Cabling, Timing and other factors in System Building.

[Chippy_boy]

I am a complete skeptic when it comes to cables and cable directionality and other even more (imho) daft ideas. In my view (as an ageing physicist) - so long at the cables are of a high quality, without excessive resistance, inductance or capacitance, and with some decent mechanical integrity so they don't fall to pieces - then they should make no difference to the sound quality. If they DO, then there is something wrong with them (esp with regard to the 3 properties above)! The other thing is, I don't believe I have a particularly good "ear". I can't really say I can tell the difference from one decent cable to another.

My belief is even more strongly held when it comes to digital cables. What more is there other than bits and jitter? So long as all the bits are correct, and the jitter is either removed by the dac - or low in the first place - I can see no other way for information to be transfered from a transport to a dac. You don't get strawberry flavoured bits; only bits.

Years ago, when people had no experience of top quality hifi huge emphasis was placed on the quality of the source. 33%-33%-33% was a common understanding of the appropriate amount of spend on source-amp-speakers. Many advocated an even higher emphasis on the source. "Rubbish in, rubbish" out was the perceived wisdom.

But I really do think things have moved on so much today that a very inexpensive source can produce incredible performance. And *much* more benefit can be derived from using better speakers and amplification. Hence my use of the quite expensive Wilson Benesch's, and the slightly expensive Tag amplification.



Welcom Chip!!

You left out screening!

Dave

Indeed I did, lol.

I should have added, I have no issue with people preferring one cable sound to another... that's a matter of personal taste. Also - and this is perhaps a bit more contentious - it is my view that possibly some distortions just happen to sound nice. Maybe to everybody.

There was a device that came out in the 70's called the Aphex Aural Exciter. This device became extremely popular with recording studios and various artists - Alan Parsons and Fleetwood Mac spring to mind.

What the Aphex device did was to *add* harmonics to the signal. It was deliberately adding distortion! And yet the resulting sound was to many (most?) more appealing than the pure unadulerated source. So much so that the studios paid for it's use and records were sold with Aphex modified sound.

This being the case, it seems extremely plausible to me that certain hifi components can sound better than others, given similar, or possibly even inferior technical specs.

[StanleyB]

I am in this silly position where I used to design all sorts of cables for my former company of employment, but got this gagging order and confidentiality agreement imposed on me for a few years. So that's why I can only speak in broad terms;). So bear with me..

The point about this directionality business is largely down to the termination and connector's individual performance at each end. For a super duper test: solder one connector with normal solder, and the other connector with silver solder. Now try the RCA cable either way. If you have a reasonably resolving system, you'll hear the difference.
Then cut the cables right by the connector and turn the cable round. Solder on the connectors using the same combination of solder. If you do the listening test again, in most cases you'll find that that position of the ordinary solder versus the silver solder is still the same in terms of observations, even though the cable direction has changed.

The same trick can be tried with two different connectors at each end.

Stan

[Dave Cawley]

solder one connector with normal solder, and the other connector with silver solder. Now try the RCA cable either way. If you have a reasonably resolving system, you'll hear the difference.

Why would that be?

Dave

[StanleyB]

solder one connector with normal solder, and the other connector with silver solder. Now try the RCA cable either way. If you have a reasonably resolving system, you'll hear the difference.

Why would that be?

Dave
You'll have to wait till May 2010 before I can answer that...

[Chippy_boy]

The point about this directionality business is largely down to the termination and connector's individual performance at each end.
Stan

100% agree. However, how detectable this is, is open to debate imho. There's a world of difference between double blind controlled tests and "I think that sounds a bit nicer".

But putting that to one side for a moment and assuming we can all tell the difference, and in response to Dave's question, I don't know for sure why why the connector (or even the solder) makes any difference, but I would strongly suspect it's due to the impedance of the connector and therefore it's frequency rolloff characteristics.

This is why you have to crimp bnc connectors to maintain the rating impedance. Adding blob of solder buggers it up and you end up with significant signal attentuation due to impedance mismatch.

Phonos are not impedance matched in the same way, but it doesn't mean to say that their impedance does not have an effect on the transmission of the signal.

But as I say, this is only a guess - I don't know for sure.

[StanleyB]

100% agree. However, how detectable this is, is open to debate imho. There are ways of working that out, but I can't tell you till next year...

But in a broad sense: imagine you had a glass tube that was narrower at one end, with bends and twist in it as well at the ends. Now pump through that tube a stream of lightly coloured water. Try it from both ends. Now observe the change of density of the coloured water at the bent ends, between the wider and the narrow end of the tube. Which side has the darker coloured water, and where exactly is it darker...?

[Chippy_boy]

There are ways of working that out, but I can't tell you till next year...

But in a broad sense: imagine you had a glass tube that was narrower at one end, with bends and twist in it as well at the ends. Now pump through that tube a stream of lightly coloured water. Try it from both ends. Now observe the change of density of the coloured water at the bent ends, between the wider and the narrow end of the tube. Which side has the darker coloured water, and where exactly is it darker...?

I think that's an analogy too far Stan.

[Dave Cawley]

Adding blob of solder buggers it up and you end up with significant signal attentuation due to impedance mismatch.

Only about 0.1dB at 100,000 times the limit of a young persons hearing. But when it meets the PCB inside? this must be a red herring surely?

Regards

Dave

[StanleyB]

I think that's an analogy too far Stan.

Now let me see, water is a bunch of molecules, which are a bunch of atoms, which are a bunch of electrons.
An electrical signal is a bunch of..hmm.. electrons traveling along a conductor.

[Chippy_boy]

Now let me see, water is a bunch of molecules, which are a bunch of atoms, which are a bunch of electrons.
An electrical signal is a bunch of..hmm.. electrons traveling along a conductor.

As I said, the analogy goes a bit too far ;-)

I could pick holes in it all over the place, but to pick just 2:

1. Atoms are not electrons
2. An electrical signal is the propagation of an electromagnetic wave, not electrons travelling along a conductor.

It is wrong to think of electons as ping-pong balls whizzing down a tube. Or water in a pipe for that matter. It's more akin to a copper pipe packed with sand. You push a bit more sand in one end and almost instaneously an equal amount of sand pops out the other end. But it's not the same sand.

This is how electricity works. The electrons shuffle down the wire at circa 0.1mm / second. Not 3 x 10^^8 m/s.

I am sure you knew all this ;-)

[Chippy_boy]

Adding blob of solder buggers it up and you end up with significant signal attentuation due to impedance mismatch.

Only about 0.1dB at 100,000 times the limit of a young persons hearing. But when it meets the PCB inside? this must be a red herring surely?

Regards

Dave

Don't know where you got your numbers from.

Anyway, who knows. Personally I don't buy all this fancy cable debate, as I said. I was just trying to think of *possible* ways to justify it. I just buy decent Canare cable and connectors and that's more than good enough for me.

[Dave Cawley]

Hi Chip

Where did I get my numbers from? I can demonstrate it here a 2Ghz. RF was my life's work and I was a senior design engineer on RF at Philips for years. Then a retained consultant for the Inmarsat Cooperation. Trust me, a lump of solder on a BNC is no great shakes. If you are in the West Country drop and see me, we clearly have complementary skills!

As you sort of suggested, there are a lot of "made up stories" on cable, worse still is that some of the perpetrators actually believe it!

Regards

Dave

[Barry]

100% agree. However, how detectable this is, is open to debate imho. There's a world of difference between double blind controlled tests and "I think that sounds a bit nicer".

But putting that to one side for a moment and assuming we can all tell the difference, and in response to Dave's question, I don't know for sure why why the connector (or even the solder) makes any difference, but I would strongly suspect it's due to the impedance of the connector and therefore it's frequency rolloff characteristics.

This is why you have to crimp bnc connectors to maintain the rating impedance. Adding blob of solder buggers it up and you end up with significant signal attentuation due to impedance mismatch.

Phonos are not impedance matched in the same way, but it doesn't mean to say that their impedance does not have an effect on the transmission of the signal.

But as I say, this is only a guess - I don't know for sure.

There' a lot of twaddle being discussed on PFM over cable directionality and how a signal is propagated in an interconnect. A lot of confusion between the signal propagation velocity and the electron drift velocity. Even more confusion and nonsense discussed concerning the characteristic impedance of cables and connectors.

The concept of characteristic impedence ceases to have any meaning for cable lengths much less than the wavelength/ (2*pi). Do the maths for audio frequencies!

A 'blob' of solder makes very little difference to the performance of a BNC connector.

Regards
Barry
(Formerly Principle Research Scientist at the GEC-Marconi Research Centre)

[Chippy_boy]

A 'blob' of solder makes very little difference to the performance of a BNC connector.

Regards
Barry
(Formerly Principle Research Scientist at the GEC-Marconi Research Centre)

I do agree. I am in the "cables is cables" camp - I was merely throwing a crust to those who passionately believe otherwise.

I haven't done the sums (and I am far too rusty anyway) but I assume the blob of solder becomes more significant at MHz instead of KHz? There must be some reason why bnc's have to be crimped to maintain their impedance?

[Steve Toy]

Hmm. I've heard lots of differences between cables. Some mess up the timing, some don't so much. Some mess up a particular part of the frequency range, some less so. None are perfect but the very best cables are the ones that impose the least of themselves on the music signal.

I recently replaced my £400-a-pair Siltech SQ28s for two pairs of Mark Grant i/cs using Belden video cable costing £20 a pair.

They are better in all respects - timing, dynamics, neutrality and bandwidth.

Some Chord Epic Twin cable costing £40/m was also replaced with the Green Home Electronics Black Mamba stuff costing £85 for the complete set. The improvement in dynamics and timing was not subtle and I had money in the bank to cover the cost of a Tube Distinctiobs Linear PSU for my CD player.

It isn't a case of spending huge amounts of money. It's a case of using your ears - they are the only point of reference of any relevence.

Welcome to AOS.

[Barry]

Hmm. I've heard lots of differences between cables. Some mess up the timing, some don't so much. Some mess up a particular part of the frequency range, some less so. None are perfect but the very best cables are the ones that impose the least of themselves on the music signal. ..........

The only difference I have heard when changing cables was when I changed my speaker 'cables' from, what was essentially, 2A 'bell wire' to 20A QED 79 strand wire. The difference? The volume control is now set lower for the same perceived loudness: not surprising as the new cables have one quarter of the loop resistance of the cables they replaced.

I do change cables around, especially when I am trying out new items of equipment, however I have never noticed any change with the cables themselves. Maybe I can't hear these supposed differences, maybe they're not important to me - I don't know. Because of that, I would never charge fellow listeners with mendacity over their claims to hear a difference: it's their ears and it's their money. What does annoy me however, is the technical claptrap used by cable manufactures in support of their (usually expensive) products.

Can you explain what you mean by "Some mess up timing"? I don't understand this timing (PRAT) thing that is often discussed, even though I have read various websites on the effect. Are there any recordings that demonstate this effect well?

Do you hear the effects of cable directionality?

Regards

[Steve Toy]

I guess by timing I mean phase coherence across the frequency range. Subjectively it is the difference between tapping your feet with ease or feeling your ankle grinding as you try to make sense of the rhythmic pattern and force you feet to tap.

Phase issues occur when there are slight but perceptible time delays between different frequences as they reach your ears. The result initially is perhaps not to really notice followed by lack of involvement in the music and ultimately brainache. Phase issues also mess up the perception of dynamics, fundamental pitch and harmonic info as well as perception of the stereo image.

Some cables really can screw up timing in this way.

As for directionality I heard it clearly with an interconnect once but it may have been a question of shielding.

[Chippy_boy]

I have to say I don't hear much (if any) difference from different cables. But that's not to say others don't have more accute hearing than I do.

I suppose one of the problems is also trying to describe any differences. We're inevitably in the realms of "one of the more woody cables" or "a distinctly tobaccoey sound". It's meaningless really. But that's not to say people don't hear (or think they hear) differences.

Also there seems to be a distinct lack of hard evidence. If cable A sounds markedly different from cable B, it would be very very easy to set up some controlled double blind tests to see if there is any statistical basis (beyond random) to prove people can hear the difference. I haven't seen any published papers with such evidence.... which causes me to be very skeptical. I am not saying I think it's definitely nonsense, any more than I believe the existance of UFO's or ghosts is nonsense, but I'm afraid I put a lot of it in the same category.

[Alex_UK]

to add my 2p, I have very little experience of "fannying around" with different cables, though I can clearly tell the difference between a bit of bell wire and some QED 79 strand - I think mainly I am just a cloth ears, but I've never actually tried to actively A/B cables - something which I am hoping to do when Mike Homar's digital coax cable arrives, which will be interesting as I am sceptical (but open minded - can you be both?) that noughts and ones can really travel cattle class on one cable, first class via another. All part of the fun, though!

[The Vinyl Adventure]

i have been following this thread with interest. i am probably within the category of the relativly-less-informed on this forum, and i would say my hearing is less effective than some people on here too! i dont spend a lot on cables, most of mine are relativly inexpensive and usually qed as they are more widely available on the high street and i buy them when i need them!
the only "sepcialist" cable i have spent money on is my nva ls1. i previously had qed silver aniversary cable airlocked. when i bought it i was suprised to hear no improvement over the previous lenghts of 10 year old chord carnival, i was infact unsure if it had in fact made things worse?! anyway i ended up buying the ls1 and it did in my veiw make a marked improvment! i could swear the music just sounded like it was flowing better... and my sceptical missis even said the same! sorry if i have missed the point,and this is just about interconnects
i do find it refresing that people who obviously know more than me are saying that to a great extent "cables are cables" but surly there must be something in it all... or are we just all daft and overly suseptable to marketing?

[Chippy_boy]

I think it's not black and white Alex. In my mind, it's not a case of either saying (a) cables make a difference, or (b) they do not.

Clearly (at least I think so) a 10ft piece of bell wire is not going to be able to handle a 40A peak from a 500W amp handling a transient from a full orchestra. And therefore it would be madness to assume ALL speaker cables sound the same.

But at the other end of the extreme, are we to believe that if a DAC receives every single one of the bits sent to it in a digital stream, and the DAC also reclocks the signal to remove any timing errors, then somehow the digital cable can affect the sound? That's equal madness to me. What on earth physical phenomenon could be responsible for enabling one set of bits and timing to sound different from another set of bits and timing, when the bits are the same and the timing is the same???? It makes no sense at all, does it.

[Jonboy]

I have dabbled a bit with a few cables and found that i'm not that keen on silver ones on Valve amps, i tend to use My copper based Atlas ones most, if you have a dull sounding system try using silver and vice verser for a dull system.
The worst combination i used was Chord Rumour 4 speaker cables with a Siver Arrow interconnect between source and amp through a pair of Mission Argonaut speakers to much sibbulence thats for sure:(

[Alex_UK]

Well Chip, I agree, it makes no sense at all, but I have very little knowledge of the scientific side of hi-fi, passed the basics, and certainly not to any academic level passed 'O' ;)

However, there are a lot of things in the world which (to me at least) make no sense, so I am definitely an open-minded sceptic - and the only thing I can judge with is my own ears, or maybe sometimes my own imagination, I guess!

[The Vinyl Adventure]

Well Chip, I agree, it makes no sense at all, but I have very little knowledge of the scientific side of hi-fi, passed the basics, and certainly not to any academic level passed 'O' ;)

However, there are a lot of things in the world which (to me at least) make no sense, so I am definitely an open-minded sceptic - and the only thing I can judge with is my own ears, or maybe sometimes my own imagination, I guess!

im with you on this one alex...

phisics is riddled with unaswerables... its one of those things i never really understand about science, im fairly sure it can be pretty much proved by science its self, as we currently understand it, some things are unaswerable! dont ask me to name an example,im not clever enough..i have just read stuff that says thats the case... so knowing that, how can scientists be so sure of them selves all the time

please no one take that as a personal jab, its just an uninformerd observation of science as a whole

[Steve Toy]

Phase and timing issues chaps?

Forget about cables as tone controls and learn what to listen for perhaps, regarding differences.

[Dave Cawley]

Hi Steve

They are better in all respects - timing, dynamics, neutrality and bandwidth.

Could you explain what you perceived relative to "bandwidth" please?

Thanks

Dave

[Chippy_boy]

Phase and timing issues chaps?


I don't buy any of that Steve. But I accept if there are differences, they are difficult to describe in the same way as it's hard to describe how a Chateaux Lafite tastes compared to a Latour, if you are lucky enough to have tried both.

[Steve Toy]

Chippy,

If someone lends me two runs of Chord Epic Twin I'll be happy to have you round, and demonstrate by comparing it with the much cheaper Black Mamba.

The difference is not subtle but you will have to believe what your ears tell you.

Timing issues. Do you believe that some systems resolve rhythm and timing better than others? Note I said R & T not PRAT. I'm not sure where "pace" really fits into all of this. A note should be permitted to tell its full story and in the temporal context of other notes and musical events. Overemphasising its leading edge does not do that.

Dave,

Bandwidth - is it really necessary to reproduce frequencies that are inaudible to the human ear/brain?

Yes. Just as it is necessary to produce cars that do 150 mph when the limit in most EU countries in practical terms is only 80. The power of an engine capable of such speed gives other benefits in terms of torque, acceleration and effortless refinement. With extended bandwidth a given hi-fi component will not only reproduce those inaudible frequencies it will also reproduce the audible ones with much greater accuracy, lower distortion and with less scope for timing anomolies.

So, if I hear a cable that seems to reproduce the audible frequency extremes much more accurately to the extent that I hear and appreciate much improved top-to-bottom cohesion and I am able to make more sense of the rhythmic pattern of the music, the soundstage is bigger and imaging more precise (imaging is perceived through accurate reproduction of high frequencies, is it not?) I think I'm safe to conclude that there has been an increase in bandwidth through that particular cable.

[Joe]

I don't buy any of that Steve. But I accept if there are differences, they are difficult to describe in the same way as it's hard to describe how a Chateaux Lafite tastes compared to a Latour, if you are lucky enough to have tried both.

It's also interesting to note how wine experts' opinions change depending on whether they know what they're drinking; in a 'sighted' test they will tend to rate the most expensive/prestigious wines more highly than they are likely do in a 'blind' test.

IMO the same applies to cable comparisons, once you know you're listening to a more expensive cable (particularly from the same manufacturer) you'll be likely to rate them as 'better' than cheaper cable. This was borne out in a cable test in HiFi Plus some years back, when the blind test failed to give any consistent ranking order. For some reason, they never repeated the experiment!

[Steve Toy]

Joe, my point about rhythm and timing. It is quite a specific one that goes beyond "hearing differences" in the vaguest sense. It is the difference between walking out of the room after a couple of minutes and being moved by the music on an emotional level for some considerable time. Some setups won't show up the differences anyway, especially if there is a bigger bottleneck in the chain than that imposed by any of the cables.

We can all idly read reviews and reports before regurgitating them on a forum. Hands-on experience is what counts.

Chord Epic Twin versus Black Mamba in the context of the system I use for resolving rhythmic pattern of music. I'll give you a clue:

The cheaper cable wins.

[Steve Toy]

It's also interesting to note how wine experts' opinions change depending on whether they know what they're drinking; in a 'sighted' test they will tend to rate the most expensive/prestigious wines more highly than they are likely do in a 'blind' test.


Some people are more discerning than others. Some people are more susceptible to powers of suggestion/interference from other sensory inputs than others.

I did a blind vodka taste test once and not only could I tell the difference between Smirnoff Blue and Solichnaya I was able to describe each of them.

Smirnoff Blue - a kick like the proverbial mule.

Stoli - more rounded, earthy, smoother.

[Steve Toy]

If you don't apply the subjectivist approach you'll never have a musically satisfying system unless you are very very lucky, but then how would you even know?

[Dave Cawley]

So, if I hear a cable that seems to reproduce the audible frequency extremes much more accurately to the extent that I hear and appreciate much improved top-to-bottom cohesion and I am able to make more sense of the rhythmic pattern of the music, the soundstage is bigger and imaging more precise (imaging is perceived through accurate reproduction of high frequencies, is it not?) I think I'm safe to conclude that there has been an increase in bandwidth through that particular cable.

I don't think so and I don't understand how this would be. However it is your belief and you explained it to me properly, and I thank you for that.

Regards

Dave

[Joe]

I apply the subjectivist approach. My scientific knowledge could fit on the back of a postage stamp, so specifications are gibberish to me.

Mostly I listen to stuff and if I like it, I buy it (sometimes I'll take a punt and buy on spec). I like what I've got and don't feel the need to upgrade it any further, though clearly something might break beyond repair, or I might heave the BP amp out the window in a fit of pique (and end up in hospital with a dislocated back - that's one heavy amplifier!)

How do I know I've got a good system? Because I listen to lots of music, and because my range of listening material grows ever-wider, rather than remaining narrowly focused on one genre, as has happened with previous systems. It's 'musically satisfying' in other words.

[Steve Toy]

How do I know I've got a good system? Because I listen to lots of music, and because my range of listening material grows ever-wider, rather than remaining narrowly focused on one genre, as has happened with previous systems. It's 'musically satisfying' in other words.


Well that's about as good as it gets I guess.

[Steve Toy]

I don't think so and I don't understand how this would be. However it is your belief and you explained it to me properly, and I thank you for that.



Fair enough. To illustrate my point about bandwidth and cables further, Spectral who make high-end, wide-bandwidth solid state amplifiers insist on the use of certain cables for their bandwidth capabilities. The use thereof is an issue of warranty.

[Clive]

I admit to not wanting cables to make much of a difference, they can be an expensive annoyance. At least with mains cables there are some decent reasons why some sound better (filtering) - and good diy mains cables are simple to make up.

With i/cs and speaker cables whilst they make a difference IME providing they are not really lousy then far greater differences come from capacitor and valve rolling, operating point changes with valves, turntable and arm tweaks. Cables really are the icing on the cake and in comparison to these other tweaks almost insignificant. Yes I can hear differences though often these are simply differences, not necessarily better or worse.

[Clive]

Fair enough. To illustrate my point about bandwidth and cables further, Spectral who make high-end, wide-bandwidth solid state amplifiers insist on the use of certain cables for their bandwidth capabilities. The use thereof is an issue of warranty.
If their amps fail with some cables it sounds like they require cables with specific capacitance or inductance to complete their circuit. Rather like Naim (is Naim still like this, probably not?).

[Barry]

How do I know I've got a good system? Because I listen to lots of music, and because my range of listening material grows ever-wider, rather than remaining narrowly focused on one genre, as has happened with previous systems. It's 'musically satisfying' in other words.

I would say that also applies to me - it would seem then, that I too have a good system?

Regards

[Joe]

If their amps fail with some cables it sounds like they require cables with specific capacitance or inductance to complete their circuit. Rather like Naim (is Naim still like this, probably not?).

That certainly was the case with Naim and Exposure, both of which mandated the use of their owncables and warned specifically against the use of 'Litz' type cables (whatever they are). NVA has a similar warning on its site.

[Joe]

I would say that also applies to me - it would seem then, that I too have a good system?

Regards

I think that's the deciding factor, rather than the ability to hear the drummer shifting from one buttock to another.

[Barry]

I guess by timing I mean phase coherence across the frequency range. Subjectively it is the difference between tapping your feet with ease or feeling your ankle grinding as you try to make sense of the rhythmic pattern and force you feet to tap.

Phase issues occur when there are slight but perceptible time delays between different frequences as they reach your ears. The result initially is perhaps not to really notice followed by lack of involvement in the music and ultimately brainache. Phase issues also mess up the perception of dynamics, fundamental pitch and harmonic info as well as perception of the stereo image.

Some cables really can screw up timing in this way.

As for directionality I heard it clearly with an interconnect once but it may have been a question of shielding.

Ah, so it's the Linn 'toe tapping test'? Well, my system allows me to tap my toes, snap my fingers and have me bopping around the room if so desired.

All cables will introduce an electrical delay that is given simply by the length of the cable divided by the propagation velocity. Unless the cable has some dispersion (and I cannot see how that is possible at audio frequencies), then the delay, and hence the phase shift, will be the same for all frequencies.

I would have to have this effect demonstrated to me. I make all my interconnects, using standard coaxial cable (RG58/CU or RG174/U) from the likes of Amphenol, BICC, Huber & Suhner and Van Damme - basically whatever is to hand. I cannot hear any difference between them, they all sound the same to me.

Regards

[Joe]

Ah, so it's the Linn 'toe tapping test'? Well, my system allows me to tap my toes, snap my fingers and have me bopping around the room if so desired.

I've never understood this 'toe-tapping' stuff meself; a simple transistor radio can get my feet tapping, and there's some music which doesn't lend itself to toe-tapping.

[Clive]

I've never understood this 'toe-tapping' stuff meself; a simple transistor radio can get my feet tapping, and there's some music which doesn't lend itself to toe-tapping.
It can be synthesized by having strong leading edges on notes but weaker mid and end to notes (fast rise time). Very much a Linn/Naim thing, making the music artificially punchy.

[Barry]

I've never understood this 'toe-tapping' stuff meself; a simple transistor radio can get my feet tapping, and there's some music which doesn't lend itself to toe-tapping.

Precisely my point (hence my qualification "if so desired").

Regards

[Steve Toy]

It can be synthesized by having strong leading edges on notes but weaker mid and end to notes (fast rise time). Very much a Linn/Naim thing, making the music artificially punchy.

Indeed. Further back in the thread I said:



Timing issues. Do you believe that some systems resolve rhythm and timing better than others? Note I said R & T not PRAT. I'm not sure where "pace" really fits into all of this. A note should be permitted to tell its full story and in the temporal context of other notes and musical events. Overemphasising its leading edge does not do that.




I've never understood this 'toe-tapping' stuff meself; a simple transistor radio can get my feet tapping, and there's some music which doesn't lend itself to toe-tapping.

Well of course. If we take a piece of music with a strong sense of rhythm, does the system reproduce it convincingly? If the rhythm is fairly complex, does the system lay the complexity bare or does it make it sound muddled?


I'll ask the question again:

Do you believe that some systems resolve rhythm and timing better than others?

[Clive]

I'll ask the question again:

Do you believe that some systems resolve rhythm and timing better than others?

http://www.touchnote.com/files/assets/LOHL006.jpg

[Chippy_boy]

Ah, so it's the Linn 'toe tapping test'? Well, my system allows me to tap my toes, snap my fingers and have me bopping around the room if so desired.

All cables will introduce an electrical delay that is given simply by the length of the cable divided by the propagation velocity.

Which since it is of the order of 10^^8 m/s in copper, we are talking about a 1/100th of 1 millionth of 1 second delay.

Or to put it another way, 1/10,000th of a sine wave with a 10KHz signal.

I think we can rule that out as having any relevance, can't we!

[Steve Toy]

What about different frequencies?

I hear timing glitches with certain cables across the frequency range. As a physicist (don't even go down the psychology route...) can you please explain to me how this happens.

[Dave Cawley]

I hear timing glitches with certain cables across the frequency range. As a physicist (don't even go down the psychology route...) can you please explain to me how this happens.

It doesn't happen!

Dave

[Clive]

I hear timing glitches with certain cables across the frequency range. As a physicist (don't even go down the psychology route...) can you please explain to me how this happens.

It doesn't happen!

Dave
Dave, now you've gone down the psychology route....

[Steve Toy]

It happens. I am not deaf, I don't imagine it and I am not lying. So, what is the physics behind the phenomenon?

[Joe]

It happens. I am not deaf, I don't imagine it and I am not lying. So, what is the physics behind the phenomenon?

How do you know you're not imagining it? Have you recorded the gltches, for example?

[Steve Toy]

This is a subjectivist forum. We trust our ears and each other's integrity. Circular objectivist/subjectivist discussions that virtually destroyed one other forum with the endless sneering, doubting sanity or questioning integrity are precisely why this forum was created.

The phenomenon has been observed and not just by myself. A true physicist will be able to provide an explanation. A mere technical jobsworth will say it is impossible.

[Clive]

To be fair I'm sure that every effect is measurable, it's just that we don't know what to measure.

[Steve Toy]

Good point Clive.

[DSJR]

Clive got there first, but I should say that the "most audible" cables are often silly foo wires with strange or "odd" balance of parameters.

Mr Toy, I'd hardly call any of the Siltech wires I played with "honest" or "neutral" in the sound, although I never measured what it was. I use Belden (9272 and 8760) at home and they don't seem to have much of a "sound" at all, the differences in recording, venue and production seemingly transmitted faithfully down the line with no hums, hisses, sparkly "HiFi" treble or warm "analogue" bass either. Timing? It's up to the production being played..... But then, I'd be accused of not having a "high-resolution" system these days, so what do I know?

[Steve Toy]

Dave,

I'm using Belden 1694A Video Brilliance Cable as interconnects. It also doesn't have much of a sound, it just gets on with the job. The Siltech SQ28s I used until late last year were not exactly neutral and they seemed to manipulate the sound in some way. The upper frequencies were certainly slightly muddled and rolled off.

These sound more wide-open, dynamic and extended at the top with less in the way of character. Oh and it says 4.5 GHz on the insulation, I've only just noticed that. Would that be the measured (or at least claimed) bandwidth by any chance?

I'm waiting on another set of Beldens made by Mark Grant that, according to Marco, improve timing even more, i.e. bring it closer to that of the original production being played.

[Joe]

This is a subjectivist forum. We trust our ears and each other's integrity. Circular objectivist/subjectivist discussions that virtually destroyed one other forum with the endless sneering, doubting sanity or questioning integrity are precisely why this forum was created.

The phenomenon has been observed and not just by myself. A true physicist will be able to provide an explanation. A mere technical jobsworth will say it is impossible.

Well, I'm neither, but it strikes me that some things which are 'real' to the percipient may not be measurable at all (eg placebos used in drugs trials, which have the same effect on the patient as 'real' drugs, but have no active compounds/

[Spectral Morn]

Well, I'm neither, but it strikes me that some things which are 'real' to the percipient may not be measurable at all (eg placebos used in drugs trials, which have the same effect on the patient as 'real' drugs, but have no active compounds/

I really don't like or accept that term in audio. The position that we who hear effects/changes/improvements have pre-programmed ourselves to hear those effects is frankly IMHO/E crap, and a cop out by those who have closed narrow minds...all IMHO of course.

I have over many years heard many things and mostly I view listening like a drive in the country you never know what you are going to see, in this case hear. Often if there has been any bias, it is against what I have ultimately heard. And yes I have heard differences during blind listening test...but please lets not go down that road.


Regards D S D L

[Mike]

This may come as a bit of a surprise to some people, but I fully agree with this:-


But at the other end of the extreme, are we to believe that if a DAC receives every single one of the bits sent to it in a digital stream, and the DAC also reclocks the signal to remove any timing errors, then somehow the digital cable can affect the sound? That's equal madness to me. What on earth physical phenomenon could be responsible for enabling one set of bits and timing to sound different from another set of bits and timing, when the bits are the same and the timing is the same???? It makes no sense at all, does it.

And yet...

Folk still say the cables I make for them 'sound' better than some others. I have no convincing explanation for it! Not at all!

It may come as a further surprise to learn that I don't 'listen' to them. Ever. Never have done. It's all done 'on the bench', I pour data in (at a silly rate in S/PDIF terms) one end and measure what comes out of the other end. If what comes out is 'bit perfect' then it passes.

At least one person has said the cable is also directional. I have absolutely no answer to that! :confused:

[Beechwoods]

At least one person has said the cable is also directional. I have absolutely no answer to that! :confused:

Your Belt-like charisma? ;)

[Mike]

I'm using Belden 1694A Video Brilliance Cable as interconnects.

I have a couple of kilometres of that stuff... And YR46940.

Wouldn't use either as analogue interconnects though... :eyebrows:

[Mike]

Your Belt-like charisma? ;)

No. I just find it utterly baffling!

[Spectral Morn]

This may come as a bit of a surprise to some people, but I fully agree with this:-



And yet...

Folk still say the cables I make for them 'sound' better than some others. I have no convincing explanation for it! Not at all!

It may come as a further surprise to learn that I don't 'listen' to them. Ever. Never have done. It's all done 'on the bench', I pour data in (at a silly rate in S/PDIF terms) one end and measure what comes out of the other end. If what comes out is 'bit perfect' then it passes.

At least one person has said the cable is also directional. I have absolutely no answer to that! :confused:

Mike unlike some, you at least acknowledge that it is possible that many hear differences...you have an open mind. I can't explain why I have heard differences with cables...I can offer suggestions but If they are right...who knows. Digital cables are interesting, as in theory if its 75 ohm through out, then there should be no difference. Guess what, I have heard it with these too.

I think the key to understanding all this lies with all the items in the signal chain and the particular system used. This will make it very difficult to quantify, as there are numerous variables including the room acoustics and person listening. Not everything can be measured....YET.


Regards D S D L

[Barry]

....... If we take a piece of music with a strong sense of rhythm, does the system reproduce it convincingly? If the rhythm is fairly complex, does the system lay the complexity bare or does it make it sound muddled?

I'll ask the question again:

Do you believe that some systems resolve rhythm and timing better than others?

Yes I do, but I don't believe it has much to do with interconnects. The phenomena under discussion has everything to do with 'time smearing' of the notes caused by phase differences: can you hear the notes start, sustain and decay? I believe this is all part of the design of, principally, the speakers and, to some extent, of the electronics. Those speakers with multiple drive units in which the acoustic centre of the drive units are not aligned will display phase errors. The alignement does not necessarily have to be physical, the 'alignement' can be made in the design of the crossover.


To illustrate my point about bandwidth and cables further, Spectral who make high-end, wide-bandwidth solid state amplifiers insist on the use of certain cables for their bandwidth capabilities. The use thereof is an issue of warranty.
This strikes me as a design limitation by Spectral (and Naim and no doubt others). The important thing here is that the slew rate of a source (or preamp) should not be grater than that of the electronics which follow it. Using interconnects with excessive capacitance could possibly ameliorate this problem.


This is a subjectivist forum. We trust our ears and each other's integrity. Circular objectivist/subjectivist discussions that virtually destroyed one other forum with the endless sneering, doubting sanity or questioning integrity are precisely why this forum was created.

The phenomenon has been observed and not just by myself. A true physicist will be able to provide an explanation. A mere technical jobsworth will say it is.
I do trust other's ears - I have to, I only hear with my ears. Neither do I question other members integrity - if I did, I wouldn't have joined AoS.

With time no doubt this phenomenon will be explained, but as you know physics can't explain everything yet - if it ever will. What I have been trying to do was not ridicule those who can hear these effects, rather state that based on our current understanding of cable theory, there is no explanation for the claimed effects.

Regards

[The Vinyl Adventure]

i know its not really my place to say, but im quite glad that this thread has returned to the normal aos standard of polite discusion! it is an interesting thread but for a while it did loose the integrety of conversation that keeps me and many others a member of this thread...
...as you were!

[DSJR]

Dave,

I'm using Belden 1694A Video Brilliance Cable as interconnects. It also doesn't have much of a sound, it just gets on with the job. The Siltech SQ28s I used until late last year were not exactly neutral and they seemed to manipulate the sound in some way. The upper frequencies were certainly slightly muddled and rolled off.

These sound more wide-open, dynamic and extended at the top with less in the way of character. Oh and it says 4.5 GHz on the insulation, I've only just noticed that. Would that be the measured (or at least claimed) bandwidth by any chance?

I'm waiting on another set of Beldens made by Mark Grant that, according to Marco, improve timing even more, i.e. bring it closer to that of the original production being played.

Belden have a huge range of wires it's totally confusing to me.. I did try some "Ecoflex 10" coax wire with very wide bandwidth. Once I'd welded it into some large phono plugs i was surprised how good it sounded (and it was slightly bloody directional too - grrr!). Total cost? £16, yet a commercial version could easily be a couple of hundred quid IMO...

[The Vinyl Adventure]

i sware i have had a cable that didnt work one way round... did i just imagine it?

[Alex_UK]

Wow - certainly a heated debate, and a very interesting and prolific thread! As per my contribution yesterday (4 pages ago...! ;) ) I need to do my own testing in my own system to find out if my ears can tell any difference at all. And just to complicate matters, I need to look at both digital and normal interconnects.

I do have to go back to the "toe tapping" point though, I think it was the WAF thread where Steve (Toy) suggested that to say "it is all about the music" is a "cop out" (paraphrasing here) but it is my opinion that the system has virtually bugger all contribution to the emotional connection to a piece of recorded music - I could name hundreds of tracks that I heard played a few times on a crappy car radio, fell in love with, then bought them (in whatever format) - and in some instances, I've actually been dissapointed listening to the "real" version, compared to the compressed-for-radio version which I had fallen for... I now stand back and await a virtual stoning! :)

[The Vinyl Adventure]

is that just because it was no longer the first "wow this track is amazing" though ...

[Alex_UK]

Exactly my point - the "wow" factor is very often (exclusively?) the music, not the reproduction equipment - I can honestly say I don't hear a beloved track on a cheap kitchen radio and feel any the less emotionally attached to it. I'm probably missing the point, I usually do! :)

[The Vinyl Adventure]

i think its the extrapolation of emotion from the music it self as aposed to emotional atachment to the song that they refer to...
incidently i do atcually completely agree with you emotional enjoyment of music can be obtained from even the worst reprodution
that is definatly a different discusion to the one that was happening :)

as example of emotional extrapolation...i have said this before .. but the best hifi reproduction i have ever heard was on the naim ref system cd555 etc with the dbl speakers
i could not only completely hear the room the music was recorded in but i could completely here every aspect of emotion of the singers voice
it was litereally awesome... i couldnt stop phisically shaking afterwards

[Dave Cawley]

A true physicist will be able to provide an explanation. A mere technical jobsworth will say it is impossible.

A physicist cannot provide an answer to something subjective that only some people claim to hear. The "jobsworth" description is below you.

Dave

[Marco]

Chaps,

I've said before that audio, as we know it, is not a perfect science; therefore trying to ascertain the cause of effects heard (such as those with cables) by applying solely scientific 'reasoning' is unlikely to result in a full and complete understanding of them, or other areas of audio where measurement doesn't tell the full story.

This is why the sensible amongst us use our ears as the final arbiter, and always keep an open mind :)

I keep things straightforward and simple, as I trust my ears and experience implicitly (these rarely let me down), so my motto is if sounds better, it *is* better. And yes, I can hear the effect of directionality in cables, usually fairly easily.

Marco.

[Alex_UK]

i think its the extrapolation of emotion from the music it self as aposed to emotional atachment to the song that they refer to...


Indeed, but it is all very subjective unless it is the first time you hear the piece - at that point, is it the recording itself or the system reproducing it that "lights a fire" somewhere inside you? In my case, tonight it is the rather fine Rioja that I shouldn't have drunk so much of on a "school night" that is making whatever I play sound awesome! ;)

[Alex_UK]

A "few sherbets" is as valid an explanation as turning your cables around!

[Barry]

Indeed, but it is all very subjective unless it is the first time you hear the piece - at that point, is it the recording itself or the system reproducing it that "lights a fire" somewhere inside you? In my case, tonight it is the rather fine Rioja that I shouldn't have drunk so much of on a "school night" that is making whatever I play sound awesome! ;)

Do tell - I have just drunk a very reasonable 2008 white Rioja 'Gran Familia', £4.11 from Tesco. :cool:

Regards

[Barry]

Chaps,

I've said before that audio, as we know it, is not a perfect science; therefore trying to ascertain the cause of effects heard (such as those with cables) by applying solely scientific 'reasoning' is unlikely to result in a full and complete understanding of them, or other areas of audio where measurement doesn't tell the full story.

This is why the sensible amongst us use our ears as the final arbiter, and always keep an open mind :)

I keep things straightforward and simple, as I trust my ears and experience implicitly (these rarely let me down), so my motto is if sounds better, it *is* better. And yes, I can hear the effect of directionality in cables, usually fairly easily.

Marco.

Care to give some examples Marco?

Regards

[The Vinyl Adventure]

isnt it wierd how wine makes music sound better... i specifically find it with red wine!
the only other drink that i personally find has a similar effect is whiskey

[Alex_UK]

Do tell - I have just drunk a very reasonable 2008 white Rioja 'Gran Familia', £4.11 from Tesco. :cool:

Berberana 2004 Reserva - silver medal in the 2008 Decanter world wine awards, so they say - currently half-price in Tesco at £4.99 - a veritable bargain if you like your oak... sure I should be posting this in a different thread! ;)

[DaveK]

isnt it wierd how wine makes music sound better... i specifically find it with red wine!
the only other drink that i personally find has a similar effect is whiskey

Hi Hamish,
How come a guy with the name of Hamish prefers Irish (whiskey) to Scotch (whisky) ?? or is the red wine working it's magic on your memory :lolsign: .
Cheers,

[Mike]

trying to ascertain the cause of effects heard (such as those with cables) by applying solely scientific 'reasoning' is unlikely to result in a full and complete understanding of them, or other areas of audio where measurement doesn't tell the full story.

But if no-one does it... it never will be understood! ;) What else is going to bring about this
full and complete understanding ???

I'm all for using my ears, but I'd still like to understand why this, that, or the other sounds better. Or worse!

[Barry]

Berberana 2004 Reserva - silver medal in the 2008 Decanter world wine awards, so they say - currently half-price in Tesco at £4.99 - a veritable bargain if you like your oak... sure I should be posting this in a different thread! ;)

Sounds good - I'd better pick up a bottle tomorrow!

Nobody reads the 'Beer and Wine Recommended' thread anyway.;)

Cheers

[Barry]

Hi Hamish,
How come a guy with the name of Hamish prefers Irish (whiskey) to Scotch (whisky) ?? or is the red wine working it's magic on your memory :lolsign: .
Cheers,

Or is it Hamish's 'unique' spelling? ;)

[The Vinyl Adventure]

.. that would be my "unique" spelling (cheers for holding back with the description there most people choose to be rude about it... i cant say i blame them!)
im not actually scotish, belive it or not! i found have scotish routes in my biological family routes the other week, but it was actually my adopted londoner father and midlander mother that gave me the name... no idea why...
i wont claim to be a whiskey or whisky conoser... i dont like bells (im drinking it now...its all i could find after i just though about it a few momets back) i have found taliskers i like, isle of juno (or something).. i quite like chivers ... theres loads in my local i just let the bar man choose (hes a good mate of mine and has worked out what i do and dont like) i should probably think about taking a note of whats good and not ... in case he leaves...

[Spectral Morn]

.. that would be my "unique" spelling (cheers for holding back with the description there most people choose to be rude about it... i cant say i blame them!)
im not actually scotish, belive it or not! i found have scotish routes in my biological family routes the other week, but it was actually my adopted londoner father and midlander mother that gave me the name... no idea why...
i wont claim to be a whiskey or whisky conoser... i dont like bells (im drinking it now...its all i could find after i just though about it a few momets back) i have found taliskers i like, isle of juno (or something).. i quite like chivers ... theres loads in my local i just let the bar man choose (hes a good mate of mine and has worked out what i do and dont like) i should probably think about taking a note of whats good and not ... in case he leaves...

Black Bush vintage is very nice...........very smooth...with a wee dash of Coke. Its Northern Irish Whisky.... I like Scottish as well. But I don't drink much...maybe a class or two a year.


Regards D S D L

[The Vinyl Adventure]

... my local odbins are really good at telling me whats nice too...
we had a rum tasting in there the one night (i like rum too) just after we came back from the dominican republic where we were drinking the local cheap stuff from the hotel bar... quite the contrast in quality... and completely the wrong way round.. the stuff in odbins was loads nicer
we did have some good stuff in a rum factory over there though.. that was really good...

[The Vinyl Adventure]

ive tried that one.. they have that down the cellar


Black Bush vintage is very nice...........very smooth...with a wee dash of Coke. Its Northern Irish Wisky.... I like Scottish as well. But I don't drink much...maybe a class or two a year.


Regards D S D L

[Spectral Morn]

ive tried that one.. they have that down the cellar

Did you like it Hamish?


Regards D S D L

[The Vinyl Adventure]

this one:

http://www.thedrinkshop.com/products/nlpdetail.php?prodid=314 ?

if it is that one, yes i belive i did ... this is the one that i had assumed was american because of the bottle ...
like i said im not going to claim to know anything about this sort of thing..
i like wine, but i have only just learned the identifying flavor of chardonay ... i jsut know what i like when i drink it if that makes sence?

[Barry]

Black Bush vintage is very nice...........very smooth...with a wee dash of Coke. Its Northern Irish Whisky.... I like Scottish as well. But I don't drink much...maybe a glass or two a year.


Regards D S D L

Black Bush and Powers are two of my favorites, however Aberlour, Lagavulin and Laphroaig are my real favorites. I'm drinking Aberlour now. :cool:

[Marco]

Care to give some examples Marco?

Regards

Hi Barry,

Mike's analogue cables, for one! Ask him and he'll tell you what I heard and how it made sense to him ;)

Marco.

[Covenant]

[QUOTE=barry.d.hunt;61379]Yes I do, but I don't believe it has much to do with interconnects. The phenomena under discussion has everything to do with 'time smearing' of the notes caused by phase differences: can you hear the notes start, sustain and decay? I believe this is all part of the design of, principally, the speakers and, to some extent, of the electronics. Those speakers with multiple drive units in which the acoustic centre of the drive units are not aligned will display phase errors. The alignement does not necessarily have to be physical, the 'alignement' can be made in the design of the crossover.


I totally agree with this Barry and dont think it gets talked about enough on forums.Its a reason for not attempting home made speakers unless you have access to high level testing equipment.

[Ali Tait]

A dash of coke? In a fine malt? Sacrilage!!

[Steve Toy]

Indeed. Ali, you are using the same cable as me iirc. I believe you also observed similar properties with it in your system.

[Steve Toy]

Agreed re. time alignment of speakers and electronics. I believe cables are also capable of introducing phase errors especially when tailored as tone controls.

[Spectral Morn]

this one:

http://www.thedrinkshop.com/products/nlpdetail.php?prodid=314 ?

if it is that one, yes i belive i did ... this is the one that i had assumed was american because of the bottle ...
like i said im not going to claim to know anything about this sort of thing..
i like wine, but i have only just learned the identifying flavor of chardonay ... i jsut know what i like when i drink it if that makes sence?

Thats the one Hamish.


Regards D S D L

[Spectral Morn]

A dash of coke? In a fine malt? Sacrilage!!

Its a question of taste, and that is what I like....:)


Regards D S D L

[Ali Tait]

Hi Steve,
Yes I was using the Mambas and they were very good indeed,and did indeed seem to be better at the frequency extremes than my previous cables.However,my previous cabless were the DIY Twisted Twins from the TNT site.While these are excellent cables,by design they have quite a high capacitance.They were great with my previous speakers,but were terrible with the statics when I got them,and indeed I was warned that these speakers did not like high capacitance cables when I first got them,and this turned out to be the case.Buying the Mambas improved things greatly,getting rid of all the peaky harshness at the top end and filling in the bass.I've since got hold of a pair of NVA LS3 cables,and these are better still with the statics,but I would say this is probably because these cables are deliberately designed to be very low capacitance,so work even better with my speakers.The upshoot of all this is would say that cables can indeed make a marked difference to a system,but there may be a single cause for this,as in my case.

Mr Supreme,
Indeed,whatever floats your boat! Most Scots however would regard anything more than a splash of water anathema to a fine malt. :)

[Marco]

Indeed - it would be like pouring brown sauce over a fillet steak!

Neil, you love Scotland, and if you want to retain any credibility there with the locals next time you'll not put Coke anywhere near a fine malt whisky...

If you want to bastardise some whisky like that, stick to Bells - or Jack Daniels ;)

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

Indeed - it would be like pouring brown sauce over a fillet steak!

Neil, you love Scotland, and if you want to retain any credibility there with the locals next time you'll not put Coke anywhere near a fine malt whisky...

If you want to bastardise some whisky like that, stick to Bells - or Jack Daniels ;)

Marco.

Hi Marco

:lol::lol: As I only have a drink literally once or twice a year it hardly matters much. I have had this reaction before many times, but its what I like.

As to Jack, yuck... sour mash...IMHO its a foul drink...why would any one want to drink it ? :scratch: Bells is okay.

Its been many years since I had a whisky in Scotland. I do love the country, and the national drink, but I worry when people get this precious about it.

I don't put brown souce on steak...but RED "YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS." <Says he gliding away as fast as his anti grav units will carry him.>:lol::lol:


Regards D S D L

[Steve Toy]

Maille Dijon mustard on steak. Oh, and some freshly ground black pepper.

[Joe]

This is a subjectivist forum; if someone prefers their single malt with a dash of coke that entirely is a matter for them.

(Personally I can't stand whisky, despite being half-Scottish)

[Spectral Morn]

This is a subjectivist forum; if someone prefers their single malt with a dash of coke that entirely is a matter for them.


:exactly:........:sofa: :)



Regards D S D L

[REM]

If it's a fine piece of sirloin then just de-horn it, wipe its' arse and throw it on the plate, mate.
:lolsign::lolsign:

[Marco]

This is a subjectivist forum; if someone prefers their single malt with a dash of coke that entirely is a matter for them.


Indeed, Joe.

One could say the same if the subject were being critical of, say, Shakespeare or The Beatles... ;)

We don't have to approve!

Neil,

Enjoy what you want to enjoy, matey. I was just pulling your leg :eyebrows:

Marco.

[The Vinyl Adventure]

theres a steak resturant im going to on friday night where they do 48oz steak...and if you eat it all its free!!
im guessing its not gonna be a few strips of fillet but im still tempted to give it a go... its only £19 if you have to pay!

[Spectral Morn]

Indeed, Joe.

One could say the same if the subject were being critical of, say, Shakespeare or The Beatles... ;)

We don't have to approve!

Neil,

Enjoy what you want to enjoy, matey. I was just pulling your leg :eyebrows:

Marco.

I know..tis your way....;):lol::lol::lol:


Regards D S D L

[REM]

theres a steak resturant im going to on friday night where they do 48oz steak...and if you eat it all its free!!
im guessing its not gonna be a few strips of fillet but im still tempted to give it a go... its only £19 if you have to pay!

There was a place round here did that (32oz though) catch was they used to pile your plate about a mile high with chips and the offer didn't count unless you ate everything. Went once with this chap and his wife who both liked their grub and had the shape to prove it, they both scoffed theirs in about 10 mins flat and then turned round to the next table and had the nerve to say 'not leaving that are you?' and promptly finished off the strangers left overs as well, talk about embarrassing....

Cheers:cool:

[Alex_UK]

Yikes - 48oz = 3 lbs! That's a big lump of cow - good luck with that Hamish! (or should we call you Elvis from now on?! ;) )

[Barry]

Nothing like a good bit of thread meander. To tidy up a couple of points:

(1) Nothing wrong with a little Maille Dijon mustard with steak, or (to my taste) some Colman's English mustard (and if it can be freshly made, so much the better).

(2) I have to say that I rarely drink anything other than malt whisky and I drink it neat. I realise, Neil that I mistook 'Black Bush' with 'Bushmills' 10 year malt'. It's been a while now since I drank Irish whiskey. Connoisseurs will tell you that adding a single drop of water brings out the flavour. Have tried this but I can't say I have noticed the effect. If I want to make my drink last, I will add an equal quantity of tepid tap water to it (don't use rain water: that could lead to the start of WW3!).

Which brings me neatly to another effect I have not noticed: cable directionality. Marco, I would need to know the make of cable to which you refer. If the cable is shielded twin-core cable that has the shield connected at one end only, then I will concede that an audible difference might be noted, depending on the potential difference between the shield and the '0v', or ground, of the electronics which it feeds. The shield should be connected to the point of lowest potential, otherwise the shield effectiveness is impaired.

I do not believe that coaxial cables are directional, or speaker cable for that matter.

Regards

[Mike]

If the cable is shielded twin-core cable that has the shield connected at one end only, then I will concede that an audible difference might be noted, depending on the potential difference between the shield and the '0v', or ground, of the electronics which it feeds. The shield should be connected to the point of lowest potential, otherwise the shield effectiveness is impaired.

That is precisely how the cable of mine (that Marco referred to) is constructed. Pseudo balanced, as it is often called. :)

I tried to explain it to him on the phone, but I could hear his eyes glazing over...

[The Grand Wazoo]

That's the way I make up my cables too, always have. And yes, they are directional.

Put a single drop of water into a glass of whisky & watch closely what happens where the water hit the whisky. You can see all sorts of swirly twirly stuff going on as the two mix.

It makes the flavour open out.

............currently languishing in a tumbler of Laphroaig Quarter Cask - 48% & rather lovely

[Barry]

That's the way I make up my cables too, always have. And yes, they are directional.

Put a single drop of water into a glass of whisky & watch closely what happens where the water hit the whisky. You can see all sorts of swirly twirly stuff going on as the two mix.

It makes the flavour open out.

............currently languishing in a tumbler of Laphroaig Quarter Cask - 48% & rather lovely

My favourite whisky, unfortunately I have run out, so am 'making do' with Aberlour. Oh the sacrifices we have to make!

Regards

[The Grand Wazoo]

My favourite whisky, unfortunately I have run out, so am 'making do' with Aberlour. Oh the sacrifices we have to make!

Regards

Haha...........you sound like a farmer moaning about the how the Common Agricultural Policy is bankrupting him and he can only afford one Range Rover nowadays.