Hi,


My system is as follows:
Densen beat b100 mk5 amp
Cambridge audio azur 640c cd player
Sonus Faber Concerto Grand Piano speaks
QED xtube 300 speaker wire + banana plugs

Anyways, recently a freind of mine was selling a pair of audioquest
power cords (their best) with "rf stoppers".. Being a sceptic of "power
cords" making a difference, etc, I still wanted to try it out so he gave
htem to me for an audition... So I tried them out, thinking what could
it possibley hurt?

I don't if the following effects I've experienced are "placebo" or not:
increase and more control in the bass, sweeter more extended treble,
more discernable and detailed micro dynamics. It was as if it was a REAL
upgrade of some sorts, a new cd player, a better amp ??

It was a pretty good system in the first place, but now the thing sounds
like a $30000 setup!

I am just thinking that "it's just freakin power, how could this be?"

But here comes the most curious part.. The azur cd player made "tak tak
tak" mechanical noise on some cd's, very AUDIBLE for instance with the
philip glass "koyaanisqatsi" cd, so much that it distracted from the
music on quiter passages. But with the audioquest used as power cord on
the azur even this mechanical noise disappeared!! ... Now asking you
guys (and why not gals?), any educated opinions as to how this is possible??

One last question: taking backup from my old CD's (notibly charlie haden
"ballad of the fallen") I've encountered a very annoying problem that
make these backups practically useless: On continuous pieces with track
numbers changing in the middle my CD player plays the tracks normally,
there is no cut off between tracks, the music does not cut, with the
original. But with the CD-r versions the player cuts the music to give a
two second in-between tracks silence which needles to say divides the
music and spoils the whole experience, the whole concept of the CD. Not
only the azur, but also a very expensice naim cd5 is doing the same
thing with the cd-r? Any ideas as to how I can overcome this problem?
SOme software (better then HP record now) or some special tye of cdr
made for audio specifically??

Any help much apreeciated, much obliged, happy listening.

The cd bust be burned as "disc-at-once". Don't know what software you're
using. Might have to just specify zero spacing between songs. It certainly
can be done.

The power cord, on the other hand...

I think you realize the power cord on your amp cannot make a mechanical
difference in the operation of your cd player. Once in a while one sees a
problem like this which is somewhat intermittent or just stops on it's own.
I would suggest this is probably what happened.

Most of us tech types would not accept any power cord as being able to make
a sonic difference under any normal circumstances.


Mark Z.

--
Please reply only to Group. I regret this is necessary. Viruses and spam
have rendered my regular e-mail address useless.


"Fella" wrote in message
...

Hi,


My system is as follows:
Densen beat b100 mk5 amp
Cambridge audio azur 640c cd player
Sonus Faber Concerto Grand Piano speaks
QED xtube 300 speaker wire + banana plugs

Anyways, recently a freind of mine was selling a pair of audioquest
power cords (their best) with "rf stoppers".. Being a sceptic of "power
cords" making a difference, etc, I still wanted to try it out so he gave
htem to me for an audition... So I tried them out, thinking what could
it possibley hurt?

I don't if the following effects I've experienced are "placebo" or not:
increase and more control in the bass, sweeter more extended treble,
more discernable and detailed micro dynamics. It was as if it was a REAL
upgrade of some sorts, a new cd player, a better amp ??

It was a pretty good system in the first place, but now the thing sounds
like a $30000 setup!

I am just thinking that "it's just freakin power, how could this be?"

But here comes the most curious part.. The azur cd player made "tak tak
tak" mechanical noise on some cd's, very AUDIBLE for instance with the
philip glass "koyaanisqatsi" cd, so much that it distracted from the
music on quiter passages. But with the audioquest used as power cord on
the azur even this mechanical noise disappeared!! ... Now asking you
guys (and why not gals?), any educated opinions as to how this is
possible??

One last question: taking backup from my old CD's (notibly charlie haden
"ballad of the fallen") I've encountered a very annoying problem that
make these backups practically useless: On continuous pieces with track
numbers changing in the middle my CD player plays the tracks normally,
there is no cut off between tracks, the music does not cut, with the
original. But with the CD-r versions the player cuts the music to give a
two second in-between tracks silence which needles to say divides the
music and spoils the whole experience, the whole concept of the CD. Not
only the azur, but also a very expensice naim cd5 is doing the same
thing with the cd-r? Any ideas as to how I can overcome this problem?
SOme software (better then HP record now) or some special tye of cdr
made for audio specifically??

Any help much apreeciated, much obliged, happy listening.

Mark D. Zacharias wrote:

The cd bust be burned as "disc-at-once".


Thanks Mark for the answer. I am using "make an exact copy" option on
the hp record now software. I could not see any option to "zero space"
on that sofware. The manual does not help either. I guess I need to buy
some software that specifically addresses that prob, though I need to
find it first.



I think you realize the power cord on your amp cannot make a mechanical
difference in the operation of your cd player.


I have *two* power cords with rf stoppers, one for the amp, the other
for the CD player.

The CD player is now dead quite mechanically on ALL problematic disks
previously. I myself find this hard to beleive..

Most of us tech types would not accept any power cord as being able to make
a sonic difference under any normal circumstances.

Yes I was very much sceptical also of a power cord making a difference.
But they are there. There is no mistaking it. I asked a freind to help
me in on this. We did a blind test where the audioquest cords were
applied (or not) and every time I knew the difference linstening
blinfolded. The reason is that the differences are just huge, like I
said, it's like having bought a new amp or some such. Even the presence
is smoothed out (which is not all that a positive thing, mind you)...

"Fella" wrote ...
Thanks Mark for the answer. I am using "make an exact copy"
option on the hp record now software. I could not see any option
to "zero space" on that sofware. The manual does not help either.
I guess I need to buy some software that specifically addresses
that prob, though I need to find it first.

Be aware that many mass-market applications (like the one you
seem to be using) do NOT handle this properly (or allow you to
manually fix it). There are commercial and shareware apps,
however that likely handle it just fine.

Yes I was very much sceptical also of a power cord making a
difference. But they are there. There is no mistaking it. I asked
a freind to help me in on this. We did a blind test where the
audioquest cords were applied (or not) and every time I knew
the difference linstening blinfolded. The reason is that the
differences are just huge, like I said, it's like having bought a
new amp or some such. Even the presence is smoothed out
(which is not all that a positive thing, mind you)...

Did you test the cords on the different componenets independently,
CD player vs. power amp, etc.? I find the whole scenario quite
preposterous myself unless your original cords are wimpy and/or
loose, etc.

It is not possible to do a real, valid double-blind a/b (or a/b/x)
test with power cords because of the logistics involved. I still
believe the effect is psychological. I loved Laurence Payne's
statement: "Remembering that the prime objective of audiophile-
level sound equipment is not to be good but to be expensive..."
Perhaps real engineers are too practical to be willing to spend
4x, 8x, 16x the $$$ for the last 1-2% of improvement.

Of course you realize that the equipment that was used to MAKE
those recordings didn't include any power cords that cost more
than $5. Or any "boutique" massive, gold-plated audio inter-
connects either. Hope that doesn't spoil your quest.

Richard Crowley wrote:

I find the whole scenario quite
preposterous myself unless your original cords are wimpy and/or
loose, etc.

No they my original cords are perfectly OK, normal stock cords. But
with power I was under the imression that either it is there or not.
Even if they were "wimpy" isn't it so that they just convey the power,
that's it.. ?



It is not possible to do a real, valid double-blind a/b (or a/b/x)
test with power cords because of the logistics involved.

Well actulay a freind of mine helped on this. I was away from the
lsitening room and he switched (or not, I didn't know) the audiophile
power cords with the original stock ones. Then I came in and listened
the same samples, blindfolded of course. And every time I knew which
types of cords were being used. We did this some 10 times. Then we got
tired of it.

"Remembering that the prime objective of audiophile-
level sound equipment is not to be good but to be expensive..."

I can't speak for all audiophile equipment out there obviously, but for
instance my sonus fabers costing around 3000 bucks are worth every
penny, and I know just exactly what makes them expensive. If they were
to be replaced by some, dunno, cervin wegas, perhaps, I would notice the
difference from around the block.

There were those days when some people claimed that all CD players
sounded the same since it was a stream of ones and zeros in question,
data, they said, it's the same thing from every player. Then came the
concept of "jitter", something to measure the difference with. Most
still would ask "what's jitter", and we're already moving ahead with the
traditional CD format.

But I digress.

Of course you realize that the equipment that was used to MAKE
those recordings didn't include any power cords that cost more
than $5. Or any "boutique" massive, gold-plated audio inter-
connects either.

Well I know for a fact that studios, etc, use those b&w nautilus
speakers for monitoring, etc, so I wouldn't bet on that.

Hope that doesn't spoil your quest.

I am not on a quest. Actualy quite distrubed by this audible difference,
somewhat big difference this power cord makes.

In article ,

I don't if the following effects I've experienced are "placebo" or not:
increase and more control in the bass, sweeter more extended treble,
more discernable and detailed micro dynamics. It was as if it was a REAL
upgrade of some sorts, a new cd player, a better amp ??

It was a pretty good system in the first place, but now the thing sounds
like a $30000 setup!

I am just thinking that "it's just freakin power, how could this be?"

Unless there's something very odd (broken) about your system, I'd
expect that a power-cord upgrade alone could not create any real
changes of this sort, and I'd strongly favor the placebo /
anticipation effect.

It's possible that your system is subject to high levels of RF
interference from a nearby transmitter, that the new power cable's "RF
stopper" (very probably a $.25 ferrite or two) is helping keep the RF
out of the electronics, that the electronics had poor RF rejection
capability, and that you're hearing sonic changes which result from a
reduction in noise and interference (intermodulation?) in your circuits.

If you had disconnected and reconnected any of the interconnect cables
when you replaced the power cables, you might be hearing some
improvement as a result of the "wiping" of oxides off of the plugs and
jacks.

Overall, though, I think "placebo effect" is the most likely suspect.

But here comes the most curious part.. The azur cd player made "tak tak
tak" mechanical noise on some cd's, very AUDIBLE for instance with the
philip glass "koyaanisqatsi" cd, so much that it distracted from the
music on quiter passages. But with the audioquest used as power cord on
the azur even this mechanical noise disappeared!! ... Now asking you
guys (and why not gals?), any educated opinions as to how this is possible??

I've observed the tak-tak effect on one or two other players. It
occured when the player was on a non-flat surface... the flexing of
the chassis due to the player's weight put some twisting stress on the
transport mechanism, and the upper portion of the magnetic clamp which
holds the CD to the drive spindle was scraping against its retainer.
When I moved the CD to a flat-and-level platform, the problem went
away - the clamp "floated" far enough above its retainer that it was
no longer scraping.

I'd guess that your CD player may have a similar issue, and that by
moving it (when you swapped cords) you shifted its position,
levelling, or flexure enough to eliminate the unwanted contact between
some moving and stationary parts.

One last question: taking backup from my old CD's (notibly charlie haden
"ballad of the fallen") I've encountered a very annoying problem that
make these backups practically useless: On continuous pieces with track
numbers changing in the middle my CD player plays the tracks normally,
there is no cut off between tracks, the music does not cut, with the
original. But with the CD-r versions the player cuts the music to give a
two second in-between tracks silence which needles to say divides the
music and spoils the whole experience, the whole concept of the CD. Not
only the azur, but also a very expensice naim cd5 is doing the same
thing with the cd-r? Any ideas as to how I can overcome this problem?
SOme software (better then HP record now) or some special tye of cdr
made for audio specifically??

Better software. You're burning the backup in "track at a time" mode.
You need to rip and burn it in "disc at once" mode.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 17:53:39 +0300, Fella wrote:

Well actulay a freind of mine helped on this. I was away from the
lsitening room and he switched (or not, I didn't know) the audiophile
power cords with the original stock ones. Then I came in and listened
the same samples, blindfolded of course. And every time I knew which
types of cords were being used. We did this some 10 times. Then we got
tired of it.


Well OK. Repeat the test with ferrite rings, or with a simple
capacitor circuit across the power input (can someone point us to a
suitable spec?). Then, if the super-leads really still make a
difference, buy and enjoy.

Fella wrote:
stuff deleted
I am not on a quest. Actualy quite distrubed by this audible difference,
somewhat big difference this power cord makes.

The "difference (a) power cord makes" may be a bit of a red
herring but I always say that if you are skeptical and seem to be
hearing significant differences, then there has to be a reason
whatever it may be. I suspect though that in your case, it may
have nothing to do with "power" but rather with broadband noise
travelling along the power cord and/or its shield.

If what you have discribed is really true (and I have no doubt
that you are relating your personal experience accurately), it
sounds as though you may have a significant ground loop noise
problem. I would presume that the so-called "RF stopper" part of
the power cord is some kind of ferrite core or set of beads.
There is a possibility that simply putting a ferrite clamp on
your original power cord may have resulted in similar effects.

Here is a possible scenario that you may be experiencing. Imagine
a RF loop antenna. It starts in the power supply area of your amp
or ground for the power cord, travels to the wall socket, through
the wall or that same socket to the power cord of another
component (say, your CD player), up the power cord to the
component, through the component's ground to its interconnect
shields, to the preamp's inputs, through the preamp's grounds to
the preamp's output IC shields, and back to the main amp's signal
inputs on the shield.

Noise on the signal shield can transfer in part to the signal
itself. More on this below.

The sensitivity of a loop antenna is directly proportional to the
area inside the loop. If you have 20 foot ICs going to an amp
plugged in on the other side of the room resulting in the power
line leg of the loop returning all the way to the service
entrance and then back on a different line, it is obviously going
to have far more noise levels than if all your components are
plugged into the same outlet using short ICs.

Anyway, somewhere there is a noise source. It may be external to
the loop or it may be internal (CD players are notorious for
emitting all kinds of digital/RF noise both directly to the air
and through their signal grounds), or even due to inter-chassis
potentials. The noise may be getting picked up from the air or is
being inserted directly onto the power ground connection in a
component supply, etc.. In any event, that noise has a complete
loop (i.e., circuit) to follow along the ground loop and is
managing to couple to your signal somewhere along that loop. By
installing the ferrite RF block, you have basically opened that
leg of the loop reducing the noise currents in the signal shields
and grounds of your system.

If the noise was being picked up in the air, the use of
telescoping shields on your ICs or power cords would reduce this
as well. Most commercial power cords are not shielded, and the
ones that are have the shield connected at both ends. Many high
end audio power cords use a telescoping shield that is only
grounded at one end which is likely the case with your new one.
Most low-end ICs do not use telescoping shields so again, noise
picked up on the shield can travel off of both ends of the cable
supporting the loop. You may not have telescoping shields on your
ICs which would exacerbate the problem if the noise source is airborn.

Although in theory, the currents in the shield of a coax due to
noise are kept separate from those due to signal, it can be shown
that it doesn't take a high amount of ground loop current with
even a very low resistance where the RCA plug shell connects to
the component's RCA jack, for minute amounts of the RF noise
current to couple to the signal. Most audio inputs are not going
to be linear up in the MHz region and the potential of
Intermodulation distortion producing minute signal in the audible
region is possible depending on the design of the component
(e.g., 1MHz and 1.001MHz components of an RF hash will produce a
1KHz difference component). Many audio components are not
designed to deal with this since, in theory, "there is no RF
signal there to worry about" (i.e., everything is shielded).

Anyway, the bottom line is that when you add the ferrite in one
leg of the loop, you effectively open the loop and reduce the
noise current.

BTW, this is a systemic thing. It has a lot to do with how all of
your components and accessories work together. The signal
corruption may not be occuring at the amp although that may be
one of the best places to block the RF loop. Also note that even
though that cord improves things, if it were moved to another
system, under certain circumstances it could actually make things
worse since adding inductance to the cord can produce system and
loop resonances. Even though the ferrite is eliminating many RF
frequencies, if it happens to be that a resonance is close to a
noise spectrum that one of your components is suceptable to, you
may actually have the effect of increasing the problem.

Anyway, I,ve seen some good papers showing the math on these
issues (i.e., how a "poor" connection of only fractions of an ohm
can still allow a significant amount of ground loop signal to
couple to the main audio signal in a coax connection, the affects
of ferrite resonances in an audio system power line loop, etc.)
although I don't have any online references. An audiophile friend
of mine who is also a high-speed digital engineer produced the
following report that refers to some of these issues if you are interested:

http://www.soundstage.com/articles/pete01.htm

I have talked to some audiophile cable DIY types that claim that
you can take a standard large guage Belkin shielded cable,
disconnect the shield at one end and add a ferrite clamp and it
can have effects similar (i.e., significant in many cases on high
resolution systems) to some $2K-$3K cables which, to me anyway,
makes a lot of sense.

Changing cables can make a difference on high resolution systems
depending on a lot of items but the biggest effects seem to come
from larger guage cables, shielding (any type although
telescoping is preferred), and RF blocking of some sort. However,
if your cables are already big enough and you don't have ground
loop problems, you may not see much (or any) difference.

Although I may not have described things as accurately as I would
like, I hope this gives you some ideas of what kinds of things
might be contributing to the effects that you are hearing. All of
this is only IMHO of course :-)

- Jeff

"Fella" wrote ...
It is not possible to do a real, valid double-blind a/b (or a/b/x)
test with power cords because of the logistics involved.

Well actulay a freind of mine helped on this.

Double-blind means that neither you nor your friend
know which example you are listening to.

I was away from the
lsitening room and he switched (or not, I didn't know) the audiophile
power cords with the original stock ones. Then I came in and listened
the same samples, blindfolded of course.

If you can't switch back and forth within a few seconds
the ability to compare is very questionable. This is the
kind of protocol (or lack of it) that makes the claims of
the "golden ears" seem so questionable to scientific and
engineering types.

Of course you realize that the equipment that was used to MAKE
those recordings didn't include any power cords that cost more
than $5. Or any "boutique" massive, gold-plated audio inter-
connects either.

Well I know for a fact that studios, etc, use those b&w nautilus
speakers for monitoring, etc, so I wouldn't bet on that.

Exactly the point. The money is spent where it has the most
benefit, on the transducers (microphones and speakers.) NOT
on snake-oil boutique cables, etc.

Hope that doesn't spoil your quest.

I am not on a quest. Actualy quite distrubed by this audible
difference, somewhat big difference this power cord makes.

Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?

Richard Crowley wrote:


Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?


"my kind of beliefs" ?? What's with the hostility?

If you have nothing to say, or if it is so that actualy are not able to
understand what you read, just shut the f. up then.

Jeff Wiseman wrote:


Changing cables can make a difference on high resolution systems
depending on a lot of items but the biggest effects seem to come
from larger guage cables, shielding (any type although
telescoping is preferred), and RF blocking of some sort.

Thank you Jeff. I've read your article (well, why not? and it seems
it will eventually save me all that money. I will respond with more
detail and update later. But for now, thanks again.

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:24:43 +0300, Fella wrote:

But here comes the most curious part.. The azur cd player made "tak tak
tak" mechanical noise on some cd's, very AUDIBLE for instance with the
philip glass "koyaanisqatsi" cd, so much that it distracted from the
music on quiter passages.

My Denon CD player comes up with that noise from time to time too. It
mechanics of that player (CD tray, platter, motors, optics) are made
by Sony and a couple of CD players having other brand names will use
that too. It is a simple mechanical problem that boils down on a
spring that opens the CD clamp when the drawer moves out.
Changing the tension of the clamp is one way to cure the problem.

But with the audioquest used as power cord on
the azur even this mechanical noise disappeared!! ... Now asking you
guys (and why not gals?), any educated opinions as to how this is possible??

What happens when you go back to the old cable?

Norbert

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:24:43 +0300, Fella wrote:

... But with the CD-r versions the player cuts the music to give a
two second in-between tracks silence which needles to say divides the
music and spoils the whole experience, the whole concept of the CD.

That's a problem with the software you used to copy or create the CD.
I use Exact Audio Copy (EAC) for copying a CD and for extracting a CD
to disk, (www.exactaudiocopy.org). It's freeware!

Norbert

Norbert Hahn wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:24:43 +0300, Fella wrote:



What happens when you go back to the old cable?


As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests. My freind
changed the cables 7 times and left the audioquests where they were 3
times. He didin't say anything just started the sample songs with my
que. All other variables were the same (volume, speaker placement, etc).
I was able differentiatewhich cords were being used each time without
*any* hesitation.

It seems I really do have a problem with the mains outlets in my living
room (they do not have ground, for instance). THough they work perfectly
OK for the TV, etc, and they do work for the intial system also.

Jeff Wisemann had some sound ideas and I will be implementing them.

Anyways, the phenomenon is so disturbing that I am seriously considering
selling the "high end" stuff I have (though I like the way sonus fabers
look) altogether and getting some off the shelf sony cd casette recorder
with "detachable" speakers and mp3 compatibility, whatever, and get on
with life.

Amongst others the idea of putting a couple thousand dollars to some
equipment that do not contains proper power cords with the package is
disturbing. That these equipment are so sensitive that changing power
cords alters their performance this much is also unnerving.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:15:44 +0300, Fella wrote:

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests. My freind
changed the cables 7 times and left the audioquests where they were 3
times. He didin't say anything just started the sample songs with my
que. All other variables were the same (volume, speaker placement, etc).
I was able differentiatewhich cords were being used each time without
*any* hesitation.

You obviously have Golden Ears. Have you considered a career writing
for "Hi-Fi News" or whatever the favourite audiophile comic is called?

Fella wrote:

snip
It seems I really do have a problem with the mains outlets in my living
room (they do not have ground, for instance). THough they work perfectly
OK for the TV, etc, and they do work for the intial system also.

snip

That should wave a red flag. Do you have three prong sockets or two
prong? Are your cords three prong or two? If two prong, are they
polarized (one prong large)?

There is the possibility for some really bad ground loops in a worst
case situation with very unpredictable results.

You ought to get the grounding straightened out and then repeat the
listening tests. Could be all power cords will then have the equipment
sounding the same; as they should.

Richard Crowley wrote:
Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?

"Fella" wrote ...
"my kind of beliefs" ?? What's with the hostility?

Not trying to be hostile. Perhaps you didn't notice the
word "tech" in the name of this newsgroup. Just
suggesting that you are more likely to find people who
share your beliefs in botique power cables over in
news:rec.audio.high-end or news:rec.audio.opinion
etc.

Richard Crowley wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:

Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?


"Fella" wrote ...

"my kind of beliefs" ?? What's with the hostility?


Not trying to be hostile. Perhaps you didn't notice the
word "tech" in the name of this newsgroup. Just
suggesting that you are more likely to find people who
share your beliefs in botique power cables over in
news:rec.audio.high-end or news:rec.audio.opinion
etc.



I don't beleive in "botique" power cables. That's exactly why I am here
to ask these questions. Learn to *read* or better just put me on
killfile, OK?

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:24:43 +0300, Fella wrote:


Hi,


My system is as follows:
Densen beat b100 mk5 amp
Cambridge audio azur 640c cd player
Sonus Faber Concerto Grand Piano speaks
QED xtube 300 speaker wire + banana plugs

Anyways, recently a freind of mine was selling a pair of audioquest
power cords (their best) with "rf stoppers".. Being a sceptic of "power
cords" making a difference, etc, I still wanted to try it out so he gave
htem to me for an audition... So I tried them out, thinking what could
it possibley hurt?

I don't if the following effects I've experienced are "placebo" or not:
increase and more control in the bass, sweeter more extended treble,
more discernable and detailed micro dynamics. It was as if it was a REAL
upgrade of some sorts, a new cd player, a better amp ??

It was a pretty good system in the first place, but now the thing sounds
like a $30000 setup!

I am just thinking that "it's just freakin power, how could this be?"

But here comes the most curious part.. The azur cd player made "tak tak
tak" mechanical noise on some cd's, very AUDIBLE for instance with the
philip glass "koyaanisqatsi" cd, so much that it distracted from the
music on quiter passages. But with the audioquest used as power cord on
the azur even this mechanical noise disappeared!! ... Now asking you
guys (and why not gals?), any educated opinions as to how this is possible??

One last question: taking backup from my old CD's (notibly charlie haden
"ballad of the fallen") I've encountered a very annoying problem that
make these backups practically useless: On continuous pieces with track
numbers changing in the middle my CD player plays the tracks normally,
there is no cut off between tracks, the music does not cut, with the
original. But with the CD-r versions the player cuts the music to give a
two second in-between tracks silence which needles to say divides the
music and spoils the whole experience, the whole concept of the CD. Not
only the azur, but also a very expensice naim cd5 is doing the same
thing with the cd-r? Any ideas as to how I can overcome this problem?
SOme software (better then HP record now) or some special tye of cdr
made for audio specifically??

Any help much apreeciated, much obliged, happy listening.

Q1. If you want to test the effect of the RF stoppers on the power
cables, turn the volume up and listen with no music playing. That is
where the difference will lie - anything you hear in the music itself
is you fooling yourself, I'm afraid.

As to the question of the gaps between tracks on your CDR, when you
record a CDR, inter-track gap is one of the parameters you specify -
you must set it to zero, or this is what will happen. I don't know
what software you are using, and whether it offers this facility - if
it doesn't, you must find some that does.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:

Q1. If you want to test the effect of the RF stoppers on the power
cables, turn the volume up and listen with no music playing.


With our without the audiophile cables there is dead, complete silence.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:24:33 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Q1. If you want to test the effect of the RF stoppers on the power
cables, turn the volume up and listen with no music playing.


With our without the audiophile cables there is dead, complete silence.

Then with or without the audiophile cables, you have no problem. So
the choice boils down to the way you see the world. Do you like value
for money, or do you like to gaze fondly at an expensive purchase and
bask?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Fella wrote:
As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up.

I'm sure you verified this with a metrognome. (sic)

Don Pearce wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:24:33 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

Q1. If you want to test the effect of the RF stoppers on the power
cables, turn the volume up and listen with no music playing.


With our without the audiophile cables there is dead, complete silence.

Do you like value
for money, or do you like to gaze fondly at an expensive purchase and
bask?

If I did I wouldn't be asking these questions here. I hear a difference,
though *I do not want* to hear it, even my freind (the one helped me do
the blind tests) which thinks his ghettoblaster is "just fine" says I
have a point.

In anycase, thanks to everyone answering both the questions, both I deem
as having been answered. Thanks for all the help.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 01:15:44 +0300, Fella wrote:

It seems I really do have a problem with the mains outlets in my living
room (they do not have ground, for instance). THough they work perfectly
OK for the TV, etc, and they do work for the intial system also.

Ah. Now, here in the UK we would never DREAM of using a power
connection without a separate ground. In fact, there aren't any :-)

Maybe the US system is different. But maybe it isn't THAT
different. A properly organised grounding system is a
first-resource weapon against the sort of noise that "veils" the
sound.

I wonder how many people who claim results from magic power cables are
plugging into ungrounded power outlets? This is one area where some
simple circuitry might actually make a notable difference.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 12:09:24 +0300, Fella wrote:


I don't beleive in "botique" power cables. That's exactly why I am here
to ask these questions. Learn to *read* or better just put me on
killfile, OK?

It's OK. Mention "magic" audiophile items, some people here just
switch into attack mode. They don't listen long enough to discover
what you're actually SAYING about the gear :-)

Fella wrote in message . ..
As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests.

Really?

So, you should be able to, using a good digital stopwatch with
a 1/100th second resolution, precisely time the length of songs
and show how, with one power cord, a song took, oh, 04:29.67,
and that same song with a different power cord took maybe 04:15.83?

This seems to be a rather extraordinary claim. I am wondering if
you would not mind, in fact, doing these timings and posting the
results for us to see. At the same time, if you would also not mind
listing the specific pieces of music you used to do the timing.

It just so happens that I have several different power cords here
as well, and I am fortunate enough to have been lended a high-priced
audiophile cable to evaluate. I have also done timings of this sort
and have the data in hand and would be happy to present them.

However, since you've already hinted that a power cord can make
a difference in, to use your words, the timing and the beat, I am
more than happy to wait until you post your results, because I
don't want to seem like I'm trying to upstage you with my data
when, certainly, you can provide good timing data of your own that
would support these extraordinary claims. Most assuredly, we can say
with great certainty that if the timing and beat changes, then the
duration MUST change as well. Presenting clear timing differences
like this will certainly lend enormous credence to these claims.

We look forward to your timing measurements. What marvelous times we
live in when just a power cable can change how fast something plays!

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Fella" wrote ...
It is not possible to do a real, valid double-blind a/b (or a/b/x)
test with power cords because of the logistics involved.

Well actulay a freind of mine helped on this.

Double-blind means that neither you nor your friend
know which example you are listening to.


That's true, I believe the OP had performed what would be called
a simple "blind test".


I was away from the
lsitening room and he switched (or not, I didn't know) the audiophile
power cords with the original stock ones. Then I came in and listened
the same samples, blindfolded of course.

If you can't switch back and forth within a few seconds
the ability to compare is very questionable. This is the
kind of protocol (or lack of it) that makes the claims of
the "golden ears" seem so questionable to scientific and
engineering types.


I respectfully disagree. The longer the time between tests with a
100% match rate INCREASES the reliability. You want the high
success rate with as much handicap added as possible. You add the
blindfold as a handicap. You increase the time between tests as a
handicap. For example, if you only sat down for 2 minutes each
day and listened to the system not knowing which item was being
used and could still identify what was being used 100% of the
time, this would be a good indication that there was in fact a
difference and it could be easily heard IMHO.

If one day you were to hook up a set of 3way floor standing
speakers and listen to them blind, and then the next day replace
them with 2inch speakers out of an old transistor radio, most
people would immediately tell the difference. Saying that the
ability to compare the 2 inch speakers with the 3way systems is
"very questionable" because "you couldn't switch back and forth
within a few seconds" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The fact
is that the difference would be so noticable that it didn't
matter how long between tests, you could still tell.


stuff deleted
Hope that doesn't spoil your quest.

I am not on a quest. Actualy quite distrubed by this audible
difference, somewhat big difference this power cord makes.

Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?


The issue of hospitality on this group unfortunately appears to
be a regular issue here :-S however, his choice to come here with
the question would make sense. He has experienced a significant
effect on his system when he changes out a cord. The effect is
stiking enough to him, and so far has been 100% repeatable under
a simple blind test for him where he seems to recognize that
there must be a physical reason for it. Since he himself was
skeptical to start with, he has come to a tech group where other
skeptics would exist in the hopes of finding some physical clues
as to why this "thing" really happens.

Unfortunately, many critics who have never experienced some of
these "effects" and have chosen not to believe that they can
exist in any way, shape, or form, can only surmise that it is all
a phsychologic preconception in the head of the listener--even
when that listener was a skeptic himself to start with! To me,
that seems quite unscientific. With extrememly small and subtle
differences, yes, you need to deal with the phsychoacoustics of
the situation. That just doesn't seem to be the experience of the OP

To imply that the only reason he can correctly guess the cord in
use 100% of the time in a blind test (even if it is not an
ultra-controlled one) is totally due to his "beliefs" or some
phsychological misdirection also doesn't seem to address any of
his experiences very well--at least not as he described them.

The real issue so often doesn't seem to be the OP "beliefs" but
rather others who believe their theory-based knowledge totally
compensates for their lack of experience in a given situation (or
that their given experience can be extrapolated to ALL other
experiences). I have yet to see a skeptic who hasn't had a major
change in attitude when sat down in front of a significantly high
resolving and well balanced audio system and given the
opportunity to experience comparing different components that
"shouldn't" affect the sound.

Also, there is a lot of "snake-oil" components in the industry
and many charlitans. This ticks off a lot of people
understandibly and I expect that is what may drive some of the
hostility when certain "magic" components are discussed. But when
a person with an $80K system decides to add a $3K power cord,
just because someone thinks that it is a total extravegance and
waste of money does NOT mean that cord won't enhance or change
the sound of that system in a desirable way. It can (and does) in
many cases make a difference.

The original poster's belief has nothing to do with the original
questions. He came to this forum to find some clues as to why he
got a particular effect on his system. A lot of what he is being
told is, in so many words, "you imagined it". From my personal
experience with high-end systems, I doubt that very much.

- Jeff

Fella wrote:

Norbert Hahn wrote:

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 11:24:43 +0300, Fella wrote:

What happens when you go back to the old cable?

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests. My freind
changed the cables 7 times and left the audioquests where they were 3
times. He didin't say anything just started the sample songs with my
que. All other variables were the same (volume, speaker placement, etc).
I was able differentiatewhich cords were being used each time without
*any* hesitation.


As has been asked already, have you actually measured the timing
issues? Timing is something that is easy to mistake without some
kind of reference to measure from.

There seems to be a bunch of possible noise sensitive attributes
of your CD player. Borrow a different type from someone else and
try it in your system. See if you get similar results. A flakey
supply might be exacerbating other issues. Just a guess though.


It seems I really do have a problem with the mains outlets in my living
room (they do not have ground, for instance). THough they work perfectly
OK for the TV, etc, and they do work for the intial system also.


This does lend some fuel to the ground loop theories.


Anyways, the phenomenon is so disturbing that I am seriously considering
selling the "high end" stuff I have (though I like the way sonus fabers
look) altogether and getting some off the shelf sony cd casette recorder
with "detachable" speakers and mp3 compatibility, whatever, and get on
with life.


The sonus fabers, in a way, may be part of your "problem" as they
are excellant (and fairly revealing) speakers. If you had far
lesser speakers, you might not be hearing the audible
differences. But if you like their sound, giving them up would be
a shame. If you can live with the sound of MP3 though, that could
same you some grief (and a lot of $$ too)


Amongst others the idea of putting a couple thousand dollars to some
equipment that do not contains proper power cords with the package is
disturbing. That these equipment are so sensitive that changing power
cords alters their performance this much is also unnerving.


Remember, if it is a noise loop problem (possibly RF in nature),
it's not so much changing the cord as adding some RF protection.
How many components come with surge supressors built in? A lot of
audio stuff isn't set up to handle large amounts of ground loop noise.

- Jeff

Jeff Wiseman wrote:


Richard Crowley wrote:

"Fella" wrote ...
It is not possible to do a real, valid double-blind a/b (or a/b/x)
test with power cords because of the logistics involved.

Well actulay a freind of mine helped on this.

Double-blind means that neither you nor your friend
know which example you are listening to.


That's true, I believe the OP had performed what would be called
a simple "blind test".


It is possible to do a real, valid DBT with power cords.


I was away from the
lsitening room and he switched (or not, I didn't know) the audiophile
power cords with the original stock ones. Then I came in and listened
the same samples, blindfolded of course.

If you can't switch back and forth within a few seconds
the ability to compare is very questionable. This is the
kind of protocol (or lack of it) that makes the claims of
the "golden ears" seem so questionable to scientific and
engineering types.


I respectfully disagree. The longer the time between tests with a
100% match rate INCREASES the reliability. You want the high
success rate with as much handicap added as possible. You add the
blindfold as a handicap. You increase the time between tests as a
handicap. For example, if you only sat down for 2 minutes each
day and listened to the system not knowing which item was being
used and could still identify what was being used 100% of the
time, this would be a good indication that there was in fact a
difference and it could be easily heard IMHO.

If one day you were to hook up a set of 3way floor standing
speakers and listen to them blind, and then the next day replace
them with 2inch speakers out of an old transistor radio, most
people would immediately tell the difference. Saying that the
ability to compare the 2 inch speakers with the 3way systems is
"very questionable" because "you couldn't switch back and forth
within a few seconds" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The fact
is that the difference would be so noticable that it didn't
matter how long between tests, you could still tell.

'Quick switching' means that the time it takes to do the switch
from A to B, is very short. It does not refer to the amount of time one
listens to A or B. Quick switching has been shown to be a more
sensitive means for detecting subtle differences, as it maximizes
the power of audio memory. Similarly, short listening times,
using the same material for A and B, are usually used in
studies of audio perception. But there is no 'rule' that
says you can't use a listening session (A) that is hours or days long,
before switching to the second listening session (B). Nor does the
switching have to be quick.

Speakers can be expected to sound different; blind comparison is
used by Harman-Kardon/JBL in speaker development, to
sidestep the effects of appearance and foreknowledge on perception of
*quality* as well as difference. H-K has a rather elaborate
facility for doing such comparisons, involving relatively
'quick' switching, where speakers meachanically swapped into
the listening positoin.



stuff deleted
Hope that doesn't spoil your quest.

I am not on a quest. Actualy quite distrubed by this audible
difference, somewhat big difference this power cord makes.

Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?


The issue of hospitality on this group unfortunately appears to
be a regular issue here :-S however, his choice to come here with
the question would make sense. He has experienced a significant
effect on his system when he changes out a cord. The effect is
stiking enough to him, and so far has been 100% repeatable under
a simple blind test for him where he seems to recognize that
there must be a physical reason for it. Since he himself was
skeptical to start with, he has come to a tech group where other
skeptics would exist in the hopes of finding some physical clues
as to why this "thing" really happens.

INdeed, and if he is skeptical, he will remain skeptical that a 'simple
blind test' is sufficient to settle the matter. 100% repeatable
ID could be a real, obvious difference -- or it could be a real bias.
Both could easily render 100% repeatability.

Two avenues of further investigation would be

1) make the test more stringent (double blind)
2) measure the characterstics of the cords. A real, obvious
difference should have a real, obvious measurable effect. It's not
rocket science, it's a power cord.


Unfortunately, many critics who have never experienced some of
these "effects" and have chosen not to believe that they can
exist in any way, shape, or form, can only surmise that it is all
a phsychologic preconception in the head of the listener--even
when that listener was a skeptic himself to start with! To me,
that seems quite unscientific.

If so, then you don't understand the nature of perceptual biases.
THey need not be conscious, and usually aren't.

With extrememly small and subtle
differences, yes, you need to deal with the phsychoacoustics of
the situation. That just doesn't seem to be the experience of the OP


Competent power cords are not expected from basic acoustic/electical
principles to sound different; speakers are.



To imply that the only reason he can correctly guess the cord in
use 100% of the time in a blind test (even if it is not an
ultra-controlled one) is totally due to his "beliefs" or some
phsychological misdirection also doesn't seem to address any of
his experiences very well--at least not as he described them.

To imply that that's the *only* reason is incorrect; to imply
that it is a reason that hasn't yet been adequately ruled out,
is correct.


As for the rest, the vast majority of audiophile forums,
led by the mainstream high-end press, are *hostile* to
the idea of controlled comparison...they consider a protocol
which has been scientifically vetted for decades in the field
of psychoacoustics, to be *suspect*.




--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth

Richard Crowley wrote:
Richard Crowley wrote:
Are you aware that there are other forums (newsgroups,
mailing-lists, blogs, etc.) where people with your kind of
beliefs find it more hospitable?

"Fella" wrote ...
"my kind of beliefs" ?? What's with the hostility?

Not trying to be hostile. Perhaps you didn't notice the
word "tech" in the name of this newsgroup. Just
suggesting that you are more likely to find people who
share your beliefs in botique power cables over in
news:rec.audio.high-end

I can assure you that such beleifs would not go unchallenged
on rec.audio.high-end, which hosts a vigorous skeptical
subcommmunity.

or news:rec.audio.opinion

A completely different kettle of kooks from r.a.h-e ;




--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth

Fella wrote:

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up.

I need to slow down some banjo pieces so I can transcribe them. What
power cord would result in a 50% speed decrease?

- Village Idiot

wrote:

Fella wrote:

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up.

I need to slow down some banjo pieces so I can transcribe them. What
power cord would result in a 50% speed decrease?

- Village Idiot

This is one of the most common questions we get at the Electrical Institution.
It's in the Electrical Institution FAQ (http://powertothepeople.com/FAQ), but
I'll repeat it he

Q10.15: Why do I need two wires to only carry one voltage?

A10.15: You don't - each wire only carries 1/2 the required voltage. That way,
we at the electric company can sell you twice the wire you'd need if it all came
thru one bigger wire.

Just use one of the two wires in the power cord (that go to the flat blade
thingies). Leave the one going to the round thingy alone, since it's a ground
wire for your safety and protection. Only the two wires going to the flat blades
carry the electricity - all 120 volts of it.

If you only use one wire instead of two, simple math says you will only get half
the electricity, therby decreasing the speed of the music. Make sure you
disconnect the wire from the wall socket BEFORE attempting this modification.

If the wire only has two flat blades of equal size, it's called a balanced
system, and either blade may be safely cut, which will indeed result in a
noticable difference to your sound, improving much of the music being offered
these days.

If one blade is noticably bigger than the other, it's an unbalanced system; the
big blade puts out 70 volts and the little blade puts out 50 volts, so you'll
hafta retune your banjo. Most hardware stores sell a little balanced to
unbalanced orange or gray converter for about 79 cents. The Audioquest version
is black and sells for $899 and is a much better value than the cheapie 79 cent
unit.

(I tried to be the Village Idiot, but the test was too hard.)









Finally, before you all jump my ass, this is supposed to humor. If you took me
seriously, you have no business being around electricity of any type. The only
thing that wasn't nonsense was about not cutting the wire going to the round
thingy; that was serious.

Harvey Gerst
Indian Trail Recording Studio
http://www.ITRstudio.com/

"Jeff Wiseman" wrote ...
The issue of hospitality on this group unfortunately appears to
be a regular issue here :-S however, his choice to come here with
the question would make sense. He has experienced a significant
effect on his system when he changes out a cord.

Unless you believe his posting from this morning in r.a.p where
he appears to reveal himself as a troll by saying "Naa, I was just
kidding you guys...."

Richard Crowley wrote:
"Jeff Wiseman" wrote ...

The issue of hospitality on this group unfortunately appears to
be a regular issue here :-S however, his choice to come here with
the question would make sense. He has experienced a significant
effect on his system when he changes out a cord.


Unless you believe his posting from this morning in r.a.p where
he appears to reveal himself as a troll by saying "Naa, I was just
kidding you guys...."



What is with this animosity!!?? You *deliberately* quote me out of
context! You know for sure that that reply was directed towards people
actually making fun of the high-end music setup I had listed. You must
know that since you've read my reply to the two clowns, you must know
what those clowns wrote.

WHY!!!!!!!??????? are you bent on turning this into a flame war?? What a
disgusting, small-soul little fart extension you turned out to be! BE
GONE!! you vile cockroach!

IN ANY CASE! I got my answer from Jeff. I am in the process of
implementing a grounded extension (from the kitchen) to the living room
exclusively for the stereo system. I thanked Jeff. THAT'S IT! I am gone.
NEVER will I ask anything here again. But if you keep up with this foul
play I will beat you senseless with a crazy stick.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 17:41:14 GMT, Jeff Wiseman
wrote:

I respectfully disagree. The longer the time between tests with a
100% match rate INCREASES the reliability. You want the high
success rate with as much handicap added as possible. You add the
blindfold as a handicap. You increase the time between tests as a
handicap. For example, if you only sat down for 2 minutes each
day and listened to the system not knowing which item was being
used and could still identify what was being used 100% of the
time, this would be a good indication that there was in fact a
difference and it could be easily heard IMHO.

You have misunderstood the function of double blind testing. A
properly run double blind test is set up to make hearing a difference
as *easy* as possible. If that means rapid switching, then so be it.
If you deliberately introduce impediments like delays, then you can't
be sure if a null result is real, or due to interfering factors. Your
reference to a blindfold above is *not* the same handicap as
increasing the time between tests.

All you are trying to prevent in a double blind test is sighted bias,
either from the subject or the proctor.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Dick Pierce wrote:
Fella wrote in message . ..

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests.


Really?


We look forward to your timing measurements. What marvelous times we
live in when just a power cable can change how fast something plays!

Before bidding a fond farewell to you cross bunch of know-it-all
electrical prodigy einstein wannabees (whatever) this "beat" and
"timing" issue which you obvioulsy gladly misunderstood, and stretched
to the opposite end with stopwatches, etc, is ... or *was* about wow &
flutter per se (I guess) and not about actual duration of any of the
songs on CD. The "timing" the inner timing, of the songs became right,
(werre not right) as it were.

Reading the words "wow % flutter" on CD I know some of you out there
will be very very angry indeed and deem me a troll again, but I just
wanted to perhaps say my say on this point (as I see some smart
ass(hole) replies out there asking "what kind of a power cord I need to
use to make a song %50 slower" gobbledygook) and clarify it for those
who *might* be inclined to treat it as some communique to understand and
not something to go all haywire and VERY VERY ANGRY about.

In anycase, I am happy to report that a heavy-duty, well shielded and
*grounded* extension cord strecthed in from a grounded outlet in kitchen
has made all the difference. I know the audiophile cord was not
mysteriously adding grounding to the equation but it no longer has an
audible effect on the system.

And yes, the system sounds sweet, it sounds good, it sounds detailed,
and precise and involving and musical. So there.

PS: I will try so that this is my last message here but any intentional
provocations, misrepresentations, below-the-belt demogogy might get me
reactional enough to trigger a response.

I'd much rather end this thread here and thank those who helped out on
the issue.

"Jeff Wiseman" wrote in message


That's true, I believe the OP had performed what would be called
a simple "blind test".

Agreed. Therefore the so-called test was critically flawed and its results
are irrelevant to a discussion of improvements in sound quality.

Richard Crowley wrote:

If you can't switch back and forth within a few seconds
the ability to compare is very questionable. This is the
kind of protocol (or lack of it) that makes the claims of
the "golden ears" seem so questionable to scientific and
engineering types.

Agreed. It is well known that amazingly-large differences can go undetected
when the time between presentation of alternatives is more than a few
seconds.

I respectfully disagree.

The following pargraph is just a straw man argument, and shows zero respect
for anybody's viewpoint:

If one day you were to hook up a set of 3way floor standing
speakers and listen to them blind, and then the next day replace
them with 2inch speakers out of an old transistor radio, most
people would immediately tell the difference. Saying that the
ability to compare the 2 inch speakers with the 3way systems is
"very questionable" because "you couldn't switch back and forth
within a few seconds" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The fact
is that the difference would be so noticable that it didn't
matter how long between tests, you could still tell.

Please let me *respectfully* point out that this thread started out as
discussion of power cords, not transistor radio speakers versus good speaker
systems.

The longer the time between tests with a
100% match rate INCREASES the reliability.

Say what?

You want the high success rate with as much handicap added as possible.

I think that first we'd like to see *any* success rate at all, in a power
cord comparison.

You add the blindfold as a handicap.

What blindfold?

You increase the time between tests as a handicap.

Since when are we trying to get a negative result by bogus means?

For example, if you only sat down for 2 minutes each
day and listened to the system not knowing which item was being
used and could still identify what was being used 100% of the
time, this would be a good indication that there was in fact a
difference and it could be easily heard IMHO.

But that's irrelevant to the problem at hand. The discussion at hand is
about power cords, and it is well known that if you do a proper listening
test, power cords comparisions yield negative results.

The issue of hospitality on this group unfortunately appears to
be a regular issue here

That might be because some people have an odd idea of hospitality. They
equate hospitality with going out of your way to convince someone of a false
fact.

:-S however, his choice to come here with
the question would make sense. He has experienced a significant
effect on his system when he changes out a cord.

Wrong. He did a bogus listening test and is no doubt deceiving himself as a
result.

The effect is
stiking enough to him, and so far has been 100% repeatable under
a simple blind test for him where he seems to recognize that
there must be a physical reason for it.

But, as a rule, single blind tests aren't blind tests at all. They have a
built-in defect.

Since he himself was
skeptical to start with, he has come to a tech group where other
skeptics would exist in the hopes of finding some physical clues
as to why this "thing" really happens.

The most likely explanation has been given. He did not do a proper listening
test.

Unfortunately, many critics who have never experienced some of
these "effects" and have chosen not to believe that they can
exist in any way, shape, or form, can only surmise that it is all
a phsychologic preconception in the head of the listener--even
when that listener was a skeptic himself to start with!

One major reason why many critics have not heard these effects is that they
did proper listening tests. Remember, the OP was talking about power cords,
not comparing transistor radio speakers to proper high fidelity speakers.

To me, that seems quite unscientific.

To me, equating a comparison of power cords to a comparison of transistor
radio speakers to proper high fidelity speakers is worse than unscientific -
it's just a word game that wastes our time and efforts.

With extrememly small and subtle
differences, yes, you need to deal with the psychoacoustics of
the situation.

We're not really talking about psychoacoustics here, we're talking about
experimental design. Therefore, introduction of a widely-divergent topic
such as psychoacoustics would appear to be a red herring.

That just doesn't seem to be the experience of the OP

The experience of the OP was based on a grossly flawed listening test. 'Nuff
said.

To imply that the only reason he can correctly guess the cord in
use 100% of the time in a blind test (even if it is not an
ultra-controlled one) is totally due to his "beliefs" or some
phsychological misdirection also doesn't seem to address any of
his experiences very well--at least not as he described them.

Wrong. The OP did not have the reliable experience that he seems to have
thought he did, because he did an inherently-flawed listening test.

The real issue so often doesn't seem to be the OP "beliefs" but
rather others who believe their theory-based knowledge totally
compensates for their lack of experience in a given situation (or
that their given experience can be extrapolated to ALL other
experiences).

I've done so-called listening tests that produced positive outcomes that
disagreed with established audio theories as I understood them at the time.
Then I realized that the listening test in question was not a proper
listening test. When I repeated the exprience under proper, relevant test
conditions the outcome changed dramatically. When I improved my
understanding of audio theory by independent means, the theory and my
observations agreed.

I have yet to see a skeptic who hasn't had a major
change in attitude when sat down in front of a significantly high
resolving and well balanced audio system and given the
opportunity to experience comparing different components that
"shouldn't" affect the sound.

You've obviously been dealing with the wrong people.

Also, there is a lot of "snake-oil" components in the industry
and many charlitans. This ticks off a lot of people
understandibly and I expect that is what may drive some of the
hostility when certain "magic" components are discussed. But when
a person with an $80K system decides to add a $3K power cord,
just because someone thinks that it is a total extravegance and
waste of money does NOT mean that cord won't enhance or change
the sound of that system in a desirable way.

Now that's true. What is relevant is the fact that power cords are rarely a
source of audible problems in audio systems.

It can (and does) in many cases make a difference.

Not at all. In a few rare circumstances it might make a difference. However,
in those cases there can be serious questions about system design and setup.

The original poster's belief has nothing to do with the original
questions.

Sure it does. It biased him towards perceiving a postive outcome in a
defective listening test. The nature of the listening test defect is that it
is prone to be affected by the beliefs of the people performing it.

He came to this forum to find some clues as to why he
got a particular effect on his system.

The most likely reason is the obvious defect in the so-called listening
test.

A lot of what he is being told is, in so many words, "you imagined it".

No, its more like "you did a listening test that is prone to tell you that
your pre-existing beliefs are correct".

From my personal experience with high-end systems, I doubt that very much.

Jeff, you've already admitted to your lack of experience to high end systems
doing proper listening tests, so your experience is irrelevant to a
discussion of sound quality.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 15:49:36 +0300, Fella wrote:

Dick Pierce wrote:
Fella wrote in message . ..

As curious as it may seem, the problem reappears. The timing of the
songs change also from cable to cable, the beat changes, with the
audioquest some songs slow down, others fasten up. This was one of the
contributing reasons why I was able to discern with 100 certainty
everytime which cable was being used in the blind tests.


Really?


We look forward to your timing measurements. What marvelous times we
live in when just a power cable can change how fast something plays!

Before bidding a fond farewell to you cross bunch of know-it-all
electrical prodigy einstein wannabees (whatever) this "beat" and
"timing" issue which you obvioulsy gladly misunderstood, and stretched
to the opposite end with stopwatches, etc, is ... or *was* about wow &
flutter per se (I guess) and not about actual duration of any of the
songs on CD. The "timing" the inner timing, of the songs became right,
(werre not right) as it were.

Reading the words "wow % flutter" on CD I know some of you out there
will be very very angry indeed and deem me a troll again, but I just
wanted to perhaps say my say on this point (as I see some smart
ass(hole) replies out there asking "what kind of a power cord I need to
use to make a song %50 slower" gobbledygook) and clarify it for those
who *might* be inclined to treat it as some communique to understand and
not something to go all haywire and VERY VERY ANGRY about.

In anycase, I am happy to report that a heavy-duty, well shielded and
*grounded* extension cord strecthed in from a grounded outlet in kitchen
has made all the difference. I know the audiophile cord was not
mysteriously adding grounding to the equation but it no longer has an
audible effect on the system.

And yes, the system sounds sweet, it sounds good, it sounds detailed,
and precise and involving and musical. So there.

PS: I will try so that this is my last message here but any intentional
provocations, misrepresentations, below-the-belt demogogy might get me
reactional enough to trigger a response.

I'd much rather end this thread here and thank those who helped out on
the issue.

I think it would probably better for your self esteem, and everybody
else's aching ribs if you steered clear of ec.audio.tech. This is
clearly a forum in which you are way out of your depth, and no amount
of angry yelling at everybody else who can swim is going to help you.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Don Pearce wrote:


I think it would probably better...if you steered clear of ec.audio.tech.


Wow! We agree on something.


This is
clearly a forum in which you are way out of your depth,

Well obviously I am not an electrical engineer and that was the *reason*
in the first place why I came to ask these questions. Being a cross
bunch of insincere never-will-be's *of course* my sincerity was
questioned and agnry retaliations, ridicule, whatever was spewn forth.

In matters of "self esteem" I suggest that you guys take a long hard
look in the mirror before tending to your ribs, since I somehow sense an
unhealthy amount of "envy" (more or less) behind the ridicule and anger
that my "trolling" provoked.

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 16:32:23 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:


I think it would probably better...if you steered clear of ec.audio.tech.


Wow! We agree on something.


This is
clearly a forum in which you are way out of your depth,

Well obviously I am not an electrical engineer and that was the *reason*
in the first place why I came to ask these questions. Being a cross
bunch of insincere never-will-be's *of course* my sincerity was
questioned and agnry retaliations, ridicule, whatever was spewn forth.

In matters of "self esteem" I suggest that you guys take a long hard
look in the mirror before tending to your ribs, since I somehow sense an
unhealthy amount of "envy" (more or less) behind the ridicule and anger
that my "trolling" provoked.

No, I don't think so. The point is that it should have been clear to
you within a very few posts that you wee suggesting things that were
patently ridiculous. At that point, a sensible person would have
stepped back and gone to do some homework. Instead you persisted and
peopled got ****ed off with you. Quite some time ago I gave you a
sensible answer to your power cord question, and suggested a test that
would establish whether it made things better. You did it (well done)
and reported back that there was no difference with or without the AQ
power cord. This was as everybody here would have predicted. But you
couldn't let it go at that and persisted with semi-mystical claims of
effects that could never be attributable to the cord and were clearly
a figment of your imagination; and I'm not being insulting - I
guarantee that everybody here has fallen victim to this at some time
or other. It is just that as your technical knowledge grows, you
understand better what can cause which effect and you know when to
doubt your sensual interpretations.

So consider this a lesson learned - boutique power cords do nothing.
Everybody here knows they do nothing. Everybody who makes them knows
they do nothing. We here get annoyed with the vendors of such things,
and we get annoyed with the victims of such vendors when they appear
here extolling the virtues of these cords. When you persist in the
face of the evidence, and assurances of the experts here (and there
are a few) then yes, you can expect ultimately to have ridicule heaped
on you. There are two ways you can deal with it. Unfortunately you
appear to be adopting plan B.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com