LieNo. 1 about wire rod

Logically, we shouldn't start with this lie, because the wire belongs to the accessory, not the main audio part. However, this is the biggest, meanest, most irritating and insulting lie, and it is also the most embarrassing lie in the field of fever. So I have to put this in front.

The lie is that high-priced horn lines and signal lines sound better than standard or ordinary lines. This lie has been exposed, ridiculed and refuted again and again by honest authorities in The Sun. But many innocent people can't tell the difference.

The simplest fact is that the parameters of impedance (R), inductive reactance (L) and capacitive reactance (C) are the only parameters that can affect the performance in the audio frequency range. The signal simply doesn't know whether it is transmitted by a high-priced line or a cheap line. Of course, you have to pay some price for a well-made plug, shielding treatment, insulation treatment and so on. , to ensure that the wire can work reliably and stably. Also, you should pay attention to the wire is not too long, to avoid excessive impedance and signal attenuation. But in terms of basic conductivity, a pair of high-quality clothes hangers, after scraping off both ends and straightening, are not worse than the magic wire rod worth 2000 dollars. 16 the same is true for one foot of electric light line 18 minutes. High-priced wire rod is one of the biggest scams in electronic consumer goods. It's frustrating to see almost all audio publications timidly surrender to cable TV providers.

PearCable, a fever audio company, has launched a top-level speaker cable called Anjou, which costs $7,250 and has a length of 12 feet (about 3.5 meters). Even super enthusiasts will be shocked by this price.

JamesRandi used to be a famous magician, and now he specializes in exposing all kinds of pseudoscience, paranormal and super powers. 1999, Si Manan, China rewarded outstanding talents and cooperated with its foundation. This time, he offered a reward again, saying that if someone can prove in blind test that this high-priced audio cable can bring better sound quality than the ordinary "monster cable" (although we think the monster cable is expensive enough), he can take away $6,543.8+0,000.

It is reported that Pear has accepted this challenge, and the person who will take the test will be MichaelFremer, a writer of Fever Audio magazine. CEOAdamBlake of PearCable said that MichaelFremer was the first person to contact and accept the challenge, and he would benefit if he was rewarded. However, what is the final result? I can only tell you that this challenge ended in vain, and the report ends here. It's a bit anticlimactic, but for the problem of blind testing, we will continue to introduce this more outrageous scam to you in the next few points.

The second lie about the electron tube

This lie is also a peripheral problem, because in this silicon age, electron tubes have nothing to do with the mainstream. In the high-end audio market, this is a widespread and in-depth lie. The bold advertisements in high-end audio magazines, counting the proportion of pages, are incredible, but this is the case. Of course, the viewpoint inside is: in audio application, the gallbladder machine is more advanced than the stone machine. Don't doubt.

Electron tubes are very suitable for radio transmission and microwave ovens. However, at the turning point of this era, some products are not. For example: power amplifier, front stage and CD player, DVD player, etc.

What's wrong with the electron tube? No, really ... What happened to the gold teeth? Even front teeth? No, it's just another attractive option.

In an audio device, what the electron tube can do, the transistor can do, and it can do better, with lower cost and higher reliability. Even the best first-class amplifier in the world has higher distortion than the transistor amplifier of the same level, and needs more maintenance (replacing the lamp and adjusting the bias voltage, etc.). ) During the life of the machine.

Those stupid designs of 8-watt single-ended triode tube amplifiers don't count, because they have no similar transistor designs to compare.

Regarding the taste of bile, this intentional dyeing, transistor system can also easily imitate this distorted sound, if the designer wants to do so. Of course, some experienced audio designers will consider using electronic tubes, but this rare successful exception can't end the lies of those electronic tube manufacturers who advise you to buy old technology.

The third lie about anti-numbers

You may often hear people say, "Digital sound is much worse than analog sound." "Digital audio is like a rough newspaper picture composed of coarse dots." "Nyquist sampling theorem doesn't work at all." The sampling rate of that CD 44. 1 khz can't solve the problem of extremely high frequency band, because there are only two or three sampling points in a cycle. " "Digital sound, even under the best conditions, will be dry and harsh." And so on.

This is really ignorant and misleading. The mainstream rarely supports lies because digital technology has been fully recognized. However, this lie is still circulating in some non-mainstream audio worlds, Hi-End audio salons that have not been completely transformed, and various crooked listening rooms.

The most ridiculous expression of anti-digital fallacy is that I prefer LP to CD, rather than analog master to digital master. The dispute between analog masters and digital masters is still unknown. Squeak, crackle, sonic boom is better than the digital information pit with quiet background? This is an abnormal resistance to objective facts.

Here are some facts that sophomores of electronic engineering can also prove to you: digital audio is harmless, analog audio can never be done, and 0 and 1 will never change on the signal path like analog audio. Even the lowest sampling rate of today's audio fever is 44. 1KHz. It can also decompose all sound frequencies without losing information in any audio range. How to recover 20KHz from two sampling points is a naive misinterpretation of Nyquist sampling law.

As for why some analog recordings sound better, the main reason lies in the contribution of the sound engineer. It does well in microphone placement, sound level, balance and equalization. There is also the location of the recording is very consistent with auditory acoustics.

Some early digital recordings were really difficult and tricky. But this is not because it is digital audio, but because engineers are still thinking about analog methods to correct those losses that are estimated in advance but do not exist. The best digital recording today is the best recording mode ever. In all fairness, we must admit that the analog recording with the highest technology can be compared with the digital recording engineer with the highest technology. Nevertheless, the supporters of analog recording in the professional field are rapidly decreasing.

The fourth lie about the listening test

Everyone knows how to refute those old-fashioned lies that have the opposite opinion about ABX testing. The general method is as follows:

The ABX method requires that the level matching degree between equipment A and equipment B is within plus or minus 0. 1dB. You can listen to A and B at will and listen to them as long as you want. If you think they are different, you can ask to listen to X, which is actually one of A or B (this is randomly determined by the double-blind system), so that you can compare A/X or B/X at any time. You can have as many times as you want. Then decide whether X=A or x = b.

Because if you rely entirely on wild guesses, the hit rate will be around 50%. Statistical correctness must be tested at least 12 times. (16 times better, 20 times better). There is no better scientific method to test whether you listen to different things or the same thing. Those paranoid friends will tell you that the double-blind test doesn't work at all, because everyone knows that Krell's voice is better than Pioneer's.

But if they can't tell the difference in a double-blind test, Then the ABX method will be considered infeasible, which is their theory.

If everyone knows that Joe is taller than Mike, but if they all measure that his height is exactly 5 feet 1 1 and 1/4 inches, then there must be something wrong with the ruler, right?

The most common objection is that the ABX test method is too stressful. If you say: Let's see how well you can listen. They may say, no time, because they have to take the exam 16 times. Or require too much equipment, and so on.

Teach you a way to find hypocrites who oppose and confuse ABX testing: If you ask them if they believe in other AB testing methods, they may say yes. Then you ask him how to tell: 1. Different levels? 2。 Or peeking? Then wait for them to become angry from embarrassment:).

The fifth lie about negative feedback

Use negative feedback in amplifier or front stage? Too bad! No negative feedback at all? How nice! This misleading is widely circulated. Negative feedback is actually a very useful tool in circuit design. Can reduce distortion and improve stability. Only in the Bronze Age when transistor amplifiers were designed, as early as 6070' s, negative feedback was useless, the effect was not satisfactory, and many problems were encountered. This is the origin of superstition without negative feedback. In the early 1980s, EdwardCherry and RobertCordell revealed the truth in the shadow of suspicion. As long as it is used strictly according to its basic principles, negative feedback is completely beneficial and harmless. Today, those who have no negative feedback are either lying or ignorant.

The sixth lie about cooking machines

This is a widely repeated lie, which makes you believe that all kinds of audio equipment and even wires will get better after a period of time, such as a day, a week or a month. This is pure nonsense. The capacitor will charge in a few seconds after startup, and the bias will stabilize in a few minutes. In a properly designed amplifier or pre-stage or CD player, there is no difference between its performance in the first hour of startup and that after using 1000 hours. Not to mention the wires. What we are discussing with enthusiasts now is metaphysics, not science.

However, it does take some time for speakers and other equipment to achieve the best performance, because they have moving parts and are mechanical equipment that needs external force to drive. This is the same as the engine and piston of a car. But this does not mean that a good speaker will sound bad when it is first turned on. For example, a new car with only 10 km will be difficult to drive? Will it be far worse than the old car?

The seventh lie is about diphthongs.

Many people have fallen into this trap even if they have been burning. Speaker manufacturers are participants in setting this trap. They will tell you that the effect of double-line sound separation is the same as that of double-amplifier sound separation. There are even many respected people in the audio industry who bow and scrape to this feast of interests and surrender to the reality of the market. They should feel guilty.

In fact, double amplifier sound separation is meaningful in some cases, even if a passive sound separator is used. But the separation of the two lines is purely deceptive witchcraft. If you connect the two ends of a pair of horn wires to the place where the other pair of horn wires are connected, the electronic principle has not changed at all, which is called superposition theorem in physics. The superposition theorem stipulates that the current flowing through a point in a linear network is equal to the sum of the current components generated by the voltages acting on the point when multiple voltages are applied simultaneously in the whole network. Similarly, under the same conditions, the voltage between any two points is equal to the sum of the voltages generated by a single voltage acting between the two points.

Whether it is an audio salesman or an audio enthusiast, as long as someone can prove the opposite theory, they should win scientific awards and academic honors.

However, we must also say fairly: the two-line partiality is actually harmless, but it is not very useful. It's like putting a magnet in a shoe.

The eighth lie about the power processor

What this title has to say is in the product manual of Bu riston: All Bu riston amplifiers have well-designed high-quality dedicated circuits to prevent power lines such as radio waves and line breakdown. Riston's power amplifier doesn't need a special power processor, just plug it into the wall.

They are actually talking about the characteristics of all well-designed amplifiers. They don't necessarily have the same PSRR and performance as Bu riston. However, they can plug it directly into the wall without any special power supply. If you can afford a high-priced power processor, you can also afford a well-designed amplifier without special power processing. Powerful processors have no effect on you. Please note that we are not talking about switching power supply designed for computer surge protection. They are much cheaper than Tice audio boxes, and they are subject to more power interference than this audio device, such as printers and other peripheral devices. )

One of the biggest and stupidest lies about "clean" power supply is that you need a specially designed and expensive power cord to get the best possible sound. All power cords rated to handle internal AC voltage and current have the same performance as other power cords. The sky-high power cord is a fraud, your audio circuit doesn't know, and you don't need to worry about what power cord is used at the AC end of the transformer. What they need to care about is the voltage required by the DC terminal. Think about it, does your car need to care about what pipe to refuel it with?

The ninth lie about optical disc processing

Let's go back to the polyethylene age for a while. When we spray all kinds of magical liquids on LP discs, it will improve the playback effect, especially when the ejected air pressure cleans up the residues in some grooves. Business logic moves on. In the 1980s and 1990s, some magical products similar to CDs were born.

There is a problem. Yes, both CD and LP have the same side, which allows you to spray some mucus. But the surface of CD is far from LP. Its tiny pits do not correspond to analog waveforms, but only carry some digital codes consisting of 0 and 1. Those zeros and zeros of 65438+ can't get better or worse. And LP may make the trajectory smoother. They read only 0 and 1. Did you also polish the one-dollar coin to prevent the cashier from treating it as a dime?

No. 10 lies about golden ears

This all-encompassing lie should probably rank first, but it can also be used as a concluding ending. "Golden Ears" want you to believe how keen and keen their hearing is. They can hear any subtle sound in the replay, which is different from us. This is absolutely not true. Anyone who has no actual hearing impairment can hear what they hear, but one thing is that those who are trained and experienced know what those sounds are made of and how to explain and express them. Therefore, if the frequency response of the horn has a huge trough at 3kHz, then any ear, whether it is golden ear or fungus, will never sound like a flat frequency response. However, experienced people can quickly find out the problem. It's like a car mechanic can quickly know what's wrong with the car just by listening to the engine. His ears are not necessarily better than yours. He only knows what to listen to. In fact, you can do it, too, if you have handled so many engines like him.

Here comes the worst part. An extremely subjective critic who calls himself "golden ear", a salesperson of a high-end audio salon, a major member of an audio club, etc. When comparing two power amplifiers, they often threaten you with their hypocritical super hearing: "Did you hear that?" It seems that you want to hear the huge difference between the two, but in fact, Jin Er himself can't hear the difference. What they mean is that they heard, and they know that you trust their golden ears. I feel terrible.

The best rebuttal to the golden ear is the double-blind test. This is the best way to judge whether he can really hear the difference between the two. But in fact, this rarely happens. Even if there is, those golden ears will slip away after the first time.

;