The 2 philosophies in DAC design, hands off and hands on. Which is better?

[muralman1]

Muralman1

The word "CAN"T" is strong. So far I have made the effort to accept what you say about your incredible cables ... I have a hard time understanding notions such as "trapped" energy, this is to me pushing the antropomorphism a little far.. Big insulation would "trap" energy whereas thin ones would not ...

But hey!! you enjoy your system. I will (try to) bow out but my skepticism is growing

Hi Frantz,

I am talking about two things. One is cable geometry, the other cable insulation. On geometry, I have proved here, without any doubt, the thin ribbon allows every frequency through in it's entirety. If you think that is heresy, I will trow in this surprise. I use aluminum foil for the negative cable. The reason for this is simple. My speaker drivers are made of aluminum. The negative circuit , comprised of isolated aluminum ribbon, returns from the top of the 5 foot tall speaker to the terminal at the bottom. Whose to me to say they made an error? When the copper is switched with the aluminum, with Cu - and Al +, the sound suffers. It becomes indistinct, and grainy. I haven't tried it yet, but I would think all four ribbons made Cu would sound as good as the Al - Cu +.

The first time I ever heard the Apogee Scintilla I was fooled into thinking I was listening to someone playing a piano in an adjoining room. Thanks to new technology I have moved that piano into the same room.

On insulation, I have proved that, on my system, insulation acts as a capacitor. Paul Speltz http://www.anticables.com/technical.html writes of insulation noise on his site. I had a demonstrator Cardas GR SCs, and a Jena pair here over the weekend. The Anti Cable made no self noise. The Jenna made a soft white noise overlaying the music. The Cardas made a thick shush sound. All three cables had the same signal carrier, copper.

This is just a lot of fun here. I feel very lucky in my choices.

Vince

 

[FrantzM]

muralman1

Following your reasoning here: Since your speakers are made of Aluminum wouldn't Aluminum be better in the whole cable ? Why only the negative side? For the record I don't believe that cables make that much of a difference (if any at all once a level of electrical adequacy is met) and after having held to the contrary for most of my audiophile life.
I understand you are extremely satisfied with your system and that is as it should. I simply don't share your views on various subjects. The term "proved' is in IMHO misused in this context. You have simply related your subjective impression on a process. You have proved nothing, even less beyond doubts which by the way, I and (speculating here) others still have.


P.S. I have a pair of Diva, still in storage. I like Apogee speakers and did think about the H20 amp which seems to work very well with Apogee speakers.

 

[muralman1]

Frantz, see this as a science lab. I have experimented with a hypothesis, arriving at a theory after some experimentation. The prototype, a ribbon insulated with household Cellophane, showed promise. I perfected the ribbon cables by carrying the full 2" ribbon's width to the insertion of the silver rhodium spades. Now, I wrote my paper and posted it here. In science it is customary for another lab to attempt to repeat the experiment using the same materials and methods. My fate would lay on that lab's findings. Knowing I am right, I had no fear of the outcome.

You see, the experiment has been duplicated elsewhere. My amp builder uses my cables.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Frantz, rest assured that you are not just speculating when you wonder if others here have doubts.

P

 

[terryj]

is there anything your system cannot do?

All of this science in your lab was done, well, scientifically right? In other words you removed experimenter bias right?

I tend to get very wary the more any given individual raves about how their system is 'simply the best'....EVER.

In my experience it has ALWAYS been an almighty letdown. Typical boring audiophile stuff, ho-hum and yawn.

Who knows, yours could be the first to be otherwise.

Sorry, but IME when someone blows their own trumpet so damned hard it is usually out of tune.

 

[muralman1]

terryj I never said my system is the best ever. It is the best I have done. As for science, there is always bias. Like I say, though, the experiment must be duplicated to gain acceptance. That has been done.

 

[FrantzM]

Frantz, regarding cables, see my post 110 (page 11) this thread. However, it is agreed that a reasonable cable will have the least affect on the sound and if short enough should be inaudible on almost all music or tests.

Tom

Tom

That's Ok wth me . There is such a thing as "adequate" cable. There is also a threshold where differences are insignificant, i-e too small to be reliably discernible. The Siltech you mentioned are not adequate , regardless of their price and reputation ...
Back to muralman1 thread ...

 

[muralman1]

We got off on a wrong tangent. My very odd cables do deserve skepticism. They are integral to my satisfaction with my system. But, they are cables. They only carry what my source started. That source is NOS. I liked the discussion on whether the Audio Note DAC is really NOS or is perhaps a stealth OS. An interesting detail about the Audio Note DA came out during this discussion. They are an 18 bit DAC. I wonder, what are the extra 2 bits used for?

 

[muralman1]

muralman1

Following your reasoning here: Since your speakers are made of Aluminum wouldn't Aluminum be better in the whole cable ? Why only the negative side? For the record I don't believe that cables make that much of a difference (if any at all once a level of electrical adequacy is met) and after having held to the contrary for most of my audiophile life.
I understand you are extremely satisfied with your system and that is as it should. I simply don't share your views on various subjects. The term "proved' is in IMHO misused in this context. You have simply related your subjective impression on a process. You have proved nothing, even less beyond doubts which by the way, I and (speculating here) others still have.


P.S. I have a pair of Diva, still in storage. I like Apogee speakers and did think about the H20 amp which seems to work very well with Apogee speakers.

Frantz,

When the aluminum is put on the positive, and the copper on the negative aluminum, the sound suffers badly. What I have here proves there is a difference between the negative, and the positive speaker circuits. My own amp builder uses my cables with great pleasure. You can reach him through his web site if you want to test my honesty. That makes two Scintilla systems where my cables have worked miracles. I only use that term because I can't explain why they work.

Obviously aluminum introduced to a speaker, yours and mine have several square feet of AL, does nothing to deter it's great performance. By the way, in the speaker, copper is used to hook up to the positive end. That is an interesting thing to me. The guy who designed this speaker, and it's ribbons was a NASA scientist. You must know that.

 

[JackD201]

Muralman, please allow a slight detour in your thread. Frantz is a telecommunication engineer so I just need a bit of clarification on a kind of dumb technical question rather than the subjectively observed side. So I have absolutely no intention of trying to disprove anything you say. I have not heard it so as the saying goes, I have no opinion. I just need a quick cable basics brush up.

Frantz, it is my understanding that amplifier output signal is alternating current. Doesn't that mean that back emf travels back to the amplifier through both conductors and not just the negative as would be the case with DC? If that is the case, what could be the benefits of having a positive and a negative with different electrical properties?

 

[flez007]

Tom

That's Ok wth me . There is such a thing as "adequate" cable. There is also a threshold where differences are insignificant, i-e too small to be reliably discernible. The Siltech you mentioned are not adequate , regardless of their price and reputation ...
Back to muralman1 thread ...

. I have been a humble observer until this last quote

Frantz - Can you elaborate more on your last statement? Maybe I read it incorrectly but appears to say that Siltech cables/design are "not adequate"? (my appologies to muralman for slightly stepping-in his thread).

 

[FrantzM]

JackD201

emf travels back from the speakers to the amplifier. Any transducer (something transforming one form of energy into another, say a motor or loudspeaker) produces emf. In this context the term is counter-electromotive force .. a voltage in opposition to that of the source. So yes speakers produce CEMF. And speakers are driven by AC if there were a DC component it would likely fry some of the speakers innards namely the voice coils.

Any circuit has to be a closed loop... if it is open there can't be any electric flow thus no electricity.
The path followed by the current is the circuit, that is the loop with both "negative" and "positive". it should not be thought that the CEMF is on the "negative" leg of the circuit and EMF on the "positive". They act on the circuit. Thus my doubt about muralman1 claims on different results whether he uses a different material on the "negative" or "positive" among many about his claims ...

Now about Siltech. I read Tomelex post 110 in this thread , I am quoting

Siltechs ribbon cables, for example, at 10 meter length (I know thats long but needed for easier to see test results) roll off almost 3 db from 7KHz to 20Khz when driven by a less than .1 ohm output impedance solid state amp.

I would like anyone to tell me that is not inadequate ... One can like his or her Siltech but ... there are people who prefer Tang to real Orange Juice so... I will just remark that One doesn't need to spend so much to have poor specs ...

On the subject of using different metal on the positive or negative side ... I continue to be skeptical. I even have more than doubts about the audibility of such but hey .. if one is pleased by beliefs in such unusual and unexplainable finding ...it is ... all good.

 

[flez007]

Hhhmmm that is Like an equalizer within the cable, and would be clearly audible. I do not find that behaviour in my Siltech cabling, just the opposite... I have compared my spkr cable with at least a dozen from other manufacturers and among other things, music is a tad brighter but with body and textures. Go figure....

 

[muralman1]

Hey you guys, I know I am speaking heresy. There are two folks now, plus lots of listeners, that know the value of my SCs. Like I said, when I chose aluminum for the negative cable, I was not prepared for the shocking improvement of my sound over the Anti-Cables I had been using. The folks who have heard this are believers.

 

[FrantzM]

Of course mu'man the believers have seen the cable change and were told what to expect ...

all good

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Hey you guys, I know I am speaking heresy./QUOTE]

Not necessarily. In some circles, expecting wire to behave according to established principles is the heresy and hearing that which should not exist and cannot be explained is normal. I think this rather open and eclectic community has both sides, co-existing and relative peace.

P

 

[JackD201]

Thanks Frantz, that was my concern as well.

Back to our regular programming...........

 

[muralman1]

yessir....... onto more gentle topics...... One that doesn't excite the unbeliever....... OS SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! On my system....

 

[rsbeck]

Two matching anecdotal testimonials does not add up to the verification of a hypothesis.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Two matching anecdotal testimonials does not add up to the verification of a hypothesis.

And a tweaked sound system in an audiophile's living room is not a "lab," it is just more audiophile pseudo-science carried to the extreme.

Tim