New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Copper vs. Silver and brightness? - Page 3

post #31 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by RnB180
Jon L, IMHO, after a certain point there is no audio distinction discernable to the human ear.

the audioholics link I posted prior is an excellent article you should read. Because some of the cables you mention, and cryo tweaks ( people sticking their cables in the freezer and selling it for more) is really funny stuff.

EDIT: removed forbidden words
I read the article, and the graphs and charts are nice, but there's nothing new here. Just like the StereoReview of yesterday, they are making the assumption that measurements of capacitance, resistance, and inductance correlate reliably with subjective sound quality.

Just like measurements of various equipments in Stereophile, I don't believe we are yet capable of even knowing what to measure and how to measure them to actually correspond to the listening experience.

I personally do not know what "scientific"' measurements will reliabily predict subjective sound quality for MYself for any gear or wire, including skin effect. I've certainly used wires that have high skin effect and even high resistance that nevertheless sound pretty darn good to my ears.

After all the scientific tallk, I thought the most telling part was when he said:

"We feel choosing a speaker cable should be a function of electrical performance, build quality, durability, longevity and system compatibility."

What about the most important factor: how they sound??

Again, I have my views based on my own experiences. My views don't in any shape or form should affect your subjective enjoyment of your cables, silver-plated or not, just like your experiences won't effect how my ears hear things. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is fine and OK
post #32 of 87
Quote:
What about the most important factor: how they sound??
Jon, no offense meant at all, and you can buy what you want, and this is a (fairly) safe zone for you to use whatever language you want to describe whatever audible differences you're sure you heard in the metal conducting the signal, and you'll only get mildly hassled...

but "how they sound" is not anything even approaching an unknown.

Silver has slightly less resistance than copper but it will not even begin to have an audible effect until you're talking runs that are measured in miles/kilometers, not feet (or drastic increases in the power of the system, and I'm not talking about a Nad vs a SuperMacro).

Further, the phenomena that explain the reported differences were so well documented as to be mundane 30 years ago, so hardly merit mention in 2005.

IOW, don't worry about any of that "how they sound" garbage and just keep hearing what you want to hear and spending your money on whatever Cardas (et al) tell you to spend your money on. It's agreed that this forum is (generally) a place for talk of "the sound of silver" and rainbow stickers free from the burden of actual evidence and critique, so just enjoy it, because this is one of the few places where you'll be able to do it without getting laughed out of the building.

(and this isn't to say that there aren't excellent discussions and information available here)
post #33 of 87
Thread Starter 
You're saying silver and copper sound the same? Gee, I must surely be hallucinating then!

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Jon, no offense meant at all, and you can buy what you want, and this is a (fairly) safe zone for you to use whatever language you want to describe whatever audible differences you're sure you heard in the metal conducting the signal, and you'll only get mildly hassled...

but "how they sound" is not anything even approaching an unknown.

Silver has slightly less resistance than copper but it will not even begin to have an audible effect until you're talking runs that are measured in miles/kilometers, not feet (or drastic increases in the power of the system, and I'm not talking about a Nad vs a SuperMacro).

Further, the phenomena that explain the reported differences were so well documented as to be mundane 30 years ago, so hardly merit mention in 2005.

IOW, don't worry about any of that "how they sound" garbage and just keep hearing what you want to hear and spending your money on whatever Cardas (et al) tell you to spend your money on. It's agreed that this forum is (generally) a place for talk of "the sound of silver" and rainbow stickers free from the burden of actual evidence and critique, so just enjoy it, because this is one of the few places where you'll be able to do it without getting laughed out of the building.

(and this isn't to say that there aren't excellent discussions and information available here)
post #34 of 87
Quote:
You're saying silver and copper sound the same? Gee, I must surely be hallucinating then!
No, no- not at all.

There are all manner of unknown parameters at play here- "science" will get it figured out someday.

Now back to your regularly scheduled DBT-free thread...
post #35 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
It's agreed that this forum is (generally) a place for talk of "the sound of silver" and rainbow stickers free from the burden of actual evidence . . . .
We get "evidence" all the time on this forum regarding cables and other tweaks. In particular, people are always reporting what these things SOUND like. You may choose to disregard the evidence because of you own biases and prejudices which you feel compelled to assault us with constantly, but it is still evidence.

P.S. We should get you a sticky so anyone who wants to hear you on your soapbox about how cables don't make a difference, and how many of us are victims of clever marketing by Cardas etc., can go directly to sticky, and you can avoid trashing every thread regarding these issues with the same old stuff. Although, to the extent you actually wish at some point to convey your actual listening experience, I think that would be highly relevant and I'm sure many would be interested in hearing it.
post #36 of 87
Quote:
We get "evidence" all the time on this forum regarding cables and other tweaks. In particular, people are always reporting what these things SOUND like. You may choose to disregard the evidence because of you own biases and prejudices which you feel compelled to assault us with constantly, but it is still evidence.
No, Phil, it's not. It's anecdote, and you know it.

Quote:
P.S. We should get you a sticky so anyone who wants to hear you on your soapbox about how cables don't make a difference, and how many of us are victims of clever marketing by Cardas etc., can go directly to sticky, and you can avoid trashing every thread regarding these issues with the same old stuff.
Yeah- in a forum with a "DBT-Free" parenthetical in its title?

But if you're serious, I'd do it up right, with links to informed discussions and valid explanations for everyone who was looking for a serious discussion on the matter.

Let me know.

Quote:
Although, to the extent you actually wish at some point to convey your actual listening experience, I think that would be highly relevant and I'm sure many would be interested in hearing it.
Phil, this is the, what, fifteenth time you've decided you wanted to take up the fight for your cause? You should know very well that your listening experiences mean dick unless done under certain, specific, "banned" (in this forum) conditions, so you HAVE to stop mis-portraying them as the last word on the issue.

Just stick to your discussions and stop trying to call out those who inject a bit of sense when it's specifically asked for (which, in case you've not noticed, is the only time I chime in).
post #37 of 87
Why is it that everyone on this forum can say that silver ICs sound brighter than copper ICs, but when Rodbac expresses his opinion that copper sounds the same as silver, he gets flamed?
post #38 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
No, Phil, it's not. It's anecdote, and you know it. ).
You are just flat wrong, my friend. Look up "evidence" and "anecdote" in the dictionary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
But if you're serious, I'd do it up right, with links to informed discussions and valid explanations for everyone who was looking for a serious discussion on the matter.

Let me know.
I think it would be a great idea. I think you have very important points to make, and they should be heard. If you could do it in a sticky, without the usual vieled (and sometimes transparent) insults, it could be helpful to many who are attempting to make up their own minds on this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Phil, this is the, what, fifteenth time you've decided you wanted to take up the fight for your cause? You should know very well that your listening experiences mean dick unless done under certain, specific, "banned" (in this forum) conditions, so you HAVE to stop mis-portraying them as the last word on the issue.
I'm not talking about MY listening experiences. I'm talking about YOURS. If you have listened to various cables, etc. and found no difference, I'd be interested in hearing your experiences.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Just stick to your discussions and stop trying to call out those who inject a bit of sense when it's specifically asked for (which, in case you've not noticed, is the only time I chime in).
You have a extremely liberal interpreation of "when it's spefically asked for." You also, as I have pointed out before, don't confine yourself to an opinion on the issue; you always have to lace it with your condenscending sarcasm about how stupid people are who claim to hear differences.
post #39 of 87
Quote:
You are just flat wrong, my friend. Look up "evidence" and "anecdote" in the dictionary.
Phil, in the name of all that's holy, I'm not going to start arguing about this with you- everybody chiming in with their own experience is anecdote.

If you'd like to portray them as evidence, you're going to have to find a way to throw out the explanations (scientifically valid explanations) that dismiss them as proving what you want them to prove.
post #40 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Done- everybody chiming in with their own experience is anecdote.
You, of all people I would think, would care about what the written accepted definitions of "anecdote" and "evidence" are, instead of relying on your own interpretations or experiences of what these words mean. How ironic.
post #41 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by meat01
Why is it that everyone on this forum can say that silver ICs sound brighter than copper ICs, but when Rodbac expresses his opinion that copper sounds the same as silver, he gets flamed?
Well, I wouldn't say he's getting flamed, but rodbac is NOT really expressing an opinion that copper sounds the same as silver, he is saying the science says copper MUST sound the same as silver, and THEREFORE it does sound the same, and anybody who thinks otherwise has been duped by Cardas et al. There is a big difference. I will welcome with much enthusiasm any statements he cares to offer to the effect that he has compared X copper cable and Y silver cable in Z system and heard no difference.
post #42 of 87
Quote:
I'm not talking about MY listening experiences. I'm talking about YOURS. If you have listened to various cables, etc. and found no difference, I'd be interested in hearing your experiences.
Quote:
I will welcome with much enthusiasm any statements he cares to offer to the effect that he has compared X copper cable and Y silver cable in Z system and heard no difference.
You got it.

This deserves its own post, because it illustrates exactly why my listening has nothing to do with it:

I went over to a coworkers house after hearing him telling me about his new Definitive Bipolars or something.

I listened and they sounded awesome (being driven by I don't know what, but it cost him in excess of a couple grand for the CDP and receiver, so not uber high end, but not Best Buy, either).

He then told me about the silver speaker cables he had. I said "oh really" and listened a while longer, then asked if he still had Cu cable around (he did). I told him to hook them up (he did).

You know what- no difference whatsoever.

He then switched them back.

You know what- no difference whatsoever.

You know what this proves?? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Which is why you, as the person claiming you hear differences in such things, have to listen to them in an ABX test for anything useful to come out of your "listening".

Once you're able to show, under conditions where you don't know what you're listening to, that you can tell the difference between two adequately designed cables, then, and ONLY then, do we have "evidence" that a difference exists.

And what's better about this is that you don't even have to believe my story is true (it is), just as you could believe I was lying (and really did hear a difference despite maintaining I didn't). It doesn't matter because the burden of proof is on you- you're the only one who can prove there's a difference (I can't prove to you that I didn't).
post #43 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Phil, in the name of all that's holy, I'm not going to start arguing about this with you- everybody chiming in with their own experience is anecdote.

If you'd like to portray them as evidence, you're going to have to find a way to throw out the explanations (scientifically valid explanations) that dismiss them as proving what you want them to prove.
The science is evidence also. There is a difference between "evidence" and incontrovertible proof.

Prosectuor: You say Mr. Jones was shot at 10:00. How do you know that?
Witness: I heard the gun shot and looked at my watch and it said 10:00.
Defense Counsel: Objection, Your Honor. That's not evidence. That's anecdote.
Judge: Huh? That's a new one, counsel.
* * *
Defense Counsel: You examined the witness's watch?
Expert: Yes.
Defense Counsel: What did you find?
Expert: Her watch is slow by an hour.
Defense Counsel: Anything else?
Expert: Yes, it turns out she has partially deaf, and what she heard as a gunshot was actually a car backfiring.
Defense Counsel: Your Honor, I move to strike the witnesses testimony, as it has been disproven and therefore is not evidence. It should not even go to the jury.
Judge: What the hell you talkin' about Willis?
post #44 of 87
Ok, Phil- how about "anecdotal evidence", then?

Better?

It is still fallacious and won't win you any cases, counsel...

[edit]

Here you go:

http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thomps.../anecdotal.asp
post #45 of 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
Which is why you, as the person claiming you hear differences in such things, have to listen to them in an ABX test for anything useful to come out of your "listening".
Here is what is useful that can come out of my experiences. Someone else, who asks for advice, can benefit from my experience and others' experiences when considering whether to try certain cables for themselves. They could also benefit from your experience of hearing no difference, as this is also evidence to consider. I would even say they could benefit from a comment by you to this effect: "While many claim to hear differences, I have not heard them, and the science has yet to establish differences." A very valid point. And most effective without the comments about persons who hear differences being duped by Cardas, etc. and other such digs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rodbac
It doesn't matter because the burden of proof is on you- you're the only one who can prove there's a difference (I can't prove to you that I didn't).
As to the burden of proof, I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm just trying to enjoy the hobby, and share my experiences with others, including things that have brought extra enjoyment to me in terms of improving my system. You're the one trying to prove something, to wit: The science is absolutely incontrovertably correct and anyone who hears differences is wrong. I don't have the agenda; you do.

Anyway, I've got to get up early tomorrow morning, so must retire. Rodbac, I have enjoyed it as usual. Really. I do respect your opinons, and our debate, even though we both get a little edgy at times.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: