Hi all,

Want the Kans closer to the wall but the Naim right-angle connectors are on what is technically the amp end of the cables. Should I care? Really?

And yes I should of course just try it and see for myself etc but time is rather tight and I'd rather not be bothered to do and undo something that, were I to tell my friends how I spent the evening - you know what I'm saying...

many thx,

John

Dependent on which theory you subscribe to either:

a) cables make no difference and so it doesn't matter, or

b) cables are only directional in the direction they become used to.

Either way, nothing should stop you setting them up how you want them.

Well I simply cannot understand how speaker cables can be directional.
But if Naim put an arrow on them, then you may as well do what it says.

IME as long as they are both the same way round it doesn't make any audible difference.

Consensus is unlikey.

I have used them the wrong way around as it's easier to connect them to speakers that are near the wall. Yes, there where music coming out of the speakers.

JohanR

As a physicist, I cannot think of any effect that would make the speaker cables directional. Supposedly, the arrows point in the direction the wires were extruded, but why should that matter?

Even if the cables had some weird nonlinear effects (which they don't, but humour me), for example imagine we wired a diode into the cable, music waveforms go both positive and negative - the current flows both ways, so the nonlinear effects are the same when you reverse the cable!

1. Cables are not directional.
2. Cables are bits of wire and do not souond any different one from the other.
3. Cable manufacturers are unscrupulous oportunistic charlatans who can afford full page advertisements in equally unscrupulolus Hi Fi Mags because their profits are right up there with Columbian Drug Lords.
4. Hi Fi enthusiasts are no so different than those women who actually believe that a $2000 per ounce face cream can stop ageing better than another $10 per ounce face cream when both use exactly the same ingredients but different "packaging".
Aaahh, marketing and stupidity ..... what a powerful combination to make a dollar.

A manufacturer's claim that their cable is directional (whether true or false) doesn't make any difference to their profit, so why would Naim put the arrows on?

When wire is drawn, directionality is created. This means that the grains of the metal are orientated in one direction (the direction of the drawing).

Electrical conductivity is impared (reduced) by faults such as crystalographic defects and grain boundaries. Cold drawing will reduce the amount of grain boundaries for a given volume of metal, and hence the electrical performance of the wire is improved.

I have never tested a wire for resistance etc both in the drawn direction and in the opposite direction of the drawing. To my mind, I do not think there would be any difference.

So, in conclusion the directionality of speaker cable is probably rubbish. Only if the cable has a special weave/construction, might the argument have any weight. Naim NAC A5 has no special weave/construction, so I would say there is no advantage on wiring with the arrow in the correct direction.

To my mind, the perfect cable would have no grain boundaries and would be a single crystal. Probably very expensive to make though.......


Brad.

The only case I know of where directionality effects exist, and are important, is with interconnect cables that have a shield connected at one end only. For example, some interconnects are made from shielded twisted pair, with the pair used for the signal, and the shield connected at one end only, to avoid an earth loop. For this type of construction, you normally want the end where the shield is connected closest to the component that has a real earth connection (typically the preamp), as this usually gives best rejection of EMI.

interesting, I'd often wondered about this directionality thing. Apart from NACA 5, I have some Chord Odeyssey speaker cable, and where there is some heat shrinked insulation at the terminals, it carries the Chord name, and arrows showing the 'direction' but on the cable outer itself, there are no arrows anywhere to show 'direction'. So, when they (Chord) were making up the leads, doing the soldering and putting on the heat shrinked insulation, I wonder how the knew the 'direction' of the actual wire. Perhaps there is something one can see in the metal under a microscope? :D

Hmm,,

Best

John..:cool:

"So, when they (Chord) were making up the leads, doing the soldering and putting on the heat shrinked insulation, I wonder how the knew the 'direction' of the actual wire."

In the case of single-insulated cable not visibly, automatically, marked by machine, it's typically done per batch of reels (all reels from the same batch should be manufactured the same way, direction, etc.) by listening.

It makes a difference. A big difference. Highs are higher, lows are lower and there is an inky blackness to the soundstage. Connecting it in the wrong direction made my CDS555/6xNAP500 sound broken. If you can't hear the difference, you're not listening properly. It's like a veil had been lifted, it's worth 2 1/2 Hi Caps. It invalidates the waranty. Even my wife noticed the difference without me even telling her what I'd done. I heard all seven "tings".

Colour should have no effect, but they do say that once you've had black, you never go back.

Sometimes 'directionality' is perceived aurally-sometimes it isn't.

As long as for peace of mind both L & R wiry bits are reversed so 'arrow' etc is consistently pointing in 'wrong' direction, you might be one of the lucky ones who enjoys sound equally with 'cables reversed'.

Can someone explain...

OK, I'm not an electrical engineer, so bear with me. I thought audio signals are waves, with no DC component. So I imagine there's no net flow of electrons/current when you integrate over sufficient time - so its not like I'm pumping electrons one way or the other. Also whenever current flows one way (for a millisecond) if then flows the other way - if cable were directional you'd affect half the wave form, which would not seem to be ideal. The only way for the signal not to be affected would be for the cable to be bi-directional.

Or do I completely misunderstand what's going on?

Dan

According to Julian Vereker, uninsulated cables are not directional. It is when the insulation is put on that they become directional. He stated that when a new batch of cable arrives at the factory, Naim tests it for directionality, to make sure the manufacturer hasn't put the arrows on the wrong way. I would guess with a very long length, it is easier to hear a difference. It is also often stated that cables become directional when they are used over a period of time (so the direction can be reversed). I assume this would occur faster when large currents are flowing.

I have never bothered checking for a difference, so I just do what the arrows tell me. If I were to build an amp, I would used uninsulated cable, probably single core, and add a loose sheath if necessary. Then I can avoid having to worry about such things.

Well a few years ago I tried swapping my old set of NACA5 around as it came to me with all the marks rubbed off. Can't say I could tell much difference.

Correctly terminating the ends with Naim plugs and using F connectors on the bi-wire terminals of my speakers made more of an impression though and that is recommended. However get the mains sorted first that bit of wire does make a difference (no I didn’t try the new spur both ways round).

I have a shielded interconnect that does appear to be directional though.

Simon

Can someone explain...

OK, I'm not an electrical engineer, so bear with me. I thought audio signals are waves, with no DC component. So I imagine there's no net flow of electrons/current when you integrate over sufficient time - so its not like I'm pumping electrons one way or the other. Also whenever current flows one way (for a millisecond) if then flows the other way - if cable were directional you'd affect half the wave form, which would not seem to be ideal. The only way for the signal not to be affected would be for the cable to be bi-directional.

Or do I completely misunderstand what's going on?

Dan

I agree there is minimal or no dc present but a musical waveform is often asymmetric. It is also often possible to hear a change to the sound by reversing the absolute phase.

Therefore it seems possible that IF a cable does have some property where current flows in a (minutely) different manor in one direction, it might be audible.

I understand that you want to understand everything, guys.
But on the otherhand I am amused how much wiser some of you are than the companies who have made the best amps.

What do you think about the Naim's Snaic shaking station, then?

Oz

Speaker cables are not directional.
Some interconnects are because they have a screen which is only terminated at one end.

He stated that when a new batch of cable arrives at the factory, Naim tests it for directionality,

Anybody know how they test for directionality?

Keith

Anybody know how they test for directionality?

Keith
Do they look at the arrows?

Haven't been here for ages, but a search led me to this interesting topic. Despite being reasonably well educated in this area, I can't explain the physics behind directionality, so please don't ask me to.

It is very clear, however, that all cables - speaker wires, interconnects, power cables and power supply DC cables - show audible differences when reversed in direction. I have gone through hundreds of these and the difference is sometimes subtle and sometimes very clear, depending on the cable. The only "rule" I have found is that cables with many strands often (but not always) have more of this effect than single stranded ones.

When determining the right direction on a new cable, I am always "blind", as I have no way of telling which way is right before I listen to it. It usually takes a couple of turns before I am certain. Then I write down whether it's "with text" or "against text" - so far this has been 50/50 on all the cables I've tried. And on a few I just can't tell the difference.

In my experience, the direction doesn't change with time, even if you run it the "wrong" way for years.

Just try it and listen is my advice. If you don't want to, I am certain Naim has them marked the right way.

Best regards,
Fredrik Lejonklou

www.lejonklou.com

but a musical waveform is often asymmetric

But old Fourier said it can be decomposed into a combination of sinusoids.

but a musical waveform is often asymmetric

But old Fourier said it can be decomposed into a combination of sinusoids.Which go above the zero line and below...

... so having 'directionality' implies the cable affects one side of the wave form differently than the other, i.e. it introduces distortion. I'd want a cable that a manufacturer claims in *not* directional.

Dan

To my mind, the perfect cable would have no grain boundaries and would be a single crystal. Probably very expensive to make though.......


Brad,

ohno continuous casting on Google (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=ohno+continuous+casting&meta=)

cheers, Martin

but a musical waveform is often asymmetric

But old Fourier said it can be decomposed into a combination of sinusoids.

Take a look at the waveform with an oscillloscope - particularly with bass transient sounds.

Cant see how cables can be directional , as the signal travel along both the positive and the negative side , is anyone suggesting that the manufacturer when making a two core speaker cable , reverses one of the conductors before applying the insulation , ie rolls it off the drum onto another one. Emperors new cloths again , you make make yourself believe anything.

When wire is drawn, directionality is created. This means that the grains of the metal are orientated in one direction (the direction of the drawing).Hmmm - snake oil methinks...

I would say the grains are aligned along the axis of the drawing, but by definition if they are aligned in one direction, then they must be aligned in the other too.
To say that they were aligned in only one direction would imply that they were a diode, which is clearly not the case, as the current both pushes and pulls along the wire!

And anyway, the wire doesn't know from which end it is being pulled.
By way of illustration, imagine a tug of war: the two teams are pulling on the rope, one to the left and one to the right; the one pulling to the right is winning, so everything is being pulled to the right. Does it make any difference to the rope?

An old 'snake oil' subject.

I get a little disturbed when leading figures in the industry start spouting it.

Perhaps they are more marketing led figures than people with relevant qualifications.

is anyone suggesting that the manufacturer when making a two core speaker cable , reverses one of the conductors before applying the insulation
Hopefully not, as the best sounding direction is when both conductors are oriented the same way. In other words, it's not "back and forth", but "both towards speaker".

I found this out by listening. Does anybody here do that? Seems like everyone here is happy figuring things out in theory, instead of facing the subject with some music and a pair of ears.

/Fredrik

www.lejonklou.com

I found this out by listening. Does anybody here do that?

I agree. However, placebo must be eliminated. i.e. you must have someone else swap the cable around, without you being able to see the direction and be able to say which is better more than 50% of the time.

Did anyone see the BBC programme about knee operations in teh USA ? A selection of people with bad knees were given knee surgery, only in half the patients, no repair was done. 80% of patients improved - even the ones who had nothing done!

I found this out by listening. Does anybody here do that? Seems like everyone here is happy figuring things out in theory, instead of facing the subject with some music and a pair of ears.

I'm far too thick* to understand the theory, so I figure things out by listening too.

* In terms of techy/scientific/psuedo-scientific stuff.

Lejonklou wrote "its not back and forth , but both toward the speaker"
But surely the signal that is travelling toward the speaker in the positive side is travelling away from the speaker on the negative side , so if the cores are orientated the same , any effect will be negated.

I found this out by listening. Does anybody here do that?

I've done a few listening tests on so-called "directional" cables. They all sounded the same either way round. Don't assume people who are sceptical about magical claims in audio don't speak from empirical as well as theoretical experience.

-- Ian

Lejonklou wrote "its not back and forth , but both toward the speaker"
But surely the signal that is travelling toward the speaker in the positive side is travelling away from the speaker on the negative side , so if the cores are orientated the same , any effect will be negated.

If the cables are twisted pairs, the signal must get really dizzy as it travels along the wires!

placebo must be eliminated
I use blind testing all the time, by simply covering up what I am testing. Occasionally someone else does the switching, but I as the listener decide what music, how long and how loud I want to play. I also discard any round that I feel I am unsure of - this differs from usual blind tests where every round counts even if you had a bee flying into your ear at the time.

If I can't tell with these blind tests, the difference is usually too small to care about. Sometimes that happens, but with most cables the difference is rather obvious.

The trick with blind testing is IMHO to make them as close to normal, enjoyable listening as possible. Otherwise the listener becomes deaf on an emotional level - he/she hears the sounds, but doesn't understand the music. And cable directionality is almost entirely about the flow of the music - the sounds are identical, but the rhythms change.

/Fredrik

www.lejonklou.com

An old 'snake oil' subject.
Along with all other claimed cable differences, valve amps, green pens, vinyl, 'jitter', the list is endless.

If you accept one myth unsupported by science then you must accept the possibility of them all.

Paul

I'm not wanting to start an arguement, so I'll bow out !


(mumbles something about the tooth fairy, cable directionality and basic understanding of simple physics humbug)

:D


*not you paul, you wrote that the same time as me

But surely the signal that is travelling toward the speaker in the positive side is travelling away from the speaker on the negative side , so if the cores are orientated the same , any effect will be negated.
I don't quite follow you here - what makes you sure this is the way it works? Ben Duncan proposed that the difference is due to that the cable is a better antenna in one direction than the other. He also did some measurements of this and later it was shown to correlate with the listening tests on the same cables.

I'm not sure if this is the answer or how well these experiments were carried out, but it's interesting nevertheless.

I've done a few listening tests on so-called "directional" cables. They all sounded the same either way round.
Ok, fair enough.

Looks pretty conclusive eh.
Cable is not directional.

I too have done the tests and I cant hear a differance either way , so I too will bow out of this argument , but the introduction of " the cable is an Antenna" without explanation of the effect that has is heading toward voo doo and mystic meg.

Lejonklou said:the sounds are identical, but the rhythms change. Fair enough. Something changed. Good. But the change in rythmn, was it 'better' or 'worse' as regards the music.

I would assume you were present at the orignal live event to be able to judge this, or else what may seem better, is simply a form of 'enhancement' that you prefer I would guess?

Not trying to start arguments, or denigrate what you heard but to point out how subjective all of this stuff is.

Now me, I believe the sky is pink, and that you are colour blind and wrong to think it is blue, because I knowthat is pink. I see it, therefore it is....heheheh...:cool:

Best Regards

John..:cool:

I've done a few listening tests on so-called "directional" cables. They all sounded the same either way round. Don't assume people who are sceptical about magical claims in audio don't speak from empirical as well as theoretical experience.

-- Ian

Ditto. I have some in the system and have fitted one of a pair the wrong way round out of sheer spite and pure sceptical bloody-mindedness.

every cable i have ever heard was obviously directional.

the problem is that physics does not (as yet) understand the mechanism.

audio signals travel in both directions up and down the cable so why?

i got an oppotrunity to ask the great bill miller this very question and got the sage like answer.

'i dunno it just does'

The problem for me is that if we cant even measure the difference it makes to get a cable the right way around how are we supposed to make any headway via measurement.

Also the differences i have heard have sometimes been massive so something fundamental IS happening to the system.

Transmission line theory shouldnt apply at these frequencies but maybe something at rf is messing with our audio?

i wonder if resistors are directional?

every cable i have ever heard was obviously directional.Are we talking speaker cables?

Speaker cables are not directional.
Some interconnects are because they have a screen which is only terminated at one end.

Agreed.

Even Monster cables (gurus of cable marketing) say that only shielded cables are directional.

I will not dispute that drawing of wire may align crystal boundaries, but I've never heard any difference when reversing speaker cable, and I suspect any "diode effects" are minute in comparison to the basic L-C-R properties of the cable.

the introduction of " the cable is an Antenna" without explanation of the effect that has is heading toward voo doo and mystic meg.
Ben Duncan did these measurements, I simply mentioned them. I don't claim they are correct, just that he measured directionality and reported a difference. If you are interested in exactly what he did, you can contact Supra cables, who have copies of this work. It might be available on the net as well, I don't know.

But the change in rythmn, was it 'better' or 'worse' as regards the music.
I would assume you were present at the orignal live event to be able to judge this
We are not discussing how to judge a hifi system here, we are discussing whether cables have an audible directionality or not. I claim they have, but I don't claim to know why. To determine which direction is best, I use the Tune Method. Whether that is the right way to judge the quality of a reproduction of music is a different discussion.

To say that they were aligned in only one direction would imply that they were a diode, which is clearly not the case, as the current both pushes and pulls along the wire!



Prowla,

I don't really follow that. Can you explain a bit more why this can't be a diode effect?

cheers, Martin

What I love to read on these forums with arguments like these is those that sagely 'hear the difference'

In a way they seem so much better than me because they hear.

But then I am not religious either, I don't hear the difference so show me the proof.

Until then its broadly bullshit.

Prowla,

I don't really follow that. Can you explain a bit more why this can't be a diode effect?

cheers, MartinSure...
If you look at a speaker moving, it goes forwards from its position of rest, and backwards.
The forwards corresponds to the amp pushing electrical current, and the backwards corresponds to it pulling it back.
A dioide is a device that lets current flow one way but not the other.
If the cable had a diode effect, then it would only be able to push the speaker forwards, and not pull it back.
If you look at the common time vs amplitude representation of a sound wave, from a simple sine wave to anything more complicated (ie. music or voice), then the most obvious thing is that the wave goes above and below the horizontal axis (ie. forwards and backwards).
If the cable were a perfect diode, then it would not go below the axis, and thus be clipped (imagine a sine wave, with the bottom half missing, so it looked like a loch-ness monster). If it was a less than perfect diode, then the signal below the axis would be distorted in some way.
Since the aspiration of Hi-Fi is to be as neutral as possible, logic suggests that they would not deliberately engineer a 5m long diode to distort 50% of every sound wave.

I reckon cosmic rays cause many of the differences we hear in our systems.

Do they work on the systems or on the listeners?

Both I suspect:

http://www.space.qinetiq.com/geant4/rad_eff.html

I'm off, shielding my listening room.

You'll need approx 2 metre thick concrete to stop the little devils!

Would copper help (http://www.ostkreuz.de/ostkreuz/former_gdr/html_gallerys/jr/JR_Stasi/Stasi/images/940509jr03.jpg)? (Image shows the "Kupferkessel", a storage room of the Stasi, which was allegedly tap-proof)

Those potatoes must be worth a fortune!

If cables are so directional and if you get it right , the system sounds so much better , then how come I can hear the differance between speakers and pre amps, power amps etc , but I cant hear it for speaker cable , if there is a differance I dont recon its enough to worry about , I just think some people can be Hypnotised and some people cant , me , I cant , they've tried and advertising doesnt work on me either , they tested me and said i was incapable of being persauded(conned) :D

advertising doesnt work on me either'course it doesn't...

:)

Lucky sod Zener.
You're obviously on the Old Peculier!

Haha if anyone of us truly believes we are not taken in with advertising then they have truly succeeded.

Whilst we are on it, which of you wishes to tell us how you heard improvements in the speaker cable after x amounts of hours?

Why cant you believe someone is immune to advertising , you obviously believe advertising , so why not believe me , you weak minded feeble folk :D

We are not discussing how to judge a hifi system here, we are discussing whether cables have an audible directionality or not. I claim they have, but I don't claim to know why. To determine which direction is best, I use the Tune Method. Whether that is the right way to judge the quality of a reproduction of music is a different discussion.


Hallå Fredrik! :)

It is really nice to have you here! I have been often recently reading your posting in selleri.de and observed the development of your commercial internal outsource RIAA for Linn Exotik - called HUDIK.

Trevligt att ha en aktiv medlem mera på PFM som förstår tune-demming och vem är kunnig att skilja musikalisk hifi ifrån skräp. Jag sålde Naim o Linn på 80-tal i Finland och då sysslade jag ganska mycket med Göran Rudling o Stefan Mether av High Fidelity. Ny jobbar jag liten på hifi igen (jå, jag har läst att du jobbade på en Linn butik liten senare, var det i Uppsala eller Stockholm?). Vet inte om du kommer ihåg men jag även var en medlem för kortare tid till Linn forum som var under din ledning några år sen.

Oz
(Finland, www.musiikin.com)

Hi Linnik!

Used to hang around here a few years back, nice atmosphere and lots of enthusiasm I think. Just haven't had any time for it lately.

It was Uppsala I worked in, between 1990 and 1995. Good times! Just read a bit about your spagetti tweaks - rather interesting. Grounding is indeed very important, there are some amazingly big differences in the musicality of the presentation to be gained there. Hope you checked the direction of all those wires, though! ;)

Catch you later,
Fredrik

www.lejonklou.com

For those interested in wire directionality...I recall reading somewhere Bell Labs first noted the effect back in the thirties.

I also remember Canada's NRC (National Research Council) performing research on the matter in the seventies or early eighties. I do recall some type of resonance was noted in (a) wire at 50kHz when passing current in one direction vs. another. However, no correlation was drawn with respect to the resonance and what they heard as an audible, directionality difference.

Sorry to be so sketchy...might be worth researching further.

Dave

I also remember Canada's NRC (National Research Council) performing research on the matter in the seventies or early eighties. I do recall some type of resonance was noted in (a) wire at 50kHz when passing current in one direction vs. another.How do you pass an alternating current in one direction?
By definition, it flows both ways.
Here is a site describing a simple class-B push-pull amp (http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_6/chpt_6/10.html).
The circuit diagram shows that earth (0V) is the middle line, and one transistor is between 0V and the +12V rail, and the other is between 0V and the -12V rail.
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/05320.png
Part way down the page is a picture of a sine wave showing how one transister handles the +ve current (red) and the other the -ve current (blue).
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/05323.png
Any directionality would affect either the +ve (red) or the -ve (blue) half-cycle.

(Of course, this is based on the assumption that the speaker output varies around the 0V level...)

Hi Linnik!

Just read a bit about your spagetti tweaks - rather interesting. Grounding is indeed very important, there are some amazingly big differences in the musicality of the presentation to be gained there. Hope you checked the direction of all those wires, though! ;)

Catch you later,
Fredrik

www.lejonklou.com

Hehheh - to be frank, I am quite sure I have one or two leads wrong way... If I only knew which ones...??

Oz

What happens in an electronic component where we call it burn-in?

This actually seems to apply to cables, too. I have noticed it many times by DIY bodgings.

For me it seems obvious that some kind of crystal or ion or molecule/atom directioning is happening.

As cables change in sound while burn-in, something must happen there inside.

This would give an obvious hint that cable may get directionalized by use.

I don't know if a hifi-freak can hear the difference in tones or other hifi terms but by listening tune and rhythm by the tune-dem way, it is often quite obvious that the cables and wires, they're changing. By that way you can take apart different cables, you can choose the direction, and you can do it again, I mean if you turn a wire after long use, it sounds worse.

Personally I don't have to understand it. It is enough for me to know it. There is no trouble for me to take account for it. ... or perhaps... as Fredrik just showed... sometimes it may trick me..

Oz

How do you pass an alternating current in one direction?


Source at one end load at the other. If a resistive element is at one end and is getting hot then energy, at least, is passing in one direction.

Cheers

Jason


PS. I always wheel out this observation (first articulated on the forums by Paul Ranson) in these threads.

For me it seems obvious that some kind of crystal or ion or molecule/atom directioning is happening.
Rest assured, Oz, that nothing of the kind happens. the crystalline lattices of metals remain completely unchanged by the passage of electric current (unless it's a lot, in which case it melts!), it's the mobile electrons of the metal atoms that allow the passage of current. This is the nature of metals, it is well understood and thoroughly verified in the materials science world, and the sort of change you're postulating simply does not occur.
As cables change in sound while burn-in, something must happen there inside.
Here we move from fact to opinion. I would argue that cables do not burn in. There is no reason for such a thing to take place, and no viable mechanism. If such a thing actually did exist, the electrical industry and academia would be most interested and there would be papers in learned journals seeking to provide a mechanism. The fact that they are nowhere to be seen should tell you something. Moreover, in 30-odd years of stereo listening, I have never heard this burn-in phenomenon. I personally think what's burning in is the perception and/or hearing and/or expectations of the individuals involved. But of course there's nothing wrong with that, and if you believe in it, that's fine by me.
This would give an obvious hint that cable may get directionalized by use.
Sorry, I can't see that that follows at all - the two alleged phenomena, burn-in and directionality, would appear to have nothing to do with each other, other than both being equally fictitious (correct! I don't believe in directionality either, and I've never heard it). But, as I say, each to his or her own.

There was a long a heated discussion on the Swedish Linn forum (www.selleri.de) recently when a guy claimed that there existed no proof of the LP12 being superior to the Axis. In fact, measurements done by himself and others suggested the opposite, as the LP12 was proven inferior when it came to speed accuracy. When everyone else claimed the LP12 to be vastly superior, he repeatedly asked for scientific proof.

Need I tell you that he couldn't hear any difference between these two turntables himself...?

/Fredrik

www.lejonklou.com

Source at one end load at the other. If a resistive element is at one end and is getting hot then energy, at least, is passing in one direction.

Cheers

Jason


PS. I always wheel out this observation (first articulated on the forums by Paul Ranson) in these threads.



This is true, the amp gives, the speaker uses, energy flows from amp to speaker regardless of AC non directionality, the energy flows in the direction of the speakers, energy is dissipated there, so less energy moves in the opposite direction (back toward the amp) if it didn't, you'd have a superconductor.

Prowla (Paul) asked: "How do you pass an alternating current in one direction?"

Paul,

I have no idea. I'm not an electrical engineer. However, I hope Jason and Mark have answered your question. I wish I had further information for (everyone's) scrutiny but I don't. FWIW, the NRC tidbit was from a Linn distributor newsletter ages ago and the Bell labs comment came from a hifi manufacturer's website (which one, I can't recall).

As others have suggested, though we can't always (yet) prove an effect exists, it's pretty hard to ignore when the effect can be consistently repeated over a short or long period of time.

Personally, I've found cable directionality audible though not as sonically important as a hundred other setup issues. Interestingly perhaps, I've also discovered the degradation seems worse with a pair of cables (speaker cables for instance) when one of the pair is run in a different direction relative to the other cable vs. *both* cables in the pair connected the wrong way. At least I'm consistent and gullible ;-)

best regards,

dave

Tones, when you run electricity thru cable, it creates magnetism. When magnetism is created something is changing in the metal. This is the basic we have learned about magnetism.

Oz

Oz, I'm guessing your comment relates to 'burn-in'. I think technically the current must be changing to create a magnetic field. While all materials do respond to external magnetic fields, doesn't the effect end when the magnetic field is turned off unless its ferrous? I don't think copper/silver/etc. respond like iron.

Mark, while work is done at the speaker end (generating sound waves and heat), there's still no net flow of current - otherwise your speakers would discharge and set fire to the curtains. It's not as if everytime I press my brake pedal I squirt brake fluid over the wheels.

Dan

If there is no net flow of current, shouldn't my electricity bill be zero ? :confused:

Source at one end load at the other. If a resistive element is at one end and is getting hot then energy, at least, is passing in one direction.Oh, dear...
Imagine you are filing something: you move the file one way, and then you move it back the other way, repeatedly. The file is moving back and forth around a centre point. The thing you are filing will be getting warm...
(BTW, the speaker is not a resistive load, it's a bit more than that.)

This is true, the amp gives, the speaker uses, energy flows from amp to speaker regardless of AC non directionality, the energy flows in the direction of the speakers, energy is dissipated there, so less energy moves in the opposite direction (back toward the amp) if it didn't, you'd have a superconductor.The amp, cable and speakers form a circuit. The amp does not just actively push signal and passively receive the remnants back - it actively pushes and pulls, resulting in the speaker moving forwards and backwards.

Oh, dear...
Imagine you are filing something: you move the file one way, and then you move it back the other way, repeatedly. The file is moving back and forth around a centre point. The thing you are filing will be getting warm...
(BTW, the speaker is not a resistive load, it's a bit more than that.)


Yes you are moving a file back and forth BUT you are usng energy in doing it and the enrgy is entering the material being filed - it gets hot, bits come off, there is sound.
Same with a speaker. It converts electrical energy into acoustic energy and heat. Therefore by conservation of energy, energy has been moved from the amplifier to the speaker. Bit like the grid where you move energy from the power station to your house.

cheers

Jason

Yes you are moving a file back and forth BUT you are usng energy in doing it and the enrgy is entering the material being filed - it gets hot, bits come off, there is sound.
Same with a speaker. It converts electrical energy into acoustic energy and heat. Therefore by conservation of energy, energy has been moved from the amplifier to the speaker. Bit like the grid where you move energy from the power station to your house.

cheers

JasonThe way the "energy" is delivered is via the electrical current that flows through the wire. The current flows both ways along the wire, and the speaker converts it to movement. When the current flows one way, the speaker moves forward, and when it flows the other way, it moves backwards. If the cable was directional, then one of those flows would be inhibited and so the signal would be distorted.

The energy is delivered by the electric and magnetic fields in and around the wire. The electron drift in the wire is a side effect.

Paul

Eh?

The energy is delivered by the electric and magnetic fields in and around the wire. The electron drift in the wire is a side effect.
I always thought that electrons were the only things which moved in a piece of wire, and that movement, in turn, generated electric and magnetic fields.

But then, it's been years since A-level physics for me. BTW, I don't know which side of the argument I'm on about directionality.

But then, it's been years since A-level physics for me. BTW, I don't know which side of the argument I'm on about directionality.Well - my electronics degree hasn't prepared me for some of the logic here either!

Voice coils definately heat up, current does flow towards the speaker, the wave cannot be perfectly symmetrical on both send and return concurrently because of energy converted to heat and movement in the driver

The way the "energy" is delivered is via the electrical current that flows through the wire. The current flows both ways along the wire, and the speaker converts it to movement. When the current flows one way, the speaker moves forward, and when it flows the other way, it moves backwards. If the cable was directional, then one of those flows would be inhibited and so the signal would be distorted.

I can't really see what you are saying with this. Yes current flows through the circuit one way then the other but it does work at the load therefore energy has flown in one direction.

Whether that leads to audible cable directionality is an open question but you can't argue with the fact that energy is converted from electrical to heat + kinetic (and hence to acoustic) in the speaker -> energy flow in one direction: Power station -> House -> Amplifier -> Speaker -> Air (warmer + sound pressure waves)

Cheers

Jason

Tones, when you run electricity thru cable, it creates magnetism. When magnetism is created something is changing in the metal. This is the basic we have learned about magnetism.

Oz
Then, Oz, you'd better relearn your basics. Nothing changes in the metal, the magnetic field is induced by the passing of the current; it's part and parcel of the same physical phenomenon.

Current flows in circuits, and it's a basic rule of electricity (I forget who) that it's the same at all points in the circuit.

But consider information, it flows from the amp to the speaker (or from the CDP to the amp). With speakers there's also a flow from the speaker to the amp since the speaker is a source.

Paul

Only dc current permanantly magnetises and alters the cable - and then just at the spin level. AC wont do this. I imagine the thermal component of the movement of atoms will dorwn out the alternating EM effect.

Cable is not directional.

Current flows in circuits, and it's a basic rule of electricity (I forget who) that it's the same at all points in the circuit.

Paul



I think thats voltage, propogation of voltage at near light speed, current flow much slower?

Current flows in circuits, and it's a basic rule of electricity (I forget who) that it's the same at all points in the circuit.

This is only true for dc circuits or ac circuits where impedance is purely resistive.

In practice, this cannot be - all circuit boards, cables and the load itself will have reactive components (capacitance and inductance). This means you get phase lead or lag and frequency dependant attenuation.

This does not support the case for cable directionality though, assuming the impedance characteristics are the same along the length of the cable.

I think thats voltage, propogation of voltage at near light speed, current flow much slower?

You mean the volts get there before the amps?

Guys

There is much speculation here, few facts.

My own observation is that current does not flow from amp to speakers, it flows from source to sink. The source is the electron-dense side of the circuit (the "negative pole" of the power supply) and this creates a pressure wave which flows across the conductive pathways (the circuit) towards the electron-sparse region at the positive terminal of the power supply.

In AC or DC systems this is always true. The circuit creates the conditions under which that electron pressure wave takes place, through a variety of mechanisms which modulate the pressure wave (similar to opening or closing a tap in a water circuit). Amplifiers tend to work within a DC power supply, current flows are alternating only with respect to a voltage swing across paired transistors which - as a pair - switch on circuits for the + and - voltage swings caused by a voltage swing in a signal at the input with reference to a nominal 0 ve point within the overall circuit. Voltage is also a function of power supply conditions and is a measure of the difference in electrical charge present at the two poles of the supply.

A speaker, the wires leading to it, and all the other components of an amplifier are all part of that circuit. Current flows through the loudspeaker (primarily resistive) not to it or from it (though the inductive and capacitative elements complicate the actual waveform of the electrical flow with respect to time and amplitude) (this is distortion). Movement of the speaker cone and heating of the voice coil are by-products of the flow of current through the coil (an inductor in a static magnetic field).

It is also important to separate the notion of "current" and that of electrons moving within the wire. Current is a pressure function and travels instantly (within the context of the length of any meaningful circuit). Electrons move through the wire at much more mundane speeds (easily measured).

For what it's worth I've heard minor differences when swapping from one pair of speaker cables to a different pair (due I suspect to the measureable electrical characteristics of the cables, ie L-C-R and the way these affect the output stage of the amplifier). Running one set of cables this way or that way around has never yielded a discernible difference.

I can see how the way a cable is manufactured might affect its overall electrical characteristics, but not in any directional way.

But then, I think rain is wet, so what do I know.

Mark

I can't really see what you are saying with this. Yes current flows through the circuit one way then the other but it does work at the load therefore energy has flown in one direction.Nothing has flowed in one direction.
You're confusing physical placement with the circuit.
Actually, the load is half way around the circuit, not at one end.
The two wires that run to the speaker carry opposing currents. At any time, what is flowing one way in one wire will be flowing the other way in the other.

In practice, this cannot be - all circuit boards, cables and the load itself will have reactive components (capacitance and inductance). This means you get phase lead or lag and frequency dependant attenuation.
I don't think this has anything to do with current being the same all round the circuit. I just looked it up. 'Kirchoff's current law'. When you charge a capacitor the current flowing out is the same as the current flowing in. (You may wonder how the current flows across the dielectric, but it's best not to ask.)

Paul

Then, Oz, you'd better relearn your basics. Nothing changes in the metal, the magnetic field is induced by the passing of the current; it's part and parcel of the same physical phenomenon.

Not so Tones.

Take a look to smaller than atom particles and you may understand better. Namely photons are working there. There are much phenomenons people don't understand fully yet, I admit.

However, the magnetic field borne by electric current, the signal for instance, will yield magnetism into the wire. It is quite obvious that this field is leaving different imprint by which way the lead has been used. The magnetic poles do orientate.

Measuring electromagnetism in conductors do need de-magnetization of these conductors, even non-magnetic ones, between test procedures with same wire.

I believe de-magnetization would be needed if certain cable is to be re-directed after extended use in certain direction. This is my guess.

It is very possible that by magnetic fields and heat, the leads get magnetized IN THE mold of insulation. Perhaps it is this what Julian Vereker has meant when telling about it. And as the cables are not de-magnetized after the process, they will thus be directional. Which has been decided to be marked onto the insulation, by some companies like Naim.

Actually, to be strict, the leads get somewhat magnetized also by the magnetic field of the planet. Kept in east-west direction they are doing it least.

This leads to a thought of demagnetizing of components and wires. PERHAPS a burn in would not exist IF the new components would be demagnetized before taken in use. I bet it would be this way.

For me it is not too important to understand the quantums behind as in many occasions I am not one sitting on my ears. By a working music signal you can hear these phenomenons and thus they are real. The musical signal is very stringent indeed. It can reveal surprisingly minor changes in a system. But I do agree with Dave that cable directionality is not the most important thing in a system.

Oz

Thank goodness for Professor Oz. I'm glad that's physics all sorted out.

-- Ian

Thank goodness for Professor Oz. I'm glad that's physics all sorted out.

Anatomy as well. I'd never before imagined it was even possible to sit on one's ears.

Guys

There is much speculation here, few facts.

My own observation is that current does not flow from amp to speakers, it flows from source to sink. The source is the electron-dense side of the circuit (the "negative pole" of the power supply) and this creates a pressure wave which flows across the conductive pathways (the circuit) towards the electron-sparse region at the positive terminal of the power supply.

In AC or DC systems this is always true. The circuit creates the conditions under which that electron pressure wave takes place, through a variety of mechanisms which modulate the pressure wave (similar to opening or closing a tap in a water circuit). Amplifiers tend to work within a DC power supply, current flows are alternating only with respect to a voltage swing across paired transistors which - as a pair - switch on circuits for the + and - voltage swings caused by a voltage swing in a signal at the input with reference to a nominal 0 ve point within the overall circuit. Voltage is also a function of power supply conditions and is a measure of the difference in electrical charge present at the two poles of the supply.

A speaker, the wires leading to it, and all the other components of an amplifier are all part of that circuit. Current flows through the loudspeaker (primarily resistive) not to it or from it (though the inductive and capacitative elements complicate the actual waveform of the electrical flow with respect to time and amplitude) (this is distortion). Movement of the speaker cone and heating of the voice coil are by-products of the flow of current through the coil (an inductor in a static magnetic field).

It is also important to separate the notion of "current" and that of electrons moving within the wire. Current is a pressure function and travels instantly (within the context of the length of any meaningful circuit). Electrons move through the wire at much more mundane speeds (easily measured).

For what it's worth I've heard minor differences when swapping from one pair of speaker cables to a different pair (due I suspect to the measureable electrical characteristics of the cables, ie L-C-R and the way these affect the output stage of the amplifier). Running one set of cables this way or that way around has never yielded a discernible difference.

I can see how the way a cable is manufactured might affect its overall electrical characteristics, but not in any directional way.

But then, I think rain is wet, so what do I know.

Mark




What creates a 'pressure wave'?

Answer: Voltage, not current.

Losses occuring in the voice coil mean the net sum of energy passing toward the speaker is larger regardless of push or pull or 'circuit'.

Current does not travel instantaneously, not relative to voltage propogation anyway, looks like you have contradicted yourself in recognising the reactive components in current flow which prevent this.

Thank goodness for Professor Oz. I'm glad that's physics all sorted out.

-- Ian

Well.. It's not Ian. Physics are not all sorted out. Not at all.

Oz

Well, get on with it then man. If you can't sort it out, nobody can.

-- Ian

What creates a 'pressure wave'?

Answer: Voltage, not current.

Losses occuring in the voice coil mean the net sum of energy passing toward the speaker is larger regardless of push or pull or 'circuit'.

Current does not travel instantaneously, not relative to voltage propogation anyway, looks like you have contradicted yourself in recognising the reactive components in current flow which prevent this.

Mark

The "pressure" is the Electromotif Force which we measure by voltage in our system. It is a function of the different electron densities at each pole of the power supply. That does not change what flows which is current, not voltage.

Losses have nothing to do with what we are discussing. Losses simply mean that when you add up all the power consumed within a circuit it is greater than the amount of work the system can be measured to have done.

Current does flow instantly (close to speed of light, for argument's sake)(otherwise when you turned on a light you'd have to wait for a little while for it to come on - notwithstanding the short time it takes for the filament to warm up and emit photons).

Voltage does not propagate anywhere - it is merely a relative measurement across two points, not a quantity of anything that moves. The reactive nature of elements within any circuit merely change (generally in small ways, though not always) the flow of a current. Nothing contradictory here.

Regards

Mark

I recently found that Naca5 is directional, in that I went in the direction of Chesterfield and bought something nicer from Les.
Cliff

You seem to speak about very rough and most basic elements guys.

As we can hear directionality and burn-in by music, there must be a change happening in there in cables. And there is. For instance copper by it's magnetic ordering is diamagnetic.

And this will tell it all:

Diamagnetism is a form of magnetism which is only exhibited by a substance in the presence of an externally applied magnetic field. It is the result of changes in the orbital motion of electrons due to the application of an externally applied magnetic field. Applying a magnetic field creates a magnetic force on a moving electron in the form of F = qv × B. This force changes the centripetal force on the electron, causing it to either speed up or slow down in its orbital motion. This changed electron speed modifies the magnetic moment of the orbital in a direction against the external field.

A magnetic field in a cable is making even more hassle as it concentrates onto the surface or "skin" of the wire while magnetizing in the inner core is null. It is really peaking on the surface only and is not even thru the mass of the wire. This makes of course, certain imprints into the extremely complicated and delicate signal as musical signal when it is led thru the lead.

A magnetized (or used) cable is a filter. As are all the components and connectors.

Changing a 10 year old NACA5 to new one would obviously show it. As well as renewing components. Now we have taken the results by other reasons - oxidazion and dried caps. And undoubtedly these have been part of it. But very possibly not all of it.

The idea of Densen demagnetizing CD is possibly not bad at all. I guess they are trying to use heat, or better, gross emitting of photons/electromagnetism thru the system by a complicated and powerful signal with certain heating characteristics, to create a phenomenon of de-magnetizing. I am not sure how well it works, however.

Oz

Well, get on with it then man. If you can't sort it out, nobody can.

-- Ian

He's trying Ian .... really trying ....

He'll probably succeed too, once that he gets his arse out of his ears.

[ ... deleted ...]
Changing a 10 year old NACA5 to new one would obviously show it.
[... deleted ...]

Did the electrons get tired from ten years of jigging up and down the wire? Or did the rest of the wire get worn out from the continual jostling?

Mark

The "pressure" is the Electromotif Force which we measure by voltage in our system. It is a function of the different electron densities at each pole of the power supply. That does not change what flows which is current, not voltage.

Losses have nothing to do with what we are discussing. Losses simply mean that when you add up all the power consumed within a circuit it is greater than the amount of work the system can be measured to have done.

Current does flow instantly (close to speed of light, for argument's sake)(otherwise when you turned on a light you'd have to wait for a little while for it to come on - notwithstanding the short time it takes for the filament to warm up and emit photons).

Voltage does not propagate anywhere - it is merely a relative measurement across two points, not a quantity of anything that moves. The reactive nature of elements within any circuit merely change (generally in small ways, though not always) the flow of a current. Nothing contradictory here.

Regards

Mark



Losses have everthing to do with what we are discussing, they show the differences in the rate of flow, ignoring this is silly.

Glad to know you now have a partial handle on voltage, one thing, your notion that voltage does not propogate is a false one, a potential has to come from somewhere it inhabits the same world as us, even the speed of light is finite, so your contradiction with current stands, capacitve/inductive impedance sees to it.

Not so Tones.

Take a look to smaller than atom particles and you may understand better. Namely photons are working there. There are much phenomenons people don't understand fully yet, I admit.



Oz, sorry, but you've fallen at the first hurdle. Photons are particles of light, not matter, and nothing to do with atoms.

CORRECTION: MARKT BELOW POINTED OUT THE ERRORS OF MY WAYS ON THIS ONE

However, the magnetic field borne by electric current, the signal for instance, will yield magnetism into the wire.
The magnetic field is not borne by the electric current, it is a consequence of a current being passed through a conductor.
It is quite obvious that this field is leaving different imprint by which way the lead has been used. The magnetic poles do orientate.
I'm sorry, but it doesn't. The materials involved (say, copper) are not ferromagnetic, that is, they don't acquire a permanent magnetic field. As a result this next phrase:
I believe de-magnetization would be needed if certain cable is to be re-directed after extended use in certain direction.
is impossible. As is this:

Actually, to be strict, the leads get somewhat magnetized also by the magnetic field of the planet. Kept in east-west direction they are doing it least.

I think you are failing to understand the distinction between a magnetic field and permanent magnetism. Only ferromagnetic materials exhibit magnetism and can be permanently magnetised.

By a working music signal you can hear these phenomenons and thus they are real. The musical signal is very stringent indeed. It can reveal surprisingly minor changes in a system.
I never have done.

Oz, sorry, but you've fallen at the first hurdle. Photons are particles of light, not matter, and nothing to do with atoms.


Actually Tones, a photon is given off in each inter electron exchange for normal conduction.

I resent having to sound like Jek.

Take a look to smaller than atom particles and you may understand better. Namely photons are working there. What the f*** have photons to do with the electric signal in a wire?

Thermal noise?

Mark

Your understanding is flawed. Voltage is a measured of a difference, nothing more. It doesn't move. Electrons move. As far as I am aware no one has suggested that losses are responsible for the differences (perceived or real) in wires connected one way or the other.

Stop contradicting me and write a coherent argument for your viewpoint, as I attempted to do. And get your basic understanding of electricity right first, please.

Mark

It makes a difference. A big difference. Highs are higher, lows are lower and there is an inky blackness to the soundstage. Connecting it in the wrong direction made my CDS555/6xNAP500 sound broken. If you can't hear the difference, you're not listening properly. It's like a veil had been lifted, it's worth 2 1/2 Hi Caps. It invalidates the waranty. Even my wife noticed the difference without me even telling her what I'd done. I heard all seven "tings".

Colour should have no effect, but they do say that once you've had black, you never go back.


I thought the white nac5 was meant to sound better than the black nac5 ?

I thought the white nac5 was meant to sound better than the black nac5 ?

Racist!

Cant see how cables can be directional , as the signal travel along both the positive and the negative side , is anyone suggesting that the manufacturer when making a two core speaker cable , reverses one of the conductors before applying the insulation , ie rolls it off the drum onto another one. Emperors new cloths again , you make make yourself believe anything.

I have noticed the cable core's are twisted in oposite directions in some cables.

Nothing has flowed in one direction.
You're confusing physical placement with the circuit.
Actually, the load is half way around the circuit, not at one end.
The two wires that run to the speaker carry opposing currents. At any time, what is flowing one way in one wire will be flowing the other way in the other.

I am not confusing anything you insist on talking about current when I am trying to make you see that ENERGY is only travelling in one direction. So you are saying that ENERGY is not converted at the speaker but flows down the speaker cable in one phase and back up it in the other?

That is clearly nonsense. When I turn a light on (mains is also AC) Energy is converted from electrical to light and heat. The energy does not get returned to the grid. I have extracted some of it and I will be billed for that extraction. How is a speaker any different?
And yes I know and absolutely agree that the current flowing in equals the current flowing out.

P = IV ?


Cheers

Jason

Mark

Your understanding is flawed. Voltage is a measured of a difference, nothing more. It doesn't move. Electrons move. As far as I am aware no one has suggested that losses are responsible for the differences (perceived or real) in wires connected one way or the other.

Stop contradicting me and write a coherent argument for your viewpoint, as I attempted to do. And get your basic understanding of electricity right first, please.

Mark




I don't want to get in a heated debate to the benefit of no-one, but spreading mis-information and mis-representing my viewpoint should not be your goal, instead please just accept that we have very different viewpoints.


You previously mentioned that there was very little real information being given here, just a lot of...?

My understanding will never be complete (that would be impossible) but at least I admit when I am wrong which is not what is happening with you, perhaps you should re-think?


Love and kisses

I also agree that current flowing in = current flowing out, and energy losses happen progressively away from the amplifier, converted to heat/movement, this has nothing to do with HOW MANY ELECTRONS passed a certain point but rather how much energy was lost to inductance/resistance on the way i.e. the speaker load.

Mark

We may well be talking the same thing from different perspectives, however:

The flow of current (ultimately that can only be seen as a manifestation of electrons moving in the wire) is directly proportional to the resistance in the circuit. The inductance is a characteristic of the wire, how it's wound, etc. The amount of movement of the voicecoil is directly proportional to the inductive characteristics of the coil and the strength of the fluctuating field created by the flow of electrons. Nothing else involved.

As far as the speaker cable itself goes, inductive and capacitative characteristics are pretty trivial unless your amps are miles away from your speakers.

I'm not trying to flame you, simply present the systematic view of how the circuit behaves. Only electrons move. This is not disinformation and I haven't got that wrong.

My simple contention is that neither NACA5 or any other wire can be directional enough for you to hear a difference. I've no evidence of any of the basic measurable characteristics of wires (L, C, R) being different depending which end you put the red probe wire and which end the black one. There is no magic in this stuff, I am sure we agree on that.

Regards

Mark

Actually Tones, a photon is given off in each inter electron exchange for normal conduction.

I resent having to sound like Jek.

Didn't know that. I stand corrected. Thank you.

I am not confusing anything you insist on talking about current when I am trying to make you see that ENERGY is only travelling in one direction. So you are saying that ENERGY is not converted at the speaker but flows down the speaker cable in one phase and back up it in the other?

That is clearly nonsense. When I turn a light on (mains is also AC) Energy is converted from electrical to light and heat. The energy does not get returned to the grid. I have extracted some of it and I will be billed for that extraction. How is a speaker any different?
And yes I know and absolutely agree that the current flowing in equals the current flowing out.

P = IV ?


Cheers

JasonSo - is the "energy" when the speaker moves forward and the "energy" when the speaker moves backwards the same, or opposite?
Anyway, I am saying that current flows along the cable, in both directions, and is converted to motion at the speakers.
And, again, I am saying that the speakers are not at one end of the circuit, but rather half way around!

Regarding P=IV, the point is that most of the potential difference (ie. "V") appears across the speaker terminals, not between the respective ends of the two pieces of wire connecting the amp to the speakers.
So the "P" lost in the cable is minimal, and should be the same for both the wire that is connected to the + terminal and the one connected to the - terminal.
Now the "I" that comes out of the + terminal is the same as the "I" that goes into the - terminal (and vice-versa) - this is fairly fundamental, as is it a closed loop, and the amp does not generate electrons.

Ok Mark, we agree on these things, but where I differ is that the send and return wires have something in common, they both have a dominant source at one end (amplifier) and a less dominant force at the other (speakers), while the AC current is linear in both cables concurrently, heat dissipated by the speaker cannot re-enter it, so both cables are seeing a net loss in this direction (not an electron loss, a resistive/inductive thermal loss) whether or not this has an effect I don't know, thermal emf?

Didn't know that. I stand corrected. Thank you.

Thanks Tones,

I see you misunderstood possibly due to that you have not heard the difference yourself. It is often a mistake to think we can see or hear everything and if not, such thing does not exist.

This does exist and the electromagnetism is actually photons.

Electromagnetic interaction is a fundamental force of nature and is felt by charged leptons and quarks. Its exchange particle is the photon (symbol γ) and the many forms of electromagnetic radiation are a manifestation of this interaction.

Rutherford scattering showed that the electromagnetic field has a greater range than the weak or strong fields due to the photons having no mass, and travelling at the speed of light. The fact that photons have no mass makes them easy to produce, and charged particles usually interact electromagnetically before other fields have a chance to operate.

Electromagnetic interactions are long range attractions or repulsions between any particles or antiparticles that have charge. If the particles are attracted they stay together, because there is a continual exchange of photons.

When any wire (or other conducting object such as an antenna) conducts alternating current, electromagnetic radiation is propagated at the same frequency as the electric current. Depending on the circumstances, it may behave as a wave or as particles. As a wave, it is characterized by a velocity (the speed of light), wavelength, and frequency. When considered as particles, they are known as photons, and each has an energy related to the frequency of the wave given by Planck's relation E = hν, where E is the energy of the photon, h = 6.626 × 10-34 J·s is Planck's constant, and ν is the frequency of the wave.

In the vast majority of cases, however, the information carried by light is not directly apprehensible by human senses. Natural sources produce EM radiation across the spectrum; so, too, can human technology manipulate a broad range of wavelengths.

Oz

Tones: About magnetisazion of diamagnetic stuffs like copper.

All materials show a diamagnetic response in an applied magnetic field; however for materials which show some other form of magnetism (such as ferromagnetism or paramagnetism), the diamagnetism is completely swamped. Substances which only, or mostly, display diamagnetic behaviour are termed diamagnetic materials, or diamagnets. Materials that are said to be diamagnetic are those which are usually considered by non-physicists as "non magnetic", and include water, DNA, most organic compounds such as oil and plastic, and many metals such as gold and bismuth.

A thin slice of pyrolytic graphite, which is an unusually strongly diamagnetic material, can be stably floated in a magnetic field, such as that from rare earth permanent magnets. This can be done with all components at room temperature, making a visually effective demonstration of diamagnetism.

The Radboud University Nijmegen has conducted experiments where they have successfully levitated water and a live frog, amongst other things.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7b/Frog_diamagnetic_levitation.jpg

Diamagnetic materials have a relative magnetic permeability that is less than 1, and a magnetic susceptibility that is less than 0.

But as I said, I am not personally interested what is there in the background, how it happens. For me it is enough that I can hear it. The leads wrong way or one lead from another. Cause it effects on notes/melodies and rhythm. But first you gotta have a system able to reproduce these things well and you have to be used to turn your attention on them.

The musical signal is so very delicate that it allows you to hear incredibly small changes in the system. Once in Glasgow (at Linn) one of my then collegue showed how on taking the metal sleeve of XLR plug out from a spkr cable and then departing the 2-3 cm of leads apart from each other (they had been pressed tightly together for going into the sleeve of the XLR plug, NACA4 cable), was producing a notable effect in musical results. Ivor himself was surprised of the results from such a small mechanical change.

You cannot expect to go anywhere near of that accuracy by any measurings for loooong time to come. Human ear with certain metholodogy in listening - trained taster in a way - can be really good in evaluating the quality of reproduction.

Oz

Oz, everything you said about diamagnetism is correct, and with a powerful enough magnetic field you can do a lot - such as your frog levitation (a famous one), and on a more mundane every level, analyse for very non-magnetic hydrogen in organic molecules in NMR analysis (there's one just down the corridor from me in work).

However, none of this appears (to me anyway) to argue for either burn-in or directionality of cables. Diamagnetic copper will not be permanently magnetised any more than your levitated frog will suddenly point north all the time. When the current is switched off, the magnetic field induced by it will vanish and there will be no residual magnetism.

Thanks Tones,

I see you misunderstood possibly due to that you have not heard the difference yourself. It is often a mistake to think we can see or hear everything and if not, such thing does not exist.
No, I simply had never heard of photons being involved in electrical conductivity. I'm a chemist, not a physicist.


Electromagnetic interaction is a fundamental force of nature and is felt by charged leptons and quarks. Its exchange particle is the photon (symbol γ) and the many forms of electromagnetic radiation are a manifestation of this interaction.

Rutherford scattering showed that the electromagnetic field has a greater range than the weak or strong fields due to the photons having no mass, and travelling at the speed of light. The fact that photons have no mass makes them easy to produce, and charged particles usually interact electromagnetically before other fields have a chance to operate.

Electromagnetic interactions are long range attractions or repulsions between any particles or antiparticles that have charge. If the particles are attracted they stay together, because there is a continual exchange of photons.

When any wire (or other conducting object such as an antenna) conducts alternating current, electromagnetic radiation is propagated at the same frequency as the electric current. Depending on the circumstances, it may behave as a wave or as particles. As a wave, it is characterized by a velocity (the speed of light), wavelength, and frequency. When considered as particles, they are known as photons, and each has an energy related to the frequency of the wave given by Planck's relation E = hν, where E is the energy of the photon, h = 6.626 × 10-34 J·s is Planck's constant, and ν is the frequency of the wave.

In the vast majority of cases, however, the information carried by light is not directly apprehensible by human senses. Natural sources produce EM radiation across the spectrum; so, too, can human technology manipulate a broad range of wavelengths.

Oz

Oz, this is very interesting, but what has fundamental particle physics got to do with the directionality of cables? I'm afraid I don't see the connection, or how what you've said above relates to it.

Actually Tones, a photon is given off in each inter electron exchange for normal conduction.

I resent having to sound like Jek.

You are getting confused between actual light photons and virtual photons that mediate the electromagnetic force.

For gods sake guys - AC wont magnetise anything and audio is an AC signal! Leaving aside the fact that, as tones rightly points out, there is difference between ELECTROmagnetism and a magnet. Copper isnt magnetic in that way anyway. First the signal is one way and then the other therefore talk of direction is nonsensical!

Some of the energy gets returned around the loop ;) The amount depends on the electrical characteristics of the circuits.

Oz - cutting and pasting from wiki does not constitute understanding or an argument when you just tack your bit of voodoo on the end of some science :P

Go on believing guys.

At least I can trust into my ears. As I said I am not interested in the phenomenon on the background. Only thing important to me is that it is truly happening. Cables are directional and get so in time. Components and cables do burn-in. I can hear it.

I guess nobody has ever seen a paper sheet with static magnetism..

My guess have been here that the phenomenon of cable directionality and burn-in is about magnetization. If you read all the texts I have posted, it gives good indication that this is quite possible. Of course the magnetism retained by copper or aluminum is weak. But it may not matter. It may be on less than atom level and propably is. That is the reason wich interacts with signal shape and coherence while passing thru the wire.

Copper is retaining magnetism. Perhaps it is not much researched as it is weak. However there is even measured evidence about it:

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v64/i17/p2074_1

Oz

P.S. As should become clear from the posts earlier, electromagnetism is particles and the particle is photon and it is the same thing as light. It is only a question of freq range and amplitude if the photons are visible or not.

Electromagnetism is a vector force field mediated by the exchange of virtual photons.

Photons are neither particles nor waves but can be either or somewhere inbetween depending on energy and distance scales as well as wavelength and the types of measurements being taken.

A paper sheet does not have static magnetism - it has electrostatic attraction. Paper is NOT a magnet.

Sorry Jek, but i must say you have got it wrong there. It is true there is EM vector force but that is only one name of the fields - electric and magnetic fields.

Electrically charged particles are constantly emitting (or absorbing) photonic fluid, which is more commonly known as light. So how is light related to electromagnetic waves? Electromagnetic (E-M) waves are the undulatory movements of light, which can always be observed to be emitted by electric charges undergoing acceleration.

If a charged particle is at rest, then it does not emit electromagnetic waves. Instead, it is surrounded by an electrostatic field. If a charged particle is in inertial motion, then the electrostatic field is joined by a magnetostatic field. This pair of static fields produce a movement of electromagnetic energy (i.e. a field of non-zero Poynting vectors), which is similar to an electromagnetic wave, except that the fields are not oscillating.

E-M waves are propagating, expanding, harmonic, oscillating accelerations of the photonic fluid. Since the photonic fluid itself moves at the speed of light (by definition), then E-M waves can move no faster than the speed of light. E-M waves move at a speed close to the speed of light, depending on the medium through which they move (e.g. faster in air than through water, and faster through water than through a glass lens).

It is often convenient to understand the electromagnetic field in terms of two separate fields: the electric field and the magnetic field. A non-zero electric field is produced by the presence of electrically charged particles, and gives rise to the electric force; this is the force that causes static electricity and drives the flow of electric charge (electric current) in electrical conductors. The magnetic field, on the other hand, can be produced by the motion of electric charges, or electric current, and gives rise to the magnetic force associated with magnets.

The term "electromagnetism" comes from the fact that the electric and magnetic fields generally cannot be described independently of one another. A changing magnetic field produces an electric field (this is the phenomenon of electromagnetic induction, which underlies the operation of electrical generators, induction motors, and transformers). Similarly, a changing electric field generates a magnetic field.

Oz

I see some of you guys a willing to show you know much about it. Obviously it is important to you. But the texts I have found tells you are wrong. Must say we don't know too much. Not I nor you.

You are just copying and pasting from google - that does not constitute understanding.

"only one name of the fields - electric and magnetic fields" - thats two names!

There is no such thing as photonic fluid. Even if it did which it doesnt then it wouldnt be moving at the speed of light.

Jek, you seem to be a wise guy. Wiser than science. As those texts are scientific texts.

Photons are particles (with no mass). Electric and Magnetic fields are vector fields. There is also scalar and tensor fields on electromagnetism, not only vector fields. There is electromagnetic waves. Light is electromagnetic wave. Copper can be magnetized permanently. A cable often transmits music better to certain direction. What else would you like to know?

Well, Jek, I have said three times I am not interested in understanding but I know it is true. Also I said neither of us seem to understand. That is true, too.

Which I have avoided long time to say is that if somebody cannot hear the difference in cable directionality, he does not have proper system with proper music reproduction. Or he has got troubles in his hearing. Or he does not know how to orientate his listening into musical elements such way he could detect the obvious difference. That is how it is, really. With no offence whatsoever.

As one cannot hear the thing it becomes important for him to rationalize the phenomenon, to believe it or more often, to deny it. I can tell that only way is to hear it. After all my postings and still not believing but continue arguing against the known-to-be pasted scientific texts is proof for that. At least for you Yek. Hearing is believing and only hearing. But there must be a system top notch enough and skills how to listen to the musical changes.

Oz

Which I have avoided long time to say is that if somebody cannot hear the difference in cable directionality, he does not have proper system with proper music reproduction. Or he has got troubles in his hearing. Or he does not know how to orientate his listening into musical elements such way he could detect the obvious difference. That is how it is, really.

Oz

Ah, so we are back to the old Linn idea of teaching people how to listen to music?

Selling cable directionality is a combination of clever marketing and indoctrination.

In short it's claptrap.

You are getting confused between actual light photons and virtual photons that mediate the electromagnetic force.

:P



No we wern't you pompous git,

photons as in wavelenth, I thought this was more commonly known, regardless of medium traveled through, a wavelength is a wavelenth is a wavelength, an electron 'gives up' part of it's collected energy with each shift, the photon released is proportional to this.

In short it's claptrap.


The teaching people to listen is certainly that,

Directionality: dunno, I really do hear it, I really bloody do, honest.

Aha, to-become-teached-horror awakened again...

So, how many of us can find the best swamps from woods?

VERY, VERY rare.. Until somebody teaches how to orientate your
seek to find them.

Still they were there all the time quite visible.

Same thing. Not too bad actually to become teached.

RARE people do hear cable directionality...
RARE people can choose the best carts...
RARE people can say by ear when their CDP is badly supported...

You can say they are happy ones. Okay. But you cannot trust
on their opinions in hifi for yourself.

Oz

You can say they are happy ones. Okay. But you cannot trust
on their opinions in hifi for yourself.

Oz



In other words, learn for yourself, someone teaching you how is on some trip.

If you don't want to become trustworthy but learn slowly.

With hifi okay but don't do it with swamps! ;)

Oz

Ah yes, the high quality swamp shop, must pop in sometime. ;)

Ah yes, the high quality swamp shop, must pop in sometime. ;)

Yep, I was about to go same way and suggest a shop you buy your swamp knife/brush kit from. They might teach you how to find the best swamps...

Naaasty it would be, huh?! Filthy sales people!!
What a truly traumatizing experience it would be for you poor swamp enthusiast? :o

Next time other shop! Yaaa!
.

Filthy sales people...many years ago I had one suggest turntables sounded different (as if there were some mechanism beyond rumble, wow and flutter). Imagine that!!!:p

Filthy sales people...many years ago I had one suggest turntables sounded different (as if there were some mechanism beyond rumble, wow and flutter). Imagine that!!!:p


Haaah! I feel I am faintly remembering that same trauma, Dave!

They gotta really have been crazy dealers!

How in heaven one record player could have sounded different, at least not better,
when the measured performance was the same?

But I have heard that some nuts, real nuts, swallowed their pitch
and paid much more for just a turntable (and think of it: with no arm!!!) !

They must have been thinking the Earth is flat, too! :D

Filthy... filthy...

Oz

Haaah! I feel I am faintly remembering that same trauma, Dave!

They gotta really have been crazy dealers!

How in heaven one record player could have sounded different, at least not better,
when the measured performance was the same?

But I have heard that some nuts, real nuts, swallowed their pitch
and paid much more for just a turntable (and think of it: with no arm!!!) !

They must have been thinking the Earth is flat, too! :D

Filthy... filthy...

Oz

Yeah, the damn thing had no strobe, an out-of-date wood plinth, and an ugly red push button for an on/off switch. To top it off, they wanted 400 bucks for it here in the states in 1976! I remember Absolute Sound best described it as "looks like it was built in a Bronx garage" ;-)

Oz - Only part of what you wrote is cut from scientific texts - the rest is yours and it alters the meaning. Its wrong.

Conisder what an AC signal actually is and then you will realise that everything else is just mumbo jumbo.

Lets see you identify direction in a blind test. I suspect your estimation of your own rareness is somewhat optimistic in the same way that 99% of men consider themselves to be muich better than average drivers ;).






Jek, you seem to be a wise guy. Wiser than science. As those texts are scientific texts.

Photons are particles (with no mass). Electric and Magnetic fields are vector fields. There is also scalar and tensor fields on electromagnetism, not only vector fields. There is electromagnetic waves. Light is electromagnetic wave. Copper can be magnetized permanently. A cable often transmits music better to certain direction. What else would you like to know?

Well, Jek, I have said three times I am not interested in understanding but I know it is true. Also I said neither of us seem to understand. That is true, too.

Which I have avoided long time to say is that if somebody cannot hear the difference in cable directionality, he does not have proper system with proper music reproduction. Or he has got troubles in his hearing. Or he does not know how to orientate his listening into musical elements such way he could detect the obvious difference. That is how it is, really. With no offence whatsoever.

As one cannot hear the thing it becomes important for him to rationalize the phenomenon, to believe it or more often, to deny it. I can tell that only way is to hear it. After all my postings and still not believing but continue arguing against the known-to-be pasted scientific texts is proof for that. At least for you Yek. Hearing is believing and only hearing. But there must be a system top notch enough and skills how to listen to the musical changes.

Oz

Markt - perhaps I have misunderstood you but are you saying the electron gives up part of its energy at each step to emit a photon and that this process generates the EM field?

Hi guys,

Does it matter what power you are putting through the speaker cable ?

Would 500w with 60 amps current versus 25w with 15 amps current affect the cable in a different way ? and does it matter how resistive the speaker is ?

>>> So - is the "energy" when the speaker moves forward and the "energy" when the speaker moves backwards the same, or opposite?

E= I x I x t / Z => E is always positive, actually if t were negative energy would be as well.


>>>Anyway, I am saying that current flows along the cable, in both directions, and is converted to motion at the speakers.

Agree


>>> And, again, I am saying that the speakers are not at one end of the circuit, but rather half way around!

Or at an end or the beginning, makes no difference.


>>> Regarding P=IV, the point is that most of the potential difference (ie. "V") appears across the speaker terminals, not between the respective ends of the two pieces of wire connecting the amp to the speakers.
So the "P" lost in the cable is minimal, and should be the same for both the wire that is connected to the + terminal and the one connected to the - terminal.

Yes agree completely, but, and I can't believe I am trying so hard to explain this, the energy is converted at the speaker, that means energy flow is one way in a speaker cable, just as information flow is also one way from source to load.


Now the "I" that comes out of the + terminal is the same as the "I" that goes into the - terminal (and vice-versa) - this is fairly fundamental, as is it a closed loop, and the amp does not generate electrons.

Agree, and?

Please feel free to reply but I feel we are never going to reach understanding, so I'll leave this thread.


Cheers

Jason

Yek, your kind of mambo jambo people we have a lot. Here, too. With limited understanding of music signal, I mean.

BTW it is like Markt says, the energy which creates the electromagnetic field originally, is out of the signal.

Oz

Hi guys,

Does it matter what power you are putting through the speaker cable ?

Would 500w with 60 amps current versus 25w with 15 amps current affect the cable in a different way ? and does it matter how resistive the speaker is ?


Yes it matters. The more power, the bigger magnetization.

About DC and AC:

"DC generates a magnetic field that penetrates deeper into the material. In ferromagnetic materials, the magnetic field produced by DC generally penetrates the entire cross-section of the component; whereas, the field produced using alternating current is concentrated in a thin layer at the surface of the component."

"when AC is used to induce a magnetic field in ferromagnetic materials the magnetic field will be limited to narrow region at the surface of the component. This phenomenon is known as "skin effect" and it occurs because induction is not a spontaneous reaction and the rapidly reversing current does not allow the domains down in the material time to align."

This is same with non ferromagnetic materials but only with smaller permeability - lower magnetization. And even DC is obviously not going as evenly into the very core but a bit more like skinning.


Oz

"Mambo jambo" alert - the skin effect occurs at RF frequencies not audio - I spent 3 years working in RF engineering so lets hear your qualifications for a better understanding. Simply saying it is so and discarding my words without refutation isnt suffient. You are just cutting and pasting from wiki and juxtaposing it with your own words to try and make what you are saying look plausible. It isnt.

Once again the field is going one way and then the other in AC and is invariant therefore to cable direction change by definition. This is backed up by all experiments.

The energy that makes the magnetic field is not subtracted in any sense from the signal. The field does not contain energy it is a potential gradient. This aspect of the closed system sums to zero energy. You would know this if you had actually studied physics.

By way of an analogy consider someone climbing to the top of a tall mountain with a rock and then dropping it to the ground. Consider the energy expended to get it there, the gravitational potential, resultant kinetic energy and the energy absorbed by the ground and by heating of the weight on impact. This is mediated by the effect of virtual gravitons...

>>> And, again, I am saying that the speakers are not at one end of the circuit, but rather half way around!

Or at an end or the beginning, makes no difference.Well - the reason I say that is because your model seems more along the lines of a gas pipe feeding to a gas fire, where it is clear that the medium containing the "energy" (ie. the gas) flows from source out. In the case of electrical systems, it is not so obvious, and in the case of ac, the flow is bi-directional.

>>> Regarding P=IV, the point is that most of the potential difference (ie. "V") appears across the speaker terminals, not between the respective ends of the two pieces of wire connecting the amp to the speakers.
So the "P" lost in the cable is minimal, and should be the same for both the wire that is connected to the + terminal and the one connected to the - terminal.

Yes agree completely, but, and I can't believe I am trying so hard to explain this, the energy is converted at the speaker, that means energy flow is one way in a speaker cable, just as information flow is also one way from source to load.But the point is that that is not the case - the flow is bi-directional and the whole system is an electric circuit.
I could construct a model of a speaker and say that there are a load of tiny men sat in there really playing the instruments. I could then argue that the cable feeds them nourishment, and so they'll play worse if it's got a kink in it. I could then use that to support an argument for cable directionality.
The cable does not carry "energy", it carries "energy" encoded into electricity (ie. potential energy), so I don't understand how you can explain cable directionality in terms of energy flow.
Regarding information flow, I think that is too abstract to have any relevance to cable directionality.

>>> Now the "I" that comes out of the + terminal is the same as the "I" that goes into the - terminal (and vice-versa) - this is fairly fundamental, as is it a closed loop, and the amp does not generate electrons.

Agree, and?Again the point is that it is a circuit, and the context of this thread is that speaker cables are/are not directional.
My premise is that I don't understand how they can be, as they carry electric current in both directions, and the current flows around the entire circuit, meaning that any directionality would inhibit either the out or return half, and so cause distortion.

>>>Please feel free to reply but I feel we are never going to reach understanding, so I'll leave this thread.


Cheers

JasonSure - look forward to buying you a beer one day! :)

Markt - perhaps I have misunderstood you but are you saying the electron gives up part of its energy at each step to emit a photon and that this process generates the EM field?






If I could show what generates the field I'd be claiming my Nobel soon:D

If I could show what generates the field I'd be claiming my Nobel soon:D

It's God, isn't it?

Very good you gave the mambo jambo alert before your post, Jek.

Don't mix coaxial phenomenons here. I bet you worked on RF.

But the skinning phenomenon is not limited to RF. It's however used with antennas, true.

If skinning has anything to do with the cable directionality and it's results in listening music after all. That I don't know.

Anybody can read about how magnetization takes position onto skin with AC electrical current:
http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/MagParticle/Physics/CircularFields.htm

Choosing the next page, you can read about demagnetization and effect of the Earth magnetic field. Other mumbo jambo according to Jek IIRC.

Oz

"Mambo jambo" alert -

The energy that makes the magnetic field is not subtracted in any sense from the signal. The field does not contain energy it is a potential gradient. This aspect of the closed system sums to zero energy. You would know this if you had actually studied physics.


"Electromagnetic (EM) radiation carries energy and momentum which may be imparted when it interacts with matter."

"EM radiation exhibits both wave properties and particle properties at the same time. These characteristics are mutually exclusive and appear separately in different circumstances: the wave characteristics appear when EM radiation is measured over relatively large timescales and over large distances, and the particle characteristics are evident when measuring small distances and timescales. These characteristics have been confirmed by a large number of experiments."

So, your comment was mambo jambo in this case also, Jek. Like so many times..

---

And how residual magnetism may effect on signal:

"For example, a travelling EM wave incident on a particular arrangement of atoms induces oscillation in the atoms and thus causes them to emit their own EM waves. These emissions interfere with the impinging wave and alter its form."

---

A new thing I have found are phonons. They may have a part in the cable directionality phenomenon, too.

Oz

Oz, you may want to rephrase some of your (interesting) stuff, lest some poor soul gets the impression that you run the collision detector at CERN.

So, your comment was mambo jambo in this case also, Jek. Like so many times..

Yes, five times in fact, that was definitely Mambo Jambo No. 5.


A new thing I have found are phonons. They may have a part in the cable directionality phenomenon, too.

And which planet do the phonons come from?

-- Ian

Nokia.

"Solids (including insulating solids)

In crystalline solids, atoms interact with their neighbors, and the energy levels of the electrons in isolated atoms turn into bands. Whether a material conducts or not is determined by its band structure. Electrons, being fermions, follow the Pauli exclusion principle, meaning that two electrons cannot occupy the same state. Thus electrons in a solid fill up the energy bands up to a certain level, called the Fermi energy. Bands which are completely full of electrons cannot conduct electricity, because there is no state of nearby e