In Reply to: Dielectric first, then vibration... posted by Leisure7 on August 7, 2003 at 18:19:04:
I learned of this tweak from Don Palmer, maker of Highwire Power Wraps. He recommended using ceramic wall tile pieces such as quarter-round and bull-nose, that would lift the cables by about half to three-quarters of an inch, as further lifting did not seem to him to add any benefit, and the pieces are available at any home improvement store for less than a dollar each.Wood dowels would work as well. And probably have better dielectric proprties than ceramic. And of course, they're wood. :)
Speculation: the floor is a velocity null for sound wave air motion. Sound waves in the room will move the cables more, and possibly affect the perceived sound, if the cables are lifted further from the floor.
Not sure what you mean by the floor is a velocity null for sound wave air motion. You mean in the Newton's Third Law sense?
As for vibration issues, the floor seems the worst case to me. Especially a joisted solid surface floor (i.e. wood or tile).
In such a situation as this, the cable is in a pressure zone so the cable can be exposed to sound pressure levels as much as 6dB greater than if it were well away from the floor (or wall for that matter) due to the direct/reflected waves adding in phase (which is the principle of pressure zone microphones).
Then you have the vibration of the floor itself due to acoustical coupling subsequently mechanically coupling to the cable.
Lifting would help with regard to mechanical coupling to the floor (and dielectric issues with regar to the floor), but won't help much with regard to the pressure zone issue except at the highest frequencies where there's not much energy to begin with.
The way I see it, the cable is much better off both in terms of vibration and dielectric issues when it's suspended in the air, well above the floor.
se
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 21:32:27 08/07/03 (13)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Leisure7 22:02:03 08/08/03 (12)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 22:55:12 08/08/03 (11)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Ted Smith 23:38:19 08/08/03 (10)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 01:01:32 08/09/03 (9)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Ted Smith 08:06:44 08/09/03 (8)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 09:56:07 08/09/03 (7)
- Reflecting boundary - Leisure7 11:29:31 08/10/03 (0)
- Steve, are you deliberately being obtuse... - Charles Hansen 10:52:41 08/09/03 (5)
- Re: Steve, are you deliberately being obtuse... - Steve Eddy 12:35:42 08/09/03 (4)
- Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Charles Hansen 13:03:28 08/09/03 (3)
- Re: Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Steve Eddy 16:43:18 08/09/03 (2)
- Re: Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Rod M 19:00:09 08/10/03 (0)
- I give up -- it's clear all you want to do is argue... - Charles Hansen 19:48:54 08/09/03 (0)