On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:55:53 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



flipper wrote:

Shame you apparently don't know squat about transmission line theory.

Or even toasters now it would seem !

Graham

Don't you Brits eat cold toast?

I once crossed the ocean on the QE2, first-class. We had our own table
in the dining room and our own waiter, and we could order anything we
wanted, on the menu or not. But we were entirely unsuccessful in
getting them to furnish warm buttered toast.

Maybe it's a transmission line problem, having to do with ac cord
impedances going up at 50 Hz.

John

"flipper the fearless fool "


Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"


** Cos it was a stupid & irrelevant bait.

No, what's "stupid" is you can't explain why zip cord works perfectly
fine for toasters (and speakers) even though your audiophool cable
folks claim it has well over 400 ohms 'characteristic impedance' at
50/60Hz.


** There was simply nothing to explain.

You are on very confused puppy.



The answer is because it isn't a transmission line...

** Shame that is a 100% wrong answer.

Shame you apparently don't know squat about transmission line theory.

** LOL - that is your problem.

And you keep proving it with every comment.



At audio frequencies transmission line effects don't begin until you
reach one or two thousand feet and at 50/60Hz power line frequencies
it's on the order of 5 miles.


** Shame that is 100% wrong too.

http://www.audiosystemsgroup.com/TransLines-LowFreq.pdf


** Yaawnnnnnn - says nothing about speaker lines at all.

Feel free to post your 'proof' that 15 feet of zip cord acts as a
'transmission line' at audio frequencies.

** Not my claim to prove.

But 15 feet of cable with a Zo of 8 ohms will behave differently with some
speakers compared to 15 feet of figure 8 twin cable.

Go away - imbecile.



....... Phil

"John Larkin"

( snip drivel)

It's worse than the paper suggests. Characteristic impedance is the
apparent impedance at one end of an infinitely long hunk of
transmission line. For any but a lossless line, there's, well, loss.
And presumably what the The Compleat Audiophool cares about is what
gets to the speakers, not the load the amp sees.

Once the series and shunt resistance begin to have any significant
effect on characteristic impedance (ie, at low frequencies and for
very long lines) the signal that dribbles out of the far end is mostly
gone.

How many people use miles of speaker cable?

How many people can clearly hear attenuation effects that measure in
the parts-per-million? I bet I can name one.


** Anyone see any straw men hanging around ??

John is missing a few.



....... Phil

"Eeysore"
John Larkin wrote:

How many people use miles of speaker cable?

Longest run I've ever used was about 50m. And that was unusual.



** Ah - the fairy story man has just swallowed one of them whole.



.... Phil

"John Larkin"

( snip more drivel)


Maybe it's a transmission line problem, having to do with ac cord
impedances going up at 50 Hz.


** Still toting that same dumb misquote around ?

Like some dead albatross round your neck ?



....... Phil

"John Larkin"
flipper
"Phil Allison"


** The point here is about "characteristic impedance" !!

You know the definition.

Its the load R that makes a length of cable look perfectly resistive from
the feed end.

The blue lines on that graph are perfectly correct.


Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"

The answer is because it isn't a transmission line... and neither is a
domestic speaker cable regardless of how 'fancy' you make it.

At audio frequencies transmission line effects don't begin until you
reach one or two thousand feet and at 50/60Hz power line frequencies
it's on the order of 5 miles.

In short, it doesn't make a whit of difference what their cable's
'characteristic impedance' is.


Exactly.


** It is exactly wrong.

Cos it was written by a flipper the troll.



....... Phil

"John Larkin"
Eeyore

John Larkin wrote:

It's only music. I doesn't matter.

Depends on your tastes and personality.

Have you never experienced that tingle run down your spine when listening
to
truly good music ?



I suppose I did when I was very young.


** So John never got past the "Wiggles" stage of musical enjoyment.

Anything more complex went right over his pointy head.



....... Phil

"flipper the fearless fool "

Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"


** Cos it was a stupid & irrelevant bait.

No, what's "stupid" is you can't explain why zip cord works perfectly
fine for toasters (and speakers) even though your audiophool cable
folks claim it has well over 400 ohms 'characteristic impedance' at
50/60Hz.


** There was simply nothing to explain.

Sure there is: "Why does it work?"


** Absolutely no reason exists why it should not.

You are still one very confused puppy.


Prove it.


** You have done it for me here already.

And YOU do not ever get to be the judge of when you are wrong.


http://www.audiosystemsgroup.com/TransLines-LowFreq.pdf


** Yaawnnnnnn - says nothing about speaker lines at all.

It does for those sending "audio frequencies" to them.

** Yawwnnnnnnnn.

Only the biggest TROLLS post dumb links and claim the proof is in there
somewhere..... .

When it clearly ain't.



Feel free to post your 'proof' that 15 feet of zip cord acts as a
'transmission line' at audio frequencies.

** Not my claim to prove.

It is when you claim there are transmission line effects in speaker
cables.

** Still the case that I never any need to prove what I did not say.

And there definitely ARE transmission line effects going on in speaker
cables and audio signal cables.



But 15 feet of cable with a Zo of 8 ohms will behave differently with some
speakers compared to 15 feet of figure 8 twin cable.

No one said cable A would 'behave the same' as cable B. I said "At
audio frequencies transmission line effects don't begin until you
reach one or two thousand feet..." and, because of that, "it doesn't
make a whit of difference what their cable's 'characteristic
impedance' is."


** Plain wrong.

What you have not defined is what is a " transmission line effect ".

Go on - bet you cannot list them.

Same mistake is made by many others, especially ham radio ******s like the
fool who wrote your dumb link.

An you swallowed it WHOLE.

Go away - you rote learning fool.



....... Phil

"flipper the fearless fool "

Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"


** Cos it was a stupid & irrelevant bait.

No, what's "stupid" is you can't explain why zip cord works perfectly
fine for toasters (and speakers) even though your audiophool cable
folks claim it has well over 400 ohms 'characteristic impedance' at
50/60Hz.


** There was simply nothing to explain.

Sure there is: "Why does it work?"


** Absolutely no reason exists why it should not.

You are still one very confused puppy.


Prove it.


** You have done it for me here already.

And YOU do not ever get to be the judge of when you are wrong.



http://www.audiosystemsgroup.com/TransLines-LowFreq.pdf


** Yaawnnnnnn - says nothing about speaker lines at all.

It does for those sending "audio frequencies" to them.

** Yawwnnnnnnnn.

Only the biggest TROLLS post dumb links and claim the proof is in there
somewhere......

When it clearly ain't.




Feel free to post your 'proof' that 15 feet of zip cord acts as a
'transmission line' at audio frequencies.

** Not my claim to prove.

It is when you claim there are transmission line effects in speaker
cables.

** Still the case that I never any need to prove what I did not say.

And there definitely ARE transmission line effects going on in speaker
cables and audio signal cables.




But 15 feet of cable with a Zo of 8 ohms will behave differently with some
speakers compared to 15 feet of figure 8 twin cable.

No one said cable A would 'behave the same' as cable B. I said "At
audio frequencies transmission line effects don't begin until you
reach one or two thousand feet..." and, because of that, "it doesn't
make a whit of difference what their cable's 'characteristic
impedance' is."


** Plain wrong.

What you have not defined is what is a " transmission line effect ".

Go on - bet you cannot list them.
--------------------------------------

Same mistake is made by many others, especially ham radio ******s like the
fool who wrote your dumb link.

An you swallowed it WHOLE.

Go away - you rote learning fool.





....... Phil

John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:

Shame you apparently don't know squat about transmission line theory.

Or even toasters now it would seem !

Don't you Brits eat cold toast?

I once crossed the ocean on the QE2, first-class.

When, just out of interest ?


We had our own table
in the dining room and our own waiter, and we could order anything we
wanted, on the menu or not. But we were entirely unsuccessful in
getting them to furnish warm buttered toast.

Well, toast cools pretty rapidly. The only answer I reckon would be to make
the toast at the table. How do you achieve warm buttered toast delivered by
waiter in the USA ?

Incidentally, I found the Ritz hotel in London seemed unable to deliver hot
coffee too.

Graham

On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:21:38 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 08:18:21 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:48:21 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Tue, 2 Sep 2008 21:57:00 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"flipper the fool "


Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"


** Cos it was a stupid & irrelevant bait.

No, what's "stupid" is you can't explain why zip cord works perfectly
fine for toasters (and speakers) even though your audiophool cable
folks claim it has well over 400 ohms 'characteristic impedance' at
50/60Hz.


The answer is because it isn't a transmission line...

** Shame that is a 100% wrong answer.

Shame you apparently don't know squat about transmission line theory.


At audio frequencies transmission line effects don't begin until you
reach one or two thousand feet and at 50/60Hz power line frequencies
it's on the order of 5 miles.


** Shame that is 100% wrong too.

http://www.audiosystemsgroup.com/TransLines-LowFreq.pdf


It's worse than the paper suggests. Characteristic impedance is the
apparent impedance at one end of an infinitely long hunk of
transmission line. For any but a lossless line, there's, well, loss.

Right.

That'll also screw up trying to 'pretend' a speaker cable as a
transmission line in transmission line calculators because, unless you
compensate with ridiculous wire sizes, you end up with having to put
in astronomical line lengths to get the things to treat it as a
'transmission line' and cable losses also become astronomical.


What the carbon-loaded-plastic people are probably doing is diddling
the lossy transmission line equation to add enough shunt loss, the "g"
term, to make the characteristic impedance 8 ohms. The result is a
very lossy line. If it were long enough to act like 8 ohms, it would
eat all the amp's power, leaving nothing for the speakers. Even worse,
the loss vs frequency would be ghastly, the exact opposite of what an
audiophool is presumable trying to avoid.

Characteristic impedance is being confused with impedance. Some people
can't understand the difference.

What the carbon-loaded-plastic cable people are apparently not doing
is spending much money on copper.

High-end audio is mostly about lies to rip off the gullible.

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

John

On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:15:31 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:

Shame you apparently don't know squat about transmission line theory.

Or even toasters now it would seem !

Don't you Brits eat cold toast?

I once crossed the ocean on the QE2, first-class.

When, just out of interest ?

Late 70's, as I recall.



We had our own table
in the dining room and our own waiter, and we could order anything we
wanted, on the menu or not. But we were entirely unsuccessful in
getting them to furnish warm buttered toast.

Well, toast cools pretty rapidly. The only answer I reckon would be to make
the toast at the table. How do you achieve warm buttered toast delivered by
waiter in the USA ?

Red-blooded American waitresses seem to manage it. In England they
actually have ... ugh ... TOAST COOLING RACKS!

http://www.picturenation.co.uk/catal...ageid=18010&q=


Incidentally, I found the Ritz hotel in London seemed unable to deliver hot
coffee too.

The brits are good at tea. They rarely understand coffee. We bring our
own when we go to UK or Ireland.

John

On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 02:34:33 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 16:23:02 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"flipper the fearless fool "

Then why didn't you answer his question "How could a toaster work if
its line cord has hundreds of ohms of impedance?"


** Cos it was a stupid & irrelevant bait.

No, what's "stupid" is you can't explain why zip cord works perfectly
fine for toasters (and speakers) even though your audiophool cable
folks claim it has well over 400 ohms 'characteristic impedance' at
50/60Hz.


** There was simply nothing to explain.

Sure there is: "Why does it work?"


** Absolutely no reason exists why it should not.

Too bad you can't explain why when I did.


You are still one very confused puppy.

Mirror mirror.

Prove it.


** You have done it for me here already.

Prove it.


And YOU do not ever get to be the judge of when you are wrong.

I am by default since you post nothing but ad hominems.


http://www.audiosystemsgroup.com/TransLines-LowFreq.pdf


** Yaawnnnnnn - says nothing about speaker lines at all.

It does for those sending "audio frequencies" to them.

** Yawwnnnnnnnn.

Facts always seem to put Phil to sleep.

John

"John Larkin"

It's worse than the paper suggests. Characteristic impedance is the
apparent impedance at one end of an infinitely long hunk of
transmission line.

** Characteristic impedance NOT DEPENDANT on the length of the line.

Very basic fact.




....... Phil

"John Larkin"

What the carbon-loaded-plastic people are probably doing is diddling
the lossy transmission line equation to add enough shunt loss, the "g"
term, to make the characteristic impedance 8 ohms.

** That is what I said two days ago:

" The conductivity of that graphite layer likely increases the capacitance
per
meter plus add a continuous loss per metre.
It may well do just what the graph shows. "


The result is a
very lossy line. If it were long enough to act like 8 ohms,

** Once again, characteristic impedance is NOT DEPENDANT on the length of
the line.

Absolutely basic stuff.


Characteristic impedance is being confused with impedance. Some people
can't understand the difference.


** Funny how that is what YOU did here - pal.

Deserves an Olympic medal for outstanding backflip.



....... Phil

John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Incidentally, I found the Ritz hotel in London seemed unable to deliver hot
coffee too.

The brits are good at tea. They rarely understand coffee. We bring our
own when we go to UK or Ireland.

That's seriously changed now. Depends where you get it from though.

Even when I was at school, on the way in you could smell the beans being freshly
roasted in the 'Importers' shop. Lovely smell.

Graham

John Larkin wrote:

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

I'd agree with the bit about RCA interconnects unless when driven from hi_Z
outputs like nutty tube amps.

However different gauges certainly of zip cord can make readily measureable
differences in frequency response at the load end.

Speakers aren't all resistive.

Graham

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 03:45:33 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



John Larkin wrote:

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

I'd agree with the bit about RCA interconnects unless when driven from hi_Z
outputs like nutty tube amps.

Does anybody make specifically low-capacitance RCA cables?


However different gauges certainly of zip cord can make readily measureable
differences in frequency response at the load end.

Sure, too much resistance matters; use thicker wire, or turn up the
volume a little to compensate. It's feasible to make a speaker cable
with enough inductance to kick in a dB of loss at 20 KHz, but you have
to really try. And not many people would notice that dB.


Speakers aren't all resistive.


All the more reason that subtle things, like a little carbon in the
plastic, don't matter. Moving your head a few mm will change the
frequency response a lot more.

What a serious audiophile really needs is gold-plated head clamps.

John

"flipper top head "



** Once again, characteristic impedance is NOT DEPENDANT on the length of
the line.

Only if it is LONG ENOUGH .......


** Yawwwnnnnn

- is there no limit to this empty headed fool's nonsense ?



....... Phil

"HiggsField"


The reason for the braid is to reject external influence.


** Tin hats are supposed to be good for that too.




...... Phil

John Larkin wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

I'd agree with the bit about RCA interconnects unless when driven from hi_Z
outputs like nutty tube amps.

Does anybody make specifically low-capacitance RCA cables?

I believe some do, yes. Doubtless using foamed polythene or the like too.


However different gauges certainly of zip cord can make readily measureable
differences in frequency response at the load end.

Sure, too much resistance matters; use thicker wire, or turn up the
volume a little to compensate. It's feasible to make a speaker cable
with enough inductance to kick in a dB of loss at 20 KHz,

And cause some interesting shifts lower down too. You would be amazed how
reactive some speakers are spit.


but you have to really try. And not many people would notice that dB.

Some really can although I doubt I could now. I used to be able to 'detect' high
levels of 22kHz but I cut off around 15-16k now.


Speakers aren't all resistive.

All the more reason that subtle things, like a little carbon in the
plastic, don't matter. Moving your head a few mm will change the
frequency response a lot more.

What a serious audiophile really needs is gold-plated head clamps.

It doesn't quite work like that. What we hear is a sound field and the brain's
'DSP' seems to account for small head movements. This is why we have those funny
shaped ears instead of holes in the skull.

Graham

HiggsField wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
HiggsField wrote:
"Phil Allison" wrote:

** For "uk.rec.audio" readers.

Absolute overkill, and it appears that the construction style would lead
to HUGE capacitance levels.

Since when did an audiophool care about mere science ?

Look, ya ****in' donkey.. You have yet to recover from being shunned
by the group for shear stupidity.

I have more on the ball where audio is concerned than you ever have or
ever will.

Is that you dimbulb ?

Archimedes' Lever wrote:

"Phil Allison" wrote:
"Eeysore"

Can't use 4mm / banana plugs in the EU any more though.

** Completely false.

It is only 3/4 inch (19mm) spaced pairs that are banned from use as speaker
connectors due to an unfortunate compatibility with this thing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuko

Leave it to the French to ignore the standards and practices of the
rest of the civilized world.

The last time I checked. Schuko was a German company.

Graham

"flip top head "


** Once again, characteristic impedance is NOT DEPENDANT on the length
of
the line.

Only if it is LONG ENOUGH .......


** Yawwwnnnnn

- is there no limit to this empty headed fool's nonsense ?

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_14/5.html


(snip totally irrelevant Googling nonsense)

Learn something before you make a total fool of yourself.


** Not one of your dumb quotes said a thing about cable Zo being dependant
on length.

Cos it ain't.

You simply have NO CLUE what the topic is.

Cos you simply HAVE NO CLUES at all.




...... Phil

AnimalMagic wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

It's only music. I doesn't matter.

Depends on your tastes and personality.

Have you never experienced that tingle run down your spine when listening to
truly good music ?


Tales of Mystery and Imagination

Who's that ? Yes I know I could Google But it might be more interesting to ask.

The last time I specifically recall it happening was a live performance by a Pink
Floyd tribute band and were they good !

When you get the tingle live it's something else ! I don't listen to music too
much at home since if I do, too often I o/d on it and it's 5 hours later
suddenly.

Graham

Archimedes' Lever wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

I'd agree with the bit about RCA interconnects unless when driven from hi_Z
outputs like nutty tube amps.

However different gauges certainly of zip cord can make readily measureable
differences in frequency response at the load end.

Speakers aren't all resistive.

Since the range of "audio signal" we "listen to" is ALTERNATING CURRENT,
and speaker transducers consist of a COIL OF WIRE, I would argue that
they are ALL Z, and very little R while in operation.

If you're clever you can make them pretty damn close to R by spending extra
money with 'driver impedance compensation' components. I did this with a design
a friend and I both have a pair of using Mathcad. He was thinking of taking it
to market but the audiophools thought it sounded too accurate !

Interestingly speaker with low reactance often sound very good even on cheap
amps because they present such a benign load.

Graham

Archimedes' Lever wrote:

John Larkin wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

Zip cord is fine. People who can hear the difference in speaker
cables, or RCA interconnects, or power cords, are delusional.

I'd agree with the bit about RCA interconnects unless when driven from hi_Z
outputs like nutty tube amps.

Does anybody make specifically low-capacitance RCA cables?


However different gauges certainly of zip cord can make readily measureable
differences in frequency response at the load end.

Sure, too much resistance matters; use thicker wire, or turn up the
volume a little to compensate. It's feasible to make a speaker cable
with enough inductance to kick in a dB of loss at 20 KHz, but you have
to really try. And not many people would notice that dB.

Speakers aren't all resistive.

All the more reason that subtle things, like a little carbon in the
plastic, don't matter. Moving your head a few mm will change the
frequency response a lot more.

What a serious audiophile really needs is gold-plated head clamps.

https://www.optimization-world.com/p.../catid/27.html

Did not see any specs.

All this guage (sic) stuff doesn't mean a lot to me any more other than 16SWG is
about 1.6mm sheet material. What would that be in AWG ?

Graham

"Archimedes' Lever"

Speakers aren't all resistive.


Since the range of "audio signal" we "listen to" is ALTERNATING CURRENT,
and speaker transducers consist of a COIL OF WIRE, I would argue that
they are ALL Z, and very little R while in operation.


** Wot a fool.

Any wire-wound resistor is also a " coil of wire ".




....... Phil

Archimedes' Lever wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

Does anybody make specifically low-capacitance RCA cables?

A far better choice.

This guy actually makes quality wire, if you want serious quality
without the audiophool prices.

I mean seriously, if one simply adds up the prices of the parts used,
his stuff is the ****. He doesn't charge much for hand assembled
operations, as a lot of this is.

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/audio/index.htm

I've read their site. Sounds sensible. The fact that Monster tried to sue
them (it seems Monster now claim to own the artistic rights (design
patent) to many style of RCA connector) is enough to make you want to use
them !

Graham

HiggsField wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
HiggsField wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
HiggsField wrote:
"Phil Allison" wrote:

** For "uk.rec.audio" readers.

Absolute overkill, and it appears that the construction style would lead
to HUGE capacitance levels.

Since when did an audiophool care about mere science ?

Look, ya ****in' donkey.. You have yet to recover from being shunned
by the group for shear stupidity.

I have more on the ball where audio is concerned than you ever have or
ever will.

Is that you dimbulb ?

Funny that you and the KRW retard always spew this moniker, though I
have yet to ever see a post from him in years worth of archival searches.

Are you two also ****ing each other?

Sounds like a YES to the dimbulb enquiry to me.

Graham

AnimalMagic wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
AnimalMagic wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
John Larkin wrote:

It's only music. I doesn't matter.

Depends on your tastes and personality.

Have you never experienced that tingle run down your spine when listening to
truly good music ?

Tales of Mystery and Imagination

Who's that ? Yes I know I could Google But it might be more interesting to ask.

The last time I specifically recall it happening was a live performance by a Pink
Floyd tribute band and were they good !

What? The last time you googled something? Maybe if you do, you'll get
a tingle.

Two wires plugged into the room's switched outlet, and place one in
each, wetted and skin conditioned hand will also do the trick. Hold
about five inches of length in each hand (bared wire, of course)... and
then reach up and turn on the light switch.

When you get the tingle live it's something else !

That's how Genesis was before Phil broke up the band. He should have
stayed a drummer, his one hell of a drummer.

Tend to agree.


I don't listen to music too
much at home since if I do, too often I o/d on it and it's 5 hours later
suddenly.

It is The Alan Parsons Project.

Ah ! I remember them now. I vaguely recall liking their stuff.

I supplied a sound rig for Phil Collins once (and Bill Bruford from YES) when they
were doing their first tour as Brand X ! Got some of the albums too. I liked their
music. 'Tex' the usual Genesis sound guy drove the mixing desk and never once made a
complaint about missing features he'd have expected on a bigger rig. That's what sorts
the kids from the men.

Graham

HiggsField wrote:

Only the group's retarded twits ever listened to the KiethKeithTard.

You used the 'tard' word.

PROOF POSITIVE

Graham

"Archimedes' Lever"
"Phil Allison"

Speakers aren't all resistive.


Since the range of "audio signal" we "listen to" is ALTERNATING CURRENT,
and speaker transducers consist of a COIL OF WIRE, I would argue that
they are ALL Z, and very little R while in operation.


** Wot a fool.

Phil... your sig goes at the end, after what you post.
Bwuahahahah!


Any wire-wound resistor is also a " coil of wire ".


Yes, phil... An AIR CORE coil of wire. A speaker transducer, however,
has an iron and magnet core, which takes its inductance up by a couple
orders of magnitude.


** Still L is small compared to R over most of the range of a speaker.

And that little bit of L is damn lossy too - ever met a guy called "
Eddy Current " ???

Betcha you are just great pals with " Wayne Kerr "

- right ?




...... Phil

On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:13:24 -0700, HiggsField
wrote:

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:42:35 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



HiggsField wrote:

"Phil Allison" wrote:

** For "uk.rec.audio" readers.

Absolute overkill, and it appears that the construction style would lead
to HUGE capacitance levels.

Since when did an audiophool care about mere science ?

Graham

Look, ya ****in' donkey.. You have yet to recover from being shunned
by the group for shear stupidity.


Is shear stupidity cutting in the wrong direction? Or harvesting wool
from the wrong sheep?

John

AnimalMagic wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

(and Bill Bruford from YES)

Bill was from King Crimson.

Originally I imagine but I though he was with YES at the time.

Graham

"flip top nut case "

No one was talking about a "high resistance 'line cord'." The issue
was the audio cable manufacturer, and later Phil Allison, contending
that a pair of wires, be it speaker cable or 'line cord', acts as a
'transmission line' with it's 'characteristic impedance' regardless of
the frequency and length of the cable.


** Characteristic impedance IS ALWAYS independent of cable length.

Cos it IS a " characteristic " of the cable and depends only on how it
is made and the frequency.


The 'hundreds of ohms' comes
from the cable manufacturer's graph depicting what they claim is the
'characteristic impedance' of 'other' speaker cables.

** A perfectly correct set of graphs.

Characteristic impedance (or Zo) rises at lower frequencies for all normal
cable types - the transition frequency is often in the middle of the audio
band.


It's cow patty because the line cord, and speaker cables, are too
short to behave as 'transmission lines'.


** All cables act as transmission lines - whether short or long.

Only the ( electrically) short ones do not support standing waves.


No. There are no noticeable transmission line 'characteristic aspects'
at power line frequencies through an 8 foot power cord.

** Irrelevant to a cables used for audio.


None of which had a damn thing to do with whether 15 feet of zip cord
acts as a 'transmission line' except to ensure it would be flat
impossible to 'match' it to the load (at least without introducing
another potential source of distortion in another impedance network,
like a zobel, or more)

** Complete gobbledegook


Phil will still want you to 'match' the 10 inch run inside the speaker
cab, though, because he's still maintaining, to this day, the idiotic
notion that length makes NO 'difference' to the 'characteristic
impedance'.

** Fraid that " notion " is a inescapable fact of nature and I never
mentioned a *need* for matching a speaker cable's Zo to the speaker
impedances - since that is generally impossible.

--------------------------------

This article from Belden ( famous US cable maker) on cable Zo ( at high and
low frequencies) is free of the gross errors seen in the ones " flip top
head" selected:

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Techpprs/ciocahalf.htm

Interesting that the rise in Zo at low frequencies depends mainly on the
resistance of the conductors. The " transition frequency " varies widely,
but can be in the middle of the audio band or lower for twisted pair of
figure 8 cables.
See figure 7 for tests on REAL twisted pair cables.

I like these bits too:

" The characteristic impedance (Zo) of a cable is **independent of length**,
so obviously these measurements do not yield the characteristic impedance.
"

And ...

" If the infinitely long cable is cut to some finite length and the far end
of this cable is connected to a capacitor-resistor combination which is
assembled and found to be equal to the characteristic impedance, an
astounding discovery is made. The impedance measured looking into the cable
which is terminated at the far end with its matching characteristic
impedance (the capacitor-resistor combination) is still the same as it was
for the infinitely long cable! Cut the cable to *any length* and if the
termination at the far end is unchanged and the frequency is unchanged, no
difference in the measured impedance will be noticed. "

----------------------

...... Phil

"flip top nut case "

** Characteristic impedance IS ALWAYS independent of cable length.

Cos it IS a " characteristic " of the cable and depends only on how it
is made and the frequency.

The "characteristic impedance" is the impedance above the transition
region.


** Figure 7 SHOWS it is a valid parameter at all frequencies.


Quoting your source: "The characteristic impedance which is normally
listed in a cable catalog is this constant high frequency impedance."


** Which contradicts YOU - 100%.


The 'hundreds of ohms' comes
from the cable manufacturer's graph depicting what they claim is the
'characteristic impedance' of 'other' speaker cables.

** A perfectly correct set of graphs.

Characteristic impedance (or Zo) rises at lower frequencies for all normal
cable types - the transition frequency is often in the middle of the
audio
band.

I never said the graphs were 'wrong'.


** Yes you did, you flip head liar - you said it was "cow patty",



It's cow patty because the line cord, and speaker cables, are too
short to behave as 'transmission lines'.


** All cables act as transmission lines - whether short or long.

Nope,


** WRONG - again.



Only the ( electrically) short ones do not support standing waves.

Which is necessary for the impedance to matter.


** COMPLETELY WRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It matters in OTHER WAYS !!!!!!!!!!!




The topic was the toaster.


** Nothing but a ridiculous RED HERRING.


Remember, you just said "all cables" so the
question still remains for you to answer why the power cord works
instead of reflecting the power back from impedance mismatch.


** That is your own utterly mad, totally wrong idea.



Phil will still want you to 'match' the 10 inch run inside the speaker
cab, though, because he's still maintaining, to this day, the idiotic
notion that length makes NO 'difference' to the 'characteristic
impedance'.

** Fraid that " notion " is a inescapable fact of nature

Let me be more precise.


** Lets take flip head off to a cliff and drop him over...................




--------------------------------

This article from Belden ( famous US cable maker) on cable Zo ( at high
and
low frequencies) is free of the gross errors seen in the ones " flip top
head" selected:

http://www.belden.com/pdfs/Techpprs/ciocahalf.htm

Interesting that the rise in Zo at low frequencies depends mainly on the
resistance of the conductors. The " transition frequency " varies widely,
but can be in the middle of the audio band or lower for twisted pair of
figure 8 cables.
See figure 7 for tests on REAL twisted pair cables.

I like these bits too:

" The characteristic impedance (Zo) of a cable is **independent of
length**,
so obviously these measurements do not yield the characteristic impedance.
"

And ...

" If the infinitely long cable is cut to some finite length and the far
end
of this cable is connected to a capacitor-resistor combination which is
assembled and found to be equal to the characteristic impedance, an
astounding discovery is made. The impedance measured looking into the
cable
which is terminated at the far end with its matching characteristic
impedance (the capacitor-resistor combination) is still the same as it was
for the infinitely long cable! Cut the cable to *any length* and if the
termination at the far end is unchanged and the frequency is unchanged, no
difference in the measured impedance will be noticed. "

---------------------------


That is all well and good except they are presuming ....


** No they are not !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


here's a simple rule:


** Yeah - flip top is a totally autistic nut case.


Yes it has a 'characteristic impedance' and yes the impedance rises
dramatically at low frequency and if you had a 100 mile long cable,
where it *would* act like (be) a transmission line, you'd care but, to
re quote Belden, "it doesn't matter" at speaker cable lengths.

** Blatant fake quote.

Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.....


Referring back up to the first comment about 'characteristic
impedance', the paper also explains "You can see that, at low
frequencies, there is no "characteristic" impedance. It is always
changing. "

** Another blatant fake quote.

Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

What a desperate CHARLATAN !!!!





....... Phil

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:32:54 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:02:58 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 06:09:37 -0500, flipper wrote:

No, I am correct. The 'problem' is, regardless of what you may think
now, you don't understand what was being discussed.



You are an idiot. I know more about complex impedances and circuit
parasitics than you ever will, boy.

Especially since you are already pegged as a presumptuous little bitch
in this group.

Braggadocio counts for nada. You lose.

In other groups, A's L is known as Always Wrong. His record in that
regard is unblemished.

John

HiggsField wrote:

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:21:12 +1000, "Phil Allison"
wrote:



** For "uk.rec.audio" readers.



.... Phil


Absolute overkill, and it appears that the construction style would lead
to HUGE capacitance levels.

Capacitance? Where? Not an issue between strands in the same conductor.
They are at the same potential. The capacitance between the two
conductors would be no worse than that of any stranded conductor twin
lead (zip cord).

This is (like?) Litz wire, used to keep skin effects and the resulting
higher a.c. resistance down.

--
Paul Hovnanian
------------------------------------------------------------------
Leap and the net will appear.

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:37:51 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:42:02 -0700, John Larkin
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:32:54 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 07:02:58 -0700, Archimedes' Lever
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 06:09:37 -0500, flipper wrote:

No, I am correct. The 'problem' is, regardless of what you may think
now, you don't understand what was being discussed.



You are an idiot. I know more about complex impedances and circuit
parasitics than you ever will, boy.

Especially since you are already pegged as a presumptuous little bitch
in this group.

Braggadocio counts for nada. You lose.

In other groups, A's L is known as Always Wrong. His record in that
regard is unblemished.

John


You're a goddamned retard, Larkin. You're just ****ed because I noted
that you are too stupid to run something as simple as a vapor phase
degreaser.

I don't run degreasers. I design electronics.

See any grease on this?

ftp://66.117.156.8/DSC01786.JPG

You were also wrong about Motorola being out of the VME game.

OK, post us a link to some Moto VME products.

John