Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

[Guest]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I did a crossover change on some speakers with very revealing ribbon tweeters

Nate, what is the scientific definition for "very revealing" X?
What measured parameters of the tweeter (or X) have been scientifically validated to account for this "revealing"ness?
Is it by design or accident?

cheers,

AJ

[maynardg]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I think revealing in this case is not a scientific term, but an aesthetic one.

[dbe]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I don't want this to turn into a nonsense debate like the ones over speaker cables - but, I do want subjective opinions based on scientific tests.

****

Good luck on this not turning into a nonsense debate ;)

Yep, we've done A/B and A/B/X testing on Mills resistor, all kinds of caps and wire and all of the topics that invoke the ire of people like AJ, Daryl and the others that believe that what they do not understand cannot be true, ergo anyone that "hears" the differences must be a fool.

Au contraire, mon ami.

The difference in resistor is a simple, verifiable one. It boils down to TCR in the resistor. A standard resistor has a TCR in the 500-1000 ppm and a Mills is 20 ppm. This equates to less HF hash around cymbals and other steep transients. The easy way to tell without burning your brain up is in extended listening tests where the degree of listening fatigue is the clue to untrained listeners. A trained listener will pick a Mills out 10/10 in A/B/X.

Ask Wolf about listening tests. He is a killer when it comes to cap identification.

Also... wait for it, wait for it... A superior crossover component will pass the sound of a crappy source along better than an inferior one and will often be too revealing. It's kind of like a 12 mega-pixel image of a warthog - not pretty to look at. Also, note that I said image and not picture. Digital approximations are images. Analog photography produces pictures. Think about it.

Dave

[billschu]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I found that MOX resistors do sound different than Mills. Mills have a warmer sound to them.

I have to agree here although the MOX seem to have a brighter or edgier sound to me. Perhaps it's in my head but given the choice, I just use the Mills non-inductive or Dayton sand cast resistors and I am fine. Even the Radio Shack sand cast 8 ohm resistors seem fine too. Just buy extras in case one is "off" spec.

The MOX difference really is small but for the small bump in cost, the Mills or Dayton are a good fit for yours truly. Other things like the driver choice, cabinet, and crossover design are bigger factors but every link in the chain does matter.

Bill

[curt_c]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

Digital approximations are images. Analog photography produces pictures. Think about it.

Dave

Bad analogy Dave...
Analog photography does not provide infinite resolution, but is limited by the size of the grains of silver iodide. Consequently, by your definition, both digital and analog photography produce 'images'.

I've never read of any correlation between the Thermal Coefficient of Resistance, and the audible qualities of a resistor. Perhaps you'd like to suggest an article or paper that makes that assertion?

C

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I don't want this to turn into a nonsense debate like the ones over speaker cables - but, I do want subjective opinions based on scientific tests.

****

Good luck on this not turning into a nonsense debate ;)

Yep, we've done A/B and A/B/X testing on Mills resistor, all kinds of caps and wire and all of the topics that invoke the ire of people like AJ, Daryl and the others that believe that what they do not understand cannot be true, ergo anyone that "hears" the differences must be a fool.

Au contraire, mon ami.

The difference in resistor is a simple, verifiable one. It boils down to TCR in the resistor. A standard resistor has a TCR in the 500-1000 ppm and a Mills is 20 ppm. This equates to less HF hash around cymbals and other steep transients. The easy way to tell without burning your brain up is in extended listening tests where the degree of listening fatigue is the clue to untrained listeners. A trained listener will pick a Mills out 10/10 in A/B/X.

Ask Wolf about listening tests. He is a killer when it comes to cap identification.

Also... wait for it, wait for it... A superior crossover component will pass the sound of a crappy source along better than an inferior one and will often be too revealing. It's kind of like a 12 mega-pixel image of a warthog - not pretty to look at. Also, note that I said image and not picture. Digital approximations are images. Analog photography produces pictures. Think about it.

Dave

I must ditto Curt here.

Film photography certainly is not better at resolution than the best digital photos. Both have "grain" and therefore are only approximations of the projected image at the focal plane.

In fact, digital photography will easily exceed the analog, as receptor density on the image plane can be much higher than with its film counterpart.

That being said, I'd still like to see someone use their ears to resolve which resistor the signal passes through.

[Guest]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I think revealing in this case is not a scientific term

Yes, I knew that. Like all things audiophile, unconstrained by physical reality, it is whatever the user wants it to mean.

Good luck on this not turning into a nonsense debate ;)

Luck isn't a requirement. Just the uninformed/ignorant who are either too vain, or simply cannot discern between psychogenic events and the real world.

Yep, we've done A/B and A/B/X testing on Mills resistor, all kinds of caps and wire and all of the topics that invoke the ire of people like AJ, Daryl and the others that believe that what they do not understand cannot be true, ergo anyone that "hears" the differences must be a fool. Au contraire, mon ami.

It is the uninformed/ignorant of human psychology and the effect of metacognitive skills (or lack thereof) who truly understand the issues? It is Daryl and I who hold "beliefs" beyond known science?
What makes you believe that I(we) don't understand your disorder?

A standard resistor has a TCR in the 500-1000 ppm and a Mills is 20 ppm. This equates to less HF hash around cymbals and other steep transients.

Really? Because Dave says so? Because some have "heard it"? I have linked numerous scientific studies and papers in previous threads. Your link for this claim?

The easy way to tell without burning your brain up is in extended listening tests

More time is needed to fool oneself? Do the uninformed/ignorant know there is no time limit on ABX? That the brains auditory event memory is finite?

where the degree of listening fatigue is the clue to untrained listeners.

What?

A trained listener will pick a Mills out 10/10 in A/B/X.

Reference?

Also... wait for it, wait for it... A superior crossover component will pass the sound of a crappy source along better than an inferior one and will often be too revealing. It's kind of like a 12 mega-pixel image of a warthog - not pretty to look at. Also, note that I said image and not picture. Digital approximations are images. Analog photography produces pictures. Think about it.

Dave

If you claim so...

cheers,

AJ

[philiparcario]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I'm assuming your measured this inductance. This seems very high for a 2 ohm wire wound resistor. I've measured several Xicon WW resistors available at PE and they generally measure in the microhenries. I've also used Vishay/Dale and Arcon power resistors in crossover designs before with no audible differences when sub'd in, -but I didn't use a 2 ohm, so my findings may not be germane in this case.

Other observations:
It appears that Mad is having difficulty obtaining Eagle resistors and are replacing them with the $2.50 ea. 2% Mundorfs. Like Mills, these have the value stamped on them, so those color-code challenged builders will be pleased. The leads on the Mundorfs are about the same diameter as the Eagles. -that is not as beefy as the Mills, but otherwise appear to be a good product. I can’t comment on their ‘sound’, as I’ve not made any effort at comparison.

I too like the Mills for their robust construction, and they remain my first choice for resistors. If your design is really cost sensitive, I see no reason not to use the Xicon wire wound resistors in lieu of the more expensive Mills, especially when you are in the prototyping stage, and are not sure of the necessary final values.

C

I used a hi end lcr meter a B & K precision. .22mH was the reading. Remember it is a 50 watt rated resister. the pe 10 watts read .041mH much less.

[romanbednarek]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

I'd like to add a few comments.

Blind ABX tests aren't perfect but I would have to say based on experience that I would trust them over most other type of tests, especially ones where the devices playing are known.

Now the biggest strike against most blind ABX tests where people can't consistently note a difference between whatever components are compared is that this conclusion is scientifically inconclusive and doesn't prove that there are no differences sonically between what is being compared. Also, the system used in the comparison often comes into debate (usually people say that the resolution is lacking so minor differences can't be revealed). The point that I'm getting at here is that even if one of these tests (like the one Dennis mentioned above) doesn't prove that there are no differences between resistors, for example, what it does prove (in my mind) is that even if differences exist, they are below the threshold of most people's hearing and that extra money spent on that component will give very little return if any. With anything audio related I always try to consider the cost to benefit ratio and I think that there are varying degrees of this ratio in the audio chain. You must also look at the audio chain by considering the "weakest link" analogy and sometimes spending money on expensive crossover components can be a waste of time if the chain is much weaker somewhere else.

For the record, I don't spend a lot of money on crossover components nor have I done any studies in this area. I've always found that fully optimizing a crossover is very critical to getting the best sound out of a design but I've never considered the possibility that swapping in higher cost components would improve the sound (or even make me re-adjust the crossover). I think the main reason why I don't like to spend a lot on crossover parts is because if I had that extra money to put into the design I feel that it would be better spent on higher quality drivers (which hits on my statement above about how much return you get on your investment).

[Ludo]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

A lot of very interesting arguments but what troubles me is that the audio signal goes through hundreds if not thousands of resistors and capacitors on its way to the speakers, most of which were selected for low cost, convenience and integration capability onto monolythic integrated circuits. Little to no consideration is given to the "sonic" properties of those hundreds of passive components (except for KT/C or KTR) so what makes the ones in the crossover somehow so special that they have the ultimate impact on the quality of the audio signal?

I am very sceptical that there is an audible difference between Mills resistors until someone can come up with a measureable difference like the paracitic inductance or capacitance, EMI pickup, noise figure, etc.

Louis

[Guest]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

this conclusion is scientifically inconclusive and doesn't prove that there are no differences sonically between what is being compared.

Correct. The null hypothesis can never be proven. But when hundreds of audiophiles test their beliefs against the real world and the score is zero for them, a trend starts to emerge.
DBT's cannot prove that no difference exists, just that if it exists, it is below the test threshold. What it does prove, is that audiophile are prone to wild exaggerations (surprise, surprise) of any differences, real or imagined.
And exactly how do we know these differences exist in the first place?
Given the susceptibility, reliability and general (scientific) ignorance of the ear witnesses?

cheers,

AJ

[Guest]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

A lot of very interesting arguments but what troubles me is that the audio signal goes through hundreds if not thousands of resistors and capacitors on its way to the speakers, most of which were selected for low cost, convenience and integration capability onto monolythic integrated circuits. Little to no consideration is given to the "sonic" properties of those hundreds of passive components (except for KT/C or KTR) so what makes the ones in the crossover somehow so special that they have the ultimate impact on the quality of the audio signal?

I am very sceptical that there is an audible difference between Mills resistors until someone can come up with a measureable difference like the paracitic inductance or capacitance, EMI pickup, noise figure, etc.

Louis

This is quite simple Louis. It's called the "Just listen through" effect.
I've always been amazed when audiophiles attend shows and talk about "hearing" an amplifier, cd player or wires, etc.
Even though they believe that everything, including the individual parts like resistors themselves, wall outlets, sun spots, whatnot, have a "sound", they still have the ability to completely isolate the "sound" of say an amplifier, from the entire system, when the reverberant soundfield of a room impinges upon their ears. Quite amazing actually.
I wonder if they can tell exactly what brand of part(s) were used in a mixing board by "just listening" to a cd? Or should that be "more revealing" LP's? For long, relaxed and extended listening periods of course.

cheers,

AJ

[Cinemadesigner X]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

"Just the uninformed/ignorant who are either too vain, or simply cannot discern between psychogenic events and the real world."

AJ you're the Oswald Bates of Human Behaviour.

Now I must eructate before my phil-opium tubes interjects on my behalf.

"I believe it was Plato...No, excuse me, I mean Play-Doh...who stuck to the wall when he said one must not put one's transvestite in jeopardy if one is to become a cunning linguist". "Hey, I ain't no venereal fuddrucker!" O.B.

[romanbednarek]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

AJ, we're definitely on the same train of thought regarding your recent posts and a lot of my skepticism comes from experiments that I've performed myself with an ultimate goal of trying to determine which components in the audio chain have the most variation and where is your money best spent.

Another way of looking at things when considering devices other than speakers is to consider the overall sound produced by that device regardless of the quality of components used in that device. For example, if a lower cost CD player uses cheaper components yet has a better circuit design, it may sound better but then again "better" is a subjective conclusion and I always say that the synergy between components must be considered as well (like using a "bright" CD player with a "warm" amp). Component quality is a good thing to strive for but if the components don't compliment each other then spending the extra money can take you in the wrong direction sometimes.

Back to my experience with audio components. By performing these tests myself I tend to find certain posts to be a bit more credible if I've been able to notice differences with similar components myself. With this said I can honestly say that when using the analog outputs, all of my CD/DVD players sound different although some of the differences can be subtle depending on the players used in the comparison. I've found the same to be true to some degree with amplifiers but the trend is a bit different because there seems to be a bit of convergence as the amplifier quality goes up and the frequency responses of the amps in the comparison are closer to "flat."

Like you, I'll still question a post when somebody says that the difference heard in a known comparison is huge but I won't dispute the fact that there may be a noticeable difference in certain cases based on the component in question and my experience with components of the same type.

Topics like these are best settled by performing experiments but the problem is that the experiment must be set up correctly and can't be clouded by bias. I've really learned a lot through these experiments (blind, guess which component is which type) myself and I probably should continue to experiment a bit further especially with crossover components. I guess one reason why I haven't could be because it may be a waste of time for me due to the fact that even if I do notice a difference I don't know if I'll ever be able to spend significantly more money on crossover parts than on drivers for a specific project. I know that some people that build my projects like to go "all out" by buying expensive parts and the question that I have is that if those more expensive parts do produce a different sound will this sound change the character of the speaker relative to how I initially tuned it?

[dbe]

Re: Do Mills resistors REALLY sound different?

Bad analogy Dave...
Analog photography does not provide infinite resolution, but is limited by the size of the grains of silver iodide. Consequently, by your definition, both digital and analog photography produce 'images'.

Absolutley correct. The "confused" smilie should have been the giveaway there. I put this statement in to do two things: (1) Bifurcate the discussion and (2) bring out the thinkers in this bunch. You ain't seen grain until you've pushed 2475 recording film to ASA 2400. The grains are about the size of Texas Pixelization is much more controlled and predictable. I was in a discussion with a friend that is a dyed in the wool film photographer and we were having this conversation about the analog like smoothness of a film photo versus a hi-rez digital picture's sharpness. Quite an interesting conversation, to say the least.

I just had to pull the pin on the grenade and roll it into the room...

Dave