Need answer to simple question.

[Leporello]

I wasn't aware they made directional copper, must be some new science used nowhere else except audio .

Yes, move over CERN. Cutting edge physics is now discovered by audiphiles.

 

[Leporello]

Worth watching that little video too. I like how he summed it up, to the effect of:

"This stuff is no secret to any engineer, or anyone in pro audio, or anyone who deals with signal propagation. The only time this stuff gets contentious is in consumer-level marketing."

Surely that's got to get you thinking?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

And here is another all-time favourite that I forgot about - to add to my list above.

Shaving your CDs.....Did anyone actually try shaving their CDs with this "CD lathe"?

Note, it's even belt driven, to reduce vibration to the cutting blade! Now that's serious stuff, hey?? As if a blade blasting through polycarbonate is not going to cause enough vibration......that dear little motor needs to be isolated, HAHAHA. But where is it today? Why aren't we all still using it?

Matt the "Techmoan" did a simple, perhaps naive but in my opinion unassailable test of this:


He recorded the analog output of his CD player before and after shaving using a digital audio recorder, then put both files into Audacity, matched the levels, and subtracted the waveforms. They were identical. Whatever you may think about the suitability of measurements versus your ears for evaluating audio quality, if the wafeforms are identical then, all other things being equal, they will sound the same. End of story.

 

[amey01]

Yes, move over CERN. Cutting edge physics is now discovered by audiphiles

Onnly consumer ones though. Not professional ones!

 

[rpokuls]

Worth watching that little video too. I like how he summed it up, to the effect of:

"This stuff is no secret to any engineer, or anyone in pro audio, or anyone who deals with signal propagation. The only time this stuff gets contentious is in consumer-level marketing."

Surely that's got to get you thinking?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

And here is another all-time favourite that I forgot about - to add to my list above.

Shaving your CDs.....Did anyone actually try shaving their CDs with this "CD lathe"?

Note, it's even belt driven, to reduce vibration to the cutting blade! Now that's serious stuff, hey?? As if a blade blasting through polycarbonate is not going to cause enough vibration......that dear little motor needs to be isolated, HAHAHA. But where is it today? Why aren't we all still using it?

Well, as famous astronomer Carl Sagan is reputed to have said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".

 

[amey01]

Matt the "Techmoan" did a simple, perhaps naive but in my opinion unassailable test of this:


He recorded the analog output of his CD player before and after shaving using a digital audio recorder, then put both files into Audacity, matched the levels, and subtracted the waveforms. They were identical. Whatever you may think about the suitability of measurements versus your ears for evaluating audio quality, if the wafeforms are identical then, all other things being equal, they will sound the same. End of story.

I have done a very similar test myself a few years ago.

(It was to dispute/verify the bullsh1t claims around comptuer audio - you know the classic chestnuts - "wifi is bad", "you need an audiophile switch", transcoding is bad", you need an audiophile USB cable").

Well......my test combined the whole lot of those.

I created myself a WAV file (I needed to create my own so that I knew what I was working with).

* I cheecksumed it.
.....then.....
* I then converted it to FLAC
* copied it to my music server
* then played it on my music server - going through bog standard ethernet cables, a bog standard UniFi switch, then through WIFI, then through the air, to my music player, through a $5 USB cable.
* I took the digital output at the end of this USB cable (where it would normally plug into my DAC), and
* plugged it into the same computer and used Wireshark to capture the stream (so now I had two digital files on the computer).
* I checksumed.

It was the same. Same number. Same checksum. Every single 1 and 0 preserved, and in order.

Actually, I should try it again with an "audiophile" USB cable......to see if the audiophile one actually buggers up the sound quality (because a lot of them are not even USB-IF compliant).

-=-=-=-=-=-=

Not many people are responding to how many of those older "essential" tweaks they are still using (you know, because they were essential you know).

I will admit that I fell for one of those in my younger days. It must have been about 2002-2003 (pre Martin Logan - I had a pair of Audio Physic Sparks) and I bought Walker Audio "Super Silver Treatment" contact enhancer.

On delivery, I immediately put a multimeter into the jar and couldn't get continuity, no matter what I did. This stuff didn't even have slight conductivity!! I immedately emailed the company, and was advised that "I was doing it the wrong way" - that "it as the pressure on the contact that "activated" the treatment".

But the reviews were amazing! Like "My prior experiences with contact enhancers had prepared me for a rather modest forward step; but SST delivered far more. For that, it deserves an award".

Maybe the reviewers' systems were so ****, restricting the audio signal going through it makes for a more enjoyable experience? Now there's a thought. Stuff the patronising "your system is not revealing enough" - moreover, YOUR system is too offensive and needs to be muted. HAHA.

Say what?? The pure contact enhancer is not as conductive as a fcuking coat hanger! But it's my fault. I am using it wrong. FFS! And pressure ostensibly changes the conductivity properties of this yucky sticky gel? Yet I paid hundreds of dollars for this ****.

From that point on I knew I had been swindled. It doesn't feel nice to be a victim of fraudulent deception. But I thank Mr Walker for edifying me - and ensuring I do far more due diligence on all the audiphile bullsh1t out there.

Needless to say, I never used it, and I'll spare you the ensuing argument that didn't end quickly.

 

[amey01]

I wasn't aware they made directional copper, must be some new science used nowhere else except audio .

Funny how audio is different, isn't it?

Like USB cables - standard ones work for every other form of digital data.......except data that happens to represent music. Then, you have to spend thousands!

 

[R.I.P]

I wasn't aware they made directional copper, must be some new science used nowhere else except audio

How else would you explain improvement in sonics when I switched them around. Both ends of audioquest dual rca connector are identical. There was a substantial improvement similar to what happens when one uses directional interconnects in the correct direction.

 

[Russr]

How else would you explain improvement in sonics when I switched them around. Both ends of audioquest dual rca connector are identical. There was a substantial improvement similar to what happens when one uses directional interconnects in the correct direction.

Unless you empirically measured it, I would say you fell into the "tweaking bias" trap similar to myself and others who are pretty darn sure that my car runs better after I wash it. Sorry, but that's really how I feel about it... show me identically configured and scaled oscilloscope traces that prove me wrong, and I'll CONSIDER believing it, and then have to perform the test myself.

In the case of some RCA cables, they have 2 conductors PLUS a shield (as opposed to center-pin "hot" and Shield+negative being the lattice-like shielding). In this case, in order to prevent ground-loops (mains-frequency buzzing you hear sometimes while connecting RCA interconnects while everything is switched on), only ONE end of the shield is connected. You seem to be referencing an audible improvement in quality, not the introduction of mains-hum, so I find myself going back to "Tweaking Bias" mentioned above...

 

[amey01]

How else would you explain improvement in sonics when I switched them around. Both ends of audioquest dual rca connector are identical. There was a substantial improvement similar to what happens when one uses directional interconnects in the correct direction.

I’d say same reason someone said earlier…….which is the same reason your car feels faster when you’ve washed it.

im sure someone will say it’s because removal of dirt makes it lighter. But that won’t begin to compensate for the water and moisture in all the crevices adding to the weight!

 

[R.I.P]

Unless you empirically measured it, I would say you fell into the "tweaking bias" trap similar to myself and others who are pretty darn sure that my car runs better after I wash it. Sorry, but that's really how I feel about it... show me identically configured and scaled oscilloscope traces that prove me wrong, and I'll CONSIDER believing it, and then have to perform the test myself.

In the case of some RCA cables, they have 2 conductors PLUS a shield (as opposed to center-pin "hot" and Shield+negative being the lattice-like shielding). In this case, in order to prevent ground-loops (mains-frequency buzzing you hear sometimes while connecting RCA interconnects while everything is switched on), only ONE end of the shield is connected. You seem to be referencing an audible improvement in quality, not the introduction of mains-hum, so I find myself going back to "Tweaking Bias" mentioned above...

Russr, with all due respect, solid copper, aluminum or brass whatever metal the connector is made of. The improvement in sonic made it seem to me perhaps they are directional. As distinguished members pointed out solid metal is not directional. If they are accurate then must be my strong desire to hear improved sonics on my part that misled me. The stronger the belief of hearing improved sonics after the change then stronger auditory perception of sonic improvement.

Few years ago my music system had humming sound emanating from ELS 9. Luckily it was resolved by receiving accurate advice and then practically implementing it. The power supply of my previous Dell desktop was causing the hum. Replaced with new. Problem disappeared.

Perhaps there is unintentional error in your post. Not recommended to change RCA interconnects when equipment power is on.

 

[R.I.P]

I’d say same reason someone said earlier…….which is the same reason your car feels faster when you’ve washed it.

im sure someone will say it’s because removal of dirt makes it lighter. But that won’t begin to compensate for the water and moisture in all the crevices adding to the weight!

Amey01, with all due respect, if the car in question is a Porsche 961 that has just won the Paris-Dakar rally then removing mud will restore car aerodynamic and make less heavy. In addition less friction between moving parts partially jammed by mud. Depends on drag caused by mud, increase in weight due to mud and friction due to moving parts hindered in their movement by mud.

The above is a extreme example. City cars in summer season that are washed biweekly will marginally or fractionally run smoother. And objectively less smoothly than what we subjectively perceive.

Whenever a car is tuned by the computer, used oil is removed and new engine oil is added, spark plugs cleaned or better replaced with new and air, fuel filters replaced with new. Then objectively or factually there is no denying the car does run lighter and smoother. Though we can argue about to what extent improvement in performance.

 

[Leporello]

How else would you explain improvement in sonics when I switched them around. Both ends of audioquest dual rca connector are identical. There was a substantial improvement similar to what happens when one uses directional interconnects in the correct direction.

It's like the dude at the back of the crowd said in that Firesign Theater album: "That's metapheesically absurd, mun, how can I know what you hear?" I hate to be the one who moves the debate into this well beaten path, but the only way I know of that you could prove to me you hear "substantial improvements" is with statistically significant results from a properly controlled double-blind test.

p.s. since I have no interest in using cables more expensive than Blue Jeans Cables, or cables I build myself from Belden or Canare microphone cable and Switchcraft connectors, the burden of proof would be on *you*.

 

[Leporello]

Well, as famous astronomer Carl Sagan is reputed to have said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".

And as the famous physicist Wolfgang Pauli is reputed to have said, "not only is this not right, it's not even wrong".

 

[Brandon Hartwick]

I rank arrows on cables right up there with those "audiophile" network switches where they glue crystals on top of the chipset and claim it's something super special and secret underneath.

 

[Robert D]

I’d say same reason someone said earlier…….which is the same reason your car feels faster when you’ve washed it.

im sure someone will say it’s because removal of dirt makes it lighter. But that won’t begin to compensate for the water and moisture in all the crevices adding to the weight!

Washing and waxing it decreases the coefficient of friction. Duh, everyone knows that!

 

[Bodyslam]

In the case of some RCA cables, they have 2 conductors PLUS a shield (as opposed to center-pin "hot" and Shield+negative being the lattice-like shielding). In this case, in order to prevent ground-loops (mains-frequency buzzing you hear sometimes while connecting RCA interconnects while everything is switched on), only ONE end of the shield is connected. You seem to be referencing an audible improvement in quality, not the introduction of mains-hum, so I find myself going back to "Tweaking Bias" mentioned above...

Having spent most of my life in Pro audio, I can confirm that the people wiring studios etc. absolutely pay attention to this. Every tech paper or book I have on interconnection and grounding--and I have many--treats the subject of where and how to connect the shield. Hint: there are more options than you have already thought of, and there is no one-size-fits-all method of choosing.

This is mostly about minimizing interference of several sorts. Lower levels of interference are usually experienced as sound quality improvements.

 

[R.I.P]

I really appreciate and thank, Russr, amey01, leporello, Brandon Hartwick, Robert D and Bodyslam for taking the trouble and making the effort to respond.

Rehan.

 

[Rascal]

Hello, fellow MLO members.

I have been using Nordost directional RCA interconnects.

Assuming i have CD player and integrated amplifier.

Then do both ( left and right ) arrows travel and connect in the same direction.

OR

does the signal travel in circular way?

Answer will be much appreciated.

As many of you already know, I'm a retired research engineer with leadership experience in electronic design from DC to light and university experience teaching the next generation how electronics works. Not bragging --Just fortifying what follows.

The only (A/V) cables I know of that are truly directional are optical HDMI cables with a transmitter embedded at one end and a receiver at the other.

All other claims of cable directionality are utter BS / snake oil / nonsense.

Just because some brain-frat (rhymes with train-start) is out there on the world wide web doesn't mean it's sound (meaning grounded) or wholesome.

Here's an example with a direct bearing on this topic:

---
https://www.nordost.com/faqs-directionality.php
NODOST - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

DIRECTIONALITY

Are Nordost cables directional?

Yes, Nordost cables are directional. This is especially true for single ended (RCA) interconnects as the shield is connected at the source or output end only.

Which way do directional arrows point on Nordost cables?

The directional arrows always point away from the source. For example, from a CD player to an amplifier, the arrows should point towards the preamplifier or power amplifier. On a speaker cable the arrows would always point towards the loudspeaker

How can cables be directional?

When cables are manufactured they do not have any directionality. However, as they break in, they acquire directionality.

Although the cable signal is an alternating current, small impurities in the conductor act as diodes allowing signal flow to be better in one direction over time. This effect is also called quantum tunneling, which has been observed in experiments over 25 years ago. Regardless of the purity of the metal used, there are still diode effects in all conductors. In addition, the insulation material will change when it is subjected to an electrical field.
---

It's utter BS / snake oil / nonsense.

This isn't:

"A fool and his money are soon parted."
-- Dr. John Bridge, 1587

 

[Robert D]

As many of you already know, I'm a retired research engineer with leadership experience in electronic design from DC to light and university experience teaching the next generation how electronics works. Not bragging --Just fortifying what follows.

The only (A/V) cables I know of that are truly directional are optical HDMI cables with a transmitter embedded at one end and a receiver at the other.

All other claims of cable directionality are utter BS / snake oil / nonsense.

Just because some brain-frat (rhymes with train-start) is out there on the world wide web doesn't mean it's sound (meaning grounded) or wholesome.

Here's an example with a direct bearing on this topic:

---
https://www.nordost.com/faqs-directionality.php
NODOST - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

DIRECTIONALITY

Are Nordost cables directional?

Yes, Nordost cables are directional. This is especially true for single ended (RCA) interconnects as the shield is connected at the source or output end only.

Which way do directional arrows point on Nordost cables?

The directional arrows always point away from the source. For example, from a CD player to an amplifier, the arrows should point towards the preamplifier or power amplifier. On a speaker cable the arrows would always point towards the loudspeaker

How can cables be directional?

When cables are manufactured they do not have any directionality. However, as they break in, they acquire directionality.

Although the cable signal is an alternating current, small impurities in the conductor act as diodes allowing signal flow to be better in one direction over time. This effect is also called quantum tunneling, which has been observed in experiments over 25 years ago. Regardless of the purity of the metal used, there are still diode effects in all conductors. In addition, the insulation material will change when it is subjected to an electrical field.
---

It's utter BS / snake oil / nonsense.

This isn't:

"A fool and his money are soon parted."
-- Dr. John Bridge, 1587

Its good to have a pro's knowledge and opinion. I asked my father, who is a long retired electrical engineer and he looked at me like I was talking nonesense. He worked for the city's power supplier designing substations and stuff like that back starting in the late 60s and into the mid 90s. So he did not have experience in audio, but knew electrical engineering well.

 

[amey01]

I love how they're so clueless on this matter that they contradict themselves!

Firstly:

Yes, Nordost cables are directional.

then

When cables are manufactured they do not have any directionality.

I mean, what is it?

Then they say "impurities are diodes" - but in the same sentence acknowledge the current is AC.

How clueless are they? And how much are people paying this clueless outfit?

"A fool and his money are soon parted."
-- Dr. John Bridge, 1587

But it's a pretty good business model though - separating fools from their money. Isn't it? I wish I could think of a a way to do it.