're just stirring as per usual. I shall now await the usual LOL, are you serious, you guys etc...

edit - apologies thompson, that last bit was uncalled for I think, but I'll leave it there to prove I've nothing to hide. Let me phrase this another way. Do you have any actual *proof* to dispute any of the "concoted silly reasoning" I have come up with? If so I'd be very interested to hear it.

 

[chebby]

I was going to give a long explanation, but I won't. The signal in a cable (speaker, non-optical interconnect) is sent as an AC - i.e. alternating current. In simplistic terms, this means the current flows in BOTH directions always. So if a cable is directional, it must, by definition, block half of the current and reduce signal quality.

That ain't right.

An amps output is DC.

you have just blown any credibility you had in this discussion. All hi-fi signals are AC in nature. The alternating current is necessary for coils - attached to speaker diaphragms - to move backwards and forwards within magnets. If it was all DC then there would be no sound because the diaphragms would be stationery. Either pushed out (or pulled in) but fixed in position by DC. Try it with a battery across the speaker terminals!!

Explain how DC will make a speaker vibrate between tens and tens of thousands of times per second to match the musical frequencies.

 

[scene]

I was going to give a long explanation, but I won't. The signal in a cable (speaker, non-optical interconnect) is sent as an AC - i.e. alternating current. In simplistic terms, this means the current flows in BOTH directions always. So if a cable is directional, it must, by definition, block half of the current and reduce signal quality.

That ain't right.

An amps output is DC.

you have just blown any credibility you had in this discussion. All hi-fi signals are AC in nature. The alternating current is necessary for coils - attached to speaker diaphragms - to move backwards and forwards within magnets. If it was all DC then there would be no sound because the diaphragms would be stationery. Either pushed out (or pulled in) but fixed in position by DC. Try it with a battery across the speaker terminals!!

Explain how DC will make a speaker vibrate between tens and tens of thousands of times per second to match the musical frequencies.

Thanks chebby - I was just about to start questioning my sanity and my degree-level physics...

 

[cheeseboy]

Here is an interesting quote from QED i found the other day on another forum. The question was asking, Is QED original cable directional? numerous respounses later someone actually asked QED themselves, a very respected cable manufacture as we all know. This is there response

"Dear David,

unfortunately our marketing department doesn't like to offend people who believe in the "burn in" and directionality theory of speaker cables. If you subscribe to these theories, you may choose to arrange the QED Original cable so that the writing points from the amplifier, towards the the speaker.If, like me, you don't believe a piece of copper can behave like a diode, you may safely ignore the advice!Sorry to have worried you for the sake of political correctness,Yours sincerelyXXXXXX

wow, kudos to them!

 

[pauln]

Why would you have an A/C output on an amp?

The whole point of adding capacitors to its output stage is to deliver a stable electrical signal.

I don't have the time to double check this but a/c in d/c out on all electrical devices.

That's a shame - you really should check your facts before making statements that are completely and absolutely WRONG!

 

[scene]

Here is an interesting quote from QED i found the other day on another forum. The question was asking, Is QED original cable directional? numerous respounses later someone actually asked QED themselves, a very respected cable manufacture as we all know. This is there response

"Dear David,

unfortunately our marketing department doesn't like to offend people who believe in the "burn in" and directionality theory of speaker cables. If you subscribe to these theories, you may choose to arrange the QED Original cable so that the writing points from the amplifier, towards the the speaker.If, like me, you don't believe a piece of copper can behave like a diode, you may safely ignore the advice!Sorry to have worried you for the sake of political correctness,Yours sincerelyXXXXXX

wow, kudos to them!

A truly sensible and scientific response

 

[chebby]

Note the voltage changing polarity and the little lightning symbols (representing the current) moving back and forth in time to the musical signal...

http://animagraffs.com/loudspeaker/

 

[ellisdj]

lots of responses - firstly its a hifi show demo - not a university lecture - notice noone is asleep

He explains a story - a story of his engineering life and love of hifi surrounded by disbelivers - this could well be BS no idea, and its the part that seems very salesy to me - but look at this thread its also extremely likely its true as well

Either way come the end - here you go - this is my work - you like or you dont believe it or you dont - bravo

Blind tested or not - you sit and listen and we play it to you and you make your own mind up. Do you hear a difference or not simple. This is fantastic in my eys and I would love to see these more - you could have a room full of anyone so its ballsy. I know someone would pipe straight up and say I heard no difference if it was absolutey the case ( maybe they did and we didnt see it)

Now at first I thought there was a big difference in output volume / presence to the sound in the directionality test- but then I realised it finishs on a quiet bit and starts on a loud bit - so that could be why. - could be trickery, so I am going to remove that to check

So last night I tried several times - 2 tabs open both parts qeued up and to be honest its very hard to tell hence why I thought a blind test would be 50/50, but I am sure could some difference, Factor in its 3inch of only the earth lead how much difference can it make. To stand up in front of all the industry top nobs and enthusiasts of that level who go to Munich is really brave or stupid of him and Audioquest if there is clearly no difference. More to lose than gain dont you think so why do it?

Then its the same theory in the next demo of the capacitors where there is clearly a big difference - very easily audible even on a phone apparently.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

AC/DC - so called experts seem to be totally ignorant of basic electrical theory and yet try to make scientific argument. I just need to make sure that the electrons travelling down my speaker cables move in both directions. My current microscope is not adequate to test this.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Lol...... Ok, I stand corrected.

But a speaker coil only moves in one direction - it pushes from rest i.e 1watt/2mm, 2watts/4mm and so on . It does not 'move backwards'.

Reverse the polarity and the coil pulls(aka in phase and out of phase)

The electrical signal does fluctuate depending on the music/information carried from the amp which is what a speaker responds to..... an A/C signal feeding a speaker, who'd a thunk it?

The supply to the amp is A/C that goes to a transformer which converts then supply the boards.

Is there a transformer on the output stage of an amp?

Anyway fair enough you fellas got me.....or have you?..... :-D

 

[richardw42]

The word INCREDIBLE does not even begin to describe some of the statements on this thread.

the zombie apocalypse has started, I've seen it on tv.

 

[Crossie]

Thompsonuxb

What do you think is the function of a transformer?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

You've explained nothing. What you did was try and concoct silly reasoning to dismiss the point being made.

on the contrary, I've explained why I felt there was no proof as there was no testing, and I explained the resons why I felt it wasn't a test (something which ellis has agreed with - it wasn't a test) therefore no proof can be obtained.  It's no more silly than linking to a youtube video of a demo and declaring it proof of something.  I could like to a youtube video that says there is a ghost.  Does that mean ghosts exists because of one random youtube video?

A more simple test you couldn't ask for. If you want the why - then by all means set up your scientific tests.

?  It's not a test.  It's a demo.  Again for the reasons explained.  If you feel it is a test, please can you point out the controls, references and methodolgy they used in order to rule out any of the mitigating factors that happen?

The science is already done in this demo - what you get is the end product and the results, what they were trying to achieve.

there is no science in the demo.  The part we are talking about is a guy taking a bit of wire, and putting it in somewhere.  That's not science.

You only need to listen and decide if they have achieved what they set out to achieve......that's it.

No, I was responding to Ellis' thread title.

Listening to the remarks alone on the vid suggest the thing works.

really?  really really?  Is that the best proof you can come up with.  Seriously, if you think that I have said something you don't agree with, please feel free to point out and give some counter points, as I have said.  If you can't do that, then it's pretty obvious, again, you're just stirring as per usual.  I shall now await the usual LOL, are you serious, you guys etc...

edit - apologies thompson, that last bit was uncalled for I think, but I'll leave it there to prove I've nothing to hide.  Let me phrase this another way.  Do you have any actual *proof* to dispute any of the "concoted silly reasoning" I have come up with?  If so I'd be very interested to hear it.

Cheeseboy, we've been knocking heads together long enough - no need to explain anything.....

Now where was I....

Oh, yes absolute piffle.....

The man did a demo, he explains what he did.....

And you argue about proof?

Maybe it's a case of you had to be there, but it did not look staged and the person filming did not sound like a paid 'plant' in the room.

The man did a simple demo - what are you arguing?

You may not have noticed but I have not been bothering with this type of thread in recent weeks. Hardly had time for the board.
But this is a pretty cool video with a 'cable' manufacturer actually putting their neck on the line.

Be it on YouTube or live....I mean c'mon they're saying their products work it's not snake oil and will demonstrate their product publically!

What's the argument?

 

[Covenanter]

The word INCREDIBLE does not even begin to describe some of the statements on this thread.

the zombie apocalypse has started, I've seen it on tv.

+1, well plus several thousand actually.

Chris

 

[Frank Harvey]

Be it on YouTube or live....I mean c'mon they're saying their products work it's not snake oil and will demonstrate their product publically!

What's the argument?

There'd be arguments regardless of whether or not they did the demo - if they did do it, it's a trick/not scientific, if they didn't, it's snake oil/nonsense

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Thompsonuxb?

What do you think is the function of a transformer?

Tell me....

 

[Frank Harvey]

Isn't that John Dawson of Arcam in the audience?

Yes. I'm just watching it now.

 

[cheeseboy]

Oh, yes absolute piffle.....

the only piffle is coming from you at the moment. Let me show you why....

The man did a demo, he explains what he did.....

yep, I've not disputed that.

And you argue about proof?

Yes, and why would I do that.? Hmmmm, maybe because the thread is called "cable directionality - do you want PROOF". So, I came in looking for PROOF. I didn't find any. I explained why. Did you even read the thread title before you barged in with your size 13's?

Maybe it's a case of you had to be there, but it did not look staged and the person filming did not sound like a paid 'plant' in the room.

Unless you know this for a fact, it can't be discounted. Just, as I said before, I have not discounted that the demo he did, did make a difference.

The man did a simple demo - what are you arguing?

lets try this again. The thread title says proof, I came for proof, i did not find any, I explained why. I'll repeat that in case you missed you the 4 or 5 other times I said it...The thread title says proof, I came for proof, i did not find any, I explained why. So far you have yet to raise any actual counter points to why I said I did not believe this was proof. I've asked you to do so, you can't.

You may not have noticed but I have not been bothering with this type of thread in recent weeks. Hardly had time for the board. But this is a pretty cool video with a 'cable' manufacturer actually putting their neck on the line.

Again, please actually read what I say, not what you think I say. I said I found the video quite interesting. If you also bothered to read, you'll also have read I said I heard a difference as well. However, lets not let these pesky facts get in the way of you making stuff up. I don't think they put their head on the line though. This is controlled (by them) demo. Of course they aren't going to do something then suddenly say "oh, this worked before". This is demo to demonstrate something, not dispute it. They set out to demonstrate what they wanted to demonstrate. At no point did they say, let's try this blind to really prove the point, or anything else that may have removed other mitigating factors. Nor would I expect them to in this case. I like demo's personally, but just because I sit in a room and see something doesn't mean I can't question it, or take it at face value, which is what you are doing. Have you ever seen any live magic. Did you see somebody make a person dissapear? Does that prove magic exists, or did you think, hey that was neat?

Be it on YouTube or live....I mean c'mon they're saying their products work it's not snake oil and will demonstrate their product publically!

They would have to prove (as in test) to claim it's not snake oil. This was not that, this is demo. Please see my response written many times before.

What's the argument?

not sure, but I think you could start an argument in an empty room.

I'll repeat this once more becuase I know you won't read it. I'm not disputing what is was - a demo, and quite a good and interesting one at that (I'm agreeing with Ellis again, just hope he doesn't faint ) I'm just saying that in the context of the thread title, this is not proof. There is no testing. It was a controlled demo. This is not proof of anything other than what they wanted to show you/make you listen.

edit: sorry the rant, it's frustrating when somebody appears to be responding when they haven't actually read what I've written, and seemingly ignoring the answers they've asked for.

 

[scene]

Isn't that John Dawson of Arcam in the audience?

Yes. I'm just watching it now.

Was he shaking his head in disbelief?

 

[Frank Harvey]

Was he shaking his head in disbelief?

Nope.

 

[spiny norman]

Was he shaking his head in disbelief?

No, and since I have seen Mr Dawson on one or two discussion panels in the past where he hasn't been shy about making his views known, I'd suggest that speaks volumes about what's being said in the presentation.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Oh, yes absolute piffle.....

the only piffle is coming from you at the moment.  Let me show you why....

The man did a demo, he explains what he did.....

yep, I've not disputed that.

And you argue about proof?

Yes, and why would I do that.? Hmmmm, maybe because the thread is called "cable directionality - do you want PROOF".  So, I came in looking for PROOF.  I didn't find any.  I explained why.  Did you even read the thread title before you barged in with your size 13's?

Maybe it's a case of you had to be there, but it did not look staged and the person filming did not sound like a paid 'plant' in the room.

Unless you know this for a fact, it can't be discounted.  Just, as I said before, I have not discounted that the demo he did, did make a difference.

The man did a simple demo - what are you arguing?

lets try this again.  The thread title says proof, I came for proof, i did not find any, I explained why.  I'll repeat that in case you missed you the 4 or 5 other times I said it...The thread title says proof, I came for proof, i did not find any, I explained why.  So far you have yet to raise any actual counter points to why I said I did not believe this was proof.  I've asked you to do so, you can't.

You may not have noticed but I have not been bothering with this type of thread in recent weeks. Hardly had time for the board. But this is a pretty cool video with a 'cable' manufacturer actually putting their neck on the line.

Again, please actually read what I say, not what you think I say.  I said I found the video quite interesting.  If you also bothered to read, you'll also have read I said I heard a difference as well.  However, lets not let these pesky facts get in the way of you making stuff up.  I don't think they put their head on the line though.  This is controlled (by them) demo.  Of course they aren't going to do something then suddenly say "oh, this worked before".  This is demo to demonstrate something, not dispute it.  They set out to demonstrate what they wanted to demonstrate.  At no point did they say, let's try this blind to really prove the point, or anything else that may have removed other mitigating factors.  Nor would I expect them to in this case.  I like demo's personally, but just because I sit in a room and see something doesn't mean I can't question it, or take it at face value, which is what you are doing.  Have you ever seen any live magic.  Did you see somebody make a person dissapear?  Does that prove magic exists, or did you think, hey that was neat?

Be it on YouTube or live....I mean c'mon they're saying their products work it's not snake oil and will demonstrate their product publically!

They would have to prove (as in test) to claim it's not snake oil.  This was not that, this is demo.  Please see my response written many times before.

What's the argument?

not sure, but I think you could start an argument in an empty room.

I'll repeat this once more becuase I know you won't read it.  I'm not disputing what is was - a demo, and quite a good and interesting one at that (I'm agreeing with Ellis again, just hope he doesn't faint )  I'm just saying that in the context of the thread title, this is not proof.  There is no testing.  It was a controlled demo.  This is not proof of anything other than what they wanted to show you/make you listen.

?

edit: sorry the rant, it's frustrating when somebody appears to be responding when they haven't actually read what I've written, and seemingly ignoring the answers they've asked for.

Read Ellis's opening paragraph.....

In fairness that's a good rant, one of the best I've seen in ages but in the context of the opening post I can't see what you're arguing about.

 

[ellisdj]

I like the reference to magic, must have had a magic wire up his sleeve - ready for the slight of hand

Great Thread - great topic for once its not all one sided either and full of sarcastic comments exception Anderson but thats to be expected - hence the reason for posting.

Its a cracking video and demonstration - who wouldnt want to see more like that taking place - you say something is great now show me.

I wonder how much that Niagra is going to cost - no small amount I would guess given the power conditioning market is now anything upto £25k+ serious wedge

 

[ellisdj]

Only to you as you are only person who reads what you write

 

[spiny norman]

Are you saying because he hasn't spoken out he's actively supporting the demo.

No, not at all: rather I'm suggesting that Mr Dawson would usually not be backward in coming forward if he felt something needed challenging.