Audiophoolery

[k4kyv]

An article in the 24th May issue of Radio World has an interesting take on audiophoolery. This month's installment of  Steve Lampen's Wired for sound series is titled, "A vacuum-filled brain."  He discusses a set of vacuum-filled speaker cables that sell for $10,000.  They consist of a set of big hoses with all the air pumped out.  Since vacuum is the ultimate dielectric, this makes a "big difference" in the sound you hear.

By definition, the dielectric constant of a vacuum is 1.0.  But the dielectric of plain old air is 1.0167. Much of this audiophoolery nonsense has taken a grain of truth, such as dielectric constant, resistance, capacitance, inductance, impedance and skin effect, to absurdity.  These are real things, but do they really matter at audio frequencies?  Lampen comes up with a perfect analogy: it's like worrying about the aerodynamics of a golf cart or a lawnmower.

http://www.rwonline.com/reference-room/wired-4-sound/2006.05.24-09_rwf_lampen_may_10.shtml

[The Slab Bacon]

GEEEEZZEE, where in the hell does it end!!
                                                              the Slab Bacon

[Vortex Joe - N3IBX]

I'm in the wrong business.

Anybody want to buy a cyrogenically treated 5R4 or 5U4? I promise you it'll increase your "tessitura"!

Regards,
           Joe N3IBX

[k3zrf]

"A vacuum-filled brain."

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[wavebourn]

"A vacuum-filled brain."

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Yes, oxygen free brain!

[WBear2GCR]

This is the text of a reply I had already sent to RW mag:

Letter To The Editor:

I must take exception to the derisive tone and title of Steve Lampen’s most recent article, “A Vacuum-Filled Brain.” It is misplaced and not constructive. While I cannot stand in support of the nominal object of his derision – “vacuum filled speaker cables” – that is not the issue. It appears this is an obvious “straw man” for a shotgun aimed at all of “high end audio.” Steve’s usually well-grounded commentary has perhaps gone awry?

It is critical to understand that while there may be a percentage of “snake oil” being touted in various markets, high-end audio being one of them, that not all, and not a majority, and likely not more than a small percentage of all high-end audio products are designed to mislead or prey upon gullible consumers. Most high-end manufacturers have a genuine interest in producing a superior sounding product. Furthermore it costs a fair amount of raw $$ to enter this market – it’s not something anyone would do on a lark.

Furthermore, the requirements for commercial audio installations, broadcast sound, PA/SR sound, home theater and high-end audio are different. They do share many commonalities, but they are not the same in all regards.

It’s fairly obvious that for a vast majority of people out there, that FM stereo, cassette, 8-trk tapes, and before that AM radio and before that Edison cylinders were all “good enough.” Let’s not forget that Mr. Edison at one time did a public demonstration of his acoustical playback equipment that was adjudged at the time as being “indistinguishable” from the original! Later there was the famous demonstration by AR at Grand Central Station in NYC that proclaimed the same! Were they? Not hardly.

When CDs were first becoming popular, audiophiles complained that the “leading edge” was being lost – they were scoffed at. Turns out they were right, 14 bits were not enough… Then some people were complaining about the quality of CD “pressings”, iirc the debate raged for some years – it was impossible! Finally some really smart person determined that there was some sort of clock jitter in a transfer process at the pressing plants… fixed that problem.

The Japanese grabbed up all the low power tube gear they could from the USA, all the Western Electric 300Bs, and speakers – while we reveled in Phase Linear 400s and 700s, Crown 300Bs and the like – were they insane? No, it turns out those silly old things can sound really amazingly good!! (For good scientific and engineering reasons too!)

Today the popular modes are using forms of digital compression, pretty much a step up from the popular modes of the past. But these are clearly still compromises compared to reality or high quality SOTA recordings.

There is no need to open and pour out the can of worms that this sort of topic evolves toward, but a simple analogy might serve to illuminate the topic? Take the example of a highly refined, modern racecar – perhaps an Indy car, an IROC car, a NASCAR vehicle – it’s immediately obvious that there is an extreme, obsessive attention to minute detail, tolerances, adjustments, and very diminishing returns in performance. For example the adjustment of a suspension or the pressure in a tire is a major factor in daily racing. Is it on your daily driver? Clearly it is not. Would it make any difference at all if you paid attention to these factors? Highly unlikely, right?  What’s more, the setups for these different applications are all rather different, and are so sensitive that they vary according to the specific race day conditions.

This is the simple analog is between consumer audio and high-end audio. The goal in high-end audio is to wring out the last drop of “performance.” Consumer audio’s aimed at a somewhat different target.

The fact remains that solid engineering is the bedrock for high-end audio. But that is not the sole criterion. If it were then there would be no differences (good or bad) to be had in audio equipment of any sort, they’d all be identical, like bricks or plastic molded parts? Recent peer reviewed studies (Dr. Earl Geddes) have shown audible differences in low THD/IM amplifiers, and also the ability to not hear differences between some low THD/IM amplifiers and some high(ish) THD/IM amplifiers! In other words there is no direct correlation between typical specs and what we can perceive – the correlation is elsewhere.

That finding explains to a great extent what has been going on in high-end audio, and why there are products that to many appear incredulous and outrageously foolish. Those who have noticed the above finding or been otherwise aware of this have been attempting in various ways to determine, control and affect this elusive factor – thus the propagation of seemingly wild audio products, including cables & wire. It ends up being an art as much as an engineering or scientific endeavor.

The success of these attempts has been highly variable to say the least. Generally speaking there has been no scientific basis or engineering paramater(s) to manipulate that correlates directly to the quality or perception of what is being heard. Results are rather much situation specific and application specific… and of course we’re talking about wringing out the last drop of fidelity and performance.

So, regular “zip cord” is quite sufficient for many situations as a speaker cable, as is your standard import receiver. You can get 90% of the way without much more than that. Going beyond that point you start to find that rather miniscule and seemingly insignificant things begin to have more impact – sort of a “Princess & The Pea” effect, except that it is often quite real, and evident.

Let’s not condemn so quickly… the average person neither needs nor understands extremely high audio performance, the consumer doesn’t need it or want it. For those who desire it, seek it in a variety of ways, engineering and science are definitely included in the process. It reduces to an art that employs technology. Seemingly odd things have results that do not have ready explanations, thus this proliferation of very odd and assorted products that appear to be quite off-the-wall.

Let’s not jump to conclusions, and be gentle in our appraisals.

   _-_-WBear2GCR

[k3zrf]

It's still an oxymoron.

I don't know squat, just an innocent bystander.

I have only been in the audio industry 35 years.

Guess I have more to learn.

[k4kyv]

I would challenge anyone, in a valid scientific, double-blind test situation, to be able to tell the difference between "high end" speaker cable and zip cord, at better than 50% accuracy.

[WBear2GCR]

I would challenge anyone, in a valid scientific, double-blind test situation, to be able to tell the difference between "high end" speaker cable and zip cord, at better than 50% accuracy.

C'mon down!

But seriously, the issue of double-blnd testing is deep and not for this forum.

Suffice to say that it is trivial to hear differences in cables of different geometry, since they will measure differently as well. The greater the geometery & materials, the easier it is to hear. This is not in dispute since the differences have been clearly measured.

Where it starts to get dicey is when you put two otherwise identical cables to test that vary only by something like say the material of the conductor itself... but again that's for another forum.

Also, there is an issue of the distortion and resolution of the system which is being used to "test". It is not too difficult to find systems that have inherent distortions and masking effects that make it very difficult to hear any differences - in otherwords everything sounds pretty much the same, like the system sounds. This as opposed to hearing differences in the character of the recordings and recording "space" dictating the character of what is being heard. The latter is rare, the former common.

Making this a bit simpler still - if you don't think there is or can't find a difference between a given tube amp set up as pentode and set up strapped as triode (not clipped), then you can forget entirely about hearing most of these so-called "differences."

          _-_-WBear2GCR

[KB2WIG]

Double blind testing will settle the argument, therefore, it will not be done.... too much money at stake.....   KLC ( worlds leading expert of his opinion)

[WBear2GCR]

Double blind testing has been done extensively, fwiw. As has ABX double-blind.

It has thus far settled very little.

The method has its merits but simplistic application of it, as it is usually applied to this problem - there are scads of uncontrolled variables at play - has yet to yield results that can be generalized.

For most people and most systems the entire issue is moot anyhow.



             _-_-WBear2GCR

[The Slab Bacon]

Hey Bear, You are always pretty quick to defend the perveyers of this garbage, and much of the other audiofollery. Are you, by chance one of the rug merchants that sells this szht??
                                        The Slab Bacon

[w1guh]

IMHO, the "sound" of anything....an instrument....a voice....a system....a receiver is so subjective that any technical means devised to find out if a particular thing has that "one true sound" isn't going to work.  It's what the individual hears and how they react to it that's important.

So many times I've auditioned pairs of speakers (remember Tech HiFi's great setup for that?).  In most cases I could tell that both of them were delivering "good sound", e.g. the frequencies were there, there was no distortion, imaging was good, etc., etc.,....but they sounded "different."  But it was impossible to say one was "better" than the other.  The answer to that lies with the individual listener...what they want to listen to.

When the so-called realm of "high end" is entered, it's pretty obvious that many things come into play...a lot of which have nothing to do with the sound.  And there, all bets are off.  Vacuum enclosed speaker wire probably is irrelevant in  99.9% of the applications where the guy with the $$$$$$ sprang for them (BTW...how many have the sold?)...until you come to the people for whom price is the all-important characteristic of what they buy.  (You konw, "He knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.")  Obviously, high-end manufacturers, distributors, shop owners and salespeople, being savvy businessmen will definitely prey upon this attitude.  Looks like some of 'em are making a good living doing that.

[Tom WA3KLR]

I want to remind everyone that we have another bulletin board devoted to audiophoolery. 
It is run by Tom KA1ZGC, and is suffering from inactivity:

http://audiophools.net/phpBB/

[WBear2GCR]

Hey Bear, You are always pretty quick to defend the perveyers of this garbage, and much of the other audiofollery. Are you, by chance one of the rug merchants that sells this szht??
                                        The Slab Bacon

Yo Bacochips,

If you could read what I wrote, I did NOT defend any "perveyers of this garbage", now did I??

But some people seem pretty quick to condemn things they may or may not know all that much about, across the board, I wonder why?

            _-_-WBear2GCR

[WBear2GCR]

So, why don't y'all rag on that guy who sells overpriced Gold Plated Microphones to the ham community? At least that is on topic for this forum.

As long as ur at it...

  Inquiring minds want to know.

         _-_-WBear2GCR



PS. two other thoughts:

- does anyone really think that the people who can afford to spend THAT MUCH MONEY are either stupid or particularly gullible? I guess a few might be, but most people who have that type of descretionary income are pretty sharp cookies.

- the company that showed that "Vacuum" cable I'd guess did it for the PR - at a show you have to do something to differentiate yrself from the rest, and get press coverage. They probably got the idea from gas filled heliax anyhow... 50/50 someone there is a ham or has a similar background, eh?

- anyone who bought it, probably bought it for the same reason - so that people who saw it would go, WOW! What's that thing??

[k4kyv]

So, why don't y'all rag on that guy who sells overpriced Gold Plated Microphones to the ham community? At least that is on topic for this forum...

- the company that showed that "Vacuum" cable I'd guess did it for the PR - at a show you have to do something to differentiate yrself from the rest, and get press coverage. They probably got the idea from gas filled heliax anyhow... 50/50 someone there is a ham or has a similar background, eh?

But at least everyone KNOWS that the gold-plated microphone is a marketing gimmick.  He makes no claim whatever that the gold plating on the microphone gives any kind of (imaginary) accoustical effect.

- does anyone really think that the people who can afford to spend THAT MUCH MONEY are either stupid or particularly gullible? I guess a few might be, but most people who have that type of descretionary income are pretty sharp cookies.

- anyone who bought it, probably bought it for the same reason - so that people who saw it would go, WOW! What's that thing??

But $10,000 for a set of speaker cables?  Sounds like anyone who buys into such bullshit has more money than brains indeed.  To paraphrase Lampen, any accoustical difference between "high end" speaker cables and plain old zip cord of adequate size, amounts to about as much as the effect aerodynamics would have on a golf cart or lawnmower.

Actually, I'll be glad to sell someone my bumblebee capacitors for whatever price the market will bear.  Leave it up to the buyer to imagine why they are worth any more than a sack full of orange drops.

I'm curious who originated all that "oxygen free" tessitura bullshit anyway, and how they were able to successfully market it.  I plan to retire soon from my regular job.

Let them spend the bux if that's what floats their boat.  A phool and his money are soon parted, and I'd just as soon share the booty as to let the next guy.  Personally, the biggest problem I have with these idiots is that they have driven up the prices of the tubes, audio transformers and other components that we need to keep our transmitters going, to the point that most people with a legitimate need for this material can't afford what little is left on the market.

[The Slab Bacon]

There are many people that partake in many different hobbies that they are in over their technical heads. They dont have the technical wherewithall to compete for bragging rights, but they do have a wallet full of money. They want to be one of the "heavy hitters" with the big bragging rights. Since they dont have the technical know how to do it, they are willing to empty their wallets to inflate their egos. Henceforth the PTBarnum factor plays in.

I have seen this in just about every hobbie that I have been involved in in the last few years. If you cant build a faster race car, just brag about the big bux that you spent. It is such a shame thet so many people are willing to piss away their money trying to buy the bragging rights they need to bolster their egos.

If you have any knowledge of electronics and how some of this stuff works, you really get a laugh out of some of the "snake oil" that some of these rug merchants try to sell. Remember that folklore is always born out of ignorance. If you dont know any better, you may be just as likely to believe the same bullszht!!
                                                                                      The Slab Bacon

[WBear2GCR]

Hey no prob!

As far as the tube prices, it's a double edged sword, OM! If it wasn't for there being a market for tubes at a "modern" (read: inflated, as in gasoline) prices it's unlikely that the Chinese or Russians would still be making ANY tubes at all!! As it is they are struggling to stay afloat. Count ur blessings on that count.

And, fwiw it was the Japanese and the Guitar nutz who ran the prices up for the most part. Most of the audio people in the USA and Europe got on the tube bandwagon way way late.

No doubt the PT Barnum effect is present across the board for everything. There is no denial there.

What's the point of a hobby? To make people happy. So, who cares how you/they find that?

I don't advocate BS to sell things myself, but if I had my money back for every time I bought something from a ham at a hamfest who said, "yeah it works fine, I just want to get rid of it"... I'd have a nice pile of $$ sitting around. There are greedy, selfish and unscrupulous people everywhere.

We all know that those Gold plated mics must be better otherwise he wouldn't have gone to the trouble of Gold Plating them!![/i] Similar idea. It's implied, he doesn't need to say a word!

And, fwiw, most copper wire is "oxygen free' to begin with. The cool stuff was developed by some Japanese mfr, that was monocrystaline copper wire, drawn from a single copper crystal... that was back in the 80s. Does it make a diff? I dunno, never tried any of that.    But they spent a lot of time and money to make that happen...

Now regarding this:

To paraphrase Lampen, any accoustical difference between "high end" speaker cables and plain old zip cord of adequate size, amounts to about as much as the effect aerodynamics would have on a golf cart or lawnmower.

That's simply not a valid generalization at all. Its fairly easy to demonstrate, and has been documented by objective and rather detailed measurements in numerous journals that zip cord and other cables can be and often are quite different.  Where the discussion diverges from that point is where is becomes a question if plain old R, L & C are the only effects that play a role in this.

The fact that if your system is analogous to a golf cart or lawnmower, then (as I also noted) it is a 100% true and certain assertion. However, IF you still can hear to 16kHz. or better, AND you have a very low distortion set of speakers, and a source chain to match then you will most definitely hear the effect of many cables (being audibly different) and the differences in things like CD players or DACs with little difficulty, double blind or not. Are they important differences? To many people, not.

         _-_-WBear2GCR

 

[The Slab Bacon]

As far as good audio reproduction is concerned, good equipment = good reproduction
at least as long as the equipment is operating to its published specifications. You cannot expect quality sound from $2 equipment. No argument here.

However, like you said how good ares the listeners ears? Just like modifications to ham gear, eventually you hit the "point of diminishing return" and this is where the
P.T. Barnum effect starts to play in to things. When you hit this point, is it really worth it to shell out megabucks for accessories that make very minimal differences??

Now, add a lack of technical knowledge and the poor uninformed sucker is left wide open to be raped trying to get that "little extra" performance for his bragging rights.
This leaves the uninformed sucker willing to empty out his wallet to "be the man".
I have seen this in ham radio as well as many other hobbies. I hate to see anyone,
even if they are a sucker get taken advantage of.

And err furthermore, I own and have repaired for others a lot of tube gear. I have yet to use any chineese or russian tubes in anything that I myself own or repaired for others. I still have 1000s of N.O.S. and good used American tubes around here.
I like having running spares for my gear. I laugh my ba's off when I hear an amer or other "vintage gear afficianado" who has a piece of gear that is inoperable because he has to "order a XXXX tube" from AES because his crapped out. Most common tubes are still very reasonably priced if you shop carefully at hamfests. there is no excuse for not having running spares!

                                                                      The Slab Bacon   

[The Slab Bacon]

Bear,

Can YOU hear the difference between the $10,000 vacuum speaker cables and zip cord ?

Hey Buddly,
                 You forgot one!! Vacuum speaker cables, zip cord, and how about
 00 guage welding cable
                                                          the Slab Bacon      

[KB2WIG]

just make sure the welding cable is NEW... If its been used, all that gas used will contaminate it.....all the electrons coming out of the weld are NOT from the copper, and will Affect the sound .....   klc

[WBear2GCR]

Bear,

Can YOU hear the difference between the $10,000 vacuum speaker cables and zip cord ?

Laugh and point all you want. As long as it makes you feel better??

Almost certainly someone with still good hearing (= or > 16kHz.) a low distortion speaker system (rare, btw) and appropriate signal chain and source material is likely to hear some differences between cable A and cable B no matter what the cost. IF the R,L,C is not identical or very very close you can hear it in most cases. Beyond that is where the debate sits at this point in time.

As far as welding cables? Been there, they've been tested, believe it or not. Turns out they are fairly inductive, so yes you can hear them vs. zip cord.

Zip cord has some very specific R, L & C characteristics, fwiw. Not the best really for speakers. And PVC is a fairly leaky dielectric, which has its own issues... albiet seemingly a minor issue.

Keep in mind that when you are playing *most* sound systems you are dealing with what are actually cascaded filter sections, all with various and unknown characteristics + distortions. This includes most importantly the speaker, which is obviously the "worst" of the lot. Out of this mess, which includes everything back to the mic used in the original recording (which is why 2 mic minimalist recordings usuually sound so good?) we're expecting to reproduce some semblance of the original sampling of sound! Everything you've put between the original and your ears has altered it. The trick is to minimize the alterations, and importantly NOT make some that are extremely bothersome and audible. Most home systems are simply stated too crude to have any of this make one iota of difference. In reality, although many audiophiles try very hard to achieve this "holy grail" they fail miserably, regardless of cost or price - as noted here in part because they lack the techinical background required to overcome many of the issues. Conversely, technical background alone will not permit you to achieve the "holy grail" either, since a good portion of it comes under the "art" heading - which is knowing which compromises are acceptable and which are not according to the specific situation at hand. All of these sound systems, be they DIY and cheap or "cost no object" are chuck full of compromises.

Think of it as a continuum of reproduction similar to the range of  photography & painting. None of it is reality, but any example of them is a portrayal of reality. Eg:  What matters on a 3x5 taken with a disposable camera is quite different than a wall size print that will be shown in a museum, for example. The degree of acceptable compromise & detail and where those compromises are is different depending on what you are doing!!

I know it seems stupid, silly and whatnot, but if you can still hear, and you muck about with this stuff for a while, you can't help but notice when something that you know can't possibly have any effect does. And, when you check with other people who know better they confirm your finding. It happens all the time. People are not all delusional or stupid or ignorant who do the audio hobby.

            _-_-WBear2GCR



PS. anyone who gives me notice, and is coming this way is welcome to stop by and draw their own conclusions. I've got zip cord available, or bring ur own. And three flavors of CD players to listen to as well. You can report back no matter what you decide. I don't mind either way.

[The Slab Bacon]

Of the many parables of MURPHY'S LAW that is coming to mind here:

"never argue with a fool, because sooner or later no one will be able to tell the difference"


Always keep this mathematical equation in mind when evaluating speaker cables:

"the angle of the dangle does not always equal the arc of erection, but the mass of the ass stays constant!"
                                              The Slab Bacon

[WBear2GCR]

Of the many parables of MURPHY'S LAW that is coming to mind here:

"never argue with a fool, because sooner or later no one will be able to tell the difference"


Always keep this mathematical equation in mind when evaluating speaker cables:

"the angle of the dangle does not always equal the arc of erection, but the mass of the ass stays constant!"
                                              The Slab Bacon

Bacobits,

Your approach here isn't very nice.
Sorry that you feel so insecure and inadequate.

        _-_-WBear2GCR