Holy cow! You went right to the bottom line, where I danced around it in my post.You have years of study ahead before you can even think of disagreeing.
Holy cow! You went right to the bottom line, where I danced around it in my post.You have years of study ahead before you can even think of disagreeing.
It's ok, I'm more toward UK culture guy. (aka known to be direct and had very bloody sense of humour)Holy cow! You went right to the bottom line, where I danced around it in my post.
Calculate the difference in delay for a cable at audio frequencies. It is pretty simple at low frequencies, but way up in the high-frequency region (GHz and above) it gets very complicated. Propagation velocity for typical interconnects tends to range between 60%~80% the speed of light, still well (well) above the audio band. The difference in wave flow (which is not "electron transfer") for conductive metals is negligible, as is the impact of dielectric properties, in the audio range.It's ok, I'm more toward UK culture guy. (aka known to be direct and had very bloody sense of humour)
That being said, I will stick to my hypothesis, cause I didn't see anything contradicting it.
Electric isn't always operating at/ near speed of light (unlike optic cable), different material do had different speed limitation for electron to transfer. It makes sense that the speed also varied with different frequency cause we know resistance do, so theoritically capacitance also.
It's actually kinda simple.
It's actually kinda simple.
So? I don't see why does it contradict my transient response claim? The point is they are variable, and I don't think it's 60-80 but can be as low as 20-60.Calculate the difference in delay for a cable at audio frequencies. It is pretty simple at low frequencies, but way up in the high-frequency region (GHz and above) it gets very complicated. Propagation velocity for typical interconnects tends to range between 60%~80% the speed of light, still well (well) above the audio band. The difference in wave flow (which is not "electron transfer") for conductive metals is negligible, as is the impact of dielectric properties, in the audio range.
You can look at these articles but I suspect you've already made up your mind: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/interconnect-bandwidth.25441/ and https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...cle-does-audio-cable-skin-effect-matter.7157/
Did you note music was used in this testing for the nulling?So? I don't see why does it contradict my transient response claim? The point is they are variable, and I don't think it's 60-80 but can be as low as 20-60.
Cause "The drift velocity is known to be primarily dependent on the applied voltage and another property on which it depends is the molecular structure of the wire and hence the material of the conductor. Slight temperature dependence is also observed."
That's why they said it doesn't matter if you use a coat hanger for speaker cable, as long as it's appropriate gauge, material and length.
Not for interconnect which is low power and will be EQ and boost about 10-1000 times afterward.
Do you mean "notice"?Did you note music was used in this testing for the nulling?
Humor usObviously there much more other reasons to support my hypothesis, but I won't bother you guys with the details.
Obviously there much more other reasons to support my hypothesis, but I won't bother you guys with the details.
Also i know in order to eliminate transcient delay in cable, many big, expensive studio had dedicated syncronize cable to maku sure it's accurate, which I also don't see in this experiment.
There were three parts to the review. First part was measurements. Second part was playing superbly recorded orchestral music and comparing the difference through this cabke and ultra cheap one. Difference was inaudible. Music samples and null were provided in the review.No, I admit I didn't see there's actual music samples in this testing, only 32 notes in different frequency etc (At least not enough to show frequency transcient accuracy in a very short time).
You either didn't read the original post or didn't understand most of it. There is music and it was synchronized in time.Do you mean "notice"?
No, I admit I didn't see there's actual music samples in this testing, only 32 notes in different frequency etc (At least not enough to show frequency transcient accuracy in a very short time). Also, I actually stumbled on this topic not because it related to my own topic, but it's the 1st suggested topic. (Somehow it actually related, so I guess physic is that simple huh? )
But since this is not my topic... Long story short, I support the former Belden guy's not only because I had 1st hand experienced TC core cable do make a substantial different in vintage signature sound quality, but i also know Belden still had produce inexpensive TC core cable until today. So that guy obviously know what transcient response is. Also i know in order to eliminate transcient delay in cable, many big, expensive studio had dedicated syncronize cable to maku sure it's accurate, which I also don't see in this experiment.
Obviously there much more other reasons to support my hypothesis, but I won't bother you guys with the details.
You said you prefered the cheapo compared to the iconoclast, That mean it does have sound different.There were three parts to the review. First part was measurements. Second part was playing superbly recorded orchestral music and comparing the difference through this cabke and ultra cheap one. Difference was inaudible. Music samples and null were provided in the review.
Last part was just listening to both cables where I initially preferred the cheap cable to iconoclast.
In summary you ran over here without bothering to read and or understand the review. Still think you have a reasonable point worth considering?
Clearly you just read what you want to reed:You said you prefered the cheapo compared to the iconoclast, That mean it do have sound different.
Immediately I "heard" more air, more detail and better fidelity. This faded in a few seconds though and the sound was just as it was with the Iconoclast.
For my main system, I used a Topping D90SE driving the Topping LA90 which in turn drove my Revel Salon 2 speakers. I picked tracks with superb spatial qualities to judge the usual "soundstage." I again started with Iconoclast XLR TPC cable. I was once again blown away how good my system sounds. I don't get to enjoy it often enough given how much time I spend working at my desk. Anyway, after a while I switched to WBC cable. Once again, immediate reaction was that the sound was more open, bass was a bit more tight, etc. This too passed after a few seconds and everything sounded the same again.
That’s what EQ is for, not a cable., not everyone like dead flat response.
You said you prefered the cheapo compared to the iconoclast, That mean it do have sound different.
It's pretty much same as frequency response as much as transcient response, not everyone like dead flat response.
You say you're an EE can you maybe read up on psycho acoustics? You may not realize how silly your claims are on this.You said you prefered the cheapo compared to the iconoclast, That mean it does have sound different.
As a matter of facts, not everyone like true to accurate transcient response of cable.
Like the vintage sound TC core cable, they actually use the tin surface to create the old hifi analog era delayed transcient response. Or the famous gold conductor "voodoo", gold also had much slower transcient response compared to copper. Same reason some don't like silver transcient response and prefer copper.
It's pretty much same as frequency response as much as transcient response, not everyone like dead flat response.
As for other sceptical but without substantial content. I'll just refer to #19 post of mine in my own topic Here.
Don't want to hijack this thread for meaningless answer that without constructive information.
Well, i really don't want to hijack or answering this kind of unconstructive question.It only means he had the impression they sounded different at that single point in time. Due to the lack of controls, which could confirm if his observations where accurate, it is not proof.
I have separate amp's and DAC's using basic interconnects, and next to that a fully integrated system. No difference in transients to be heard. So what's wrong with my interlinks?