Had an interesting conversation with an E-E,Telecomm guy concerning "Cables" (1 Viewer)

[Brett DiMichele]

Saurav,
His main field is Telecomm and he's the lead man on the team
but he also knows datacomm. This man sat down with me and
told me about his "project" in college where he had to build
an amplifier that output at least 1 true watt with a linear
response from point A to point B (we will say like 500-1Khz)
I can't remember what he said the professors specs were.
The result was his 3 stage (+10,+10,+10) capacitorless
Direct Coupled amp that produced 20 watts output with a flat
linear Freq-Resp from 3ohz-20Khz. When the professor tested
it he couldn't not beleive what he saw.. He actualy looked
under the table to see if he had something under there! He
also dissasembled the amp to see how he was doing it.. Then
once he came to the conclusion that he wasn't cheating he
asked him "Why did you build a capacitorless amp?" and he
replied "I overbuild everyting, And you could sell this and
MAKE money!"
The guy is nuts like that, and he knows his stuff!
And I beleive that if it's measurable then it effects performance.
EG: Capacitence,Inductance,Impedance. Anything else is hog
wash.. If you can't show me on a Fluke Multimeter what is
making the sound supposedly "sound" better, then don't even
try to convince me..
Like I said, I am a firm beleiver in quality cables if they
are needed. But quality does NOT mean overpriced.. E-O-S
------------------

Brett DiMichele
My Home Theater Site!
[email protected]

 

[ChristopherS]

Imagination is far more valuable than knowledge. Albert Einstein

Wow! I had no idea that Einstein did not believe in analytic proof.

Do you think it is possible that the above quote is taken out of context? Has anyone, other than engineering/science types, read any of Einstein's scientific work? Do you think someone could get that famous if other people (usually scientists) could not duplicate his results? Surprisingly, Einstein attempted to factually prove all his theorems (and when he could not provide absolute proof, these ideas continued to be called theories. Although they advanced science, until scientifically proven, they remain a theory.)
If people want to think a 3 foot cable that costs $2000 (or $200 for that matter) sounds better than a $20 DIY cable, that is fine as it is their own money and their own home theater system. But to start misquoting one of the most brilliant people to ever live in order support their reasons for buying boutique cables is sad.
Enjoy your weekend everybody.
Chris

 

[Saurav]

quote: Wow! I had no idea that Einstein did not believe in analytic proof[/quote]
I think you're the one who's taking his quote out of context. The quote says he believes imagination is more important than knowledge. Where does he say that he doesn't believe in analytical proof? "More important" and "the only thing that matters" are pretty different, and that's a fairly big jump from the one to the other, IMO.
Edit: Brett, that's pretty impressive about your friend's amp
[Edited last by Saurav on November 09, 2001 at 01:26 PM]

 

[Alex F.]

Lest it be forgotten, Einstein's theories and ground-breaking work were an outgrowth of his imagination. He possessed the ability to free his mind of conventional thinking, which led to new ideas that pushed physics into previously unexplored realms.
If Einstein did not have such an incredible imagination, he would have remained just another patent-office clerk.

 

[RobertR]

Another interesting aspect of Einstein's Theory of Relativity is that it was based on ideas having no correlation with sensory experience. It actually contradicts knowledge gained via direct sensory experience. In fact, experimental verification of it requires very precise measurements using instruments.
Einstein, of course, had no objection to scientific experiments designed to test his theory. It's too bad other claimants don't have the same attitude.

 

[Saurav]

Einstein, of course, had no objection to scientific experiments designed to test his theory. It's too bad other claimants don't have the same attitude.

Yup, that really is pretty sad
Actually, to be fair to the cable believers (if this is being fair), no one has proposed a theory to explain why there may be differences, all they have said is that they think the current theories don't explain everything. And while that isn't an ideal statement to make (i.e., if you don't think this theory is right then you ought to have a different theory to propose), it's not a logically inconsistent statement, and IMO it's certainly not the same thing as what you're saying, that they object to scientific testing of their theories. A DBT tests already existing theories, and re-affirms them, it is not a test designed to verify the truth of any new theory. So, an objection to DBTs isn't the same thing as objecting to scientific testing of their theories. In fact, in some ways, it's exactly the opposite.
If we were to make a realistic comparision to Einstein, someone in the cable believers camp would need to come up with a new theory describing how cables worked, and then you would design new tests based on that theory which would then be used to prove/disprove that theory. A DBT doesn't count as a test of a new theory. Well, obviously, because no one actually has a new theory.
Of course, I assume your statement is directed at the whole DBT issue, and it's possible you were referring to something else completely.

 

[RobertR]

no one has proposed a theory to explain why there may be differences, all they have said is that they think the current theories don't explain everything.

Let's be more clear about who the "they" is. I wasn't referring to the universe of Believers, but to cable makers, who may tout some "new" cable design based on some "new theory" of metallurgy or cable topology or whatever. And yes, I've SEEN people do this sort of thing, so it is not true that "no one has proposed a theory".
Of course, I'm sure you know what sequence will follow. The claim is made that the new cable design (based on some sort of theoretical underpinning) improves "soundstage depth", "inner detail", or any of a plethora of subjective terms. Objectivists will then say, "okay, let's test your cables to see if reality matches theory". It's THERE that the problem arises. They'll object to the test. That's what I was referring to.
Now, it may be that some cable "makers" (I got a lot of amusement out of Bhagi's post showing that these "manufacturers" very often don't even make their cables) throw together cables (I don't think they could even be called "designs") with no theoretical underpinnings whatsoever, ie it "sounds good" for some utterly mysterious, unfathomable, unmeasureable reason. In that case, you'd be right, ie they're defending no theory, except maybe the theory that you can engineer something without using engineering thought.

 

[Saurav]

I wasn't referring to the universe of Believers, but to cable makers

OK, I did read that wrong then. My apologies.

 

[Mike Knapp]

For everyones information this is my interpretation of Einstein's quote.
Knowledge is indeed very important but it is easy to be restricted and contained by it. All the knowledge in the world is of little creative use if you are un-able to think beyond what you already know. That is why imagination is more important.
Imagination grounded in knowledge is the magic recipe for discovery.
Mike