Quote:
They claim that using electrically insulating materials as cable risers actually causes problems.

LOL, of course they'd say that.

Please ask them to show hard evidence for any of their claims - I'd love to hear their response.

--Ethan

Those elevators are crucial for people who suffer from Short Audiophile Syndrome.

And if it is indeed "Patent Pending" I'd love to see the evidence sighted to make those claims. Of course, just because something is patented doesn't even mean that what is claimed works. Most patents are just broadly theoretical so as to cover POSSIBLE applications. So the whole "pending" thing is just to lend an air of credibility, which these things certainly need...

How about this as a concept- just tell people "they look kinda cool, and will keep your cables seperated!" Whoa- tell the truth and skip the weird science? Never happen.

Quote:
It sure appears deliciously nutty.

Nutty implies silly but innocent. Below is my further analysis. Do we know what this nonsense costs per piece?

--Ethan

Quote:
The central problem with the conventional model is that elevating a cable from the floor with an electrical insulator creates a relative static charge differential between the cable and floor.

No it doesn't, and I challenge you to show a test setup with voltmeter that proves your point.

Quote:
When an electrical signal is sent through the cable, the signal can become distorted or inter-modulated by the static electrical field differential between the cable and floor.

This is not possible and shows your total lack of knowledge about audio and electronics. Static is a DC phenomenon - distortion requires AC, and intermodulation requires two different AC frequencies.

Quote:
This effect is similar to sending an electrical signal through a wire that passes through a powerful magnetic field. The distortion that results is quite audible with any quality entertainment system.

If it's "quite audible" then it's also quite measurable. Test data please.

Quote:
The elevator is constructed from expensive, multiple layers of electrically conductive foam.

How expensive? Most foam costs a buck a gallon. Not that I'd ever accuse Shunyata of lying, but please show us invoices from the foam manufacturer if you'd like to be believed.

Quote:
In addition to eliminating static-field differential effects, Dark Field Elevators minimize the transmission of vibrations by combining two soft layers of vibration absorbent foam with a third rigid layer that has a different resonant frequency.

Vibrations of what?

Quote:
This not only minimizes floor-borne vibration, but also breaks up standing-wave vibrations within the elevator itself.

Standing waves in a cable elevator? You're kidding, right?

Quote:
Placing Dark Field Elevators under signal cables, speaker cables and power cables will bring obvious improvements in clarity, detail and resolution to your high-end entertainment system.

Test data please.

Here's the one that floored me.

"The central problem with the conventional model is that 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."

10,000 VOLTS!

My cats run around back there all the time. Hell, I'm back there messin' round from time to time.

Wasn't it Elk who told us to try those teacups?

RG

Actually a Patent is NOT an example of a real thing - it is called a "preferred embodiment" in the patent and need not have any real world corollary at the time. If it is produced it is called the "commercial embodiment" and at that point will likely have many details and applications that are different than what the patent may have stated. The Patent is a concept, originally meant as a teaching device to stimulate the new American industrial revolution. For protection of the inventor, yes, but primarily to help other inventors to learn about what was happening at large and hopefully use this information to build upon. As time went on it became more a tool to protect, obscure capture lines of ideas, particularly in today's litigation-driven economy. How do I know all this? Well, I worked for a company that specialized in litigation oriented 3D animation, a great deal of which was intellectual property related. A truly educational and interesting line of business, but in the end, it didn't endear me to the legal profession. If anything patents, like rampant copyrighting, are probably one of the biggest obstacle to free-market competition.

As I stated in another thread. If raising a cable causes problems by creating static charges between the cable and the floor and cable resonances based on riser spacing, then how can cable risers be a good thing? A cable laying flat on the floor will have no static differential between it and the floor. Problem solved.
A cable laying flat on the floor will have no resonant frequency because it is supported evenly over its' entire length. Problem solved.

Quote:
would you please explain why distortion requires AC?

Distortion in the conventional sense is the addition of frequencies that are harmonically related to the original audio signal. So aside from the fact that audio is by definition AC, not DC, you also need a frequency (AC) in order to have harmonically related artifacts. More:

Distortion is another word for nonlinearity, which means that changes in the input are not directly scalable to changes in the output. When a preamp circuit has 20 dB of gain, whatever voltage is presented to the input will be ten times larger at the output. If the 10:1 ratio is not the same at all signal levels, then the preamp is nonlinear and thus adding distortion. However, this can be extended to DC circuits if the preamp has a response that includes DC, so it is possible to have nonlinearity at DC too. But then it's no longer audio. I'm sure all of this discussion is way over the head of whoever wrote that Shunyata ad. Which brings us to:

When you see ad-speak as misinformed scientifically as this, there are only two possible explanations - the manufacturer is either dishonest or incompetent. Take your pick.

--Ethan

Weired science makes the world go round. Every theory and every reality today in science, nearly to a single point, was at one time considered - bullshit.

So be careful what you dismiss.

Condemnation, without examination, IS prejudice.

So go ahead, continue to turn your back on something you don't understand, or haven't examined. All you do...is expose your ignorance, for all to see.

As for their product, I have no idea myself. But I won't 'talk shit' about it, without a thorough examination.

Nor will I accept ANYONE'S word on it. I'll examine it myself.

And perhaps I'll end up understanding something blind dissenters will miss..and perhaps I won't.

But, in essence, I'm smart enough to examine it first.

Which, bluntly, says one hell of alot more about basic intelligence, and those like minded ---than that of dissenters.

I mean, how many times to we have to sit here on this forum and talk about human psychology, and how fucked up it is...until people 'get it'?

One at a time..I guess...one at a time.

Capacitance added IS bad, drainage is more correct. The building of field, creates more cubic field for creation of interference and interaction, and thus creates issues. Capacitance has a nasty habit of being non-linear.

So yeah, capacitance build up is a bad thing. One of the common issues of cable design and the use of insulating materials. Drainage is also an issue. It can be non linear as well.

BUT..outside the cable, a bit of capacitance drainage is a good thing. After all, one is draining away something that the cable designer did not intend to be there. Too much grounding can take away signal quality, via being large grounding strap, ie, an avenue for modulating field (an AC signal, DUH!) to be shaped into current flow, ie, inductive reactance issues.

Who's to say how it's best done?

Quote:
Condemnation, without examination, IS prejudice.

No prejudice here, and I did examine the claims in great detail. But I'll gladly turn the tables on you Mr. KBK.

I have a new audio product that works by transmogratic anti-conduction. This is a new field of research, and I have proven to my satisfaction that inserting this product into the signal path from a CD player or turntable etc markedly improves the sound quality. I don't mean a small improvement either - I'm talking a night and day difference that anyone can easily hear. How do I know the process works? Well, you can't measure any change to the signal using current audio practice, but I can hear the improvement so I am certain I'm right and the field of audio science has yet to catch up to me. And since nobody else understands transmogratic anti-conduction as well as I do, nobody can call me wrong even though I freely admit here that it's all BS I just made up on the spot.

If you think there's still a chance I might be right, I will gladly sell you as many as you want for only $3,400 each.

--Ethan

Cable elevators are good for easy cleaning the floor and, sometimes, better cosmetics ONLY.

DC can and does pulse as well. It's called 'transient draw'. Happens every day in your amplifier. Thousands of times second. It does have a small amount of voltage fluctuation attached to it, but it is very largely current draw fluctuation, and to the very smaller part... voltage fluctuation. So it's AC alright, in the classic description, but rarely recognized to even exist.

Some might rightfully say that this effect and condition is fully part of standard electrical AC analysis, but it is worth analyzing on it's own as it has it's own set of issues.

For example, in a superconductor, in the classic descriptive sense, there would be no voltage fluctuation, yet the current density could be fluctuating in the mega-ampere level.

And Ethan, Elk, I apologize if I sounded a bit rude, that is my usual method of discourse..like the coyote and the sheepdog in the old Warner cartoons fighting over the sheep..at the end of the day they go home and it's just..work. I try to adopt the contrary position in order to further the discussion. Standard scientific argument methodology, on might say.

I was speaking with an older gentleman the other evening about the idea of the societal condition and layering of awareness. The idea of the 'producers and consumers' at the larger levels of 'mass of humanity' and then the more esoteric levels, of which he felt there were about 10 of, depending on one's method of analysis. Each one, at their particular level of awareness..largely..unaware of the layering of the next and smaller group. The nature of the situation.

Creating a map in one's head of where one is at, recognizing the existence of it all,and then making an conscious decision to move through that chain of awareness, is a good way to reach a better understanding of the world, reality, multidimensionality, etc...is my point. Everyone has their thresholds, and such is more correctly called a 'limit', which is self imposed. Remove those limits within yourself, and there is virtually no understanding that will be closed to you.

This last bit is both highly relevant to the discussion, and not, depending on one's level of awareness.

Here's a coupla quotes to illustrate the point.

"If at first, the idea is not absurd, there is no hope for it." -- Albert Einstein.

Quote:
Here's a coupla quotes to illustrate the point.

The problem with those quotes is that you present them as logical arguments, which they are not. Yes, many people are resistant to change and new ideas. Yes, often things that seemed preposterous turned out later to be true. That does not mean that every stoopid new BS theory is deserving of consideration, though I see people try to use such illogic often - especially in audio forums.

In the case of cable elevators generally, stoopid is exactly the right word because nobody can identify a problem that is solved by using them.

--Ethan

I see you failed to see the point again. Oh well. Can't say I didn't try.

Quote:

Quote:
DC can and does pulse as well. It's called 'transient draw'. Happens every day in your amplifier. Thousands of times second. It does have a small amount of voltage fluctuation attached to it, but it is very largely current draw fluctuation, and to the very smaller part... voltage fluctuation. So it's AC alright, in the classic description, but rarely recognized to even exist.

This is totally separate from voltage ripple from rectifying AC to DC, correct?

Does the output of the amp carry this variation from "perfect" DC to the speakers - modulating the musical output?

Absolutely they do. Big time. The best revenge is a very fast 'controlling/stabilizing amplifier' or voltage regulator on the main DC power rails. This is very expensive to execute but it can and does make 500WPC power amps sound just like pure class A power amps....sometimes..notably better.

As stated, most will see it specifically as part of the standard AC impedance pathway analysis, combined with the pathway and source generation limits. That's one way to look at it. I tend to find that it can be revealing to turn the chessboard around and look at it from the other side. Current limits show up as distortion in transient waveforms. In the same way a bouncing motor (the loudspeaker's motional and multi-resonant cone motor system) will generate a huge amount of need in the amplifier for control via negative feedback, if it has such. This tends to make such amplifiers increase in harshness as the volume increases. This is assuming a single driver, no crossover. Then toss in the rest of the equation and it gets stupid pretty darned fast.

We were having a discussion on the DIY forum about active crossovers and I piped up and contributed to the thread and said that ..contrary to what most might think..the zobel networks on a passive crossover, which are there to linearize the complex AC impedance under load..are STILL required in active crossover systems. A few others let on that they too were doing the same thing. Reluctantly, I might add..as we were each all under the impression that it was our little private secret.

Oddly enough, most loudspeaker designers have never bothered to do the experiment, and have not found what those who DO such things have found..which is that there is a notable increase in sonic fidelity. this falls right in line with the analysis of the DC current limit of the electrical pathways and translates directly into distortion. Specifically, it translates into transient distortion, and that's where the ear is most sensitive.

Distortions in the temporal domain and transient domain is where the distortions or differences created by a cable with or without cable elevators will show up, and once again, this...in the areas where the ear is most sensitive. To put it bluntly - the human ear does not give a flying fuck what a oscilloscope says on/about a sine wave. That has virtually zero to do with how the ear works.

Cable elevators are getting to the point where folks start to enter well into the area of diminishing returns but tht does not mean there is no market for them. In the same way, there are guys out there tho modify the be-jabbers out of the best Lamborghini's and the like. Basically strap a rocket to your ass....and go just a bit faster.

In the same way, there is room for improvement at the top, with some tweaks. And that is where cable elevators are best used. In the most tweaked and revealing systems.

So yes, in my humble opinion, there is legitimate use and legitimate, wholly 'scientifically sound reasoning' (if one has the balls to drop preconceived notions) thinking around..and legitimate market for Cable elevators.

Like anything, there are those who are in the market who don't really understand the issues and how to solve them, and those who do and excel at creating the correct product at the correct price.

They can be miles apart.

Quote:
I see you failed to see the point again.

That's not a valid argument either.

If you have an explanation for why cable elevators are ever necessary, now would be a good time to present it.

--Ethan

Allow me to quote myself from earlier in the thread. If this seems fishy to you, turn the chessboard, the investigative assumptions, and investigative methodology around..and then stew on it for a few years. It might become clear then.

Quote:

Capacitance added IS bad, drainage is more correct. The building of field, creates more cubic field for creation of interference and interaction, and thus creates issues. Capacitance has a nasty habit of being non-linear.

So yeah, capacitance build up is a bad thing. One of the common issues of cable design and the use of insulating materials. Drainage is also an issue. It can be non linear as well.

BUT..outside the cable, a bit of capacitance drainage is a good thing. After all, one is draining away something that the cable designer did not intend to be there. Too much grounding can take away signal quality, via being large grounding strap, ie, an avenue for modulating field (an AC signal, DUH!) to be shaped into current flow, ie, inductive reactance issues.

Who's to say how it's best done?

Remember tha terms like: Speed, E, Time, Capacitance, Inductance, Current, etc..are lumped parameters, ie 'aggregates' of basic fundamentals. To understand what they are you need to take them apart, and not use them as engineering level aggregates. Then it becomes a bit more clear. I'm talking about the fundamentals of molecular/dimensional function, not something like Joules, which is again, in reality, a lumped parameter.

What does any of that have to do with cable elevators?

I have just bought a box of these. I don't know electrically why these work, but all of their claims are true (no, I haven't drank the kool-aid). Clarity and detail much improved. Soundstage improved in every way. The improvement is not subtle.

I'm still back at why use a conductive elevator?
No elevator would be a much easier solution and also have a much better isolation from cable resonances if it even matters.

Quote:
I'm still back at why use a conductive elevator?
No elevator would be a much easier solution and also have a much better isolation from cable resonances if it even matters.

Carpets, ceramics, cement, vinyl flooring, etc, all exhibit capacitance effects. This adds to the original spec of the cable design. To affect a wire..we run another item (possibly wire!) right along it's length. Capacitors are made this way, as are inductors and transformers. The further apart the wire from the other wire..or the further away the metal film from the other metal film....the lesser the inductive, or coupling(the transformer) or capacitive effect.

When a cable is laid on the floor.....the floor is along the cable's entire length.

Get it?

Raise the cable with something of small intrusion and/or cross section.....and the problem goes away. Vibration causes signal as well. So the suspension device should have some minimal (but not overwhelming!) damping of some sort.

Yah wanna ruin the sound of your expensive cables? Tape them in bundles to your metal rack legs/frame, for example.

My cables are an unholy snakes mess/nest. Sounds just fine.

Organizing them without thought of these coupling and induction considerations....would make my system sound like shit.

mildly conductive is good,as it drains away the building capacitance..as entropy rules..and capacitance always builds. But one cannot simply add large amounts of conductive materials to the elevator to create a quick drain of any potential capacitive build up. The large cross section of metals causes it's own issues, and they can be severe.

Mildly/slightly conductive, is far better. It does the job, and does not intrude via induction of current and eddy current issues, etc.

Thus the (hopefully) now obvious validity of the elevators in question.

it is not a panacea solution, either. Not all cables are designed and executed the same way, the effect will be different for different cables. The usual result will generally be positive in some manner.

Every single point is scientifically valid and verifiable.

It may not make sense until one couples that to the way the human ear hears, which I rant about in other threads.

A lot of what you said makes some sort of sense- all except the vibration thing. I mean how can vibrations affect a current bearing wire. I can't get my head around it since there are no moving parts or acoustic properties to a wire. I'm open to an explanation, it's just I can't remember ever seeing one. So...explain away please! Thanks.

I think the argument for microphonics-induced distortion in audio cables goes something like:

• Conductors are separated by dielectric, so there is some finite capacitance between conductors.
• A charge is stored in the dielectric by the audio signal carried by the conductors (Charge=Volts x Capacitance).
• Vibrating the cable will cause the spacing and capacitance between the conductors to also vary with that vibration.
• This varying of capacitance will result in a varying voltage that modulates the signal being carried.

This process, of course, is very similar to how condenser microphones work. This effect is easily controlled by using stiff dielectrics and low output impedance sources. Based on these priciples though, cables that apply a static bias voltage to the dielectric would seem to make the problem only worse.

I also think static electricity could interfere with the signal
as it passes along the carpeting. The longer the cable run across
the carpet, the greater the possibility that that interference
could be introduced through static.

You don't have to spend any money to test this sort of thing.

I was looking through a few back issues of Stereophile last month and came across an "As We See It" from quite a few years back that had JA discussing cables. He mentioned microphonics/vibration as a possible cause for distortion. His experiment involved terminating one end of a cable with a typical input (?) load, striking the cable with a mallet and watching the resulting deformation of the waveform on a 'scope, if I remember correctly. If no one remembers this column, and JA can't help locate it, I'll try to find the issue again. It seems this column was in an issue from the early 1990's, possibly 1992.

Quote:
Carpets, ceramics, cement, vinyl flooring, etc, all exhibit capacitance effects.

How could these affect the signal on an INSULATED cable??

Quote:
How could these affect the signal on an INSULATED cable??

Capacitors have insulators in them, but that's not the point with cable elevators. The real issue is that any capacitance is infinitesimal in the context of speaker impedances, and thus has no audible effect no matter what people think they hear. Even if the capacitance was large enough to matter, then it could be easily measured and confirmed. I have never seen any cable elevator vendor offer legitimate measurements.

--Ethan

After messing with a new (with respects to being used commonly, for conduction purposes-ie, cable) form of cable...that metallic based shielding is highly audible and the usefulness of such a feature on a given cable need be done on a case-by-case basis. 'nuf said!

While some of the posts here are technically correct and others completely not, the technically correct ideas about things like vibration possibly causing variations in cable capacitance will have no audible effect based on the overall system interaction. The capacitance/inductance/resistive values of the speaker cable is insignificant relative to the source/load values.

Quote:
While some of the posts here are technically correct and others completely not, the technically correct ideas about things like vibration possibly causing variations in cable capacitance will have no audible effect based on the overall system interaction. The capacitance/inductance/resistive values of the speaker cable is insignificant relative to the source/load values.

If I had a set of elevators, I'd use them on interconnects long before attempting to try them under speaker cables. However, there is no saying 'no' here. ?

Anyway..Under my speaker cables, believe it or not, it is quite likely to make an audible difference. No Guff. I've not tried it - but due to the exact method of conduction, it is more possible than one would think.