Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Randy chalenges speaker cable manufacturer

E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eeyore said:
Wow ! They claim their cable has a better frequency response ! Shame that the link is corrupted.

Here is their frequency response claim !
http://www.pearcable.com/sub_products_comice_frequencyresponse.htm

They are claiming that an unspecified "competitor's cable" is more than 6 dB down at 20kHz ! Bizarrely they
reckon their own cable is over a dB down at 20kHz too !

Quite why their cable is also some 8dB down at 30 ? Hz is also a very strange claim.


Graham
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored

Jan 1, 1970
0
Wow ! They claim their cable has a better frequency response ! Shame that the link is corrupted.

Graham


Works fine here, you fucking retard.
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
ChairmanOfTheBored said:
Works fine here, you fucking retard.

The link about frequency response in the quoted article you BLIND IDIOT !

Graham
 
E

Eeyore

Jan 1, 1970
0
ChairmanOfTheBored said:
Don't know much about signals, do ya, retard boy?

It's obvious you certainly don't.

Graham
 
F

Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
They are claiming that an unspecified "competitor's cable" is more than
6 dB down at 20kHz ! Bizarrely they reckon their own cable is over a dB
down at 20kHz too !

I got to thinking about this. Audio isn't my field, but transmission lines
are. Looking at the article quoted, I noticed that they were comparing a
pair against a quad line, using loudspeakers as loads, and comparing the
voltages at the speaker terminals.

A quick and dirty Spice model of a single transmission line versus two in
parallel, both having 23ns delay (14feet at 1ns per foot corrected for 0.6
propagation factor) into loads consisting of resistance and inductance in
series shows a pronounced difference, with the quad rolling off at a
higher frequency (pair down 3dB at 20kHz, quad down 3dB at 37KHz , using
loads of 1 ohm in series with 1 microhenry). I don't know enough about
loudspeakers to even *guess* at a realistic load model, but it shows maybe
how the published "results" were obtained.

Maybe somebody with a reasonable model for a loudspeaker could expand on
this...
 
F

Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
Looking at the article quoted, I noticed that they were comparing a
pair against a quad line, using loudspeakers as loads, and comparing the
voltages at the speaker terminals.

Looking again, I must be getting senile. It's 6 conductors, not 4. This
makes the difference even more pronounced.
 
B

Bungalow Bill

Jan 1, 1970
0
I got to thinking about this. Audio isn't my field, but transmission lines
are. Looking at the article quoted, I noticed that they were comparing a
pair against a quad line, using loudspeakers as loads, and comparing the
voltages at the speaker terminals.

A quick and dirty Spice model of a single transmission line versus two in
parallel, both having 23ns delay (14feet at 1ns per foot corrected for 0.6
propagation factor) into loads consisting of resistance and inductance in
series shows a pronounced difference, with the quad rolling off at a
higher frequency (pair down 3dB at 20kHz, quad down 3dB at 37KHz , using
loads of 1 ohm in series with 1 microhenry). I don't know enough about
loudspeakers to even *guess* at a realistic load model, but it shows maybe
how the published "results" were obtained.

Maybe somebody with a reasonable model for a loudspeaker could expand on
this...


It certainly won't be the DonkTard.
 
H

HardySpicer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Wow ! They claim their cable has a better frequency response ! Shame that the link is corrupted.

Graham

You must admit - they are sexy looking cables though!!
 
H

HardySpicer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Wow ! They claim their cable has a better frequency response ! Shame that the link is corrupted.

Graham

Ok let's suppose that their cables are 6dB better at 20kHz. How many
of us can hear that high? I can hear to about 13kHz at a push maybe a
bit higher.

Hardy
 
F

Fred Abse

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ok let's suppose that their cables are 6dB better at 20kHz. How many
of us can hear that high? I can hear to about 13kHz at a push maybe a
bit higher.

Looking at your 'nym, maybe you need new needle rollers ;-)
 
T

Tim Williams

Jan 1, 1970
0
I know someone who's measured his hearing as cutting off around 21kHz. I
personally know mine rolls off around 18kHz.

It does drop with age.

Tim
 
M

Martin Griffith

Jan 1, 1970
0
I know someone who's measured his hearing as cutting off around 21kHz. I
personally know mine rolls off around 18kHz.

It does drop with age.

Tim
Ha, I don't measure signal to noise ratios anymore for audio, it's
signal to tinnitus ratio.
Strange, I can still hear a mosquito flying into the bedroom at a few
meters.
The great thing (in the olden days) with lower HF response was the
inability to hear unlocked CRT monitors in a tv studio. Probably
happens at 30yo, with the eyepod generation


Martin
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ok let's suppose that their cables are 6dB better at 20kHz. How many
of us can hear that high? I can hear to about 13kHz at a push maybe a
bit higher.

Hardy


That's pretty damned sad. Go to many concerts, did ya? Or was it loud
headphones... or wait... was it one of those lame, thumpy thumpy car
sound outfits?
 
C

ChairmanOfTheBored

Jan 1, 1970
0
I know someone who's measured his hearing as cutting off around 21kHz. I
personally know mine rolls off around 18kHz.

It does drop with age.

Well, that guys must drop with stupid human tricks, because even a
ninety year old recluse can hear about 13kHz.
 
K

Ken

Jan 1, 1970
0
Ok let's suppose that their cables are 6dB better at 20kHz.
How many of us can hear that high? I can hear to about 13kHz
at a push maybe a bit higher.

Very individual.
I could hear up to 24 kHz when I was 35 years old and now
when I'm 53 years I can hear 19 kHz without any problem.
 
M

Martin Griffith

Jan 1, 1970
0
Very individual.
I could hear up to 24 kHz when I was 35 years old and now
when I'm 53 years I can hear 19 kHz without any problem.
do you have asthma?


Martin
 
B

BobG

Jan 1, 1970
0
I could hear up to 24 kHz when I was 35 years old and now
when I'm 53 years I can hear 19 kHz without any problem.
===================================================
When you guys say 'hear' Should I assume you mean 'Set the signal
generator to freq in question, turn up the volume until the threshold
of audibility is reached', or do you use the 'sweep across the freq of
interest and judge if audibility at test freq is within some
perceptible level'. If your speakers claimed 24KHz response, but were
20 dB down at 24KHz, you'd cry foul.
 
Top