Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Let's simplify this

I think we agree on much of this stuff....

I agree with you that making the measurements is valuable. I suspect that, eventually, all measurements made on all cables will contribute in some way to any objective rating system.

Since it's always better to know, how could I object to the meaurements? It's the conclusions that bother me.

The problem I had with this thread was that we were arguing over the relevance or otherwise of the results, and the AH tendency to make an arbitrary value judgement based on a specific set of measurements, when we can't even establish (YET) that there is ANY meaningful relationship between ANY measurements and the successful execution of the cable's only mission.

Let's argue about HOW to fix this situation.... :-)

BTW, one exception: cables that vary drastically from the norm often create clear signatures and problems in some systems, such as the vdH First non-metallic cable and grounding, or highly-capactive cables w/unstable amps. This is what I meant by gross characterization.

Let's say we construct a hypothetical perfect cable model: zero capacitance and zero inductance; zero series resistance and infinite shunt impedance.

We can make measurements on any number of cables, select a weighting system for each of the parameters above, and come up with (if we so desire) a numberical rating for each cable. This gives us a measure of goodness w.r.t our chosen definition of perfection.

There are several problems with this model:

If a cable meets our perfect model, are we certain that it will sound perfect? If the answer is NO, then we aren't measuring the right things.

Are we certain that there are no other cable variables? For example, if we had 2 perfect cables, one with polyester dielectric and the other Teflon, would they sound the same? If the answer is NO, then we aren't measuring ENOUGH things.

You could say that our rating is a measure of the technical correctness of the cable, except that this is implicitly accepting that the end goal (the end state of "correctness") is conformance to a measurement, rather than the sonic performance. In other words: technical correctness must be defined by, and is meaningless without, audible correctness.

IMO, the technical correctness of a cable must ultimately be a meaure of:

1) Its ability to transmit music and only music (no EMI, no RF, no hum pickup, no external mechanical stimulation)
2) Its ability to allow upstream and downstream components to operate optimally (no oscillating amplifiers, no RC filters)
3) Its ability to transmit ALL of the information used by our brains to process music (and I doubt we know what that is yet e.g the lateralization stuff)

Do the RLC measurements characterize all 3?

Obviously, the measurements at the AH site are PART of the puzzle. IMO, anyone who suggests that we have all of the pieces of the puzzle now, and can explain all that is happening around cables in a high-resolution audio system, is an idiot. Just my $0.02, of course...

Peter

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]