WBF: How Much Science Talk Do You Want to See?

[ddk]

That is not a spec. Spec would be "Speaker Impedance: 4 ohms." What is there instead is a complex graph of loudspeaker impedance, followed by an analysis of it is impact on amplifier performance and why. It directly advises on the impact at 2 Khz for example if inappropriate tube amplifier is used.

If people are not offended, then I wonder how much they pay attention to such a measurement in reviews and help that inform them of their amplifier choice. And how aware they are that if they violate such, they are listening to colorations as opposed to what they think is high fidelity.

And how it is that we want to accept reviews of loudspeakers that have no measurements as such.

I don't see anything offensive about specs or science, I very much doubt that's what bothers anyone. Its the dismissal of subjective values that people object to. We don't all have the same understanding or experience so these specs or science is of relative value to different individuals. Speaker measurements are very important to me because I understand them, but you show me spec parameters for a tube and I wouldn't know what to make of it, so I have rely solely on subjective sound.

david

 

[microstrip]

Was looking in a Wilson loudspeaker manual to find an answer for another member and ran into this after a measurement of impedance was shown:

(...)
This is precisely the usefulness of audio science that I mentioned earlier in the thread. That we can and do know how to tie the world of objectivity and subjectivity together. Maybe not all the time but often.

Are members who don't want to hear about audio science are likewise offended by this section in Wilson's manual???

Amir,

IMHO, you are addressing electrical science, not audio science as we often refer to it.

But your example can be very interesting. According to the "official" electrical science and data shown in these graphs, none of these loudspeakers should work properly with OTLs. However it seems that the system V could sound good with them. Really good news!

Being a ex-System V and OTL user I can assure you they sounded really great with Atmasphere OTLs. I am sure Ralph Karsten can confirm it.

 

[microstrip]

(...) That is not a spec. Spec would be "Speaker Impedance: 4 ohms." What is there instead is a complex graph of loudspeaker impedance, followed by an analysis of it is impact on amplifier performance and why. It directly advises on the impact at 2 Khz for example if inappropriate tube amplifier is used.
(...)

IMHO it is just where many times the analysis completely fails. Take Dynaudio speakers. They do their best to present a flat, low phase angle impedance curve with an average value around 4 ohms, no big dips. However experience shows that they really need high power amplifiers with high current capacity to control the speaker. Perhaps it why many people who love science in this forum endorse the principle "lots of clean power, the much you can have" every time some one asks for advice on an amplifier for his system.

Again IMHO unfortunately 95% of what is said in magazines about technical correlation between sound quality and "complex graphs" shown in reviews adds very little real value to them. We have the few cases where thinks are very simple and logical such as Krell and Apogees, but little less for consumer advice. I am surely addressing people who do not have a mathematical or engineering degree.

By chance I was just listening a few hours ago to a Bascom H.King interview on why amplifiers sound different. Just an appetizer "Music passes through electronic circuitry in a different way than electrons" http://www.psaudio.com/bhk-signature-250300-amplifiers/

 

[ddk]

IMHO it is just where many times the analysis completely fails. Take Dynaudio speakers. They do their best to present a flat, low phase angle impedance curve with an average value around 4 ohms, no big dips. However experience shows that they really need high power amplifiers with high current capacity to control the speaker. Perhaps it why many people who love science in this forum endorse the principle "lots of clean power, the much you can have" every time some one asks for advice on an amplifier for his system.

Again IMHO unfortunately 95% of what is said in magazines about technical correlation between sound quality and "complex graphs" shown in reviews adds very little real value to them. We have the few cases where thinks are very simple and logical such as Krell and Apogees, but little less for consumer advice. I am surely addressing people who do not have a mathematical or engineering degree.

By chance I was just listening a few hours ago to a Bascom H.King interview on why amplifiers sound different. Just an appetizer "Music passes through electronic circuitry in a different way than electrons" http://www.psaudio.com/bhk-signature-250300-amplifiers/

That's very true microstrip, I know from experience that speakers large Tannoys and even horns using TAD woofers need quite a lot more than what their fairly benign specs and load suggests. Nothing is fool proof or a substitute for experience.

david

 

[NorthStar]

91 votes so far:

- For 16.5% of those voters Science (tests, analyses, measurements, readings aptitudes, matching component values, interactions of audio components between themselves, the room and the ear's listeners @ the MLP and the surroundings too, even in adjacent rooms as mentioned earlier by another member in this thread or another, and specs are based on measured values of the parts used in audio components including the loudspeakers, and coherence and phase are measurable and important, etc.) is irrelevant...they ignore it or it don't matter @ all...only their ears matter.

- For 83.5% (the remaining portion of the 91 voters, Science and Listening Tests/Sessions are fine together...they can live with it and they accept them both, up to their own belief and limit. And out from that 83.5% there are 38.5% who rely more on their ears @ the end; but did they test all the other audio gear out there? ...Certainly not, so their reliance is only as good as their experience's limitation...and that's a true fact to not be ignored.

* Yes, we have no choice; what we have and don't have, what we know and don't know, what we have experienced and not are our own limitations, realities of life, our restricted knowledge. To expand our knowledge on better music reproduction we need more experience with more audio gear and loudspeakers out there plus in various rooms.
Whoever has the most experience in all those parameters, and also on room's acoustics, plus on accurate readings of measurements in those rooms, with the tools @ end (best tools and mics), a very good set of ears, ...a person who can correlate what his ears tell him with the measured performances of all equations relative to music reproduction, also who can distinguish clearly between sound preference and sound reference, based on live acoustic music, ...real musical instruments and people's voices in real avenues including our listening rooms (having real live Jazz or Classical chamber bands in our listening space...did you guys ever had that before? ...Un-amplified music. ...I'm sure some of you had...and I had too), a person who understand and can coordinate his emotional chords in sync with the technical sounds being reproduced in each and every room, a person who tested acoustically treated and untreated rooms (many of them), a person who worked with many other persons as a group, as a force, to have a broader range, a more expanded view on all the relative elements of sound reproduction, a quantum listening session with physics collaboration, ...brief a person with all the experience and carrying tools from the vast baggage of all the essential parameters in the pursuit to duplicate the live musical event.

@ the end, isn't it what we all aspire to? ...Or just to be happy with OUR OWN sound in OUR OWN rooms? ...Are we limiting ourselves by not exploring all the science of reference and preference? ...We sure are. ...And when we think that we have found the path to the holy grail, the road to music nirvana, with or without measurements; then that's when we are further away from the musical truth. ...Music is a constant evolving series of sounds and harmonies with various pitches and emotional chords inside each person and different with each piece of gear and in different rooms. The only constancy is the music recording itself (LP, CD, R-2-R tape, hi-res download, ...) and that's if we can adjust the volume level exactly the same each and every time in each and all the rooms.

And live music is never the exact same twice...it is simply impossible...humans are not robots...they are less than perfect.

This...to be continued. ...The theory between science and our sense of hearing. ...We all love listening to music, that's why we are here to learn even more on how to improve that love. ...Yes, no? ...It is never "finito", it never ends till we say so and only then it's an all new beginning...with new and better quality music recordings that we love even more and learn to. ...It's a life journey, and when we die I just don't know if we can still hear from the new passage into a newer dimension... ...And we can perhaps substitute "new" for simply "another". ...An entanglement?

 

[amirm]

Amir,

IMHO, you are addressing electrical science, not audio science as we often refer to it.

I am unclear of that distinction here. I am quoting a manual for an audio product. It is giving advice on how to get the best sound out of the loudspeaker, not some talk of electrical systems. It is talking about how you can experience audio colorations due to low impedance of the loudspeaker at certain frequencies.

But if you like, we can take it to the next step and bring psychoacoustics into it and firmly reinforce audio science. There, controlled listening tests show that deviations of just 0.5 db is audible in broad resonances/frequency response variations. This means you better use loudspeaker wires and amplifiers that have such low impedance as to not be remotely a significant ratio of the 2 ohm (see http://www.madronadigital.com/Library/AudibilityofSmallDistortions.html).

But your example can be very interesting. According to the "official" electrical science and data shown in these graphs, none of these loudspeakers should work properly with OTLs. However it seems that the system V could sound good with them. Really good news!

I can add reverb to a track, boost its bass, reduce its treble, etc. and have people like that too. Colorations can certainly be pleasing. What I can't do is show that they sound good on all content and for all people. So whoever is resorting to them by choice of high impedance amplifier, should be conscious of this.

Being a ex-System V and OTL user I can assure you they sounded really great with Atmasphere OTLs. I am sure Ralph Karsten can confirm it.

No doubt per above. It is a validation that much of what we like may be colorations, not high fidelity.

 

[DaveC]

Really?



Is this your subjective or objective opinion? Please tell what makes silver so accurate, and how have you measured and defined this accuracy? Silver is a material and has a very strong sonic signature, where's the accuracy? How is copper less accurate or warm as a material? Plenty of cold, harsh sounding copper cable out there to probe you wrong. I'm one of those people who avoids any wire or equipment using silver as a base, only because I generally find the sound of silver very colored and inaccurate!



I beg to differ along with some very high end audio manufacturers, but we won't argue with your feelings!

david

Silver wire was created for the aircraft industry as a weight saving measure, never intended for high end sound, IMO silver wire has a lot of undesirable sonic qualities! I wonder when Aluminum wires will find their way into high end.

david

Check out JPS Labs for aluminum wire....

On silver, I agree on it's particular and undesirable sonic signature but it's obvious you have not tried a cable that uses UPOCC silver. The crystal structure of UPOCC silver keeps it from displaying these faults, and the resolution is far better than with any other conductor material. You can only get so far with copper cables, especially IC cables. I have tested my silver/gold OCC alloy wire vs some pretty high end copper cables from Jorma, Master Built and others and there is no contest... the OCC alloy wire is far superior in clarity and resolution. This allows you to hear the micro detail in acoustic instruments more clearly, you hear reverb trails that aren't truncated and spatial cues that may have been completely lost are now audible. Copper sounds nice, it adds warmth and body, but it's not high fidelity... especially for IC cables. I'll make the same offer to you as NorthStar, if you want to try them yourself I'll send you some cables and I have absolutely no doubt you'll change your mind.

And IMO, if a manufacturer uses silver plated copper wire it's just not high end... sorry. Some, like DH Labs, Wireworld, etc do offer good products made with silver plated UPOCC copper but if you check out their highest end cables they are using UPOCC silver. Silver plated copper is truly compromised way of constructing a wire but for some it makes sense when designing to meet a pricepoint. Even Siltech now uses UPOCC silver in their highest end cables. I am, afaik, the only one that uses an OCC silver/gold alloy and if you want to compare them against any other company's top of the line cables, regardless of price, I'm all for it. Ridicule me later if you think I'm wrong but I've had so many people test these cables I have no doubts as to the outcome of comparisons.

And speaking of NorthStar, true to the form of every objectivist I have ever talked to, won't try anything new and is unwilling to experiment. This is where science becomes religion, the unwillingness to keep an open mind and experiment is possibly the least scientific viewpoint you can take on anything and resembles the faith of the religious. The article previously posted about how bad science is like bad religion is absolutely true. Once we decide we know everything there is no need to keep an open mind anymore and any information that contradicts their beliefs MUST BE WRONG!

 

[DaveC]

No doubt per above. It is a validation that much of what we like may be colorations, not high fidelity.

Absolutely. I think with experience most folks would prefer fidelity because it is capable of connecting you with the music to a greater degree. It's just not easy to get folks to experience this.

 

[microstrip]

I am unclear of that distinction here. I am quoting a manual for an audio product. It is giving advice on how to get the best sound out of the loudspeaker, not some talk of electrical systems. It is talking about how you can experience audio colorations due to low impedance of the loudspeaker at certain frequencies.

But if you like, we can take it to the next step and bring psychoacoustics into it and firmly reinforce audio science. There, controlled listening tests show that deviations of just 0.5 db is audible in broad resonances/frequency response variations. This means you better use loudspeaker wires and amplifiers that have such low impedance as to not be remotely a significant ratio of the 2 ohm (see http://www.madronadigital.com/Library/AudibilityofSmallDistortions.html).


I can add reverb to a track, boost its bass, reduce its treble, etc. and have people like that too. Colorations can certainly be pleasing. What I can't do is show that they sound good on all content and for all people. So whoever is resorting to them by choice of high impedance amplifier, should be conscious of this.


(...).

My interpretation is that David Wilson was not addressing the coloration due to the impedance but the memories of the high distortion and smoke smell caused by the Watt 3/ Puppy 2 2 kHz impedance dip on the Futterman's. In the 90's, Futtermans's were considered some of the best sounding amplifiers, and he wanted to make clear that they were compatible with the new Watt/Puppy.

No problem - please stay with your "high-fidelity" concepts and "controlled listening tests". Some of us try to have the best of both sides - science to evaluate the technical performance of equipment and our ears and experience to estimate how it sounds. Again, the high-end does not want to sound good on all content for all people. Audio is not a democracy where next day after the election we have a president for the whole country. As Nelson Pass said

" Our real customers care most about the experience they get when
they sit down to listen to their music. We create amplifiers that we
like to listen to, on the assumption that we share similar taste.
We want our products to invite you to listen. We want you to enjoy
the experience so much that you go through your entire record
collection - again and again. This, by the way, is a very strong
indicator. "

 

[microstrip]

No doubt per above. It is a validation that much of what we like may be colorations, not high fidelity.

An interesting subject. a)Do we like the colorations, or b)do we like something else that the classical measurements do not show or we do not know how to interpret, in spite of the measurable colorations?

My answer is b). I can change frequency balance by a few dB in bass, medium and treble in the Soundlab's. But the fundamental character of the OTL amplifier stayed. BTW, the Soundlab's have an horrible impedance curve.

 

[microstrip]

Absolutely. I think with experience most folks would prefer fidelity because it is capable of connecting you with the music to a greater degree. It's just not easy to get folks to experience this.

DaveC,

Now the difficult question - how do you exactly define coloration in a cable?

 

[amirm]

My interpretation is that David Wilson was not addressing the coloration due to the impedance but the memories of the high distortion and smoke smell caused by the Watt 3/ Puppy 2 2 kHz impedance dip on the Futterman's. In the 90's, Futtermans's were considered some of the best sounding amplifiers, and he wanted to make clear that they were compatible with the new Watt/Puppy.

You must not be reading the same thing I am reading. The paragraph I posted is proceeded with this measurement:

He goes on to say, "However,
in the 2 KHz region it should be noted that the impedance drops to approximately 2
ohms. This does not present a problem with most modem high performance amplifiers.
It does, however, contraindicate the use of certain amplifiers with vacuum tubes in their
output stage, but no output transformer, such as the classic Futterman."

"contraindicate the use of ... Futterman" means it is compatible??? And why bother with all that graph and such if it is just to say what you said?

Answer is no, he is practicing proper science. He is trying to give you more information to make a more informed decision about your amplification. Kudos to them for doing so.

No problem - please stay with your "high-fidelity" concepts and "controlled listening tests".

What I said should be every subjectivist's friend. It explains that loudspeaker wires can cause colorations. And provide a proof point for doing so. Are you saying that isn't so and that neither amplifiers, nor loudspeakers can cause audible colorations due to low impedance of a loudspeaker???

Some of us try to have the best of both sides - science to evaluate the technical performance of equipment and our ears and experience to estimate how it sounds.

The "ear" is part of the quote from the manual, and in my expansion of it. What you mean is that you also include personal observations which are not bias controlled.

Again, the high-end does not want to sound good on all content for all people.

You are right as long as a claim is not made that you are getting closer to the source, have a more transparent system, are hearing what was heard in the studio, etc. Because if you say you are presenting the highest fidelity yet a bunch of people don't agree with you, then you have failed at proving that point. After all, there can't be 100 different versions of the audio truth.

Audio is not a democracy where next day after the election we have a president for the whole country. As Nelson Pass said

" Our real customers care most about the experience they get when
they sit down to listen to their music. We create amplifiers that we
like to listen to, on the assumption that we share similar taste.
We want our products to invite you to listen. We want you to enjoy
the experience so much that you go through your entire record
collection - again and again. This, by the way, is a very strong
indicator. "

Standard advertising copy. It is like saying come to our restaurant and our eat our delicious cakes. What exactly are we supposed to take away from it other than that?

 

[DaveC]

DaveC,

Now the difficult question - how do you exactly define coloration in a cable?

That's not difficult at all, it's the most frequently asked question I get. To answer... it's all relative, just like any component. Since there is no defined reference and we can't compare a cable to no cable or an amplifier to no amplifier, or a source to no source at all, we have to make relative comparisons.

How do I judge personally? My goals are the most neutral and highest fidelity possible without introducing harshness that can cause listening fatigue. Listening fatigue is evil and to be avoided at all costs. Fidelity I define as resolution as well as accurate timbre. Timbre is the reason I use gold in my cables, it makes for a very realistic timbre combined with the silver, which some find a bit "light" in tone by its self. With copper you typically get a warmth that makes the timbre too thick, and this warmth also obscures detail. Most people are used to this artificial warmth but when they experience the additional resolution a good cable can offer they miss it a lot less. Silver of 4N purity or lower causes listening fatigue by accentuating the leading edges and higher frequencies as well as adding a particular kind of harshness to the sound. It sounds exciting at first but over time it's really annoying and causes you to turn the volume down and eventually turn your system off. It reduces your enjoyment of music, which is why it's to be avoided at all costs. It's better to have an overly warm system with less resolution than a fatiguing system.

 

[amirm]

An interesting subject. a)Do we like the colorations, or b)do we like something else that the classical measurements do not show or we do not know how to interpret, in spite of the measurable colorations?

The ears and measurements agree on colorations. They are audible beyond limits such as the one I gave the example of. Before we worry about anything else on top of that, we need to make sure we agree on that.

My answer is b). I can change frequency balance by a few dB in bass, medium and treble in the Soundlab's. But the fundamental character of the OTL amplifier stayed. BTW, the Soundlab's have an horrible impedance curve.

If it has a horrible impedance curve and causes colorations distinct from what else you modified, then sure, that is believable. But has nothing to do with the question. Certainly you did not love the Soundlab equally with or without those boosts or cuts, did you?

 

[microstrip]

You must not be reading the same thing I am reading. The paragraph I posted is proceeded with this measurement:

Yes, we are reading the same. But I followed the Futterman /Watt3/Puppy2 dramas in magazines decades ago, read about it in OTL foruns and remember what the contraindications really were. David Wilson has much more recent speakers with very large variation in impedance and he is not worried with their use with SETs having high output impedance - ask Steve about his X2 / Lamm SET.

You are right as long as a claim is not made that you are getting closer to the source, have a more transparent system, are hearing what was heard in the studio, etc. Because if you say you are presenting the highest fidelity yet a bunch of people don't agree with you, then you have failed at proving that point. After all, there can't be 100 different versions of the audio truth.

Yes, I want to have better and different sound quality than what was heard in the studio. The Japanese receiver all sounding the same argument again?

Standard advertising copy. It is like saying come to our restaurant and our eat our delicious cakes. What exactly are we supposed to take away from it other than that?

Sorry you only interpret it this way. Behind the marketing there is a clear message. Try reading some good poetry and then re-read it.

BTW, can you resist arguing with the structure "if you say you are ... and then inventing something I am not saying? IMHO it is not a fair style. High-fidelity has so many meanings and connotations that I would never risk being a sponsor of it!

 

[ddk]

Check out JPS Labs for aluminum wire....

On silver, I agree on it's particular and undesirable sonic signature but it's obvious you have not tried a cable that uses UPOCC silver. The crystal structure of UPOCC silver keeps it from displaying these faults, and the resolution is far better than with any other conductor material. You can only get so far with copper cables, especially IC cables. I have tested my silver/gold OCC alloy wire vs some pretty high end copper cables from Jorma, Master Built and others and there is no contest... the OCC alloy wire is far superior in clarity and resolution. This allows you to hear the micro detail in acoustic instruments more clearly, you hear reverb trails that aren't truncated and spatial cues that may have been completely lost are now audible. Copper sounds nice, it adds warmth and body, but it's not high fidelity... especially for IC cables. I'll make the same offer to you as NorthStar, if you want to try them yourself I'll send you some cables and I have absolutely no doubt you'll change your mind.

And IMO, if a manufacturer uses silver plated copper wire it's just not high end... sorry. Some, like DH Labs, Wireworld, etc do offer good products made with silver plated UPOCC copper but if you check out their highest end cables they are using UPOCC silver. Silver plated copper is truly compromised way of constructing a wire but for some it makes sense when designing to meet a pricepoint. Even Siltech now uses UPOCC silver in their highest end cables. I am, afaik, the only one that uses an OCC silver/gold alloy and if you want to compare them against any other company's top of the line cables, regardless of price, I'm all for it. Ridicule me later if you think I'm wrong but I've had so many people test these cables I have no doubts as to the outcome of comparisons.

And speaking of NorthStar, true to the form of every objectivist I have ever talked to, won't try anything new and is unwilling to experiment. This is where science becomes religion, the unwillingness to keep an open mind and experiment is possibly the least scientific viewpoint you can take on anything and resembles the faith of the religious. The article previously posted about how bad science is like bad religion is absolutely true. Once we decide we know everything there is no need to keep an open mind anymore and any information that contradicts their beliefs MUST BE WRONG!

You & I must have a very different definition of high end sound and resolution. You're also generalizing qualities of copper cable maybe based on what you've experienced, specially if you consider the products from any of the above names as quality. Yes, I do have samples from most of them, even raw silver/gold Siltech wires, let's just say I prefer and used Radio Shack cables over any of them… Much more natural!

You're putting too much emphasis on a name. UPOCC is a process, not a guarantee of any quality! There are many brands of casting equipment and even more wire manufacturers using the process, neither the casting equipment nor the manufacturers wire are equal and neither are their alloys the same. You have no way of knowing what you're getting, even from a brand that you like the batches will differ. The heat you apply for your termination will affect the crystal structure of the wire too, then there's the termination product itself that will contribute to the final sound. You're also completely ignoring proper engineering and high end cable engineering which is far more important than any material alone. Please understand, I'm not putting you or your products down, and not arguing your preference for silver or silver/gold alloy, only totally disagree with your generalized statements and the hifi standards that you mention as a measure of sound quality;

the OCC alloy wire is far superior in clarity and resolution. This allows you to hear the micro detail in acoustic instruments more clearly, you hear reverb trails that aren't truncated and spatial cues that may have been completely lost are now audible. Copper sounds nice, it adds warmth and body, but it's not high fidelity... especially for IC cables.

I thank you for your trial offer, someday I might take you up on that.

david

 

[NorthStar]

...
And speaking of NorthStar, true to the form of every objectivist I have ever talked to, won't try anything new and is unwilling to experiment. This is where science becomes religion, the unwillingness to keep an open mind and experiment is possibly the least scientific viewpoint you can take on anything and resembles the faith of the religious. The article previously posted about how bad science is like bad religion is absolutely true. Once we decide we know everything there is no need to keep an open mind anymore and any information that contradicts their beliefs MUST BE WRONG!

Alright Dave, you want to walk the talk, let's do it, PM me for arrangements.
One thing though, I don't have measuring tools @ home for your ICs, so it would be only a subjective evaluation, and @ 60 my ears are no good anymore past about 12kHz.
Who knows the level of my aptitudes; I never did any blind tests, never collectively participated in methodical listening sessions, and never measured any of it.

Why don't you send your ICs to Amir instead; he has a good set of ears, experience in listening sessions and knows what to listen for, plus he can do some useful measurements.
Amir would be a much better person than I for this experimentation, and I trust him.

And if you insist on my participation, ok, PM me, share what you have in mind on how to proceeed. ...I'm in Canada though, so the charges they won't be free, for me.
We'll talk first, and see how we can accommodate each other. You put me on the spot; I'll tango in duo.

Best cheers,
Bob

 

[DaveC]

dkk, I'm not even going to respond to that, when you say stuff like this "You're also completely ignoring proper engineering and high end cable engineering", well, that's going to end all reasonable discussion, isn't it? How do you know what engineering principles I use? BTW, I do have a degree in engineering.

Also, your nonsense about UPOCC wire is just that. There is currently ONE factory with a license to use Professor Ohno's patented process. It's Neotech. They make all my wire, not some no-name mainland China company that does not have a license. BTW, Neotech is responsible for the manufacture of many brands of high end cable and has been in the business for many years, they make a product that can be trusted.

The entire tone of your post was offensive, way far off base and nowhere close to the truth, David... you'll never take me up on my offer and after that post I withdraw my offer anyway. Have fun with your Radio Shack wire.

 

[DaveC]

Alright Dave, you want to walk the talk, let's do it, PM me for arrangements.
One thing though, I don't have measuring tools @ home for your ICs, so it would be only a subjective evaluation, and @ 60 my ears are no good anymore past about 12kHz.
Who knows the level of my aptitudes; I never did any blind tests, never collectively participated in methodical listening sessions, and never measured any of it.

Why don't you send your ICs to Amir instead; he has a good set of ears, experience in listening sessions and knows what to listen for, plus he can do some useful measurements.
Amir would be a much better person than I for this experimentation, and I trust him.

And if you insist on my participation, ok, PM me, share what you have in mind on how to proceeed. ...I'm in Canada though, so the charges they won't be free, for me.
We'll talk first, and see how we can accommodate each other. You put me on the spot; I'll tango in duo.

Best cheers,
Bob

Sounds good, Bob! If you accept you have no requirements except to listen and see what you think. In a huge majority of demos the differences have been pretty obvious and the descriptions of the sonic character of the cables are very consistent and similar, it's surprising even to me.

I have some cables being demo'd in Canada right now that could be sent to you before they get back to me which will help with the shipping issues. I'll PM you about the type of cables you use in your system to make sure they will fit.

If Amir is up for it that is fine too, but if you are truly interested in trying them out I think you'll enjoy the experience. If not I don't want to force you either, this shouldn't be too serious... it's just audio.

 

[NorthStar]

Copper sounds nice, it adds warmth and body, but it's not high fidelity... especially for IC cables.
I'll make the same offer to you as NorthStar, if you want to try them yourself I'll send you some cables and I have absolutely no doubt you'll change your mind.

And IMO, if a manufacturer uses silver plated copper wire it's just not high end... sorry. Some, like DH Labs, Wireworld, etc do offer good products made with silver plated UPOCC copper but if you check out their highest end cables they are using UPOCC silver. Silver plated copper is truly compromised way of constructing a wire but for some it makes sense when designing to meet a pricepoint. Even Siltech now uses UPOCC silver in their highest end cables. I am, afaik, the only one that uses an OCC silver/gold alloy and if you want to compare them against any other company's top of the line cables, regardless of price, I'm all for it. Ridicule me later if you think I'm wrong but I've had so many people test these cables I have no doubts as to the outcome of comparisons.

And speaking of NorthStar, true to the form of every objectivist I have ever talked to, won't try anything new and is unwilling to experiment. This is where science becomes religion, the unwillingness to keep an open mind and experiment is possibly the least scientific viewpoint you can take on anything and resembles the faith of the religious. The article previously posted about how bad science is like bad religion is absolutely true. Once we decide we know everything there is no need to keep an open mind anymore and any information that contradicts their beliefs MUST BE WRONG!

Sounds good, Bob! If you accept you have no requirements except to listen and see what you think. In a huge majority of demos the differences have been pretty obvious and the descriptions of the sonic character of the cables are very consistent and similar, it's surprising even to me.

I have some cables being demo'd in Canada right now that could be sent to you before they get back to me which will help with the shipping issues. I'll PM you about the type of cables you use in your system to make sure they will fit.

If Amir is up for it that is fine too, but if you are truly interested in trying them out I think you'll enjoy the experience. If not I don't want to force you either,
this shouldn't be too serious... it's just audio.

All good Dave. :b ...It's just audio. ...And words of yours just above.
And audio matters are serious enough for some folks to ban themselves if they can't ... ;-)
Yup, this is how serious some people from above ground level feel. Where is the balance of the science @ the service of the art, son haute fidelité?