The narcissistic approach of “I am better than you because of reasons 1, 2 & 3” and “you’re no good because of reasons 4, 5 & 6” shows everyone what they really are.
3 Likes
…irrational?
(Ironically enough…)
3 Likes
4 Likes
Goodness gracious me, it’s the messiah, he’s returned! It’s the end of the dark ages.
3 Likes
Hysterical!!!
1 Like
3 Likes
You are very welcome to present accurate information, but your interest unfortunately resides in berating and insulting others rather than presenting “accurate” information.
5 Likes
Yes, you’re missing something. If you look at the 3rd and 4th magenta photos (the actual photos), you can see that both photos are in sharp focus.
No offense taken.
I had the same issues with images not uploading the same size too. It is also not easy to get a good focus. I am looking at the right edge of the tv screen where it meets the tv frame to determine whether the image is in focus. Several of us have noticed the screen appears smoother when powered by the P12 (or another power regenerator) and was simply trying to capture that. It is approx 2.5’ away from the tv where the photos become interesting
I don’t know why people keep saying the pictures were out of focus or taken at different angles when they are just using their eyes and not scientific measurements of the pictures. In other words it’s okay to look at the pictures and discredit them, but it isn’t okay for the OP to look at his TV screen and notice a difference.
4 Likes
Well said.
Oh, the irony.
1 Like
For some reason I thought we resolved this topic with the thought that until someone is willing to invest in either the proper equipment, or a technician with equipment to come to one of our homes, we are left with: If you see a difference with a PP, you see a difference; if you don’t see a difference with a PP, you don’t see a difference.
6 Likes
Another possibility? You can never be in the same room as a power plant and still say they will make no difference.
I prefer, “If the stereo is on in the other room and nobody is in there to listen, is it still playing music.”
3 Likes
Measurable changes:They add plenty of heat to the room. But not enough to roast a marshmallow. The cables drain a decent bank account.
Subjective positive changes are sight and hearing. So we will never convince the other crowd.
2 Likes
Well I’ll say it again here as I did on the PS12 review thread. As a video engineer who has been with digital video systems since their inception in the early 1980s.
There is no mechanism for AC power quality to produce these proposed image changes assuming an HDMI video path.
On an analog CRT, absolutely. But not on a digital signal path with a PWM technology display panel. It just can’t happen.
Digital audio and video are actually very “anti audiophile” technologies. All the legitimate arguments supporting analog cables go away with digital signals. Audiophiles understandably have a hard time swallowing that. Now LCR still rules and any electrical signal is still analog. But it’s the manner in which the information of interest is encoded into that analog signal. FM radio is in fact a crude form of digital signal transmission. If the signal strength is saturating the detector in the tuner, FM is immune to minor RFI. Now if there is a lightning strike that will break the noise threshold. But routine RFI will not. That was the point of FM - fix the AM static problem. That was David Sarnoff’s order to Howard Armstrong. The famous legal fight was that Sarnoff just wanted AM fixed, not a new incompatible public radio standard.
Are their crappy HDMI cables, yes! Are their crappy SPDIF cables, yes! Can either of them distort the electrical signal being carried. Yes, just as with any analog signal. But the visual and audible results are quite different. There are no subtle changes. Cable failures or defects are both loud and bright.
As for the photos shown here, I too am very suspicious of the optical setup. But this is why science has peer review. No one persons data is taken as accurate. If I were to post photos with no differences shown, that too is equally subject to further evaluation and peer review. Only when a a significant sampling of the data is the same from varying test setups is the data declared valid.
3 Likes
Does this mean that you fall into the:
“if you don’t see a difference with a PP, you don’t see a difference” camp?
-or-
“I haven’t tried this in my own home camp, but still don’t believe it’s possible” camp?
I ask, because I am reading a lot of theory in your post, but you don’t mention experience with exactly this particular equipment deployment. I’m not judging, I love theoretical exercises, I spend many hours a week at work solutioning, much of it initially based on theory. I’d just need a basis of understanding your personal experience with a PP and an OLED TV. Are you at the theoretical stage or have you moved into proof of concept?
Here on the forum, I read a lot of posts where someone buys a cable, fuse, tube, stands, isolation pucks, etc… and they try it and they post an opinion. In my mind I’m thinking “Cool, they purchased/borrowed X and tried it and here’s their opinion”. I can’t tell how to interpret your posts on this subject.
2 Likes
I would like to dedicate this song to this thread. It’s pretty toe tapping thanks to my regenerator.
Listen to Cotton Eyed Joe by Robert Herridge on Qobuz Open Qobuz
App available on Download Qobuz app: iOS, Android, Mac and PC
The lyrics should resonate with both sides. Not your normal Cotton Eyed Joe Lyrics BTW.
Now back to our regular programming.
I believe I understand your argument about the tolerance of digital transmission for signal noise that is insufficient to induce a (unrecoverable) bit error. But I think you’re mistaken to claim that “there is no mechanism for AC power quality to produce these proposed image changes” and similarly for the audio realm.
In both digital video and audio we have confidence that information can be reliably transferred from a source (say a Blu-ray player or a digital audio streaming device) to an output device (an LCD or OLED display, or any audio DAC). That’s not the domain of the effect being asserted here.
In both cases we have a digital-to-analog conversion taking place, and at that point we can have noise introduced which is independent of the data. Whether it’s the specific luminosity of an individual sub-pixel or the precise amplitude of audio signal for a given sample, variations in analog supply voltage right there at the component level will add noise to the output.
The claim being made is that by providing the cleanest and most stable AC power possible, a consequential reduction in supply noise at a component level can lead to detectable improvements in video quality – just as it is known to do in the world of digital audio. I don’t have any evidence to support or refute that claim, but the idea is supported by a reasonable proposal for a mechanism.
2 Likes