Reducing a computers EMI improves picture quality of attached monitors.
- Thread starter JasonM
- Start date
So we're going radio silence on identifying the power cables from the music clips without the cable salesman telling you which one it is. Ok.
You showed a site by a guy who made speaker cable for Abbey Road over 30 years ago. Who now sells power cables that are not claimed as going anywhere near Abbey Road.
So no you haven't showed anything is false.
And I said if you respect Van Damme cables then you should be aware what VDC Trading sells for mains power.
You showed a site by a guy who made speaker cable for Abbey Road over 30 years ago. Who now sells power cables that are not claimed as going anywhere near Abbey Road.
So no you haven't showed anything is false.
And I said if you respect Van Damme cables then you should be aware what VDC Trading sells for mains power.
There a business that sells a variety of products, different cables are suitable for different applications.
OCUK sell basic business computers, it does not invalidate their overclocked computers costing many thousands of pounds.
Soldato
Seems to be a common theme here, I'm still waiting for answers to my questions as well
The significant increase in contrast should be easy to prove, surely?
The middle cable is an entry level cable and adds a contrast ratio of only 100.
Bottom cable is a high power cable, this adds 250 extra contrast ratio.
The problem with adding so much power, is LED screens suffer more blue light effect, if this happens choose the yellow cable as the yellow counters the blue light.
I could have told you the construction differences, but ask a daft question, get a daft answer.
I agree VDC Trading sells cables for wiring up a studio of all levels, professional and someones hobby basement. Audio, video, power and the connectors for the technicians to build the cables.
You reckon when their business is selling all the cable for wiring a professional studio and they have stock of 30 miles of power cable that they just don't supply the good stuff?
The truth is the professionals use ordinary cables correctly and have sound/electrical technicians to fix real and measurable issues between equipment.
Pseudoscience cables are for consumers who have no idea if they have interference or if they actually like a certain kind of distortion.
Oh holy **** I just read your last post. You're beyond helping.
If you don't see that's a joke reply to Haggismans ridiculous question then it's you the humour is lost on.
I'm of the opinion you're halfway off with the fairies in believing without measured proof that an exotic power cable results in better audio. You certainly aren't open to proving you can hear the difference of power cables when I remove the obvious hints, perhaps I'm being blanked for creating an unreasonable test of asking you to repeat what you said you could already do.
So yes I am open to hearing that you would buy power cables to adjust the output of your monitor. How is it any different to what you've been saying.
Soldato
How is it a ridiculous question?
Post 1:
Post 60:
You have literally stated that changing the cable gives you a significant improvement in contrast. This is a measurable element of picture quality. If you look at pretty much any monitor's product page, it will state the contrast ratio. Surely if it's such a significant improvement, it should be easy to prove?
The fact you refer to a legitimate question as "daft" and "ridiculous" is clearly deflection, and suggests maybe you don't have an answer that isn't "daft" and "ridiculous"?
I explained the cables remove EMI, I'm also using them with a Tacima mains conditioner.
How much difference depends on the equipment your connected them to.
I have no ability to measure the levels, however i'm seeing better picture quality, again the improvement will depend on the monitor your trying these on.
Again like most people on this thread, you have a belief system that cables don't make any improvement.
To justify your correct your asking me for exact measurements, I can't possible give you any measures.
Do you think one of my bedrooms is converted into the RFI testing facility, or I have some specialist light metering equipment for testing monitors. Of course I have none of this, but this does not mean the improvements I'm describing are not real.
I've just fitted some Yokohama AD08's to my Integra Type R, I think the Yokohama AD08 are great tyres. Would you take my word for this, or should I fit some G meters into my car and provide some data to you? Should we say that until I can provide some real data Yokohama AD08's offer no performance over say a budget cheap tyre?
Last edited:
Analog signals were and still are very vulnerable to any EMI at frequency of carried signal starting to distort that signal instantly.
Still EMI at other frequencies wouldn't be as automatic instant problem.
But digital signals again are by their nature very robust and it would take significant amount of EMI to start causing problems.
And once problem threshold is exceeded it won't be some subtle difference.
Even uncompressed audio will start glitching with pops, crackles etc if bits are getting "dropped".
And uncompressed video isn't any less sensitive with every single error easily causing big difference to colour of pixel whose bits were transferred at the moment.
While continuous EMI would cause continuously corrupted pixels everywhere around the screen...
Assuming input electronics just didn't surrender and lose whole signal.
Compressed digital signals again starts suffering heavy corruption of carried data from even low rate of errors.
But as long as interference/noise signal is inside tolerances of signaling scheme, data remains literally bit perfect.
That robustness is why pretty much any electronics is nowadays digital and data is processed, stored and transferred in digital form.
And only reason why you even have computer in front of you and have internet!
Soldato
Why no just say this then instead of making a stupid childish post which makes you look like a donkey?
A "belief system"? I assume you are using that phrase in an attempt to make out that I'm some kind of fanatic and that in fact it is my claims which are false? It's nothing to do with any "belief system", I'm just applying critical thought to outlandish claims which fly in the face of any established science - anyone who understands even GCSE level physics knows that a digital signal doesn't degrade/improve in the way you are suggesting. Now if you said you were using a VGA connection to your monitor with an analogue signal, I'd be open to accepting that your claims were at least plausible, but with the information you've provided I'm afraid I'm going to be sceptical unless you can provide some kind of proof.
I'm not trying to justify anything. You've claimed something which is a) almost certainly not true, and b) easy to prove if it is. Of course you don't have to prove anything to anyone, but don't expect people to take you seriously if you don't.
And yet you've somehow discovered this in your completely normal bedroom when the multi-million ££ R&D departments of various tech companies haven't?
That is generally how it works, yes. If you (as Yokohama) want drivers to pay an extra 20-30% over a budget tyre to buy your tyres, then it's definitely a good idea to justify to them why they should do so. In this case of course there are plenty of independent tests out there which compare various tyres for things like wet & dry grip, road noise, wear, etc. so that you don't have to. Where are the independent tests showing this significant improvement in picture quality that you keep claiming?
Grains of salt are required for subjective opinions.
What is your word worth on this audio matter? You specially linked a video that you heard power cables being swapped but you're keeping quiet after I removed the guy loudly saying which cable was being tested and cut the tracks to the same length and note.
Without a clear demonstration what you're doing is the equivalent of telling people to buy unknown prescription glasses without having an eye test because doing that gave you a subtle improvement you noticed over a couple of hours. After all, corrective lenses have been around for hundreds of years so it must do something right? Just give it a go and if it doesn't work just sell it on.
Don
I can google tyre reviews and find measurable comparisons e.g. in both noise measurements, wet and dry stopping distances etc.
If I google audiophile cables, the reviews are full of unquantifiable audiophile nonsense buzzwords. If tangible metrics were provided by manufacturers or reviewers, then it would allow your word to be taken more seriously
And few posts later you say this:
Then again that's standard audiofoolery BS output...
Like I said earlier those are crappy TN LCD tech monitors, so if you use them as reference for image quality your credibility ain't high.
Especially if that hour amount is true.
Assuming power supply and backlight's inverter were actually built well enough to have lasted that long, CCFL backlight itself would be badly dimmed.
(+colours no doubt changed/degraded)
For example Eizo guarantees even their top ColorEdge monitors only for 30k hours.
In couple models they give LCD panel itself only 10k hour warranty.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 1,145
24 hours x 365 days = 8760 hours per year.
200, 000 / 8760 = 22.83 years.
Be fair, that's A LOT of experience.
200, 000 / 8760 = 22.83 years.
Be fair, that's A LOT of experience.
Soldato
These sorts of thread are pointless. OP has an entrenched position
Here's a video from people who actually test audio hardware with more than ears regarding "audiophile" cable
But Hotwired that's talking about psudeoscience audio cables
And here's their article on power cables and why they make and sell audio cables (at moderate prices) but don't bother making and selling power cables at any price:
https://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/power-cables
The short answer is they'd have to lie to market a power cable as being any better.
Make sure to read through to the section called:
Audio cable salesmen who aren't full of ****
Their shop: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/
But Hotwired that's talking about psudeoscience audio cables
And here's their article on power cables and why they make and sell audio cables (at moderate prices) but don't bother making and selling power cables at any price:
https://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/power-cables
The short answer is they'd have to lie to market a power cable as being any better.
Make sure to read through to the section called:
Audio cable salesmen who aren't full of ****
Their shop: https://www.bluejeanscable.com/
Last edited:
Everyone here is wrong regarding EMI and it's effect on computers. From the following link.
https://www.deepcoat.com/why-emi-shielding-is-essential-in-data-centers/
The effects of EMI can be drastic. When it occurs, you may notice shaky monitor screens or system failures. At times, the interferences can be so bad that information gets scrambled and hard disks can become completely wiped. Additionally, some people use EMI to their advantage. They take it as an opportunity to intentionally mess with signals without having to take a step inside of a data center.
The Russ Andrews power cables are reducing EMI, and the Tacima is also reducing some radio interference and providing basic mains conditioning. Anyone dismissing this before trying for themselves is not being objective.
https://www.deepcoat.com/why-emi-shielding-is-essential-in-data-centers/
The effects of EMI can be drastic. When it occurs, you may notice shaky monitor screens or system failures. At times, the interferences can be so bad that information gets scrambled and hard disks can become completely wiped. Additionally, some people use EMI to their advantage. They take it as an opportunity to intentionally mess with signals without having to take a step inside of a data center.
The Russ Andrews power cables are reducing EMI, and the Tacima is also reducing some radio interference and providing basic mains conditioning. Anyone dismissing this before trying for themselves is not being objective.
Last edited: