Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: read on hi-fi.org (Read 11070 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

read on hi-fi.org

Hello...

I was looking to build myself a headphone amplifyer for my headphones, and thought that a good source to look would be www.head-fi.org, so I started reading up topics in the DIY section, and fell onto this:
Quote
I long ago read all kinds of articles/ads/interviews on high-end cable construction. One of the things often referred to was "skin effect" -- the basic idea was that the current flow in the wire tended to occur mostly on the "skin" (outside edge) of the wire rather than the core.
[...]
it would explain a lot about why different platings impart different sonic signatures on cables.

Anyhow, the proof is in the listening... I generally agree with the earlier post that there are clearly audible differences between silver and copper wire of the same diameter, and that the silver-plated copper I've tried has been something of a bit of a middle-ground. But I'm sure there are varying qualities of this -- i.e. what is the purity and the thickness of the silver (or the copper for that matter).
[...]
All I know is that different cable materials and construction do indeed offer very different sonic signatures. To my ear, solid core high-purity silver has always been the ultimate in terms of hearing clarity and detail in recordings, but it's not always desirable (for instance when the combination of your recordings, source, amp, and speakers/phones already tend towards a "bright" tonal balance).
Many other articles like this one were posted there, so I just wanted to say,
Thank you HydrogenAudio, for the Terms of service.  Especially #8 -- keep us from the charlattans of pseudo-acoustics.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #1 –
I agree. When I researched what kind of headphones I am supposed to buy I ended up reading a lot of rubbish statements there. So much that I got dizzy. I really feel that general education in the western world failed miserably.

Anyway. The problem is that unlike HA, they deal with HW and there are not many HW ABX systems around. Still these rules keep HA sane even when we deal with HW, because all these lunatics that shun scientific approach we have here also shun this site as a result.

Triza

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #2 –
I absolutely agree, HA is very refreshing after having spent too much time at Head-Fi (and Headwize before that.)

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #3 –
Quote
"All I know is that different cable materials and construction do indeed offer very different sonic signatures."


I could make claims like that nearly pulling stuff out of my ass. If I told you could fly would you believe me?  , even if I had no scientific evidence to back up my claims.  Yes, thank god for the TOS #8 it's something to live by.
budding I.T professional

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #4 –
Strictly in terms of headphone discussions, I think that Head-Fi really is stronger than HA. They may have the occasional odd discussion on "fuzz" and whatnot in the Headphone forum, but audible differences between phones are pretty much beyond debate, and most of the differences can be correlated (albeit not proved) to differences in the objective metrics. That sort of stuff just doesn't exist here.

I think a lot of HA's discussion quality stems as much from the quality of moderation as from the TOS. Head-Fi is so uncontrolled I could easily mistake it for PlanetCrap on some days. A lot of the threads are just a complete waste of time to wade through, even from an audiophile point of view.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #5 –
Quote
Quote
"All I know is that different cable materials and construction do indeed offer very different sonic signatures."


I could make claims like that nearly pulling stuff out of my ass. If I told you could fly would you believe me?  , even if I had no scientific evidence to back up my claims.  Yes, thank god for the TOS #8 it's something to live by.

Two words : Lamp cord.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #6 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
"All I know is that different cable materials and construction do indeed offer very different sonic signatures."


I could make claims like that nearly pulling stuff out of my ass. If I told you could fly would you believe me?  , even if I had no scientific evidence to back up my claims.  Yes, thank god for the TOS #8 it's something to live by.

Two words : Lamp cord.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320289"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lamp cord has a bad sonic signature, because it is made for "light" electrons, not "audio" ones. I once tried lamp cord, but the effect will be even worse than the skin effect.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #7 –
Quote
Lamp cord has a bad sonic signature, because it is made for "light" electrons, not "audio" ones. I once tried lamp cord, but the effect will be even worse than the skin effect.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320295"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Correct.  That's why I use cords from vacuum cleaners.  Everyone knows that vacuum cleaners have high audio output.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #8 –
Quote
Quote
Lamp cord has a bad sonic signature, because it is made for "light" electrons, not "audio" ones. I once tried lamp cord, but the effect will be even worse than the skin effect.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320295"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Correct.  That's why I use cords from vacuum cleaners.  Everyone knows that vacuum cleaners have high audio output.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320302"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Plus the soundstage will be much enhanced, and much more airy.  For true overkill, braid together 3 vaacum cables : as their name says, they're oxygen-free, and if you have a high quality vaacum cleaner, they'll be silver plated, too.  That way, you'll get added capacitance, from the skin effect and light corrosion, making your bass sound much fuller.  On top of that, you will not limit your sound bandwidth because the impedance of the cable is very high, and that wan you can increase your input impedance.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #9 –
That's enough.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #10 –
Quote
That's enough.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320310"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

thank you

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #11 –
Quote
That's enough.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320310"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yes, stop making fun of cable freaks: the placebo effect is a scientifically proven method for improving the perceived quality of many types of subjective stimuli.

Nobody is saying different headphones all sound alike of course, there's a obvious difference between my SR-80s and my HD-600s for example.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #12 –
Head-fi people care less about cables than hydrogen audio people care about not caring about cables. So I think the former group is more sane.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #13 –
Quote
Head-fi people care less about cables than hydrogen audio people care about not caring about cables. So I think the former group is more sane.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=320536"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


 

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #14 –
The skin effect is real, although a lot of people misinterpret it. There's an objective analysis here which suggests that any differences caused by skin effect are unlikely to be audiable in any practical situation.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #15 –
Looks like the author fell for the noobish "It's sounds louder so it must be better" argument by virtue of silver being the least resistive metal around (at temperatures above what other metals superconduct at).
No one can be told what Ogg Vorbis is...you have to hear it for yourself
- Morpheus

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #16 –
Skin effect is important at RF, not at AF.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #17 –
so, the spoof ad would be:

?
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #18 –
Nice.
Acid8000 aka. PhilDEE

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #19 –
Made my day. Thanks

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #20 –
I made it my desktop wallpaper. Shame on you for not using png, by the way.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #21 –
Quote
I made it my desktop wallpaper. Shame on you for not using png, by the way.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=321499"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why? Can you see the difference between png and jpg? Post ABX results please.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #22 –
Quote
Quote
I made it my desktop wallpaper. Shame on you for not using png, by the way.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why? Can you see the difference between png and jpg? Post ABX results please.


[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=321504"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


PNG is lossless, he wants to encode his own jpeg from it.


as for ABX'ing: [a href="http://www2.b3ta.com/spot-the-giference/]http://www2.b3ta.com/spot-the-giference/[/url]

10/16 for me. Gif and png-8 don't differ except for filesize.
Veni Vidi Vorbis.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #23 –
14/16, it's quite easy on my tft and I didn't concentrate much.

read on hi-fi.org

Reply #24 –
15/16  , i failed the last one. One can see artifacts in both, the jpeg's (diffuminated) and the gif's ( dots).