@Shazb0t To determine audible differences, you have to introduce the speaker. You can’t just utilize a static resistor, as the reactance of the cable cannot be determined without the speaker itself in the circuit. Each speaker will react differently (otherwise all speakers would sound the same, which we know they do not) within the system, of which the cable is a part. Each system is unique. This is where a systems synergy comes into play.
3 Likes
The reply speaks for itself. So many do not trust their ears and need someone to try to convince them with fake science.
3 Likes
Just don’t know how that pertains to me and Davida talking about how to get around a high power amp tripping the P20 at startup.
2 Likes
Tests need to be done DYNAMICALLY and we don’t do that with amps or any of our devices. Again, you rely on steady state loads that negates the reactive nature of what we are hearing. We need to test the way we use a device, under dynamic loads. There is no good way to get in front of the speaker to measure what we hear, the speaker terminals aren’t the end of the chain. You yourself suggested we hear far finer than 2 dB, and I 100% agree with that. 0.5 dB is easy to hear around 82 db SPL. Harmonics shifter due to group delay alter the voltage sum no matter where it happens. Feedback changes SKEW / BW, and that too impacts what we hear.
Changes to the cable have influences on the sound, speaker cable’s being a bigger train wreck since the speaker LOAD is reactive where IC see a high value resistor at least but there are ways to improve the linearity of the cable should you chose to do so.
Some changes are harder to come by once the AWG is smaller and smaller as it is like hearding cats on keeping L and C in the proper range, low as we can yet taming the Vp group delay linearity.
The signal is a voltage sum at any point in time and that changes with group delay, phase and simple reflections. Cable impedance phase shifts from near zero degree at way high frequencies (it is essentially resistive) to 45 degree at the lowest frequencies as it looks more reactive. All cables do this, too, not just specific ones.
In use there are differences in speaker and IC cables. No, I don’t hear every difference such as power or digital cable though I’ve experimented. I do hear digital AD and DA filters, however, and those filters make, on paper, supposedly inaudible changes.
Listen to a PS Direct stream DAC and change the DAC’s firmware from YALE to HURON to Torreys to SnowMass and tell me it all sounds the same. It doesn’t and it is all changes to the filters. Cable acts like a reactance linear filter, it follows the time based summation properties under dynamic conditions.
I don’t agree that better analog cables in the chain don’t impact the end result. It has to. ALL the changes to analog audio keep adding up and cable has no place in the past if we can design more linear products. Odds are, the PRICE is the bigger argument. Most of the performance at the lowest price is a good argument for most, I’ll give you that.
I drive a VW GTI and a Porsche PANAMERA 4. Which is the PRICE and which is the better car? On paper where you can keep them in near the same performance spec envelope (slow down the Porsche) the Porsche is still a far better feeling car. Both cars do 0.8G easily in a turn, but the Porsch FEELS so much more secure doing it. There is no spec for that. If the driver was a rock, and remote control we’d be done…they are the “same”. The driver isn’t a rock and we FEEL things the test spec can’t convey. They are not imagined.
Best,
Galen
5 Likes
Are you using the power on switch of the P20 or the power switch of your amplifier?
I could be wrong but my understanding is the current limiting only happens when the P20 activates the high current outlets.
I remember spending time equalizing my home system to get it sounding just right, only to find out that the bypass button was engaged the whole time. A spectrum-analysis display would have shown me that in fact, the sound had not changed.
1 Like
Is it changes to the filters? I guess @tedsmith could answer that for us but I thought it was more making changes to reduce the noise generated by the FPGAs in the process of doing what they do.
1 Like
I watched AMIR’s review of the DSD, during which he did a firmware update. His measurements concluded that the firmware update did absolutely nothing.
Having done several updates over the years, I can only conclude that Amir’s measurements are not looking in the right places.
8 Likes
When i check my cooking for salt and spices, I taste. No need to run to the chemistry lab.
Just saying 
8 Likes
Most of the changes over time are not filter changes. It’s changes in the timing of the bits. For example, most of the sound changes in Sunlight are simply rotating the phase of the output from the phase of the sigma delta modulator. (The other big Sunlight change was input processing, but that didn’t nearly affect the output as much.) Some of the multiple Torreys releases that sounded different to people were the same source recompiled with a different random number seed - i.e. same bits out in the same order - only changes in self generated noise in the FPGA and jitter.
8 Likes
Wow if my ears were that bad I would find another hobby not buy a spectrum equalizer.
3 Likes
If it goes in A and comes out B in the FPGA circuit block I call that the filter. But yes, it could be ancilliary to the actual DA and AD filter itself and that is even more compelling actually, that we hear the changes.
I hear your comment, though. Maybe Ted can respond. Opps, he did!
Best,
Gaalen
1 Like
The only way the inrush current limiting is in effect is if the outlets are set to be switched when the P 20 is power up or when they are switched via the front panel or remote of the Power plant. If everything is turned on and you power up the amp by it’s power switch I could see why the Power plant could trip.
1 Like
It was not in reply to that posting but the over all thread of relying on measurements to tell how something is going to sound
2 Likes
You can hear them separately, playing at the same time. Bet you can’t see that on Amir the Merciless’s box of toys.
3 Likes
So why can’t we setup a dynamic test? Play the same music file as the test signal in a static system and record the frequency response, noise, and distortion of the speaker at the output. Or describe the system output property that you believe we need to measure (and why). Then swap the cable and repeat. Record the measurements and lay them on top of each other for relative comparison after the tests are completed. We can also measure the audio signal going to the speaker while it’s playing in this setup.
This is what I’ve already shown you in the above tests. They were done with a frequency sweep, which you claim won’t reveal the differences that music will, I contest this. It sounds like you have the equipment and expertise required to setup this test. Until we see these measurements the only thing we have to go off of are the measurements we have. We have access to FFT, multitone, frequency response, noise, distortion, and other testing which has shown the measurable “cumulative” cable affects (which we agree exist) having a negligible affect that your claiming should be present at levels that suggest audibility. That evidence combined with null testing and published controlled listening tests pointing to the conclusions that these things are likely not audible makes your position hard to defend. Your assertion that all these low level affects must be cumulative and have to be audible requires evidence that you haven’t been able to provide or point to. The onus is rightly on you to provide it, as it’s your claim which goes against the current evidence.
Are you able to define a test protocol that you hypothesize will show the measurable differences in a dynamic test of an audio system output? It’s a yes or no question. That will put this to bed.
3 Likes
Ace!
2 Likes
What a goof. I laughed like hell. WWWWWWhat???
1 Like
It must be cocktail hour.
1 Like
If you insist! Hey, it’s almost past 2, out west!
3 Likes