Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles
I also note that Shunyata does not employ silver period in any of cables at all. They use high quality copper period.
|
Actually, that statement is inaccurate. The Shunyata Venom USB cable is, acc. to the Shunyata Research web site:
"The signal conductors are silver-plated VTX™
Regardless, there is virtually no reason a copper cable could not sound as good or better than a silver cable. There is ALWAYS more than one way to accomplish a transformation to produce a desired and optimal functional response. This understanding is the key to the design discipline, TRIZ, the Theory of Inventive Problem-Solving, developed by Genrich Altschuler. It could well be that utilizing silver-plated copper is example of TRIZ Inventive Principle, #22, Blessing in Disguise. Or, Triz Inventive Principle #3, Local quality. Or both.
Quote:
|
I could go on but It won't. Suffice it to say that a company like AQ employs manufacturing methods and design that is at least the equal of Shunyata's. I suspect much better.
|
I'm confident their manufacturing methods in Ops are comparable, they simply wouldn't be able to manufacture high quality products consistently and remain profitable if they didn't. These are the "facts of life" for manufacturing operations. Audioquest manufactures products of excellent quality, one of the key reasons I use their products. But in the absence of data, there isn't a way to know if they are "much better". And data is the only metric that can be accurately used for supporting statements about Manufacturing Ops discipline and best practices utilized.
Just exploring the theme of "much better" from an Operations perspective: How is "much better" measured statistically, and more importantly, how does a manufacturer implement "much better" into
statistical process control? Do they control chart key manufacturing methods as it impacts CFRs (critical funtional responses)? How does a mfr deal with transmission variation from raw material lot-to-lot variability? Do they utilize Taguchi Robust Design DOEs to ensure their manufacturing methods are robust to common cause variation and transmission variation from raw material variability? Do they know how a Taguchi Robust Design L16 DOE matrix would be crucial for obtaining statistical robustness? I don't know; but if so, more power to them. If they're not, they should be.
Furthermore, does AQ conduct formal MSA (measurement systems analysis, a specialized form of ANOVA) to determine that they have sufficient measurement system precision to know that they have a low enough Precision-to-Tolerance ratio (P/T ratio) to detect meaningful differences in functional responses or in Operations, to tell conforming from non-conforming material?
By way of example, I don't remember AQ developing a power cable performance measurement methodology e.g. DTCD, for example, and the instrumentation to measure it accurately and precisely to be able to measure, characterize and optimize the functional performance of power cables. One of the key attritubes of the DTCD metrology is that it has sufficient measurement system precision to accurately and precisely measure power cable performance differences with statistical confidence.
When you state that the Venom USB is
"a well designed bottom tier copper USB cable selling for 99 dollars. Nothing more."
What does "nothing more" actually mean"?
Lastly, have you
actually heard a Shunyata Venom 3 USB in your system?
If you haven't actually heard a Venom 3 USB in your system, then IMHO, and respectfully, continuing this discusson, as far as I see it, is moot.