04-18-2016, 09:15 AM
C'est surtout la courbe de réponse en fréquence qui m'intéresse. Pour valider que le câble influe le son.
Curieux de savoir ce que ça donne à l'écoute du reste.
Curieux de savoir ce que ça donne à l'écoute du reste.
Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79
04-18-2016, 09:15 AM
04-18-2016, 11:50 AM
Et bien, 15 pages en un WE......faut pas s'absenter longtemps (et toujours au même point). 
Câbles secteur, HP, module.....Même combat.
Pour remettre une pièce dans le bastringue....
Juste, une petite question : Pourquoi chez un même constructeur (Tannoy par exemple), deux langages différents selon que les produits sont destinés aux pros ou aux particuliers ? ?
Pour les pros (Ex pour des Précision 8) :
http://www.tannoystudio.com/media/1113/p...ive_lo.pdf
En page 3, on peut lire ceci :
<<The types of cable used to connect the speakers to the power amplifier will marginally affect the sound. The cross-sectional area of the cable should be large enough so as not to affect the damping factor, generally a cable with a cross-sectional area of 2.5 mm2, or greater is recommended.
The lower the resistance of the cable between the amplifier and the speakers, the better the damping factor acting on the speaker. This has been covered in every audio magazine that has ever been written about speakers, so we won’t beat it to death here. You don’t need to buy speaker wire that costs as much as your speakers to get some benefit from wire size, select a finely stranded speaker cable, and dress the cable ends to prevent "hairs" or stray conductors from shorting across the terminals. If your amplifier will not directly accept that size of cable, you can trim down the cable size at the amplifier end. Ensure that the binding post retaining nuts are screwed down firmly without stripping or over tightening them. >>
Pour les particuliers (Ex pour des Kensington GR) :
http://tannoy.com/residential/#!manuals_
En page 22, on peut lire ceci :
<<This explains why the sound quality of the music reproduced by the loudspeakers is so dependent on the physical properties of the cables connecting them to the amplifier. It also explains why bi-wiring is the preferred connection method, so that low frequency and high frequency signals do not have to share the same cable.
We would recommend that you always keep the cable runs the same length for each speaker. Remember that cable construction can affect the sound quality so be prepared to experiment to find a cable that suits your ear and audio system. Please consult your dealer for further advice on choosing cables>>
Nous cacherait' on quelque chose ?
Ou prendrait' on un certain milieu pour des gogos ?
J'aimerais bien savoir ce que vous en pensez (de ce deux poids, deux mesures...) ?
Bonne journée.
En fait, très peu d'industriels donnent leurs avis sur le sujet (on ne tue pas la poule aux oeufs d'or aussi facilement...).
Pourtant, il y a quelques années, John Dunlavy (qui était connu pour ne pas marcher ses mots) avait sorti un petit billet d'humeur (va t'on dire).
Le voici :
<<Having read some of the recent comments on several of the Internet audio groups, concerning audible differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables, I could not resist adding some thoughts about the subject as a concerned engineer possessing credible credentials.
To begin, several companies design and manufacture loudspeaker and interconnect cables which they proudly claim possess optimized electrical properties for the audiophile applications intended. However, accurate measurements of several popularly selling cables reveal significant differences that call into question the technical goals of their designer. These differences also question the capability of the companies to perform accurate measurements of important cable performance properties. For example, any company not possessing a precision C-L-R bridge, a Vector Impedance Meter, a Network Analyzer, a precision waveform and impulse generator, wideband precision oscilloscopes, etc., probably needs to purchase them if they are truly serious about designing audio cables that provide premium performance.
The measurable properties of loudspeaker cables that are important to their performance include characteristic impedance (series inductance and parallel capacitance per unit length), loss resistance (including additional resistance due to skin-effect losses versus frequency), dielectric losses versus frequency (loss tangent, etc.), velocity-of-propagation factor, overall loss versus frequency into different impedance loads, etc.
Measurable properties of interconnect cables include all of the above, with the addition of those properties of the dielectric material that contribute to microphonic noise in the presence of ambient vibration, noise, etc. (in combination with a D.C. off-set created by a pre-amp output circuit, etc.).
While competent cable manufacturers should be aware of these measurements and the need to make them during the design of their cables, the raw truth is that most do not! Proof of this can be found in the absurd buzzard-salve, snake-oil and meaningless advertising claims found in almost all magazine ads and product literature for audiophile cables. Perhaps worse, very few of the expensive, high-tech appearing cables we have measured appear to have been designed in accordance with the well-known laws and principles taught by proper physics and engineering disciplines. (Where are the costly Government Consumer Protection people who are supposed to protect innocent members of the public by identifying and policing questionable performance claims, misleading specifications, etc.?) --- Caveat Emptor!
For example, claiming that copper wire is directional, that slow-moving electrons create distortion as they haphazardly carry the signal along a wire, that cables store and release energy as signals propagate along them, that a final energy component (improperly labeled as Joules) is the measure of the tonality of cables, ad nauseum, are but a few of the non-entities used in advertisements to describe cable performance.
Another pet peeve of mine is the concept of a special configuration included with a loudspeaker cable which is advertised as being able to terminate the cable in a matter intended to deliver more accurate tonality, better imaging, lowernoise, etc. The real truth is that this special configuration contains nothing more than a simple, inexpensive network intended to prevent poorly-designed amplifiers, with a too-high slew-rate (obtained at the expense of instability caused by too much inverse-feedback) from oscillating when connected to a loudspeaker through a low-loss, low-impedance cable. When this box appears at the loudspeaker-end of a cable, it seldom contains nothing more than a Zobel network, which is usually a series resistor-capacitor network, connector in parallel with the wires of the cable. If it is at the amplifier-end of the cable, it is probably either a parallel resistor-inductor network, connected in series with the cable conductors (or a simple cylindrical ferrite sleeve covering both conductors). But the proper place for such a network, if it is needed to insure amplifier stability and prevent high-frequency oscillations, is within the amplifier - not along the loudspeaker cable. Hmmm!
Having said all this, are there really any significant audible differences between most cables that can be consistently identified by experienced listeners? The answer is simple: very seldom! Those who claim otherwise do not fully grasp the power of the old Placebo-Effect - which is very alive and well among even the most well-intentioned listeners. The placebo-effect renders audible signatures easy to detect and describe - if the listener knows which cable is being heard. But, take away this knowledge during blind or double-blind listening comparisons and the differences either disappear completely or hover close to the level of random guessing. Speaking as a competent professional engineer, designer and manufacturer, nothing would please me and my company's staff more than being able to design a cable which consistently yielded a positive score during blind listening comparisons against other cables. But it only rarely happens - if we wish to be honest!
Oh yes, we have heard of golden-eared audiophiles who claim to be able to consistently identify huge, audible differences between cables. But when these experts have visited our facility and were put to the test under carefully-controlled conditions, they invariably failed to yield a score any better than chance. For example, when led to believe that three popular cables were being compared, varying in size from a high-quality 12 AWG ZIP-CORD to a high-tech looking cable with a diameter exceeding an inch, the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best - even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time.
Sorry, but I do not buy the claims of those who say they can always audibly identify differences between cables, even when the comparisons are properly controlled to ensure that the identity of the cable being heard is not known by the listener. We have accomplished too many true blind comparisons with listeners possessing the right credentials, including impeccable hearing attributes, to know that real, audible differences seldom exist - if the comparisons are properly implemented to eliminate other causes such as system interactions with cables, etc.
Indeed, during these comparisons (without changing cables), some listeners were able to describe in great detail the big differences they thought they heard in bass, high-end detail, etc. (Of course, the participants were never told the NAUGHTY TRUTH, lest they become an enemy for life!)
So why does a reputable company like DAL engage in the design and manufacture of audiophile cables? The answer is simple: since significant measurable differences do exist and because well-known and understood transmission line theory defines optimum relationships between such parameters as cable impedance and the impedance of the load (loudspeaker), the capacitance of an interconnect and the input impedance of the following stage, why not design cables that at least satisfy what theory has to teach? And, since transmission line theory is universally applied, quite successfully, in the design of cables intended for TV, microwave, telephone, and other critical applications requiring peak performance, etc., why not use it in designing cables intended for critical audiophile applications? Hmmm! To say, as some do, that there are factors involved that competent engineers and scientists have yet to identify is utter nonsense and a cover-up for what should be called pure snake oil and buzzard salve - in short, pure fraud. If any cable manufacturer, writer, technician, etc. can identify such an audible design parameter that cannot be measured using available lab equipment or be described by known theory, I can guarantee a nomination for a Nobel Prize.
Anyway, I just had to share some of my favorite Hmmm's, regarding cable myths and seemingly fraudulent claims, with audiophiles on the net who may lack the technical expertise to separate fact from fiction with regard to cable performance. I also welcome comments from those who may have other opinions or who may know of something I might have missed or misunderstood regarding cable design, theory or secret criteria used by competitors to achieve performance that cannot be measured or identified by conventional means. Lets all try to get to the bottom of this mess by open, informed and objective inquiry.
I sincerely believe the time has come for concerned audiophiles, true engineers, competent physicists, academics, mag editors, etc. to take a firm stand regarding much of this disturbing new trend in the blatantly false claims frequently found in cable advertising. If we fail to do so, reputable designers, engineers, manufacturers, magazine editors and product reviewers may find their reputation tarnished beyond repair among those of the audiophile community we are supposed to serve.
Best regards,
John Dunlavy>>
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
Vous en pensez quoi ?
C'était un hurluberlu ce J. Dunlavy ? 
Câbles secteur, HP, module.....Même combat.
Pour remettre une pièce dans le bastringue....
Juste, une petite question : Pourquoi chez un même constructeur (Tannoy par exemple), deux langages différents selon que les produits sont destinés aux pros ou aux particuliers ? ?
Pour les pros (Ex pour des Précision 8) :
http://www.tannoystudio.com/media/1113/p...ive_lo.pdf
En page 3, on peut lire ceci :
<<The types of cable used to connect the speakers to the power amplifier will marginally affect the sound. The cross-sectional area of the cable should be large enough so as not to affect the damping factor, generally a cable with a cross-sectional area of 2.5 mm2, or greater is recommended.
The lower the resistance of the cable between the amplifier and the speakers, the better the damping factor acting on the speaker. This has been covered in every audio magazine that has ever been written about speakers, so we won’t beat it to death here. You don’t need to buy speaker wire that costs as much as your speakers to get some benefit from wire size, select a finely stranded speaker cable, and dress the cable ends to prevent "hairs" or stray conductors from shorting across the terminals. If your amplifier will not directly accept that size of cable, you can trim down the cable size at the amplifier end. Ensure that the binding post retaining nuts are screwed down firmly without stripping or over tightening them. >>
Pour les particuliers (Ex pour des Kensington GR) :
http://tannoy.com/residential/#!manuals_
En page 22, on peut lire ceci :
<<This explains why the sound quality of the music reproduced by the loudspeakers is so dependent on the physical properties of the cables connecting them to the amplifier. It also explains why bi-wiring is the preferred connection method, so that low frequency and high frequency signals do not have to share the same cable.
We would recommend that you always keep the cable runs the same length for each speaker. Remember that cable construction can affect the sound quality so be prepared to experiment to find a cable that suits your ear and audio system. Please consult your dealer for further advice on choosing cables>>
Nous cacherait' on quelque chose ?
Ou prendrait' on un certain milieu pour des gogos ?
J'aimerais bien savoir ce que vous en pensez (de ce deux poids, deux mesures...) ?
Bonne journée.
En fait, très peu d'industriels donnent leurs avis sur le sujet (on ne tue pas la poule aux oeufs d'or aussi facilement...).
Pourtant, il y a quelques années, John Dunlavy (qui était connu pour ne pas marcher ses mots) avait sorti un petit billet d'humeur (va t'on dire).
Le voici :
<<Having read some of the recent comments on several of the Internet audio groups, concerning audible differences between interconnect and loudspeaker cables, I could not resist adding some thoughts about the subject as a concerned engineer possessing credible credentials.
To begin, several companies design and manufacture loudspeaker and interconnect cables which they proudly claim possess optimized electrical properties for the audiophile applications intended. However, accurate measurements of several popularly selling cables reveal significant differences that call into question the technical goals of their designer. These differences also question the capability of the companies to perform accurate measurements of important cable performance properties. For example, any company not possessing a precision C-L-R bridge, a Vector Impedance Meter, a Network Analyzer, a precision waveform and impulse generator, wideband precision oscilloscopes, etc., probably needs to purchase them if they are truly serious about designing audio cables that provide premium performance.
The measurable properties of loudspeaker cables that are important to their performance include characteristic impedance (series inductance and parallel capacitance per unit length), loss resistance (including additional resistance due to skin-effect losses versus frequency), dielectric losses versus frequency (loss tangent, etc.), velocity-of-propagation factor, overall loss versus frequency into different impedance loads, etc.
Measurable properties of interconnect cables include all of the above, with the addition of those properties of the dielectric material that contribute to microphonic noise in the presence of ambient vibration, noise, etc. (in combination with a D.C. off-set created by a pre-amp output circuit, etc.).
While competent cable manufacturers should be aware of these measurements and the need to make them during the design of their cables, the raw truth is that most do not! Proof of this can be found in the absurd buzzard-salve, snake-oil and meaningless advertising claims found in almost all magazine ads and product literature for audiophile cables. Perhaps worse, very few of the expensive, high-tech appearing cables we have measured appear to have been designed in accordance with the well-known laws and principles taught by proper physics and engineering disciplines. (Where are the costly Government Consumer Protection people who are supposed to protect innocent members of the public by identifying and policing questionable performance claims, misleading specifications, etc.?) --- Caveat Emptor!
For example, claiming that copper wire is directional, that slow-moving electrons create distortion as they haphazardly carry the signal along a wire, that cables store and release energy as signals propagate along them, that a final energy component (improperly labeled as Joules) is the measure of the tonality of cables, ad nauseum, are but a few of the non-entities used in advertisements to describe cable performance.
Another pet peeve of mine is the concept of a special configuration included with a loudspeaker cable which is advertised as being able to terminate the cable in a matter intended to deliver more accurate tonality, better imaging, lowernoise, etc. The real truth is that this special configuration contains nothing more than a simple, inexpensive network intended to prevent poorly-designed amplifiers, with a too-high slew-rate (obtained at the expense of instability caused by too much inverse-feedback) from oscillating when connected to a loudspeaker through a low-loss, low-impedance cable. When this box appears at the loudspeaker-end of a cable, it seldom contains nothing more than a Zobel network, which is usually a series resistor-capacitor network, connector in parallel with the wires of the cable. If it is at the amplifier-end of the cable, it is probably either a parallel resistor-inductor network, connected in series with the cable conductors (or a simple cylindrical ferrite sleeve covering both conductors). But the proper place for such a network, if it is needed to insure amplifier stability and prevent high-frequency oscillations, is within the amplifier - not along the loudspeaker cable. Hmmm!
Having said all this, are there really any significant audible differences between most cables that can be consistently identified by experienced listeners? The answer is simple: very seldom! Those who claim otherwise do not fully grasp the power of the old Placebo-Effect - which is very alive and well among even the most well-intentioned listeners. The placebo-effect renders audible signatures easy to detect and describe - if the listener knows which cable is being heard. But, take away this knowledge during blind or double-blind listening comparisons and the differences either disappear completely or hover close to the level of random guessing. Speaking as a competent professional engineer, designer and manufacturer, nothing would please me and my company's staff more than being able to design a cable which consistently yielded a positive score during blind listening comparisons against other cables. But it only rarely happens - if we wish to be honest!
Oh yes, we have heard of golden-eared audiophiles who claim to be able to consistently identify huge, audible differences between cables. But when these experts have visited our facility and were put to the test under carefully-controlled conditions, they invariably failed to yield a score any better than chance. For example, when led to believe that three popular cables were being compared, varying in size from a high-quality 12 AWG ZIP-CORD to a high-tech looking cable with a diameter exceeding an inch, the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best - even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time.
Sorry, but I do not buy the claims of those who say they can always audibly identify differences between cables, even when the comparisons are properly controlled to ensure that the identity of the cable being heard is not known by the listener. We have accomplished too many true blind comparisons with listeners possessing the right credentials, including impeccable hearing attributes, to know that real, audible differences seldom exist - if the comparisons are properly implemented to eliminate other causes such as system interactions with cables, etc.
Indeed, during these comparisons (without changing cables), some listeners were able to describe in great detail the big differences they thought they heard in bass, high-end detail, etc. (Of course, the participants were never told the NAUGHTY TRUTH, lest they become an enemy for life!)
So why does a reputable company like DAL engage in the design and manufacture of audiophile cables? The answer is simple: since significant measurable differences do exist and because well-known and understood transmission line theory defines optimum relationships between such parameters as cable impedance and the impedance of the load (loudspeaker), the capacitance of an interconnect and the input impedance of the following stage, why not design cables that at least satisfy what theory has to teach? And, since transmission line theory is universally applied, quite successfully, in the design of cables intended for TV, microwave, telephone, and other critical applications requiring peak performance, etc., why not use it in designing cables intended for critical audiophile applications? Hmmm! To say, as some do, that there are factors involved that competent engineers and scientists have yet to identify is utter nonsense and a cover-up for what should be called pure snake oil and buzzard salve - in short, pure fraud. If any cable manufacturer, writer, technician, etc. can identify such an audible design parameter that cannot be measured using available lab equipment or be described by known theory, I can guarantee a nomination for a Nobel Prize.
Anyway, I just had to share some of my favorite Hmmm's, regarding cable myths and seemingly fraudulent claims, with audiophiles on the net who may lack the technical expertise to separate fact from fiction with regard to cable performance. I also welcome comments from those who may have other opinions or who may know of something I might have missed or misunderstood regarding cable design, theory or secret criteria used by competitors to achieve performance that cannot be measured or identified by conventional means. Lets all try to get to the bottom of this mess by open, informed and objective inquiry.
I sincerely believe the time has come for concerned audiophiles, true engineers, competent physicists, academics, mag editors, etc. to take a firm stand regarding much of this disturbing new trend in the blatantly false claims frequently found in cable advertising. If we fail to do so, reputable designers, engineers, manufacturers, magazine editors and product reviewers may find their reputation tarnished beyond repair among those of the audiophile community we are supposed to serve.
Best regards,
John Dunlavy>>
http://www.verber.com/mark/ce/cables.html
Vous en pensez quoi ?
C'était un hurluberlu ce J. Dunlavy ?
04-18-2016, 12:31 PM
04-18-2016, 12:51 PM
04-18-2016, 01:43 PM
(04-18-2016, 12:51 PM)maxitonus a écrit : [ -> ]Il est indiscutable que tous les accesoires des chaines hifi constituent une potentielle "poule aux oeufs d'or"pour les fabricants et revendeurs de hifi, d'autant plus intéressante:
-qu'on entretient le mystère et l'image,mystère facile à entretenir,et image dont l'industrie du luxe a fait sa principale pour ne pas dire unique source de revenus (LVMH,L'Oréal,GUCCI,...)sachant que le plaisir humain provient, au moins en partie, bien souvent de la sensation qu'on se démarque des autres vers le haut. Les marges sur les cables ésotériques vendus grace à leur image n'ont pas de limites! et pourtant on peut faire aussi bien à cent sous.
-que les accessoires n'ont pas besoin de SAV, ni de réparations,ni d'ajustements, ni de reprises;C'est donc byzance.
Il ne faut pas pour autant que l'arbre cache la forêt:ca ne veut pas dire qu'il faut éluder (zapper) le sujet.
Ceux qui n'y croient pas sont dans leur droit le plus strict, chacun doit respecter les opinions des autres.
Ceux qui y croient ont toute possibilité d'approfondir s'ils le veulent.
Je suis entièrement d'accord avec tes dernières lignes.
Je n'ai rien contre les personnes curieuses et pleines d'espoirs (j'en ai fait partie, comme déjà dit). Il en faut pour avancer (dans tous les domaines d'ailleurs).
J'ai toutefois un peu (beaucoup même) de mal (comme Gort'h, je pense) avec ceux qui veulent asséner "leur" vérité d'une manière absolue, sans aucune "démonstration clinique et irréfutable" a la clef (aux constructeurs de démontrer que leurs produits sont merveilleux et non pas aux potentiels acheteurs de démonter le contraire....Sinon on marche sur la tête ! !).
Il serait pourtant tellement plus simple (pour tout le monde) de démonter une bonne fois pour toute (autrement que par les mots), les dires de ces fabricants de câbles exceptionnellement fabuleux....
Mais je crois que l'on risque d'attendre longtemps, très longtemps.....
04-18-2016, 02:00 PM
(04-18-2016, 01:43 PM)MZ3 a écrit : [ -> ]T'aurais pas du partir ce week-end car je souscris à 100% à ce que tu dis et tu aurais du le dire avant.(04-18-2016, 12:51 PM)maxitonus a écrit : [ -> ]Il est indiscutable que tous les accesoires des chaines hifi constituent une potentielle "poule aux oeufs d'or"pour les fabricants et revendeurs de hifi, d'autant plus intéressante:
-qu'on entretient le mystère et l'image,mystère facile à entretenir,et image dont l'industrie du luxe a fait sa principale pour ne pas dire unique source de revenus (LVMH,L'Oréal,GUCCI,...)sachant que le plaisir humain provient, au moins en partie, bien souvent de la sensation qu'on se démarque des autres vers le haut. Les marges sur les cables ésotériques vendus grace à leur image n'ont pas de limites! et pourtant on peut faire aussi bien à cent sous.
-que les accessoires n'ont pas besoin de SAV, ni de réparations,ni d'ajustements, ni de reprises;C'est donc byzance.
Il ne faut pas pour autant que l'arbre cache la forêt:ca ne veut pas dire qu'il faut éluder (zapper) le sujet.
Ceux qui n'y croient pas sont dans leur droit le plus strict, chacun doit respecter les opinions des autres.
Ceux qui y croient ont toute possibilité d'approfondir s'ils le veulent.
Je suis entièrement d'accord avec tes dernières lignes.
Je n'ai rien contre les personnes curieuses et pleines d'espoirs (j'en ai fait partie, comme déjà dit). Il en faut pour avancer (dans tous les domaines d'ailleurs).
J'ai toutefois un peu (beaucoup même) de mal (comme Gort'h, je pense) avec ceux qui veulent asséner "leur" vérité d'une manière absolue, sans aucune "démonstration clinique et irréfutable" a la clef (aux constructeurs de démontrer que leurs produits sont merveilleux et non pas aux potentiels acheteurs de démonter le contraire....Sinon on marche sur la tête ! !).
Il serait pourtant tellement plus simple (pour tout le monde) de démonter une bonne fois pour toute (autrement que par les mots), les dires de ces fabricants de câbles exceptionnellement fabuleux....
Mais je crois que l'on risque d'attendre longtemps, très longtemps.....
On reproche aux sceptiques de penser que les effets des câbles sur le son ça ne peut pas exister. Mais à aujourd'hui aucune démonstration d'existence n'a été faite.
La seule chose qui existe ce sont des avis d'auditeur qui relatent des impressions d'écoute. En toute bonne foi mais sans aucune démonstration scientifique.
Ce dernier point arrange bien les fabricants qui abreuvent de discours technique la mise en oeuvre de leurs câbles pour mettre en avant le sérieux de leur démarche.
04-18-2016, 02:06 PM
Bin le problème, c'est que je l'ai déjà dit (en employant d'autres mots) sur un autre post....Que n'avais pas dit là ! ! 
04-18-2016, 02:12 PM
(04-16-2016, 06:57 PM)Gorth a écrit : [ -> ]J'ai toutefois un peu (beaucoup même) de mal (comme Gort'h, je pense) avec ceux qui veulent asséner "leur" vérité d'une manière absolue, sans aucune "démonstration clinique et irréfutable" a la clef (aux constructeurs de démontrer que leurs produits sont merveilleux et non pas aux potentiels acheteurs de démonter le contraire....Sinon on marche sur la tête ! !).
Il serait pourtant tellement plus simple (pour tout le monde) de démonter une bonne fois pour toute (autrement que par les mots), les dires de ces fabricants de câbles exceptionnellement fabuleux....
Mais je crois que l'on risque d'attendre longtemps, très longtemps.....
Oui mais nous débattons sur la corrélation entre mesures et effets.
Si on commence à dériver sur le discours " marketing ", " commercial ", que mettent en avant les fabricants de câbles, on s'en sort jamais !
C'est de la PUB, ni plus ni moins....
04-18-2016, 02:13 PM
ah .... je voie que le sujet avance (pas)
raphael
raphael
04-18-2016, 02:19 PM
(04-18-2016, 02:12 PM)Eric a écrit : [ -> ]Le problème c'est que c'est de ce discours qu'est né la croyance. Et j'y ai cru aussi.(04-16-2016, 06:57 PM)Gorth a écrit : [ -> ]J'ai toutefois un peu (beaucoup même) de mal (comme Gort'h, je pense) avec ceux qui veulent asséner "leur" vérité d'une manière absolue, sans aucune "démonstration clinique et irréfutable" a la clef (aux constructeurs de démontrer que leurs produits sont merveilleux et non pas aux potentiels acheteurs de démonter le contraire....Sinon on marche sur la tête ! !).
Il serait pourtant tellement plus simple (pour tout le monde) de démonter une bonne fois pour toute (autrement que par les mots), les dires de ces fabricants de câbles exceptionnellement fabuleux....
Mais je crois que l'on risque d'attendre longtemps, très longtemps.....
Oui mais nous débattons sur la corrélation entre mesures et effets.
Si on commence à dériver sur le discours " marketing ", " commercial ", que mettent en avant les fabricants de câbles, on s'en sort jamais !
C'est de la PUB, ni plus ni moins....
Pour le reste oui tu as raison.
par contre c'est MZ3 que tu as quoté pas moi.
(04-18-2016, 02:13 PM)Raphaël a écrit : [ -> ]ah .... je voie que le sujet avance (pas)Same old tu sais.
raphael
Mais vu que tu fais du DIY tu n'es pas équipé pour faire des mesures toi?