Solid Core Wiring

[antcollinet]

I know how to do it properly, or at least I think I do. But only with one person… my wife.

If you think you do - then you probably don't. Note it is ABX - not A, then B then "can you hear". If you cant double blind it, then you need to set up so your subject can't pick up any cues from you. They should not be able to see or hear you. And obviously the ONLY thing that should be changing is the cables you are comparing.

 

[arpinnurmela]

If you think you do - then you probably don't. Note it is ABX - not A, then B then "can you hear". If you cant double blind it, then you need to set up so your subject can't pick up any cues from you. They should not be able to see or hear you.

No. I did the X part just to make sure. But obviously my sample size of one is problematic.

 

[radix]

Interesting... Of course I know about it being used inside of walls, but I was curious about people who have used it for interconnects. I haven't tried AntiCables, but I have been making my own DIY solid core wires air-gapped inside of teflon. And I've done "blind-ish" trials with this stuff with non-audiophiles and audiophiles who've all said they heard a difference. One of the best trials I've done is to put solid core copper wiring on one speaker and use stranded wire on the other, and every time, no matter the person, they hear a difference. I wasn't sure if what I was hearing was accurate, which is why I started doing careful comparisons and bringing in other people to listen.

I'm wondering if the tests have been done with coated solid core wiring (a la AntiCables) or my style. I haven't personally tested AntiCables, so I can only talk about the wires that I've made for myself and others.

If you ever re-do the tests, I think it is important to establish that someone cannot distinguish the two speakers used in the test before changing the wiring in one. And, of course, you'd want to play the same channel through both and voltage balance both.

It would also be interesting to disassemble a speaker, not change the wiring, re-assemble the speaker and do the tests. This would answer the question about if the change is due to the disassembly/re-assembly and not the wiring. For example, there might be a change in the interior foam or a speaker got rotated or a phase is backwards.

One wants to control for other possible and likely causes of a perceived sound difference. It could very well be that your test subjects all heard a difference, but was that due to wiring or some other cause?

Marc

 

[antcollinet]

No. I did the X part just to make sure. But obviously my sample size of one is problematic.

The x is not "jsut to make sure" it is fundamental part of the test. How many repeats? How were results recorded? Sample size of one is fine.

 

[antcollinet]

The x is not "jsut to make sure" it is fundamental part of the test. How many repeats? How were results recorded? Sample size of one is fine.

Don't try to invent how to do the test (it sounds like you are making it up as you go. Read up how to do it properly.

 

[arpinnurmela]

If you ever re-do the tests, I think it is important to establish that someone cannot distinguish the two speakers used in the test before changing the wiring in one. And, of course, you'd want to play the same channel through both and voltage balance both.

It would also be interesting to disassemble a speaker, not change the wiring, re-assemble the speaker and do the tests. This would answer the question about if the change is due to the disassembly/re-assembly and not the wiring. For example, there might be a change in the interior foam or a speaker got rotated or a phase is backwards.

One wants to control for other possible and likely causes of a perceived sound difference. It could very well be that your test subjects all heard a difference, but was that due to wiring or some other cause?

Marc

I have another set of speakers I’m about to do this internal rewire for. I’ll post the results here.

 

[arpinnurmela]

The x is not "jsut to make sure" it is fundamental part of the test. How many repeats? How were results recorded? Sample size of one is fine.

I did two ABXs when I did it. Then my wife didn’t want to keep playing the “game”.

 

[antcollinet]

Like I say - you need to read up on it.

 

[arpinnurmela]

If you ever re-do the tests, I think it is important to establish that someone cannot distinguish the two speakers used in the test before changing the wiring in one. And, of course, you'd want to play the same channel through both and voltage balance both.

It would also be interesting to disassemble a speaker, not change the wiring, re-assemble the speaker and do the tests. This would answer the question about if the change is due to the disassembly/re-assembly and not the wiring. For example, there might be a change in the interior foam or a speaker got rotated or a phase is backwards.

One wants to control for other possible and likely causes of a perceived sound difference. It could very well be that your test subjects all heard a difference, but was that due to wiring or some other cause?

Marc

The phase issue was something I’m super paranoid about in these rewires. So I tend to check that one about 5 times or more.

 

[arpinnurmela]

Like I say - you need to read up on it.

Tony… I did. It’s a good way to go. I’m with you on this.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Even more to the point, I also couldn't believe what I was hearing.

Me neither. I could not believe what you were hearing.

I know how to do it properly, or at least I think I do. But only did so with one person… my wife.

Claiming to pass an ABx blind test of cables is an even more extraordinary claim than just saying you may hear differences under regular conditions.

I don't believe you did one nor the other anyway.

 

[SaltyCDogg]

Amir has some go vids about this

 

[arpinnurmela]

Me neither. I could not believe what you were hearing.

Claiming to pass an ABx blind test of cables is an even more extraordinary claim than just saying you may hear differences under regular conditions.

I don't believe you did one nor the other anyway.

The me neither part was funny. Props for the wit. I was waiting for someone to roll that way.

 

[dc655321]

I can site some actual physics, that is well established and of which I’ve personally calculated.

Yes please. I would like to see your physics model and calculations.

 

[arpinnurmela]

Yes please. I would like to see your physics model and calculations.

Yeah. Sure. I’ll dig up my grad school work and post it for you as soon as I find the box I put it in. Maybe you can do the calculations instead. Might be faster.

 

[VintageFlanker]

The me neither part was funny.

It was. But not as much as this whole thread for that matter.

Yes please. I would like to see your physics model and calculations.

Easy. Solid core is thicker then it sounds thicker. Is that valid physics?

 

[dc655321]

Maybe you can do the calculations instead. Might be faster

Maybe. But I'm not the one making evidence-free claims.

 

[arpinnurmela]

Maybe. But I'm not the one making evidence-free claims.

You’re also not the one bothering to research the physics.

 

[dc655321]

Solid core is thicker then it sounds thicker. Is that valid physics?

Apparently it's valid somewhere

 

[dc655321]

You’re also not the one bothering to research the physics.

Assumptions like that explain much...