Premium AV Cables

In article , Rob
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , GM6TRS



I think you'll find most Media Studies courses 'deal' with twisted
reality, and the ex-students I know are some of the sharpest people
about. They're not working in popular media I hasten to add.

I made no comment on how 'sharp' they might be. My comments were directed
to the lack of real understanding of physical science and engineering, and
how this ignorance lays people open to being misled by technobabble. No
matter how 'sharp' someone is, if they don't understand the relevant
physics, etc, then they may fall prey to this. The point is as I said,
being 'well informed'.

They may know enough to doubt what they read in adverts. But how can then
tell if the 'science' presented is rubbish or not if they lack any
education in the relevant science or engineering? This means they can't
tell when such content is reliable, and when it is not.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Rob
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , GM6TRS


I think you'll find most Media Studies courses 'deal' with twisted
reality, and the ex-students I know are some of the sharpest people
about. They're not working in popular media I hasten to add.

I made no comment on how 'sharp' they might be. My comments were directed
to the lack of real understanding of physical science and engineering, and
how this ignorance lays people open to being misled by technobabble. No
matter how 'sharp' someone is, if they don't understand the relevant
physics, etc, then they may fall prey to this. The point is as I said,
being 'well informed'.

I took as an inference from your previous post that Media Studies was in
some way inferior to engineering or physics. Further, MS students would
be most likely to propagate 'technobabble'. If that wasn't even remotely
your intent, I apologise.

They may know enough to doubt what they read in adverts. But how can then
tell if the 'science' presented is rubbish or not if they lack any
education in the relevant science or engineering? This means they can't
tell when such content is reliable, and when it is not.


Anyone who relies on an advert to fully inform opinion probably needs to
get out more. I have maths, physics and chemistry O levels, and I think
I'm right in saying no part of any topic would help me *determine* the
efficacy of all that cable nonsense. I'm obviously not a good example
(as demonstrated elsewhere!), but it would take quite a technically
proficient bod to *disprove* those 'sharper, clearer' claims. If it was
straightforward the Press Complaints Commission and the ASA would sort
it out - non? And I do wonder how many physicists, mathematicians et al
have paid over the odds for fancy cable ...

None of which bothers me overly. I'm far more disturbed by idiots
peddling lemon juice and garlic as a cure for the AIDS virus. But I
understand your annoyance here - it's something you know about.

Rob

"Rob" wrote in message
...
If it was straightforward the Press Complaints Commission and the ASA would
sort it out - non? And I do wonder how many physicists, mathematicians et
al . . .

I too used to sprinkle my postings with foreign words, but I think it's
become rather passé. Of course in those days I was a bit conceited. Now I've
got over that phase I'm perfect.

Bill

I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure ...

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

I too used to sprinkle my postings with foreign words, but I think it's
become rather passé. Of course in those days I was a bit conceited. Now
I've
got over that phase I'm perfect.

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:38:57 +0100, tony sayer wrote:

In article , Mike
Redrobe writes
News24 wrote:
Andereida " wrote in news:B7KdnZ_
:

Saw this article in today's Sunday Times. I know this is the silly
season but thought it must be a late April 1st offering that didn't
make it then. Thought it would be of interest to the lurkers here
who want a 35 GBP aerial fly-lead or a 75 GBP mains lead!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...3-2320293.html

Andereida

Won't be very good at 75GBP - try www.russandrews.com.

..and don't forget to have your cables cough "burned in" first
http://www.russandrews.com/static/Ca...n_Service.html
for only £15


And make sure that they use fresh electrons not tired ones

Of course.. you don't want any of those recycled ones... they're rubbish!

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:58:44 +0100, Andereida wrote:

Saw this article in today's Sunday Times. I know this is the silly
season but thought it must be a late April 1st offering that didn't make
it then. Thought it would be of interest to the lurkers here who want a
35 GBP aerial fly-lead or a 75 GBP mains lead!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...3-2320293.html

Andereida

Omg.. I' seen it all now:

Do speaker cables require burn-in?

- Yes most cables take time to burn-in. This means that they do not give their
optimum performance until they have been carrying a signal with your equipment
for some hours. Before they have burned in they can often sound a bit shrill.

Are speaker cables directional?

- Once a cable has burned in it would need to be burned in again if you reversed
it. For this reason most cables have a directional marker so you can ensure that
they are always fitted in teh same diretion.

From http://www.hificables.co.uk/PreviewArticle.aspx?art=54

"Doz" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:58:44 +0100, Andereida wrote:

Saw this article in today's Sunday Times. I know this is the silly
season but thought it must be a late April 1st offering that didn't make
it then. Thought it would be of interest to the lurkers here who want a
35 GBP aerial fly-lead or a 75 GBP mains lead!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...3-2320293.html

Andereida

Omg.. I' seen it all now:

Do speaker cables require burn-in?

- Yes most cables take time to burn-in. This means that they do not give
their
optimum performance until they have been carrying a signal with your
equipment
for some hours. Before they have burned in they can often sound a bit
shrill.

Are speaker cables directional?

- Once a cable has burned in it would need to be burned in again if you
reversed
it. For this reason most cables have a directional marker so you can
ensure that
they are always fitted in teh same diretion.

From http://www.hificables.co.uk/PreviewArticle.aspx?art=54

Help!! Is there ANY physics behind all this?? What is the reasoning (even if
it's BS) behind such statements as these. What actually happens to a cable
once it's been 'burnt in' and why the hell would it make any difference if
you reversed it??
These are the questions that are costing me my precious sleep every night!!

Ok, maybe not really, but anyone got any answers for me anyway??

Cheers,

Chris.

In article , Doz
wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:58:44 +0100, Andereida wrote:

Saw this article in today's Sunday Times. I know this is the silly
season but thought it must be a late April 1st offering that didn't make
it then. Thought it would be of interest to the lurkers here who want a
35 GBP aerial fly-lead or a 75 GBP mains lead!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...3-2320293.html

Andereida

Omg.. I' seen it all now:

Do speaker cables require burn-in?

- Yes most cables take time to burn-in. This means that they do not give
their optimum performance until they have been carrying a signal with your
equipment for some hours. Before they have burned in they can often sound a
bit shrill.

Are speaker cables directional?

- Once a cable has burned in it would need to be burned in again if you
reversed it. For this reason most cables have a directional marker so you
can ensure that they are always fitted in teh same diretion.

From http://www.hificables.co.uk/PreviewArticle.aspx?art=54

Whilst that's obvious for digital signals (all those 1s and 0s stacked up the
wrong way) it's not true for the smoother analogue signals ...

--
John Cartmell [email protected] followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

In article , ChrisM
wrote:

"Doz" wrote in message
...


Help!! Is there ANY physics behind all this??

Well, you can invent plausible-sounding 'explanations' for it.... :-)

What is the reasoning (even if it's BS) behind such statements as these.

To sell people on how mysterious and non-explainable audio is. That way you
can undermine the idea that the actual engineers or physicists, or
physiologists should be listened to when you warn that such claims are
likely to be refined BS. :-) The you can sell such cables at whatever
price you can lift from the customer's wallet.

Think of it as: Boloney Baffles Brains. or: Jewellery For Men. ;-

What actually happens to a cable once it's been 'burnt in' and why the
hell would it make any difference if you reversed it?? These are the
questions that are costing me my precious sleep every night!!

Relax. Eddie the Electron isn't bothered. :-)

Ok, maybe not really, but anyone got any answers for me anyway??

See above. Note also that despite such claims being ankle-deep in audio
mags, etc, so far as I can tell no-one has ever shown in a test *based on
sound alone* and run according to a sensible experimental protocol that
these things make any difference which is audible. It is all the subjective
opinions of gurus who never do a test which would stand up... I've been
reading (and writing for, on occasion) audio mags for decades, and such
claims are common, but reliable evidence tends to be somewhat elusive.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

ChrisM wrote:
Help!! Is there ANY physics behind all this??

No.

What is the reasoning
(even if it's BS) behind such statements as these. What actually
happens to a cable once it's been 'burnt in' and why the hell would
it make any difference if you reversed it??

As with most "audiophile" tweaking, the effects are entirely in the listener
/ viewer's head, and it is this piece of equipment that often needs "burning
in". It can take time for it to reconcile the vast amount of money
squandered with its original perception that nothing has changed.