 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
77.234.42.134
In Reply to: RE: So you've got an image outside your speakers these days... posted by Wellfed on October 16, 2008 at 09:56:04
Among many other things, those few and far between days/evenings when I get to sit down, listen, and be reminded of how accurate the frequency response and presentation is of my current set-up. And all without the worry or hassle of multiple wallet-draining tweaks that are, ironically, destined to do nothing more than ease one's mind.
Follow Ups:
"What else do you have left to look forward to?"> > > "Among many other things, those few and far between days/evenings when I get to sit down, listen, and be reminded of how accurate the frequency response and presentation is of my current set-up" < < <
Wouldn't it be fair to add the following, to your list of leisure time activity?:
Searching websites, cutting and pasting manufacturer information on chat forums, and then starting a thread to pot-shot whatever strikes you as wrong in a completely ill-informed manner..?That takes a lot more free time than most people would have on their hands of an evening. You spent some considerable time ridiculing products you know nothing about -- with no consequence or understanding of the measurable science involved--just for the pleasure of trashing something. The internet can be a great place for arm-chair tough guys (one hand in chips, another on the key pad). I find it ironic that your mind is free of the worry of "wallet-draining tweaks" yet here you are, the peoples champion.
Grant
Shunyata Research
Edits: 10/17/08 10/17/08
"eliminating the usual color dyes, carbon and ferrous metals that Shunyata believes degrades degrade performance"Can you prove what you believe with measurable science? We both believe in many things, but that makes neither one of us right or wrong.
For the record, I did not surf the web looking for a product to bash. Your risers were included in an email from The Cable Company recently. I found them to be far fetched and wondered if there was anyone on these boards that might have some background on the affects of a static field on an audio signal propogating through an insulated conductor.
No comment on the lack of proof-read prior to publish...
Edits: 10/18/08
> > > "eliminating the usual color dyes, carbon and ferrous metals that Shunyata believes degrades degrade performance" "Can you prove what you believe with measurable science?" < < <
Realizing how off far off base you were with your initial slack jawed criticisms, you now change the argument and come up with new ones. Classic. This could go on forever.
Regarding dye's? No we have no measurement for that, but then that was not what the discussion was covering nor what I intended as measurable science, was it?
Ferrous metal proximity effects on a signal may not be measurable, but like other things it is explainable and a fairly accepted concept among many who know a bit about electronics design.
Obviously, you know very little about the arguments you are making, and you are taking issue with someone who has a background as an NSA research scientist. Someone that helped develop many of the US military's signal acquisition systems.
No one came here touting anything, but we do have the right to defend legitimate products and design ideas from ill informed internet hobbyists with an agenda.
> > ."I found them to be far fetched and wondered if there was anyone on these boards that might have some background on the affects of a static field on an audio signal propogating through an insulated conductor." < < <
You didn't *wonder* anything. You couldn't wait to throw the first rock and hop on the pile. C'mon, you have no real curiosity or need to know. You had an opinion and you decided to use it as a weapon in a forum where you could sling with relative anonymity.
Thank you for catching my typo. I have written over 60 pages of content on our web, I am sure some can excuse us missing that one. I have had it corrected.
Once you are reduced to pointing out a text error, wouldn't it seem prudent to find another target for your campaign?
"we do have the right to defend legitimate products and design ideas from ill informed internet hobbyists with an agenda"
We have a right to question questionable products if we chose. I can't think of any other branch of the electronic industry where products like this exist. That alone brings a big question mark.
> > > "I can't think of any other branch of the electronic industry where products like this exist." < < <
Really? What about anti-static products used in the packing, manufacturing and handling of integrated circuits, computer systems and chip sets?
What about in office use, as grounded static hard mats under office chairs keep day workers from stimulating a charge that can shock their computers into lock up?
How about the shipment of sensitive electrical instruments and parts? What do they use? It is called *conductive foam*. Ring a bell?
Does any of that count? How about Anti-static bags used to ship and package many types of cabling and electronics?
Nordost's own Eco-3 spray, used to effectively neutralize/treat static build up from their teflon insulated conductors.
The list is almost endless, and that is just within the electronics industry you referenced, there are thousands of other examples and static related products in other industries as well. As I have written several times now, these are not alien concepts or products. You can choose to accept or discard as you wish. It's the incessant ill informed chirping and name calling that gets bothersome.
You have every right to question whatever you like. Let's leave it there, unless you are concerned enough to call, or heaven forbid seek direct experience with products that so upset you. We both know your interest level relates only to the exploits of hifidave and his yahoo street cred.
You claim: "elevating a cable from the floor with an electrical insulator creates a relative static charge differential between the cable and floor. Over a period of time this static differential can become enormous -- sometimes exceeding tens of thousands of volts."So which has the higher static charge that is causing this differential, the cable or the floor? If it's a wood floor, it must be the cable.
If it's a carpeted floor, the carpet is neutral. It can produce a static charge on another object when that object is dragged across it, but carpet does not inherently possess an over-abundance of electrons or a static charge. If it did, it would shock you every time you walked onto it. So again, if there is a static differential being produced, the cable must possess the higher charge.
So is a speaker cable with it's relatively low voltage/current and insulated conductors capable of producing a static field in the +10kv range? If it IS the cable that has the lower of the 2 charges, how is the carpet/floor acquiring the higher charge?
If all of this holds true, could one not lower their speaker cables close enough to the floor to create a spark? If the conductive foam is there to reduce/eliminate a charge differential, other than vibration concerns, one could simply lay there cables on the floor and eliminate the field altogether, could they not?
Edits: 10/20/08
Quite obviously your new round of questions are neither sincere, nor from anyone seeking honest information.Answering more of your disingenuous questions poses only two possible outcomes: Continued derision based on ill conceived or irrational argument, or another round of follow up questions, typo challenges and other time wasting inquiries.
Since I am sure you have many more productive ways to spend your time, as we do, I asked Caelin Gabriel, who designs our products, for simple answers to your (likely borrowed) questions. Since honestly motivated people may ask similar questions out of curiosity some day, we'll archive the content as faq material in more detailed form.
There is no point to any further dialogue in this context. It is a lose-lose proposition. You will never run out of questions, innuendo or finger pointing because it appears to be your nature regarding anything outside the sphere of your experience.
If you have personal issues, new attacks or concerns that need more of our time, call me directly. We'll have coffee.
Here are your pointed questions, and their answers:
> > > "You claim: "elevating a cable from the floor with an electrical insulator creates a relative static charge differential between the cable and floor. Over a period of time this static differential can become enormous -- sometimes exceeding tens of thousands of volts." < < <
This is correct. See the following Wikipedia on static charge for basic understanding of the issue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_electricity
> > > "So which has the higher static charge that is causing this differential, the cable or the floor? If it's a wood floor, it must be the cable. " < < <
All charges are relative. Static charges are everywhere and relative to the various materials that are in close proximity to one another. One material (A) may have a relative electric charge that is negative to material (B) while simultaneously having a relative positive charge to material (C). Earth ground is commonly used as the reference for a zero charge, but it is irrelevant to the charges between any two materials since their potentials are "floating".
> > > "If it's a carpeted floor, the carpet is neutral. It can produce a static charge on another object when that object is dragged across it, but carpet does not inherently possess an over-abundance of electrons or a static charge. If it did, it would shock you every time you walked onto it. So again, if there is a static differential being produced, the cable must possess the higher charge. " < < <
Triboelectric materials each have relative charge potentials that vary according to the material. So, think of a scale that goes from strongly positive to strongly negative. Each material has a charge "potential" that lies somewhere along that scale. [NOTE: Do not confuse the term "potential" with charge. I am referring to its ability to manifest a charge; and when it manifests a charge, what that relative charge would be.] Then, you look at two materials to see where they lie on the scale relative to one another. The further apart they are on the scale, the stronger the electric potential they can manifest relative to one another.
Some materials do not generate a net electrical charge through the triboelectric effect. Steel is one of these substances. Carpet however is usually made from synthetic fibers such as polyesters that have strong negative potentials or from nylon that has a strong positive potential. None of these materials are like batteries. They do not inherently posses a net electric charge. It is only when they are activated through the close proximity of another triboelectric material, of differing electric potential, do they manifest a relative charge one to the other.
The charge between the floor and the cable is produced in two ways. The first is when the cable is installed. The cable is laid on the floor and (commonly) dragged about. When the cable is separated from the floor with a cable elevator, the triboelectric effect will be produced causing a relative electric charge between the cable and the floor material. Interesting, one of the popular types of cable elevators is made from glass. Glass is one of the highest positive triboelectric materials and cable insulation is usually a teflon or polyethylene which is very strongly negative - the net result will be a very high static charge between the elevator and the cable irrespective of the flooring material. So now you have three materials in close proximity with three different static states.
The second method in which static charges are developed is a bit more difficult to understand but none the less explainable. A cable is composed of a conductor which is usually copper, silver or copper alloy. The conductor is insulated with a dielectric - usually polypropylene, polyethylene, PVC or Teflon. The conductors have a mild negative electric "potential" while the dielectric materials are all very strongly negative. This creates a fairly powerful static charge potential difference. The "rubbing" force required by the triboelectric effect is provided by the movement of the electrons in the conductor. The constant back and forth movement of the electrons generates a static charge within the dielectric material that builds up over time. This effect is very commonly manifest in Teflon insulated cables and is why they are sometimes more dramatically affected by dry weather.
Regarding the "shocking" effect to humans. Human skin is one of the most positive potentials. So if a human comes in contact with just about any negative charge - there will be a transference of electrons to the human. This is why there are rigorous procedures and grounding devices used in the assembly of electronic LSI devices. FEELING the transference of electrons is another story all together. To feel the transference as a "shock" the electrons would need to jump across an air gap to produce a spark. Air breaks down at about 30KV per centimeter. So there can be electric static charges that are many thousands of volts without the presence of sparks.
> > > So is a speaker cable with it's relatively low voltage/current and insulated conductors capable of producing a static field in the +10Kv range? If it IS the cable that has the lower of the 2 charges, how is the carpet/floor acquiring the higher charge? < < <
see all of the above.
> > > "If all of this holds true, could one not lower their speaker cables close enough to the floor to create a spark? " < < <
Most cable elevators create a gap of greater than 2 inches. This would necessitate a static charge in excess of 150KV. Doesn't seem likely, does it?
Now, any genuine person who received this detailed answer might be satisfied given that it follows general common sense and accepted theory. My guess is you are not one of those folks, are you?
Any new round of questions? Call us directly. Enough forum space has been wasted on your net -detective quest already.
Grant
Shunyata Research
Edits: 10/20/08
Interesting stuff. Thank you. The attached link explains, in detail, my line of work. I deal with the whole positive/negative ion attraction/repulsion thing on a routine basis. So I fully understand your responses.
And for the record:
"Most cable elevators create a gap of greater than 2 inches. This would necessitate a static charge in excess of 150KV".
I didn't ask if a spark could be created using 2" risers. Also, 150kv is merely 15X "tens of thousands". The maximum distance at which a spark could be generated is proportional to the point at which the slope of the charge diffential plateaus and levels out. With the right materials, 150kv might not be an exaggeration.
"Doesn't seem likely, does it?" Not necessarily.
Why hang out at forums dedicated to tweaking?
Concern for your fellow man?
Edits: 10/17/08
moved here by the moderator(s).....
From ebony pucks to magic foil, mystical and controversial tweaks.
I assumed it was to cover the "why's" as opposed to the "how to's".
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
