Re: Subtleties

In article <ldhke1p3osatpa00gnshtconuffi3r2gsr@xxxxxxx>,
Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 20:01:33 GMT, George Graves
> <gmgravesnos@xxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
>
> >In article <isaie1p252h2ql22rohd5ju03lvi8hqn1g@xxxxxxx>,
> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:45:52 GMT, George Graves
> >> <gmgravesnos@xxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >>
> >> >In article <gi0he1dk092oe13h9r0eul5601giaknntn@xxxxxxx>,
> >> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 04:51:31 GMT, George Graves
> >> >> <gmgravesnos@xxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >> >>
> >> >> >In article <g09ge152rf01kiqf2bm6ogfudir8m06er1@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 00:04:43 GMT, George Graves
> >> >> >> <gmgravesnos@xxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the following
> >> >> >> wisdom:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >In article <ap4ge19oede3p9t1lgpege6m5hp9hfk46t@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> >> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:54:50 -0600, Steve Carroll
> >> >> >> >> <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> >> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >In article <db3ge1hk5isfq25gqf1c8nc6orj30v6ejd@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> >> >> > Josh McKee <jtmckee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:21:51 GMT, Mayor of R'lyeh
> >> >> >> >> >> <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:12:18 GMT, George Graves
> >> >> >> >> >> ><gmgravesnos@xxxxxxxxxxx> chose to bless us with the
> >> >> >> >> >> >following
> >> >> >> >> >> >wisdom:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>In article <kkree1lv3k5kf46rrj9bj3bpvuocosla3e@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:18:18 -0500, Travelinman
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >In article <9m6ee1dhkqfdd896nhv3akd6hs5g8en52b@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:10:47 -0500, Travelinman
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> chose to bless us with the following wisdom:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >In article
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> ><hefde19eor6eal844eq8bo09ve4sp679bn@xxxxxxx>,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> > Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.of.rlyeh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Unless they say them and it suits their agenda,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> it.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> I still chuckle over all the times I was told
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> that I
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> should
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> know
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> my
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> choices were bad ones because if they were good
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> ones
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> they'd
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cost
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> more
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> but price has nothing to do with it.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >Other than, of course, the fact that you're
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >pretending
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >that
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >people
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >said
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >things that they never really said.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> That was a frequent theme of posts whether you want
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> to
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> admit
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> or
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> not.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >Then you should be able to prove it.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> Anyone can look up your posts if they're curious.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >Then you should be able to prove it.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I don't need to prove it. I was there. I saw it with my
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> own
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> two
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> 'widdle' eyes.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> You'll either deny it or scream 'out of context' no matter
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> what
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> post
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> so there's no point in working out Google's HW.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Feel free to pretend this means that you and George didn't
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> say
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> what
> >> >> >> >> >> >>> you plainly said if that makes you feel better.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >>Mayor, if you don't know that quality products cost more
> >> >> >> >> >> >>than
> >> >> >> >> >> >>cheap
> >> >> >> >> >> >>products because they use better (more expensive) raw
> >> >> >> >> >> >>materials/ingredients and require more (expensive)
> >> >> >> >> >> >>craftsmanship
> >> >> >> >> >> >>to
> >> >> >> >> >> >>make, then you are even dumber than I think you are.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>Compare,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>for
> >> >> >> >> >> >>instance, a chest of drawers from Ikea against one from
> >> >> >> >> >> >>Hooker
> >> >> >> >> >> >>of
> >> >> >> >> >> >>Martinsville. The Ikea chest is made from cheap plywood and
> >> >> >> >> >> >>pressed-board stapled together by machine and if it's
> >> >> >> >> >> >>finished
> >> >> >> >> >> >>at
> >> >> >> >> >> >>all,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>it has wood-grained vinyl cladding. The Hooker piece OTOH,
> >> >> >> >> >> >>is
> >> >> >> >> >> >>made
> >> >> >> >> >> >>from
> >> >> >> >> >> >>solid hardwoods, with dovetailed drawers, mortise-and-tenon
> >> >> >> >> >> >>joints
> >> >> >> >> >> >>and
> >> >> >> >> >> >>fine, hand-rubbed finishes. The Hooker piece is QUALITY and
> >> >> >> >> >> >>probably
> >> >> >> >> >> >>costs 50 times what the Ikea unit costs. But you still
> >> >> >> >> >> >>insist
> >> >> >> >> >> >>that
> >> >> >> >> >> >>there's no relationship between cost and quality and you've
> >> >> >> >> >> >>got
> >> >> >> >> >> >>rocks
> >> >> >> >> >> >>in
> >> >> >> >> >> >>your head.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >Here's your problem, George. Before we were talking about
> >> >> >> >> >> >something
> >> >> >> >> >> >wholly subjective, specificly the taste of beers. You can
> >> >> >> >> >> >make a
> >> >> >> >> >> >beer
> >> >> >> >> >> >out of the cheapest ingredients and still end up with
> >> >> >> >> >> >something
> >> >> >> >> >> >some
> >> >> >> >> >> >people prefer. When it comes to what tastes a person likes
> >> >> >> >> >> >there
> >> >> >> >> >> >simply is no right or wrong no matter how much you and Joe
> >> >> >> >> >> >insist
> >> >> >> >> >> >otherwise.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Already been through this with George with respect to whether
> >> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> >> CD
> >> >> >> >> >> sounds better than an LP. He didn't understand preference
> >> >> >> >> >> then. I
> >> >> >> >> >> doubt he'll understand it now.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Josh
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >You are under the mistaken impression that there are no ways to
> >> >> >> >> >objectively measure what's missing from one to the other...
> >> >> >> >> >things
> >> >> >> >> >that
> >> >> >> >> >might tend to cause listeners to like one over another. Quite a
> >> >> >> >> >bit
> >> >> >> >> >of
> >> >> >> >> >a
> >> >> >> >> >difference between this and tasting beers. How do you
> >> >> >> >> >objectively
> >> >> >> >> >measure taste?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> With the audio snobs its not so much about preferences as it is
> >> >> >> >> about
> >> >> >> >> their snotty attitudes that they can't back up. Despite all of
> >> >> >> >> their
> >> >> >> >> overblown rhetoric about how 'superior' LPs sound I never found
> >> >> >> >> one
> >> >> >> >> who could consistently tell me whether he was listening to a CD
> >> >> >> >> or
> >> >> >> >> an
> >> >> >> >> LP.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I can, and have, and I have witnesses who are well known and
> >> >> >> >unimpeachable sources to back me up. And whether you believe that
> >> >> >> >or
> >> >> >> >not
> >> >> >> >doesn't alter the fact of it one bit.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Whatever, George. Your 'experiences' contradict everyone else's but
> >> >> >> it
> >> >> >> must be all of us who out of step. 8)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You mean they contradict everyone else's as far as you know. But as
> >> >> >with
> >> >> >many things, Mayor we know that "as far as you know" means so goddamn
> >> >> >little.
> >> >>
> >> >> Its far from just me. Plenty of people have done these tests. But you
> >> >> go ahead and keep screaming 'I know what I hear!' and pretend that
> >> >> everyone else is lying.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Are you one of those guys who insist that huge, expensive speaker
> >> >> >> cables are better than lamp cord and that you need to run your
> >> >> >> stereo
> >> >> >> for an hour or so before you do any 'serious' so the speaker cables
> >> >> >> can warm up? 8)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Larger wire has less electrical resistance which can alter dampening
> >> >> >factor. Some speaker/amp combos are very sensitive to this, others
> >> >> >could
> >> >> >care less. But even so, I'm sure that you wouldn't know one way of the
> >> >> >other.
> >> >>
> >> >> There have been reams written on the Golden Ear crowd's laws of
> >> >> physics defying claims for their favorite overpriced speaker wire.
> >> >> Suffice it to say no one has ever been able to show that the signal
> >> >> varies one iota coming down the $200/ft compared the $0.12/ft lamp
> >> >> cord. But you keep on Believing, Brother! 8)
> >> >
> >> >You are a complete idiot.
> >>
> >> No I live in the real world. All of that stuff you were talking about
> >> is perfectly handled by lamp cord at the levels a stereo amp puts out.
> >
> >Just to show you how little you understand what you are talking about,
> >I'm going to attempt to educate you. Not to better you, understand, that
> >can't be done, but to make you look like the clueless nincompoop that
> >you are.
> >
> >16 Gauge (AWG) lamp cord has about 0.1 Ohm/ft resistance. On a 10 ft
> >run, that's 2 ohms (1 ohm going the 10ft out to the speaker from the
> >amplifier, and 1 ohm coming back the 10 ft from the speaker back to the
> >amplifier). The speakers, looking back into the amplifier, wants to see,
> >current wise, the dead short that's provided by an amplifier's output
> >stage. This is because a shorted speaker has enough back-EMF to act as
> >dynamic braking on the moving parts of the speaker to stop them from
> >moving when the signal stops. After all, a speaker has mass and
> >therefore will follow Newton's third law of motion which states that any
> >mass in motion will tend to remain in motion until acted upon by an
> >outside force. A short across the speaker's voice coil will create a
> >dynamic brake which will stop the cone (or diaphragm) from, moving. This
> >is a good thing. Overhang blurs the waveform and is a type of
> >distortion. Now, since the speaker wants to look into a dead short in
> >the absence of a driving signal or at zero crossing (whichever is
> >occurring) The more resistance the speaker cable has, the less of a
> >short the speaker is going to see. So it's advantageous to use speaker
> >cable with less resistance/foot. My Monster Cable M1, for instance, has
> >0.02 ohms/ft which is less than 1/4 that of lamp cord. That means a 10
> >ft run adds only 0.4 ohms to the impedance (ignoring for a moment the
> >capacitive and inductive reactances seen) to the short circuit that is
> >the output stage of the amplifier under a zero signal condition. This
> >will control the speaker's cone better and improve transient response.
> >Like I said in another post, some speakers are VERY sensitive to this,
> >and in others (such as electrostatic designs) it's of no real
> >consequence at all but there are other things at work such as
> >capacitance and inductance which affect an AC signal (which audio is),
> >but I'm ignoring those for the purpose of this discussion. After all, my
> >purpose is to show that you're an ignoramus, not to educate you.
>
> Thius concudeth the Reading from the Holy Book by Brother Boy George
> The Bay Area ***.
> Here's the thing, no one has ever found under any circumstances a
> difference between lamp cord and the expensive speaker wire. You can
> stomp your heels and read make up all the techynical reasons you want
> but in real world testing no difference shows up. None. Zip. Nada.
> Here's an article that explains it nicely.
> http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
>
> "In the early 1980's, special speaker wires were beginning to appear
> on the market. Some of the claims were totally unbelievable and had
> prices to match. Realizing that wire resistance was the critical
> factor in speaker wire, Gordon Gow, President of McIntosh Laboratory,
> used a speaker cable demonstration to show there was no listening
> difference between these wires and plain line cord."
>
> And typical of the 'experts' who make these stupid claims:
> " Several offers have been made for anyone who can correctly identify
> a particular kind of wire under controlled conditions. Challenges
> offering $15,000 or more have not even been tried by these
> "experts,"..."
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/12/circuits/articles/23down.html
>
> "The disagreement would be unnotable except for one thing: experts are
> in agreement that most cables that claim to improve the sound of audio
> equipment don't. Even cables costing thousands of dollars per foot are
> often little more than sonic snake oil, experts say."
>
> " Mr. Dunlavy has often gathered audio critics in his Colorado Springs
> lab for a demonstration.
>
> "What we do is kind of dirty and stinky," he said. "We say we are
> starting with a 12 WAG zip cord, and we position a technician behind
> each speaker to change the cables out."
>
> The technicians hold up fancy-looking cables before they disappear
> behind the speakers. The critics debate the sound characteristics of
> each wire.
>
> "They describe huge changes and they say, 'Oh my God, John, tell me
> you can hear that difference,'" Mr. Dunlavy said. The trick is the
> technicians never actually change the cables, he said, adding, "It's
> the placebo effect."
>
> LOL! This is exactly the kind of thing to the 'Golden Ear' crowd with
> my CD vs LP tests. It was hard to keep a straight face while they were
> going on how much better the LP sounded than the CD when what I had
> actually done was to play the CD twice, telling them it was an LP the
> second time. 8)
>
>
>
>
> >
> >> I'm sure you've been exposed to this but you still cling to the silly
> >> notion that you need speaker wires as big as your arm to get a decent
> >> sound. Like I said before Keep on Believing Brother!
> >
> >And by all means, Clyde, you cling to your ignorance. After all,
> >ignorance and superstition are the core of your being.
>
> LOL! Says the guy who thinks expensive speaker wire is better than
> plain old wire!
> Like I said: Keep on Believing Brother!

I didn't say that. You're even more gullible than Steve.. What I did is
to show you a scientific reason why bigger wire is better. I didn't say
that it was always audible, or that I believed that one should run out
and buy expensive wire. In fact I've never spent a PENNY on cables.

--
George Graves
------------------
A sports car makes the journey more fun than the destination.

.

Loading