1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

fo.q tape

Discussion in 'audio' started by MarkieW, Jun 30, 2022.

  1. sq225917

    sq225917 Bit of this, bit of that

    Herb, I find myself in agreement with you. If one can only record sound with a microphone how can we ever know what was lost in the recording process by using that microphone, after all there's no perfect transducer, and how would we compare.

    I'd very much like to hear a robot played performance, such piano playing bots exist, and then hear it played back via digital medium after the usual studio processing choices have been made. After all virtually no performance goes direct to disc and anything direct to vinyl has riaa apied and monod bass.

    My own experience of live music does leave me feeling that we lose some of the dynamic range. But for me that's the difference between the raw live event, and the studio polished package. I'm not sure which the artist intends, prefers.
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  2. sq225917

    sq225917 Bit of this, bit of that

    @ nick, no difference above any basic thick cable capable of carrying the signal without loss. Let's say 4mm cores for a koad invariant 200 watt amp and typical home speakers, 8ohm, 89w/db/m
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  3. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    Yes. The difficulty is that some ideas are nonsense when others make some sense. Add to that some ideas costs vastly more than something cheaper and easier that would do as well or better, or be cheaper, even when a given 'solution' is touted and may work.

    However this means that people need to bear in mind this isn't simply a question of "does something work?". And relevant knowedge of science/engineering can help someone assess if it does work *as claimed*.
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  4. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    "Topologies" is a tad over-embracing here, I'd say. The reality is that *many* aspects of the design and build of something like an amp can affect the practical behaviour - sometimes in a situation-dependent way. And hence some 'differences' may be 'no show' in some situations, but show in others. Science and engineering can help to find out why/how, and avoid someone taking for granted that what they got, everyone else must get.
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  5. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    AIUI It is true that a single sheet of graphine has a huge breaking point when you try to pull it apart *for a single sheet of atoms*. But a piece of steel many molecules thick may be stronger, so make better sense for most applications.
    Arkless Electronics likes this.
  6. NickofWimbledon

    NickofWimbledon pfm Member

    @sq225917 -thanks, that’s extremely clear.

    If I think about Naim cables, it would indeed mean that (apart from the frequency tilt point you mention) that no-one should ever be able to distinguish BY SOUND ONLY which Naim speaker cable is being used - A4, A5 or Super Lumina.

    I would expect some listeners won’t be 100% consistent about (say) A4 versus Super Lumina, some may guess correctly which cable is being used and that may colour what they report and some will never hear any difference. However, I would expect a statistically significant number to have a pretty consistent preference.

    That makes me a believer in cables. If I understand you correctly, the same test and same result would make you a believer in cables too - it is just that you are confident now that that wouldn’t be the result. Given all the cables you have heard.

    is at fair or ami I misrepresenting your views?
  7. herb

    herb music live

    I must admit that my Naim/ATC/Harbeth system reproduces precise left to right images but throws the music at you, there is no depth. Suits me.:)
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  8. gustav_errata

    gustav_errata pfm Member

    I'm not sure that analogy works here. In the manuscript I read, conventional materials (sorry, can't remember which but I'm sure I mentioned upthread) were compared to the new stuff under the same conditions where the conventional materials are useful.
  9. sq225917

    sq225917 Bit of this, bit of that

    Nick, in most cases, excluding odd braided designs with high capacitance and flat foil high inductance designs, the only diffetence will be a tiny change in volume level.

    Now make the amp in question an old naim model, that needs to see a certain minimum inductance for stability and all bets are off. On my own amps thick Bell wire and anything you fancy at 1k a metre from cardas will be indistinguishable once you've compensated for any difference in resistance by a tiny touch of the volume dial.

    I'd certainly never consider using anything fancy, I think I'm using 4mm supra, to be honest I'm not sure what it is, such is how little I care about these things.

    £15 certified usb cables, boggo cat5 network, cheap xlr interconnects and plain stranded speaker wire.
  10. Jim Audiomisc

    Jim Audiomisc pfm Member

    If you compare two thin strips of tape you may prefer material A to material B.

    If you compare a thin strip of (costly) A with a thicker bit of (cheaper) B you may prefer B.

    The ability to actually absorb an *amount* of vibration depends on the quantity and shape of the material. Not just its inherent per/cm3 loss... or price.

    Carpet tiles also come in various snazzy patterns and colours, and can be snipped to shapes. 8-]
  11. adamdea

    adamdea You are not a sound quality evaluation device

    This doesn't seem very different from the point that silver is say 6% more conductive than copper and you could if you wanted to replace all your copper wires with slightly thinner silver wires. Obviously the difference here is that you would be using copper rather than silver to make a connection you almost certainly don't need. It's quite difficult to draw up a precise specification for a chocolate teapot.
    Arkless Electronics and sq225917 like this.
  12. westsea

    westsea Retirement present

    As an aside. Copper at about $7.5 per kg: silver $620 per kg, which perhaps explains why silver cables occasionally disapoint
  13. gustav_errata

    gustav_errata pfm Member

    The difference is that if you have a target resistance value, the thickness of the resulting cable of either material is of little practical importance. With vibration absorption, space may very well be an issue in some applications (eg inside a case), where a thinner material would be beneficial. Unfortunately I do not recall what differences in thickness we're talking about here, percentage wise.

    Please keep in mind my aim of assessing whether there are any reasonable uses of this material, not whether it's a cure-all. Also I'll point out that it's available not only in tape form but also sheets, etc., FWIW
  14. NickofWimbledon

    NickofWimbledon pfm Member

    I think that that means if we did a properly blind test comparing A4 and SL cables, I would guess a statistically significant proportion would claim to hear a difference (not just frequency tilt).

    By contrast, you are confident that that couldn’t happen because there is no meaningful difference. On the extraordinarily unlikely situation that it did, or even that you were one of those noticing a consistent difference, I suspect you’d be vigorous in finding out what the explanation was (because there will certainly be one).

    FWIW, given what you have and haven’t yourself observed, and the physics, that looks very reasonable (and free of cant or credulity) to me. I am also grateful for the patient and civilised explanations of why you say what you do. Are you sure we are on the right thread?
  15. adamdea

    adamdea You are not a sound quality evaluation device

    It’s an interesting aim. But of course one which runs entirely counter to the OP.
    In order for this to work one would need to identify an actual problem for which this was not only a solution but a sensible one. I accept that there might be one somewhere* but it has little relevance to the invitation to take apart one’s kit and have a go sticking bits of tape to it in the hope that one has such a problem and then accordingly stops having it.

    *[EDIT: and I should stress that working in that order it is possible that the unique properties of this substance could be useful to some problem]
  16. sq225917

    sq225917 Bit of this, bit of that

    I don't doubt many would claim to hear a difference, I may even be in that cohort, but 8 out of 10 correct guesses is the standard for statistical proof. If even one person could reach that level I'd accept an audible difference exists. If more than 50 out of 100 managed 7 out of ten that too might tend to indicate possible audibility, but if the other 50 only got 3 out of ten then statistically the sum of those two cohorts is the same as guessing. Though likely indicative of better skilled listeners in part of the group and worthy of further investigation.

    I doubt anyone with the time has the money or incentive to run such a trial.

    The joy of a real faith in science is the willingness to be proved wrong.
    NickofWimbledon likes this.
  17. gustav_errata

    gustav_errata pfm Member

    It seemed reasonable to me to "slow the roll" of the OP's anything-anywhere approach, step back, assess what it's actually doing, and determine if it has any clear applications. Certainly more sensible than dismissing it out-of-hand without any knowledge of its properties whatsoever. And in this case, unlike other "magic" audiophile solutions, some scientific data was not altogether difficult to find with a tiny bit of effort (and, admittedly, access to at least one paywalled article).

    Others have identified possible applications of such vibration absorption, eg transformers. Perhaps (shooting from the hip here), speaker panel or amp case panel resonance, if problematic, could be other areas. Just as people might choose more expensive electronic components for their properties, perhaps this might be a better, albeit more expensive, alternative for some applications. But if that's the case, "too expensive" is a perfectly fine complaint, but "FOO!!1!" just reflects an unwillingness to look beyond marketing guff.

    Edit: but if OP wants to stick them all over his components, it really doesn't bother me. It's his hobby to enjoy and share as he sees fit
    Fergus and Sue Pertwee-Tyr like this.
  18. awkwardbydesign

    awkwardbydesign Officially Awesome

    Which says more about relying on statistics than anything else.
  19. adamdea

    adamdea You are not a sound quality evaluation device

    I understand your admirable concerns, but this is a false dichotomy. There are no end of foo audio ideas which might have an application in another context. In fact they are often sold on the basis vague technical sounding property. (You can plate your plugs with Rhodium if you like, or plait your cables to provide some possible attenuation at some rf frequency, or replace all the resistors in your amp with more tightly specc'd ones). But the issue always is whether they actually do anything useful in the case being considered.

    I find this all puzzling. No one is saying that there is no possible application in the world for vibration absorbing materials. So where does any of this take us?
  20. gustav_errata

    gustav_errata pfm Member

    I'm afraid I don't know what I can say to answer this question beyond what I've already said.

Share This Page


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice