In Reply to: Re: Yep posted by Steve Eddy on May 5, 2004 at 10:22:12:
Yes, we are talking about inter-aural delays.Yes, we'd have to show an amplitude dependent delay of some kind.
Yes, that would require a head vice if one wants to lock the image in absolute space relative to the head.. But, if an image location is blurred as a result of variations in the delay, then it would be shifting relative at some rate, so head position and movement is relatively unimportant..you could "see" the image blurring regardless of the absolute head angle..within reason of course..
Ten feet away center stage, 20 uSec represents about a foot shift right to left..Seriously, I could not think of image accuracy to 1/2 inch, which is about 1.5 uSec, ten feet away...one foot, yes..and that is 20 uS. Way beyond what a CD should reasonably maintain w/r to origional analog content.
He used headphones.
Inter aural crosstalk? Don't know, Nordmark did not discuss the ramifications of that, from what I recall..but I'll be honest, my image blurred as I was reading past page 5..
My premise for Nordmark is that speaker wires, with the inductance and capacitance, may have less than desireable effect on the passing through of slew based lateralization info..and I'm not sure if there needs to be a non linear wire effect (violation of superposition) for the different frequency currents involved..Skin effect does seem to be a reasonable candidate, with the inductance vs frequency relation, assuming the 1.5 uSec based speeds..
He provided 1.5 uSec measured capability from about 1.5Khz up to about 12 Khz. So, for a non perfect wire to be heard, it would have to be able to delay the 12 Khz info more than 1.5 uSEc more than it did the 1.2 Khz information, or visa versa..
Since that should be measureable using SOTA equipment, and it has not, (to the best of my knowledge), I don't know what to make of that.
Cheers, John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Yep - jneutron 11:54:32 05/05/04 (19)
- Re: Yep - Steve Eddy 12:42:21 05/05/04 (18)
- Re: Yep - jneutron 12:58:45 05/05/04 (17)
- Re: Yep - Steve Eddy 14:22:39 05/05/04 (16)
- Remember the point of the thread.... - Commuteman 14:53:51 05/05/04 (15)
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - john curl 23:04:55 05/05/04 (10)
- Obviously Jung and Wurcer were just brown-nosing... - Commuteman 09:49:13 05/06/04 (8)
- Re: SY in his own speak (John Curl's wire test) - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 16:11:05 05/11/04 (6)
- Same experience as mine - Commuteman 11:28:18 05/12/04 (5)
- Re: Same experience as mine - jneutron 06:22:30 05/13/04 (4)
- Did you mean.... - Commuteman 10:28:13 05/13/04 (3)
- Re: Did you mean.... - jneutron 12:18:30 05/13/04 (2)
- Re: Did you mean.... - Granholm 14:30:25 05/13/04 (0)
- Right - Commuteman 13:43:49 05/13/04 (0)
- Re: Obviously Jung and Wurcer were just brown-nosing... - john curl 10:52:06 05/06/04 (0)
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - Steve Eddy 00:14:05 05/06/04 (0)
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - Steve Eddy 19:30:43 05/05/04 (2)
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - Dan Banquer 12:35:47 05/06/04 (1)
- Agreed.... - Commuteman 13:27:26 05/06/04 (0)
- Re: Remember the point of the thread.... - john curl 15:59:28 05/05/04 (0)