Speaker cable wrong direction

Good job I'm not running a Dolby Atmos home cinema system then.

George Fredrik Fiske posted:

As Simon explained above, music signals are alternating. The neutral point is always returned to or else the musicians would create a draft, and a DC offset!

Context is always important, Simon is Careful, not to bind himself into a Corner, Especially with a background in Engineering.  As I pointed out earlier numbers always can be construed to fit an desired outcome.  

Posted by Simon:

""However I can accept that side effects like coupling the amp to ground through the speaker cable might affect the amp performance etc, and this could be directional, that is the amp ground potential is different from the capacitively coupled room ground potential. However in which case the cable directionality will vary in sonic performance  from amp to amp and room to room.. and potentially (!) the cable direction might differ from system to system for optimum SQ....

Good game...""

Mind you I follow Simon, In fact he played an important role in my purchasing  decision.  So once Again, If you can hear the difference in the direction of your Speaker Cable in Your System, So be it!  However, don't let you most powerful Muscle, influence your decision.  A true Blind test, takes the Brain out of the Equation.

JMHO

I'm usually more curious about the affects of electrons flowing along this fine conductor - backwards or forwards - only to have to make their way through a mass of solder at the other end, then through a connector of disparate material which is slid into another connector of disparate material, then through another mass of solder to a conductor of far inferior size and questionable construction.

I don't know much about electrical engineering other than using a wire with an appropriate tensile strength for my line of work, but I do remember that resistance is highest at contact points. If a connection isn't clean and tight, damn all else.

I have just bought a pair of 2nd hand chord odyssey 4 biwire (shotgunned) speaker cables. But there is no visible direction arrows on the cable. 

So I shouldn't worry about that soundwise? 

If I recall correctly, the lettering on the casing indicates direction, source to speaker.

Harry posted:

If the test is of any validity it will be published in a journal. So all we need is the reference. Please?

Utter nonsense. I have run valid listening tests for 25 years. You wont find them in a journal, nor is there any need for them to be published to be valid. There is this concept of industrial intellectual property. Properly run listening tests are very expensive to do -- why would we just give it away?

jon honeyball posted:

Harry posted:

If the test is of any validity it will be published in a journal. So all we need is the reference. Please?

Utter nonsense. I have run valid listening tests for 25 years. You wont find them in a journal, nor is there any need for them to be published to be valid. There is this concept of industrial intellectual property. Properly run listening tests are very expensive to do -- why would we just give it away?

 

Jon,  How about publishing the methods used and results of those tests in a 'Listening Tests' special.  That will turn them from stored intellectual property (i.e. unrealised capital) into a useful revenue stream.

The interest shown here indicates that such a venture is likely to prove profitable.

No, it wont be profitable. indeed, given the amount of ill-informed argument it would generate, it would within minutes consume any profit in time sunk having to explain everything in micro detail. Which then turns into a massive ballache.

Sorry, ain't happening. And again, its IP: why should any company just hand over years of expertise and research to others for a nominal gratuity? 

And before we go any further, how many have even read BS 6840-13:1998, IEC 60268-13:1998???

56wilson posted:

I have just bought a pair of 2nd hand chord odyssey 4 biwire (shotgunned) speaker cables. But there is no visible direction arrows on the cable. 

So I shouldn't worry about that soundwise? 

 

I my view no, but why not test it yourself?

You would of course need to get someone to plug the cables in without telling you which direction the cables were set & do it a few times, sometimes changing direction, sometimes not, they should obviously do this when you are not in the room.

On the other hand, just plug them in, forget about it & enjoy the music.

Morton posted:

56wilson posted:

I have just bought a pair of 2nd hand chord odyssey 4 biwire (shotgunned) speaker cables. But there is no visible direction arrows on the cable. 

So I shouldn't worry about that soundwise? 

 

I my view no, but why not test it yourself?

You would of course need to get someone to plug the cables in without telling you which direction the cables were set & do it a few times, sometimes changing direction, sometimes not, they should obviously do this when you are not in the room**.

On the other hand, just plug them in, forget about it & enjoy the music.

** and not be in the room when you do the listening test, to ensure that their reaction doesn't unintentionally give you clues as to their expected outcome.

jon honeyball posted:

Harry posted:

If the test is of any validity it will be published in a journal. So all we need is the reference. Please?

Utter nonsense. I have run valid listening tests for 25 years. You wont find them in a journal, nor is there any need for them to be published to be valid. There is this concept of industrial intellectual property. Properly run listening tests are very expensive to do -- why would we just give it away?

 

You don't have to give anything away. But if someone is making a claim that is not backed by published, peer reviewed data it is meaningless. In your reply you do not seem to have made the distinction between R&D data on file, commercially sensitive data and stuff like that, and evidence supporting product claims, which should be strong, reproducible and susceptible to scrutiny. Or as pointed out above, you can let people listen for themselves. In a field as subjective as this it doesn't really matter what anybody else says. You hear what you hear.

A contribution here asked if we would like to hear about a test that supported an opinion and a statistical component was quoted. Not only did this sound (on face value) like a weak correlation but the methodology, results, maths and conclusion has so far failed to appear. Making the claim factotums so far. If the published data comes to light and appears strong, the situation will change.

jon honeyball posted:

No, it wont be profitable. indeed, given the amount of ill-informed argument it would generate, it would within minutes consume any profit in time sunk having to explain everything in micro detail. Which then turns into a massive ballache.

Sorry, ain't happening. And again, its IP: why should any company just hand over years of expertise and research to others for a nominal gratuity? 

And before we go any further, how many have even read BS 6840-13:1998, IEC 60268-13:1998???

Jon, please don't take a pop at me: I genuinely thought it may be profitable, I wasn't at all suggesting that you should do something at a loss.  You know the publishing business MUCH better than I; so if you believe that publishing such a special would be more trouble than profit, then I accept that view, and your reason for not publishing.

In respect of BS 6840-13:1998, IEC 60268-13:1998, are these not the same thing?  I can't justify paying £112 for something I can't actually use.  However I have a number of papers published in peer reviewed journals, so I do have some knowledge of testing in controlled conditions and of results analysis.

On the subject of "cable directionality" where, to be more precise, a cable is tried out in one direction and then the other, and one of them is adjudged to sound preferable to the other, JV's response as to the question of "why?" from the original forum are rather interesting.  It's been posted before, but worth repeating here;

I can't tell you why cables sound different one way round to the other, but I do know when the 'directionality' happens in manufacture.

It doesn't seem to matter how the bundle (of copper) is drawn, single direction or mixed direction, but as soon as the insulation is extruded onto the bundle, the directionality is established. This means that one can mark the insulation and it will always be the right way round.

I suspect that the hot plastic insulation anneals the copper in some way, and this affects the crystaline structure. But all our attempts, over many years, have failed to find any measurement to show the directionality or indeed whether one cable will sound better than another (other than the obvious - resistance, capacitance and inductance)

Maybe someone out there knows?

Harry posted:

jon honeyball posted:

Harry posted:

If the test is of any validity it will be published in a journal. So all we need is the reference. Please?

Utter nonsense. I have run valid listening tests for 25 years. You wont find them in a journal, nor is there any need for them to be published to be valid. There is this concept of industrial intellectual property. Properly run listening tests are very expensive to do -- why would we just give it away?

 

You don't have to give anything away. But if someone is making a claim that is not backed by published, peer reviewed data it is meaningless. In your reply you do not seem to have made the distinction between R&D data on file, commercially sensitive data and stuff like that, and evidence supporting product claims, which should be strong, reproducible and susceptible to scrutiny. Or as pointed out above, you can let people listen for themselves. In a field as subjective as this it doesn't really matter what anybody else says. You hear what you hear.

A contribution here asked if we would like to hear about a test that supported an opinion and a statistical component was quoted. Not only did this sound (on face value) like a weak correlation but the methodology, results, maths and conclusion has so far failed to appear. Making the claim factotums so far. If the published data comes to light and appears strong, the situation will change.

"But if someone is making a claim that is not backed by published, peer reviewed data it is meaningless."

There we disagree. Do you think the claims made by, given the house in which we are sitting, Naim regarding Super Lumina are meaningless? "Super Lumina speaker cables are designed to minimise the effect of external and internal interference sources and preserve maximum signal fidelity." Where is the "published, peer reviewed data" ? Where is the "evidence supporting product claims, which should be strong, reproducible and susceptible to scrutiny" here?

Richard Dane posted:

On the subject of "cable directionality" where, to be more precise, a cable is tried out in one direction and then the other, and one of them is adjudged to sound preferable to the other, JV's response as to the question of "why?" from the original forum are rather interesting.  It's been posted before, but worth repeating here;

I can't tell you why cables sound different one way round to the other, but I do know when the 'directionality' happens in manufacture.

It doesn't seem to matter how the bundle (of copper) is drawn, single direction or mixed direction, but as soon as the insulation is extruded onto the bundle, the directionality is established. This means that one can mark the insulation and it will always be the right way round.

I suspect that the hot plastic insulation anneals the copper in some way, and this affects the crystaline structure. But all our attempts, over many years, have failed to find any measurement to show the directionality or indeed whether one cable will sound better than another (other than the obvious - resistance, capacitance and inductance)

Maybe someone out there knows?

That is a great JV quote. Understanding of the issues, and recognition that no known measurement could show a difference (and still cant). The headstone on my grave will state "Jon was very disappointed that sound measurement made almost no appreciable improvement in 30 years"

Richard Dane posted:

On the subject of "cable directionality" where, to be more precise, a cable is tried out in one direction and then the other, and one of them is adjudged to sound preferable to the other, JV's response as to the question of "why?" from the original forum are rather interesting.  It's been posted before, but worth repeating here;

 

I suspect that the hot plastic insulation anneals the copper in some way, and this affects the crystaline structure. But all our attempts, over many years, have failed to find any measurement to show the directionality or indeed whether one cable will sound better than another (other than the obvious - resistance, capacitance and inductance)

Maybe someone out there knows?

The annealing temperature of copper is 371C  - 645C & then it should be quenched in water.

See link to pdf.

http://www.nancylthamilton.com...tures-for-Metals.pdf

I doubt if the plastic is this hot & I would be very surprised if the cable was then quenched, and even if it was the plastic cover would be a thermal insulator & so mitigate the effect of quenching.

Quite a few speaker cable makers mention that if cable direction is changed, after signal has passed for several hours it shouldn't make any difference.   Burning out the in !

Many years ago, after meticulously laying some lengths of NACA5 through some conduit, I realised I'd put one side in with the arrows facing the wrong way. It sounded fine so I lived with it for a while, but those little nagging doubts came along...I eventually relaid it the right way round. No difference at all. Still, if it's got directional markings, why not follow them?

Again John, distinction necxessary. Marketing claims, DOF and evidence. 

1. My company has X years experience, knows it's business and its customers and is expert in a particular field(s). We dedicate ourselves to excellence. And so on. We know our stuff and we make good stuff. 90% of our customers think we make good stuff and will buy more of our stuff. All good and acceptable. And often good reading.

2. We have data on file which gives us a competitive edge. Then keep it or sell it for vast sums of money.

3. I have a study which shows that 85% of Humans can't hear lyrics sung by  Geddy Lee's but 90% of dogs can. OK. Let's see the study.

I appreciate that different sectors can get away with different kinds of "evidence". I come from a pharmacological background and tend to work in the 0.1 or preferably 0.01 probability range. I worked with a cosmetics house and their scientific evidence was laughably weak for pharma but perfectly OK for the consumer groups and customers they sold to. And for the bodies who regulated them.

All good. No pedantry necessary. However, when someone (not you John) post to say they have a study which shows 75% of subjects reported something and that this constituted evidence of something, we in the realms of scientific research and there are rules/conventions for this type of research to prevent abuse and misrepresentation. I merely asked for routine supporting information.

I think it's pointless trying to tell people what they are likely to hear.  They will hear whatever they hear. If they report what they hear it may be instructive. If someone then collects this, does an analysis and presents it as a study with stats, we're in a more rigorous area.

And if two people disagree about something, well, that's fine too. No harm.

Harry, my point was the claim that something had to be published and peer reviewed for it to be real and correct. Thats not the case, and I think you agree with me on that.

A few years ago there was wide spread press of a G8 type of  convergence of various researchers and manufacturers trying to get to a universal standard with the whole issue of measurable tech data and subjective/objective ground plan regarding cables and quality.    Haven't read any thing since.. They must have found the right recipe and keeping it under lucre wraps.. Shame.

Certainly John. Anybody can publish anything they like. A study which presents itself as a statistical analysis or somehow scientific will of course be laughed out of the building if not susceptible to scrutiny by statisticians and/or peer scientists.