The disappearance of darkness

On 2013-05-22 20:23:39 -0700, Eric Stevens said:

On Wed, 22 May 2013 18:34:32 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

They don't listen to electricity.

of course they do. electricity is what moves the speaker coil.

No what moves the coils is the effect of magnatism that does that.

because there's electricity flowing in a coil.

I'd call it current but each to his own.

technically it's current, but it doesn't change anything.

It changes the magnetic field of the coil.

that's the whole point, and calling it electricity or current doesn't
change that.

if it wasn't for electricity, there would be no sound.

if it weren't for the cone compressing the air etc.. they'd be no
sound.

because electricity is causing it to move.

No, magnatism is doing that 'electricity' runs through many wire's in
cables
and they don't all make sounds.

so what?

Electricity doesn't make sound. (Can you plug wires into your head and
listen to music?)

shut off the electricity to your house and let us know how much sound
you get from your sound system.

if there was no electricity there would be no sound. period.

Ditto for speakers, not to mention several other devices.

....and there you are wondering how to charge the battery for your DSLR,
while that 40 year old SLR, or rangefinder keeps on snapping away.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Wed, 22 May 2013 18:34:31 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


They don't listen to electricity.

of course they do. electricity is what moves the speaker coil.

No what moves the coils is the effect of magnatism that does that.

because there's electricity flowing in a coil.

There has to be a magnetic field other than the coil's.

if it wasn't for electricity, there would be no sound.

if it weren't for the cone compressing the air etc.. they'd be no sound.

because electricity is causing it to move.

Only because of the magnetism.

so what? if there was no electricity, it would not move.

If there was no air gap it wouldn't move even then.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:46:09 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.21 22:27 , Eric Stevens wrote:


They don't listen to electricity.

They listen to sales pitches that appeal to their gear-headedness (ah!
something like some photographers) and desire to have nifty things.

The whole audio magazine industry is geared around deluding Audi O'Phile
while advertising useless junk for him to buy.

There is no doubt about that. Nevertheless, some junk is worth buying.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:45:24 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.21 20:10 , Eric Stevens wrote:

It's well known among some sections of the audiophile community that
the ear is much more sensitive than any instrument.

People who believe their ears have more dynamic range, phase sensitivity
and frequency discrimination than instruments have a really bad name for
themselves:

audiophiles.


To a point they are right. Nobody has yet reduced the functioning of
the ear to simple mechanics.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 22 May 2013 21:19:48 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.22 21:01 , wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:45:24 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.21 20:10 , Eric Stevens wrote:

It's well known among some sections of the audiophile community that
the ear is much more sensitive than any instrument.

People who believe their ears have more dynamic range, phase sensitivity
and frequency discrimination than instruments have a really bad name for
themselves:

audiophiles.

When it comes to phase detection, our brains (not ears) are pretty dam good - we
can detect sound direction within a few degrees by phase comparison, equal to
any PLL, and better than any equipment I own! (phase has nothing to do with spk
wire!)

Too bad we're not as good at detecting merde du boeuf!!

Two companies I've worked for have equipment that will measure fine
phase differences at frequencies FAR BEYOND human hearing. The audio
range is a piffle to do very fine phase comparisons in a very cheap DSP
even at modest sampling rates.

I mentioned phase just to add to colour about the worthlessness of
"fancy" wire statements from audiophiles.

To be clear: Plain copper wire should not affect phase at all in the 20
- 20 kHz spectrum of audio systems. BUT if you start to do fancy things
to it and change the impedance (as someone mentioned) you can be sure
that there will be phase and amplitude changes within that spectrum.

If you even increase the resistance of the wire (another "someone
mentioned") then the frequency response of the speaker system would
suffer and I would not doubt that there would be phase issues as well to
"colour" the sound.

Some people think the coloured sound is an improvement. That's what
lies behind half the talk about 'musicality'.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:44:21 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.20 19:47 , Eric Stevens wrote:
On Mon, 20 May 2013 12:03:55 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

The only characteristic that has ever counted in speaker wire is low
resistance for the installation. For such an amp, and such impedance at
the speaker, no more than a 5% x impedance resistance between the amp
and the loudspeaker and of course the ability to carry peak current.
Since wire is relatively cheap compared to the system components it is
quite easy and proper to simply over spec the cable gauge.

While I generally agree with you I know from experience that use of
some of the fancy cables on the market can result in both measurable
and audible effects. I suspect the behaviour of the loud speaker has a
lot to do with it.

And as previously mentioned, any "measurable and audible effect" is
probably to the bad, not the good.

There is little doubt.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, May 17, 2013 8:03:18 PM UTC+1, nospam wrote:
In article ,

Whisky-dave wrote:



You don't grasp the problem. Impedence is not resistance. A speaker

with 8 ohm impedence might have 0.8 ohm resistance.



http://www.prestonelectronics.com/audio/Impedance.htm



a very non-technical article that doesn't say much beyond what happens

if you connect speakers in parallel.



Generally, the reading given by an ohmmeter will be about 2/3 to 3/4 of the

impedance of the speaker.



except when it doesn't.

When you find it does it usually meaning you're not using the meter corectly, is there no link where you can prove 8R speaker coils drop to 0.8R resistance ?

What matters to an amplifier supplying AC waveforms is impedance, not
resistance. Some electrostatic loudspeakers as an extreme example have
extremely high resistance and at certain frequencies very awkwardly
low impedance.

--
Chris Malcolm

nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

but if you insist:
€ EEG monitoring of their brain activity showed statistically
significant enhancement in alpha-wave activity

how does this equate to a difference that can be heard? oh yea, it
doesn't. it's *assumed* that if something shows up on an eeg, it must
be audible. there is no evidence to back up this assumption.

The EEG activity is not evidence that it is being detected? Of course
it is, even if you don't know how.

it's not evidence that it can be heard.

just because there's brain activity doesn't mean it's audible. touch or
smell, for instance, will cause a change in brain activity, but you
can't hear either one.

the question is can you hear ultrasonic sounds and the answer is
definitely no.

True. But sometimes what some people are hearing is a kind of
distortion that is not being measured which by an accident of
technology happens in the experiment to be being produced at the same
time as the inaudible ultrasonic sound. Then you will see human ears
and brains noticing a difference between two sounds when the only
measured difference is an extra ultrasonic component. This leads
unimaginative technologically educated pedants to conclude that the
claims to be hearing a difference are pure imagination since the only
measured difference is an inaudible ultrasonic component. It also
leads to all sorts of wild speculative theories about how the
inaudible might somehow be affecting the audible without showing a
measurable audible difference.

The unglamorous truth in such cases is often just that what is being
heard is perfectly audible but wasn't being measured. Measurement
technologists often assume that what they're measuring is everything
that could possibly matter. If you check back on the history of the
development of measurements of audible distortion you will find that
every so often some ingenious and thoughtful engineer will think up a
new kind of distortion measurement.

That's what happened when high quality transistor amps started
replacing high quality valve (tube) amps. Some transistor amps whose
measured distortion was below the threshold of human hearing
nevertheless sounded worse than some valve (tube) amps whose measured
distortion was worse. Prodded by this anomaly some new distortion
measurements were discovered which showed that the transistor amps
were indeed producing a new kind of audible distortion which hadn't
previously been measured.

--
Chris Malcolm

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:46:09 -0400, Alan Browne

The whole audio magazine industry is geared around deluding Audi O'Phile
while advertising useless junk for him to buy.

There is no doubt about that. Nevertheless, some junk is worth buying.

True:
http://www.theoldfoodie.com/2009/10/...junk-food.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_(ship)

And it's always worth something to the seller.

-Wolfgang

Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 22 May 2013 17:45:24 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2013.05.21 20:10 , Eric Stevens wrote:

It's well known among some sections of the audiophile community that
the ear is much more sensitive than any instrument.

People who believe their ears have more dynamic range, phase sensitivity
and frequency discrimination than instruments have a really bad name for
themselves:

audiophiles.

To a point they are right. Nobody has yet reduced the functioning of
the ear to simple mechanics.

They usually use electricity at some point. Just like ---
the nerve cells in the ear.

-Wolfgang