The elephant in the room…

[johnjen]

Since only we oursleves are able to change our internal musical interpretation via various means, and most folks aren’t aware of how we can ‘tweak’ our mentation which includes our hearing, it leaves us with trying to eliminate as many of the other sources that can be tweaked, namely our playback systems themselves.

And by reducing the number of variables (getting the equipment to behave better) we can then discern how much, of what type, and perhaps even what we can do about, the remaining poor SQ we experience, based upon other “cleanse my brain” techniques.

And speaking of “cleanse(ing) my brain”, are you aware of the technique called ‘switching your amygdala’? It’s a very easy, fast and quite effective way of re-aligning/re-setting our cognitive abilities. It takes but 5 seconds or less, and the results are immediately apparent, well once you become familiar with the technique anyway.

The easiest way to ‘switch your amygdala’ is to either smell or even just imagine smelling something you really llike to smell. Like a rose or a favorite food, or your SO’s fragrance etc.

I can provide a link that goes into much more detail about all of this but really it’s a very simple and very effective technique. And as a means to heighten the contrast between having your amygdala switched, or not, try this…

Smell something hoirrid, or just plain bad, then soon after smell something delightful, and observe as your state of cognitive mentation shifts.

As the saying goes “Try It You’ll Like It”…

JJ

[alrainbow]

Post a link something learned is always good. As for mood based enjoyment. It can go either way off me. Sometimes after a tough day music in the train is good other times it can be just in the back ground and non effective listening

it’s very odd and has faces I do not understand. A fello ps audio Person got in e into meditation. Helps for your. It is my way of resettings thugs a bit.

also reexamineming part happy thoughts helps too. I know I am on its all us and I ambit saying it is. It’s just more plausible to me.

Al

[johnjen]

This is portion of the whole site.

http://www.neilslade.com/art/Brain/chap1.html

http://www.neilslade.com/TickleYourAmygdalabook.html

The whole site is very ‘commercialized’ (he’s trying to make money with his information), so ignore the flash and sizzle, but the essence of the technique is contained in the technique I posted. There is more to it of course but using our sense of smell (and yes even using our imagination will also work) to trigger or switch our amygdala forward, is the focal point here.

JJ

[alrainbow]

Very kind of you to post

thanks

Al

[johnjen]

JJ

[johnm]

+1 for more posts; now to find some WA Q chips pronounced “WACK”?

[johnjen]

johnm said +1 for more posts; now to find some WA Q chips pronounced "WACK"?

Would that make them WAQy chips…?

And speaking of WAQy chips, it really is a mystery why there is no technical nor full description of the what, how, why, where, etc. these come from.

It’s almost like they dropped out of the sky and no one knows where they came from.

Sorta like they originated from the black projects world, and were ‘snuck’ out while no one was watching.

I mean there is no real marketing, no solid information other than word of mouth.

Very curious…

JJ

[stevem2]

My theory is the chips travelled back in time from the future but the marketing materials couldn’t do that (no quantum magic) so you’ll have to wait until the chips are invented to find out how they work. But I could be wrong.

[johnjen]

stevem2 said My theory is the chips travelled back in time from the future but the marketing materials couldn't do that (no quantum magic) so you'll have to wait until the chips are invented to find out how they work. But I could be wrong.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahaha…

I can just see it in my minds eye…

Time transporter operator setting up another routine shipment…

When all of a sudden!

OH NO!!!

SHIT!!!

JJ

[johnjen]

ASCC as a bridge
Part 1-ten vac

Available Short-Circuit Current is an electricians performance test of the ‘health’ of electrical power systems. It seems to be used mostly with branch circuits found in commercial buildings and homes. And it’s mostly used as a diagnostic tool to determine if there are any ‘problems’ in the branch circuit and where they may be found.

This test essentially calculates the ability of the circuit under test, to deliver near instantaneous amounts of current during a hot-neutral ‘dead short’ (“bolted fault”).
ASCC test results are calculated by dividing the line voltage by the circuit’s line impedance, (by adding the hot + neutral Ω together).
This test is useful in that it determines how much power the selected branch circuit can deliver, but doing so without even the possibility of tripping the circuit breaker.
Note: a circuit breaker trips, not by over heating then melting a wire like a fuse does, but but building enough magnetic energy in a coil to ‘trip’ its internal ‘breaker switch’. This process takes more time and energy than a fuse and so behaves differently. And one of these behavioral differences is the ability of a breaker to pass large amounts of current, for a short duration. This salient fact is of interest to us because of this ability to deliver short duration high amplitude current bursts, without tripping or self destructing, and where this behavior specifically matches the needs of our diode bridge switched power supplies quite well.

So the question then becomes how much current can be ‘delivered’ in a very minuscule amount of time, coincident with the question of how much is ‘enough’? And is moar always better?

So my next series of experiments are aimed at generating further data.
Namely, how much current is available at the duplex receptacle we plug our gear into?
And
Can a power cable alone make any measurable difference?
And
Does the amount of available current have any correlation with the SQ of our systems?

And it also should be noted that I originally saw this test performed by Caelin Gabriel of Shunyata Research in one of their online videos. I then researched the tool he used and found a considerably less expensive tester to use for my experiments.

And since I have been tweaking/modifying my dedicated branch circuit that feeds my audio system, it will be easy to remove some of these tweaks and then measure the ASCC to see if there are any differences. I have also measured the ‘standard’ branch circuits in my house to see what, if any, differences can be measured with them as well.
And
I will listen to my system as the tweaks are removed (while tracking the changes with measured ASCC data) to see if there is any correlation.

It is also my hope that others will also perform these tests on their own home electrical distribution systems. And in this way we can build up a data base of ‘realistic’ ASCC measurements and coincidentally provide suggestions on how to improve the performance of these branch circuits.

The tester I’m using (a General CA10 Circuit Analyzer) has a thermal limit which restricts testing to just one cable at a time with only 3-4 tests per function with 9 functional tests, followed by a ‘cool down’ period. This shortcoming slows down how many tests I can make in a relatively short amount of time, since it uses a ‘fixed’ resistor as a load and as it gets hot the readings can vary by quite a bit.

And as I continue to generate results, a pattern is emerging from the data, as I learned how to best use the Circuit Analyzer to perform the ASCC and other relevant tests. And I am performing multiple tests over many days as a means of verifying the readings.
And to seek even further verification, I’ve ordered a 2nd tester, an Extech CT70.
So I’ll get yet another 2nd opinion, so to speak.

The comparison between my house’s built in power distribution vs. the dedicated lines I added (computer & audio), is exposing the differences between these branch circuits. And then there is the progression of measured results starting with the standard appliance cord (AppCord see list below), to my DIY G-1 & G-4 cables and then the Shunyata (Python & A-D) and Marigo cables.

It turns out that my standard house wiring is reverse polarized with a very high ground resistance (3Ω), where by contrast, on my dedicated runs, the ground resistance measures at 0.26Ω at worst, most are 0.08Ω or less.
Also the ASCC results on the standard house wiring measures at ≈ 200 amps, using a standard appliance cord (AppCord). But the ASCC measurement reading gains a tad bit more current using my DIY G-4-r (hot-rodded bottlehead kit) power cable with a reading of ≈ 210 amps.
This includes the gfci circuits in the bathroom.

However my dedicated computer ‘extension cable’ using stranded copper in a 14/3 configuration, that powers my computer and peripheral equipment (routers, printer etc.) measures ≈ 400 amps using the standard appliance cord, (AppCord). And if I use a ‘better’ power cable, my DIY G-4-r cable for instance, measured ≈ 490 amps.

This is the initial indication of a pattern that will become more demonstrable in due course.

Note: All of these readings are taken with my computer and audio systems running. And yes I have also run these tests with all of the load removed (nothing running).

The next series of tests were made at the end of my dedicated audio 12/2 w/grnd romex run (≈ 33’) straight from my panel with no additional load on this branch circuit, beyond the audio system itself.
I say end of the run because there is a ≈ 12-15’ piece of romex added to the existing ≈ 18’ original run.
And it should be noted, that for some homes these lengths are rather short.
This means that for these tests, the total cable length is of lesser impact in the first place, due to this short run.
This is a more ideal situation (potentially higher ASCC readings), because current limiting due to wire length is also minimized as a factor/variable.
AND since I’m using regular ol’, run to the hardware store and get me some wyr in a box (romex), not some fancy go to meet’n audiophool wire, this should also work against seeing any ‘magnified’ results.
AND on top of that, roughly half the way to the end of the run, these 2 pieces of romex are simply wire nutted together, along with the feed for the receptacle at that box. I call this location the ‘1st splice’.
And yes I took readings at the ‘1st splice’ location, but we’ll come back to that later as well.

Note Two: This dedicated audio run has been ‘tweaked’, not by super-zoopy wire but with Shunyata and Synergistic Research duplex receptacles, and WA-Q cable chips have been wrapped around the romex cable in 2 places.
Plus I’ve added WA-Q fuse chips to the individual wires (hot, neutral and ground) of the romex cable in the panel for this branch circuit. Also I’ve added WA-Q cable chips to the 2 main power feeds, before the main breaker for the entire service to my house, along with one on the neutral feeder wire as well.

And for these tests I have 8 power cables available to me to test, and they range from;
#1 (AppCord) The ‘standard appliance cord’ which is ‘good enough’…
#2 (Marigo) An old Marigo RMX Reference Ultra. An audiophool cable from the 90’s ($$$).
#3 (G-1) A ‘stock’ Bottlehead power cable, made from their kit.
#4 (G-1-rfi) A ‘stock’ Bottlehead power cable, with an RFI filter (a ferrite donut on the cable).
#5 (G-4-g) A ‘hot-rodded’ Bottlehead power cable, made with better materials and gold plated connectors.
#6 (G-4-r) A ‘hot-rodded’ Bottlehead power cable, made with better materials and rhodium plated connectors.
#7 (A-D) Shunyata Alpha-Digital power cable with many, many, thousands of hours that has been cooked.
#8 (Python) Shunyata Python power cable with many, many, thousands of hours that has been cooked.

As you can see, the cables run the gamut from 99¢ (AppCord) to multi thousands of $$$$ (Python) with many low cost cables in the middle.
And I’ll describe the G-1 and G-4 cables in a little more detail, just because.
G-1 cables both with and w/o the rfi choke (ferrite donut), are stock Bottlehead kits, which is to say, not all copper wire with ‘inexpensive’ connectors at each end. These cables are ≈ 17awg.
The G-4 hot-rodded versions come in 2 flavors, with either gold or rhodium plated connectors. They use the same build design but have also been cryo treated and cooked on my industrial strength wyr cooker, an Audiodharma Cable Cooker. These cables use UL listed TFFN electricians all copper stranded 16awg ‘hook up’ wire. And since the ‘design’ uses 2 pieces of wire for each conductor, the effective rating is ≈ 13awg. And I opted for the cheap Chinese knockoff connectors, which cost ≈ $25/pair.
Which makes the total cost of materials for the G-4 series of cables I made as roughly $45/cable plus the cryo-treatment (≈$15) and cooking costs (≈ $25) for ≈ $85/cable.
The ‘best’ of my DIY cables, the G-4-r, is still a reference cable in some regards, and was certainly the standard by which I compared the next cables.

Which then brings us to the Shunyata Python and Alpha-Digital (A-D) cables. These are cables of 9awg and 10awg respectively, which were already cryo treated by Shunyata as a normal part of their manufacturing process. And I did cook both of these as well, in fact I wouldn’t have purchased them if I hadn’t, as they didn’t deliver the same bass impact as my G-4-r cable in the extreme bottom end without being cooked.

The Marigo RMX Reference ‘Ultra’ is an old cable a friend gave me years ago. I haven’t used it in any system for quite a while, mostly because it never seemed to make any difference. But I’m glad I hung on to it, if for no other reason than to use it in these tests.

So there you have the line up.
I’ll continue with the observations & some results in part 2-twenty, after I take more measurements.

JJ

[desnoyersehrenberg249]

JJ

i find this to be an interesting topic and have often wondered if, beyond a certain spec, it could actually make a sonic difference.

another article for the pot.

http://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/amplifier-slew-rate

[johnjen]

I have received the 2nd tester, the Extech CT70 and have run all the tests using this unit as well.

And the pattern I’m seeing is, yes, there does seem to be a correlation between peak current delivery and SQ. This pattern shows itself, when I compare the ‘standard house wiring’ to my dedicated branch circuit. And as the different cables are measured from the each of the different receptacles in the house, the pattern emerges as well.

I’ve also found that using DeoxIT Gold G-series elixir, can also improve some of the readings. This may just be that it ‘cleans’ the mating surfaces as much as the liquid ‘magic pixie dust’ effect. But it does seem to help none the less.

That article on slew rate is a good start, but I do believe that there is more involved than just, ‘does the circuit react fast enough to meet the minimum bandwidth’ considerations. Think in terms of how ‘easy’ is it to reach the desired voltage, and settling time, and power supply ‘stiffness’ among a host of additional technical ‘issues’. And yes I see Slew Rate as being applicable to both the analog and digital sides of our systems.

Especially if we are shooting for a ‘full’ 120dB dynamic range.

JJ

[alrainbow]

There are many factors involved in spins production changes. And I agree about slew rate not being the only factor .

With amplifiers it’s much more obvious as some have very simpler specs but very different sound. Simplified some seem fast and some seem slow also neutral to warm. The fast mostly goes with neutral but not for all.

Add to this our own brains that have been tunned to what we have come to like. But as your testing shows changes what if what you perceive as better I don’t. Now this becomes even more complex . I think there is where to is now. He looks for improvements with specs first . And I cannot blame him for doing this way. As of he makes changes and then some take measurements and say it’s worse even though we some like ot more where does this leave him.

Getting back to power leaves this as just another point In a very pointed debate . In my new office rig I am doing things as I know to make it best . What this means is breaking several nec codes.

The main panel is a 150 main breaker the 6 dedicated circuits for the main rig . Each circuit is 10/4 romex. The point is

each circuit is a pair of 10 gauge wire to a 40 amp breaker then one commen 6 gauge for ground . One ground wire that loops to each of the 6 hospital grade 20 amp duplex outlets . It’s all done in deep 1900 boxes with romex clamps. Each duplex will be two circuits worth two 10 gauge to each terminal . 10 gauge is the largest one can get under a screw side feed outlet and two for neutral and two for hot totaling 8 per outlet is a very hard device to wire and install.

No kriyo wire or outlets just a very over rated conductor system.

This will feed several p10/5. But I will,be testing to hear imrpovemnts of with and without the power regenerators

the amps will,not go through the power units. At least not at first .

[johnjen]

alrainbow said There are many factors involved in spins production changes. And I agree about slew rate not being the only factor .

With amplifiers it’s much more obvious as some have very simpler specs but very different sound. Simplified some seem fast and some seem slow also neutral to warm. The fast mostly goes with neutral but not for all.

Add to this our own brains that have been tunned to what we have come to like. But as your testing shows changes what if what you perceive as better I don’t. Now this becomes even more complex . I think there is where to is now. He looks for improvements with specs first . And I cannot blame him for doing this way. As of he makes changes and then some take measurements and say it’s worse even though we some like ot more where does this leave him.

Getting back to power leaves this as just another point In a very pointed debate . In my new office rig I am doing things as I know to make it best . What this means is breaking several nec codes.

The main panel is a 150 main breaker the 6 dedicated circuits for the main rig . Each circuit is 10/4 romex. The point is

each circuit is a pair of 10 gauge wire to a 40 amp breaker then one commen 6 gauge for ground . One ground wire that loops to each of the 6 hospital grade 20 amp duplex outlets . It’s all done in deep 1900 boxes with romex clamps. Each duplex will be two circuits worth two 10 gauge to each terminal . 10 gauge is the largest one can get under a screw side feed outlet and two for neutral and two for hot totaling 8 per outlet is a very hard device to wire and install.

No kriyo wire or outlets just a very over rated conductor system.

This will feed several p10/5. But I will,be testing to hear imrpovemnts of with and without the power regenerators

the amps will,not go through the power units. At least not at first .

It would seem that the most significant improvement that can be made to the SQ of our systems in terms of the power we feed them, is a dedicated and ‘robust’ branch circuit (or 2 or 3 etc.). I’m planning on adding a 10/2 with ground dedicated feed next, or perhaps an 8/2 with ground. And of course I’ll measure their ASCC capability as well as listen for changes in my system to these changes.

The next ‘step up’ is to use tweako receptacles (Shunyata, Synergistic, etc.) at the end of these dedicated runs. And yeah spending $100 on an ‘audiophool grade’ receptacle seems a tad bit ‘excessive’, until you hear what happens. Just make sure you can return them if you’re of a mind to.

Then if you get really infected with the tweako-bug, try the WAQy chips applied to your dedicated romex feeds and also the main power leads that provide the power to the breaker box, next. These are fairly inexpensive ‘tests’ which also can be returned if need be.

Just a few additional thoughts.

JJ

[johnjen]

Sorry all that I haven’t posted the next ‘instalment’, but I’ve been working trying to get the manufacturers of the 2 ASCC capable devices to step up and fix the ‘bugs’ in their respective device.

It isn’t that they don’t work, but it can be said they are lacking in either accuracy, or resolution, or repeatability, depending upon which measurement is being taken, by which particular device.

The best I can present right now are ‘trends’ and general patterns.

I’d hoped to be able to add some analysis of actual numbers with percenatges etc. But I may not be able to reach that level of information exchange. We’ll see soon enough.

I’ll start writing up the ‘watered down’ version here soon in any case.

JJ :thumb

[johnjen]

Part 2-twenty

I figure some of you remember who Arlo Guthrie is and his famous Alice’s Restaurant song from back in the 60’s… And Officer Obie with his 8x10 full color glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back, to be used as evidence…

Well, I too have evidence, or more accurately stated - observations, and while it’s not glossy I do have spreadsheets of data, one for each tester I have used on the electrical distribution system in my home.
And these testers generate ‘real numbers’, and that is where the difficulty lies.
Are these numbers ‘real’ or just sorta approximations of what is happening? I mean these ASCC measurement devices calculate the ASCC values, which means they aren’t really measuring the actual ASCC values in the first place.
And whats more these 2 devices don’t agree numerically, except in general ways.
Which leaves me with not being able to ‘trust’ the actual numbers displayed by these 2 devices.

And since neither device is ‘calibrate-able’ this means I have no real ‘standard’ or reference to know if the numbers are close, or not.
And it should be noted that the reason the AC10 tester has a range of ASCC readings is because after using the tester, over many many tests, I ‘figured out’ how to generate more useful results. Even so they numbers were ‘spread out’, thus the range of readings. Whereas the CT70 had no such problems and if I were to ignore the low readings from the AC10 the differences tightened up considerably.

But the General AC10 ‘might’ be undergoing an update, or revision, or re-design/re programing, thing… Maybe…
It’s hard to tell because they won’t and aren’t answering my email requests, after they became aware of the ‘discrepancies’.

But I figure I can trust the trends, since I’m seeing all the information pointing in the same direction with roughly the same general degree of change, and given the same testing conditions.

And since the trends from both analyzers agree, this is what I’m going to ‘write up’…

And so first I’ll analyze the spreadsheet data then I’ll draw conclusions and bring up insights with regard to the shifts and changes to the SQ that the different power cables brings out.

What I’m seeing is, as the wire gauge gets larger (smaller AWG #s) the ASCC numbers get bigger.
Which makes sense in that larger gauge wires CAN handle more current than wimpy wires…
But it’s more involved than that, as you might suspect.

My house has post and pillar wiring in it. It’s not grounded, AND it’s polarity is reversed.

So adding my 2 dedicated runs was pretty much a necessity not just for tunes but also my computer.
And my dedicated audio run has 2 locations to test from. One being the end of the run where my amp and dac are plugged in, but there is also what I call my 1st splice location. This is ≈15’ closer to the panel on this ≈ 35’ total romex cable run length.

Which gives me 4 different ac power sources to test using the cables I mentioned in part 1.
And I also have added a ‘stubby’ ac power cable into the mix, which I can use as a ‘reference’ of sorts. Mostly because it’s a 1ft long 14awg cable which tends to minimize the effect of the cable from the tests.

Now imagine all of this data in 2, single page, spread sheets.
It’s a bit bigger than I can easily show here.
So I’m going to ‘analyze’ the results of each an ac power source separately and present that analysis. And I’ll add 2 graphics of the relevant data from the spread sheet (one from each device), for each ac power source.

Think of it as show and tell without the circles and arrows, and so to make up for those missing pieces I’ll add several more paragraphs…

So starting with the built in housewiring (post and pillar), I used only a few cables since the numbers were very low and didn’t really change much regardless of what cables I used.

So to start I’ll explain what your seeing and what is of ‘significance’ will follow.

The Extech CT70

The General CA10

Now the first thing to notice is what is being measured as listed on the left side of each graphic. We have AC Volts and Voltage Drop and Impedance and then the ASCC results, (top to bottom).

Across the top are the conditions (what ac source was being tested along with which power cable was used).

Also note the colors,
The yellow means really low numbers for that measurement.
The dark background means a ‘problem’ of some sort.

And note that for this set of tests I only used 3 cables.
The reference stubby, my best DIY cable, and the appliance cord.
Now if you pay attention to the ASCC results generated by the General AC10 device, you’ll notice the range of instantaneous current delivery starts at 200amps and ranges up to 225amps.

Likewise the Extech CT70 runs from 0.26kA to 0.42kA (260amps to 420amps)
And also notice that the Extech ASCC readings shows two numbers separated by a /. This is because this device can measure ASCC in 2 ways, using only the neutral line or both the neutral and the ground return lines together. This usually means the second number is greater than the first since the ground and neutral lines run parallel, which lowers their impedance, and thus the CT70 calculates a greater ASCC value.
This is verified when the ground is missing (the post and pillar ac sourced measurements) and the second reading is only 10amps different (the limit of the resolution of the tester). Whereas the bathroom GFCI is grounded and so the second reading takes a significant jump up.

So a simple numerical analysis is the % change (the range) from lowest to highest as the power cables were changed
The AC10 measured the post and pillar source as 200/220 which is ≈ a 10% increase
&
And it measured the bathroom GFCI ac source as 200/225 which is ≈ a 12% increase

And the CT70 measured the post and pillar source as 0.27/0.30 which is ≈ 10% increase
&
And it measured the bathroom GFCI ac source as 0.26/0.31 which is ≈ 18% increase

Note: I’m only using the readings of the neutral as the only return (not both neutral and ground) to match the way the AC10 measures ASCC for this comparison.

So for the worst ac feeds in my house the increase in ASCC numbers only reaches ≈ 10% as I use larger gauge power cables that feed the tester. And then when I use the bathroom gfci source, the readings nearly double (18%).

The trends of note start with the AppCord (the lowest ASCC readings) and then the highest ASCC readings belongs to the reference stubby cable, with the DIY cable in the middle.
This trend will be repeated.

Now take a look at the voltage drop numbers.
These devices calculate the voltage drop of the line voltage using a simulation of a 12, or 15, or 20amp load on the ac source the device is plugged into.
And the general rule is, there should be less than a 5% drop in line voltage. If the Vd % is greater than 5% there is a ‘problem’ with the circuit, by todays standards.
You’ll note that all of the readings exceed 5% and some even exceed 10%.
That’s what post and pillar wiring delivers, and it should be noted these are fairly short runs of no more than 50’ max.

Now we’ll examine the dedicated computer ac power feed.
It’s basically a 35’ extension cable (stranded, not solid 14AWG 3 cond), hardwired into a breaker in the panel with a dbl duplex box on the other end. And all of my computer equipment runs off of this dedicated run.
Nothing really fancy at all.

The General CA10

The Extech CT70

And again I’m using the same 3 power cables for this series of tests on this ac source.
And as you can see even this change results in just about all numbers either doubling (or more) or being cut in half (Vd %)
And the same trend is quite apparent here, namely as the gauge of the power cable gets smaller (the conductors get bigger) the ASCC results approach the reference ’stubby’ cables numbers. Which makes sense as you’d expect to see greater current delivery, using larger conductors.

So the same simple numerical analysis is the % change (the range) from lowest to highest ASCC #’s.
The AC10 measured the computer feed ac source as 400/520 which is ≈ a 30% increase

And the CT70 measured the computer feed ac source as 0.48/0.73 which is ≈ a 50% increase

And the trends are still holding

Also note the highlighted numbers that the CT70 generates for the stubby cable on this ac source.
As we’ll see those are excellent numbers regardless of ac source.

Also note the differences between the reference Stubby and the AppCord in terms of the impedance (Z-L) listed for the ‘hot’ conductor remain. But also note the resistance amount in Ω’s has dropped from the standard house wiring we looked at above. My hunch is, that large of a resistance reading is heavily masking other readings.

But with a decent ac source, the power cable we use with each tester becomes more of a factor in influencing the readings we are interested in.
IOW as the ac source is more robust the limitations of the power cable(s) become more apparent.
This trend will be repeated as well.

And also note the magnitude of the ASCC numbers now.
These are all 20 amp rated circuits and they are being tested while operating equipment (there is an existing load).
So on the post and pillar circuits we saw readings of ≈ 200 or 300 amps (depending on the testing device) being able to be delivered to the plug in the wall.
Then using a 14/3 ‘extension cable’ the current jumps up to ≈ 500 or 700 amps (depending on the testing device)

So using 250 (200+300/2) amps as a mid number x 120volts is 30K watts
And 600 (500+700/2) amps as a mid number x 120 volts is 72Kwatts
This means the instantaneous power delivery as increased ≈ 240%

And we haven’t even started on the audio run yet.
That’s next…

JJ

[jimsatala77]

I was an electronics technician in the US Navy for my early year’s and I retired from the IBEW local 134 in 2013 with quite a bit of experience dealing with Transient voltages/currents caused by the enormous explosion of the amount of computers and other electronic gadgets we have all become accustomed too in the last 30 year’s.

My point is that if you are noticing a definite SQ improvement in the evening it could be because of less sine wave distortion caused by computer/microprocessor chop of the signal…if not isolated from you’re line voltage by a (isolation)transformer, if you live in a mixed use area where several feeds are coming off 1 xformer.

You can even make a case for solar interference with the power lines on the telephone poles…as the sun heats them up the impedance changes…in other word’s it could be anything or nothing…or even a compressor problem on your A/C unit…I’m not trying to be jerky…I have been doing the same thing with my system trying to find out why sometimes the same tracks played at the same volume sound like it’s live…and other time’s I can tell that it’s Memorex.

[alrainbow]

All you post makes sense but it’s just not that simple. Conststantly if I am up in the middle of the night it’s just better all the time .

All my home stuff for late night listening is headphones . And this comes off of expensive ups signwave type and from there to P5. Weather irs day or night it’s the same . But it does not appear to be the same sound. One other point is how much I listen during the day. As I frequent the trains I use ciems played low to keep out the noise and enjoy the music . This alway or almost always makes my speaker listening better.

Ther is truth in all of this but how and where still alludes me big time

Al

[coli]

Balanced power is the 90% solution. P10 is prabably 50-80%. Too bad the two are incompatible.

[alrainbow]

Explain your point

please