DCT Treatment of powerkords review, AlienRik, Idc etc

[idc]

PJPro:Interesting. Who does he work for?

Its a company in Edinburgh, I think it is owned by the French now. He did work for Marconi. This link is interesting;

http://www.raysamuelsaudio.com/products/cables

It is a LOD cable, but made to a military spec. Notice how it is braided. It backs up my mates comment.

 

[Anonymous]

"I think youll find Russ Andrews (Using Ben Duncans research) has since proven that braided cables DO physically lessen RFI in the main supply and further to that have proven that in doing so the 'noise floor' of an amp is lowered
It's just a pity that Ben Duncan Research didn't get that paper published in a peer reviewed journal (or did they?). I've had a bit of a read and, it does seem as though there may be some evidence to suggest the attenuation of RFI by braiding. That said, it would appear to be minimal at best and difficult to achieve in anything other than ideal conditions. This article isn't a bad read. It's by Jim Lesurf, a recently retired physics and electronics professor (UK)."

It is all about possible causes of RF interferance and preventing mains-carried RF interference from getting into domestic audio equipment. But they do not mention how consumer electronics power supply components work, changing ac to dc. Which should eliminate all RF interference. Good amplifiers are designed to have quiet power supplys by using filtering and regulating the dc rails.

If there is so much RF interference it makes it past the power supply stage then a line filter would be the obvious solution or phoning the utility company and complaining. If there is lots of RF in the room maybe shielded power cords which cost <£10. The most common problem with power supply tends to be ground loops and ground noise, which they do not seem to be designed to tackle. Ground loop induced magnetic coupling could also in theory effect the sound quality based on the electrical properties of different power cords, but it would be dependent on the design of the components the power cord was plugged into, audible/visible effects are not proven and it is not how the high-end power cords claim to improve the sound/picture quality.

The way I see it the money back satisfaction guarantee, helps insure they do not get any disgruntled customers. Disgruntled customers are the type who complain to the ASA if they feel misled by advertising, or trading standards if they feel misled by claims on the sellers own site. The one complaint to the ASA only resulted in a poor excuse "Russ Andrews said it had not been their intention to imply that the Signature PowerKord would have an effect on measurable distortion levels in Hi-Fi equipment. *They explained that the claim was the result of a typographical error, which had not been spotted at proof reading stage. *They apologised for the error and said they would take steps to avoid a similar mistake in the future." The subsequent evidence of the Russ Andrews research papers I think will not convince trading standards or the ASA that cables improve sound and picture quality as claimed, should someone else complain, but might convince them Russ Andrews is making an effort and result in just another slap on the wrist. If I were Russ Andrews I would just rely on positive reviews and positive customer feed back, to sell the products, just quoting other peoples opinions is alot safer.

 

[idc]

To go right back to the effects of DCT I found this written by an engineer from Empirical Audio

" Two cable sounded radically different, and yet all of the classical measurements showed they were identical. to test this, I suggest that someone reading this builds a cable or takes two identical interconnect cables (digital or analog) and performs the following experiment:

Immerse one of the cables or cable pairs in liquid nitrogen. This shocks all of the materials in it.

Then listen to both cables and hear the difference.

Then go to the bench and measure L, R, and C and do some frequency sweeps to compare them. Use a spectrum analyzer if you have one.

The result will be that they are identical and yet they sound different. I've done this experiment.

Then, find a Time-domain-Reflectometer and do a TDT (Time-domain-Transmission) measurement on the cable with a high-speed step. You will find only tiny reflections at ultra-high frequency as a result of the broken crystal lattice of the conductor metal.

So, how does this affect an audio frequency analog cable? how can you possibly hear this?

Only God knows the answer right now."

So use DCT on a cable, it measures the same as a cable not treated, but sounds different and they have so far yet to figure out why.

 

[Anonymous]

idc:

To go right back to the effects of DCT I found this written by an engineer from Empirical Audio

Only God knows the answer right now."

So use DCT on a cable, it measures the same as a cable not treated, but sounds different and they have so far yet to figure out why.

They do not need to know why they sound different to prove they sound different. They just need to be able to demonstrate a statistically significant greater than pure chance ability to hear the radicall difference in controlled double blind tests. Since the difference can be heard but not measured they might get researchers intrested in psychoacoustics to oversee the testing, as it is generally understood that sensors are alot more acute than human hearing. Getting the controled double blind testing overseen will also help reduce the chance of skeptics claiming the testing methodology was flawed and the researchers might be able to figure out what they are hearing that enables them to tell the difference or that the listeners are psychic.

 

[aliEnRIK]

knightout:The way I see it the money back satisfaction guarantee, helps insure they do not get any disgruntled customers. Disgruntled customers are the type who complain to the ASA if they feel misled by advertising, or trading standards if they feel misled by claims on the sellers own site. The one complaint to the ASA only resulted in a poor excuse "Russ Andrews said it had not been their intention to imply that the Signature PowerKord would have an effect on measurable distortion levels in Hi-Fi equipment. *They explained that the claim was the result of a typographical error, which had not been spotted at proof reading stage. *They apologised for the error and said they would take steps to avoid a similar mistake in the future." The subsequent evidence of the Russ Andrews research papers I think will not convince trading standards or the ASA that cables improve sound and picture quality as claimed, should someone else complain, but might convince them Russ Andrews is making an effort and result in just another slap on the wrist. If I were Russ Andrews I would just rely on positive reviews and positive customer feed back, to sell the products, just quoting other peoples opinions is alot safer.

Which company WOULDNT really? The only alternative was to actually go ahead and PROVE it measureably. Which theyve done and for that I personally commend them

 

[Anonymous]

aliEnRIK: Which company WOULDNT really? The only alternative was to actually go ahead and PROVE it measureably. Which theyve done and for that I personally commend them

But they did not go ahead and PROVE it. They stated as fact in advertising and still state as fact on their website the cables improve picture and sound quality. The ASA ruling was that they need robust scientific evidence to make such claims in advertisments.

What they have shown is that in some cases the mains cable effects RFI. The experiment was not representive of living room conditions and did not take into account how power supply components in consumer electronics smooth the supply by changing ac to dc. They have also not proven that the results they measured had an effect on picture and sound quality.

It would have been much easier to measure the sound at the speaker from a range of hifi setups with the manufactures stock cable then with the Russ Andrews cable and show the reduction in audible distortion. Acoustic calibration does these comparitive measurements all the time. It would also have been easy to use video test discs and sensors and do the same with displays which is done in display calibration all the time. If the difference between using the manufactures stock cable and a Russ Andrews cable are not measurable or are measurable but below what is believed to be a perceiveable difference. Then they could have done a series of controled double blind tests overseen by a University, if the listeners and viewers prefered the audio and video with Russ Andrew cable by a statistically significant amount over pure chance, they have proof.

They do not need to prove how their cables improve perceived sound and video quality, just that they do. Either by measured result at the speaker and display or double blind test listener and viewer preference. If the improvements are present and significant this should be easy to do.

 

[aliEnRIK]

knightout:

aliEnRIK: Which company WOULDNT really? The only alternative was to actually go ahead and PROVE it measureably. Which theyve done and for that I personally commend them

But they did not go ahead and PROVE it. They stated as fact in advertising and still state as fact on their website the cables improve picture and sound quality. The ASA ruling was that they need robust scientific evidence to make such claims in advertisments.

What they have shown is that in some cases the mains cable effects RFI. The experiment was not representive of living room conditions and did not take into account how power supply components in consumer electronics smooth the supply by changing ac to dc. They have also not proven that the results they measured had an effect on picture and sound quality.

It would have been much easier to measure the sound at the speaker from a range of hifi setups with the manufactures stock cable then with the Russ Andrews cable and show the reduction in audible distortion. Acoustic calibration does these comparitive measurements all the time. It would also have been easy to use video test discs and sensors and do the same with displays which is done by display calibration and technicians for mastering studios all the time. If the difference between using the manufactures stock cable and a Russ Andrews cable are not measurable or are measurable but below what is believed to be a perceiveable difference. Then they could have done a series of controled double blind tests overseen by a University, if the listeners and viewers prefered the audio and video with Russ Andrew cable by a statistically significant amount over pure chance, they have proof.

They do not need to prove how their cables improve perceived sound and video quality, just that they do. Either by measured result at the speaker and display or double blind test listener and viewer preference. If the improvements are present and significant this should be easy to do.

They measured an amps output and the noise floor (Distortion) was lowered

Im not sure where your coming from there but they definitely measured a mid priced amps 'noise floor' before and after. Surely to do that it would have been measured coming out of the speaker?

Either way it was measured to lower distortion all the same so now all that remains is how much anyone could tell a difference (If any).

 

[Anonymous]

In the Ross Andrews research paper the levels of RF noise they induce is not representive of normal living room conditions. The AC inlet path through which they are introducing the noise is not loaded, it appears to be a completely open circuit, which is not representive of the normal situation where the signal would be reduced by loading. They appear to have mislabled a graph attenuation when it should be gain. It shows an average of 10dB more attenuation 100kHz-820MHz but at some frequencies it is lower, worse than an ordinary mains lead. It is also not as much attenuation as a much cheap line filter would provide.

 

[aliEnRIK]

We appear to jumping around a bit here knightout, whats that to do with lowering a noise floor on an amp?

As for the 'cheap line filter' you mention, would there be any disadvantages from using one? (I was thinking along the lines of Tacima mains conditioners not being very good with amps etc)

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry I now see why Ross Andrews tested the RFI. Reading the detailed ASA report they only challenge some of the claims made. They rejected the claim that the cable could reduce distortion and noise already in the current. So it makes sense Russ Andrews attempted to prove this claim. Rather than attempt to prove the general statement that the cables improve sound and picture quality.

"whats that to do with lowering a noise floor on an amp?"

They at no time tested at the speaker. They never gave the amp a load, which would reduce the effect of any noise still present. They also did not test in typical living room conditions they induced loads more noise than would be present. So in actual use in a normal living room would it lower the noise floor and would listeners be able to clearly hear a improvement from using the cable. They do not qualify the claims of improved picture and sound quality with statements about if you suffer from a huge amount of RFI are products may help to reduce it. Most of the details of their products and trements to products like DCT are not designed to deal with RFI, this is not how they claim to improve the picture and sound quality. The intro document to the papers states "We're not talking about the sound and video improvements (which are clearly audible and visible)" Why on earth not, that is what people buy these cables for. If they are clearly audible and visible then prove they exist and no more cable belivers and non-belivers it will be proven fact.

For powercords the attenuation effect of noise in the powersupply was measured using a sensing coil positioned at the lead outs of the toroidal transformer in the amps power supply. But for the measurements of THD noise was added directly to the tuner input at a volume just below clipping and measurements were taken at the amps output without any load/speakers attached. They compared with and without noise added this was then presented as indicitive of the effect of noise in the power supply to sound quality. Why didnt they measure THD with the noise added before the power cord with and without Ross Andrews products and why not measure THD at the speaker with the amp under a load. Why not more detail about the amount of noise added and examples of causes of this level of noise in normal living rooms.

 

[idc]

If a cable seller was ever taken to court all they would need to do is get Jase or Rick to give evidence for them and THE FORCE to be given the wrong date to appear. Sorted

 

[jase fox]

idc:If a cable seller was ever taken to court all they would need to do is get Jase or Rick to give evidence for them and THE FORCE to be given the wrong date to appear. Sorted

LOL >>> gets best suit and tie out, reaches for brief case (strictly just for show of course)asks Mrs if tie looks straight ! ha Anyway i dont NEED anyone saying to me "so & so test hasnt shown it can improve the PQ & AQ , i know it does, i can see the differences case closed >>> picks up brief case & of to the pub to sink a couple.....

 

[True Blue]

Right the final pieces of the jigsaw are on the way!!

Two Chord Powerchords (less than £60 each new) are on the way. One to replace the RA DCT treated powerkord on the reciever and the other for my PS3 (possibly Blu Ray)

Anyway the thought is the Fig of 8 RA cable can go on the BRP for now and the DCT treated Powerkord will go on the V+ box

Apart from the RA IEC to figure of 8 connector does anyone else have any alternative suggestions, thanks

 

[aliEnRIK]

True Blue:

Apart from the RA IEC to figure of 8 connector does anyone else have any alternative suggestions, thanks

You could use an adaptor so you can use a normal IEC cable

 

[True Blue]

Thank RIK, think got our wires crossed a bit. Realise that I need an IEC to fig 8 adaptor, what I was asking was other than the Russ Andrews on has anyone any idea where to get them??

 

[Anonymous]

So blue i tak eit you aint happy with the RA cable and prefer the powerchords?

 

[aliEnRIK]

True Blue:Thank RIK, think got our wires crossed a bit. Realise that I need an IEC to fig 8 adaptor, what I was asking was other than the Russ Andrews on has anyone any idea where to get them??

My bad. I thought you ment RAs actual figure 8 mains cable

I bought my adaptors off ebay

 

[True Blue]

Gander:So blue i tak eit you aint happy with the RA cable and prefer the powerchords?

Not that I am unhappy with them, just that I saw a new Chord powerchord for 1/2 price (£60 which makes them cheaper than the RA cables were in the sale) so I got two.

 

[True Blue]

Found these today - excellent

Will post as to service / postage

http://www.mains-cables-r-us.co.uk/ourshop/prod_470841-Fig-8-to-IEC-Adaptor-for-use-with-WATTGATE-Part-Number-M192.html

http://www.mains-cables-r-us.co.uk/...r-for-use-with-WATTGATE-Part-Number-M192.html

 

[Anonymous]

Got my final cable delivered today, which has gone onto my tv and must say that it has tidied up the picture. Less fizzing around edges for sure, especially in SD. Not sure about colour difference but its done what i wanted it to do which was clean up the picture.

 

[True Blue]

What cables did you get Gander?? Mine were delivered today but I was out (will pick them up tomorrow)

 

[Anonymous]

2m DCT treated classic with the standard iec plug filed down so it fits my panasonic!

 

[True Blue]

Excellent, glad you like it.

 

[Anonymous]

Gander, do tell...what is your opinion of the cable? Has there been a significant jump in picture quality?

Mine is arriving next week.

 

[Anonymous]

Its improved the picture quality notably in my eyes, especially SD. I'm glad i bought it and i am finally done on cable upgrades! (apart from having another signature sub cable being sent to me as the one i got today was faulty).