My cable test enterprise - Page 20

Thanks for the considerable effort Nick. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in cables frequency responses are so small they are not audible. So, to explain the differences some find in cables, we must look elsewhere, so as placebo and expectation.

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in the frequency responses of the cables he tested are so small that it is unlikely they would be audible.

 

FTFY.

Add Nick's research to all of the blind tests on cables and I prepared to say, using legal levels of proof, that it is beyond reasonable doubt that cables do not make a difference.

EDIT - all the reasons why I do not think that cables can make a difference;

Nick's research finding differences so small in frequency response with the cables that he tested that no one could hear a difference based on what we know about our hearing limits.

The lack of any other research that finds measurable differences in cables that can be heard. Cable companies regularly claim to have conducted a lot of research, but none have produced actual testing results which are in the relms of audibility. Instead they produce scientific sounding descriptions of tests and their products. The one instance where that has been tested is with Russ Andrews and the ASA where it has been ruled he cannot claim there is something in his cables that makes them audibly different, as he has not given sufficient proof. he has only suggested a link.

Blind Tests repeatedly fail to find anyone who can reliably tell a difference between cables.

Questions about what it is in the construction of cables that could make a difference find no answer. Add that to different types of cable construction being held as 'sounding better' and there is no consistency. So, if all types of cable construction are as good as each other, it is reasonable to deduce that they all sound the same.

That placebo, suggestion and purchase justification do provide good reasons as why to some cables can sound different. So there are reasons why cables can sound different, it is just not in the cable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy 

All this talk and not one person who owns these special cables is willing to use the Audio DiffMaker that Prog Rock Man posted about to prove his point. 

 

Nick_Charles went to a lot of trouble to make his measurements.  It would be nice to see his detractors make a contribution of their own to add to this discussion.

 

I would like to challenge all the posters who took issue with nick_charles's measurements, to make some recordings with the diffMaker and post their results.

 

If you hear a difference, the diffMaker will record it.

 

 

Edit: to post a download link --->  Here

I downloaded it a while ago, but I want to set everything up as far as possible to eliminate as many other variables that might interfere with the test as possible. I'm not sure that the THD+N of my computer wouldn't be significantly higher than that of my hi-fi gear, so I'm not sure that I could get meaningful results. I will experiment at some point though.

Prog Rock Man: I understand what you wish to believe and justify, but mis-using evidence to make your own generalisations is a gross abuse of science.  The purpose of science is to learn more about ourselves and the world, and universe, around us, not to justify religiously held beliefs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in cables frequency responses are so small they are not audible. So, to explain the differences some find in cables, we must look elsewhere, so as placebo and expectation.

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in the frequency responses of the cables he tested are so small that it is unlikely they would be audible.

 

FTFY.

Add Nick's research to all of the blind tests on cables and I prepared to say, using legal levels of proof, that it is beyond reasonable doubt that cables do not make a difference.

 

EDIT - all the reasons why I do not think that cables can make a difference;

 

Nick's research finding differences so small in frequency response with the cables that he tested that no one could hear a difference based on what we know about our hearing limits.

 

The lack of any other research that finds measurable differences in cables that can be heard. Cable companies regularly claim to have conducted a lot of research, but none have produced actual testing results which are in the relms of audibility. Instead they produce scientific sounding descriptions of tests and their products. The one instance where that has been tested is with Russ Andrews and the ASA where it has been ruled he cannot claim there is something in his cables that makes them audibly different, as he has not given sufficient proof. he has only suggested a link.

 

Blind Tests repeatedly fail to find anyone who can reliably tell a difference between cables.

 

Questions about what it is in the construction of cables that could make a difference find no answer. Add that to different types of cable construction being held as 'sounding better' and there is no consistency. So, if all types of cable construction are as good as each other, it is reasonable to deduce that they all sound the same.

 

That placebo, suggestion and purchase justification do provide good reasons as why to some cables can sound different. So there are reasons why cables can sound different, it is just not in the cable.

And you have all results of DBTs to make that statement? I don't believe everything sounds the same to you. I think your hearing is errant or you are deliberately heating up a debate for entertainment. As every thread on topic ends the same way, with a waste of effort and time. Enjoy your audio world as you see fit. Stop the politics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 


Prog Rock Man: I understand what you wish to believe and justify, but mis-using evidence to make your own generalisations is a gross abuse of science.  The purpose of science is to learn more about ourselves and the world, and universe, around us, not to justify religiously held beliefs.

Please give an examples of my supposed misuse of science, generalisations and 'religiously' held beliefs.

I have gone with the science, which shows no audible difference between cables when measured and when subjected to blind testing. My only generalisation as such is that the previous sentence applies to all types of cables, digital and analogue. There is no religion in believing the science. Bear in mind when I joined this forum, I was sure that cables made a difference. I changed my mind because of nick_charles, uncle erik and doing my own reading on the subject. I did not come here having already decided on whether cables made a difference or not and then tried to find evidence that fitted that existing belief. The best evidence is that cables in themselves do not make a difference IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Camper 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in cables frequency responses are so small they are not audible. So, to explain the differences some find in cables, we must look elsewhere, so as placebo and expectation.

Nick's measurements have found that the differences in the frequency responses of the cables he tested are so small that it is unlikely they would be audible.

 

FTFY.

Add Nick's research to all of the blind tests on cables and I prepared to say, using legal levels of proof, that it is beyond reasonable doubt that cables do not make a difference.

 

EDIT - all the reasons why I do not think that cables can make a difference;

 

Nick's research finding differences so small in frequency response with the cables that he tested that no one could hear a difference based on what we know about our hearing limits.

 

The lack of any other research that finds measurable differences in cables that can be heard. Cable companies regularly claim to have conducted a lot of research, but none have produced actual testing results which are in the relms of audibility. Instead they produce scientific sounding descriptions of tests and their products. The one instance where that has been tested is with Russ Andrews and the ASA where it has been ruled he cannot claim there is something in his cables that makes them audibly different, as he has not given sufficient proof. he has only suggested a link.

 

Blind Tests repeatedly fail to find anyone who can reliably tell a difference between cables.

 

Questions about what it is in the construction of cables that could make a difference find no answer. Add that to different types of cable construction being held as 'sounding better' and there is no consistency. So, if all types of cable construction are as good as each other, it is reasonable to deduce that they all sound the same.

 

That placebo, suggestion and purchase justification do provide good reasons as why to some cables can sound different. So there are reasons why cables can sound different, it is just not in the cable.

And you have all results of DBTs to make that statement? I don't believe everything sounds the same to you. I think your hearing is errant or you are deliberately heating up a debate for entertainment. As every thread on topic ends the same way, with a waste of effort and time. Enjoy your audio world as you see fit. Stop the politics.

I have spent hours searching for blind testing and so far, for cables the results are no better than random (Search for the thread Testing Audiophile Myths). If people listen with no other stimulous, they cannot reliably hear a difference between cables.

Only cables sound the same to me. My hearing has been tested and is fine for a middle aged male.

It takes two to have a debate and others are far worse than me at making such heated. It is not a waste of time for me as I have enjoyed the knowledge I have gained and find this issue very interesting. What politics?

There are a few Apogee Duets up at the FS forum now in case any Mac users are looking for a good ADC unit to do testing with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 


Prog Rock Man: I understand what you wish to believe and justify, but mis-using evidence to make your own generalisations is a gross abuse of science.  The purpose of science is to learn more about ourselves and the world, and universe, around us, not to justify religiously held beliefs.

Please give an examples of my supposed misuse of science, generalisations and 'religiously' held beliefs.

 

I have gone with the science, which shows no audible difference between cables when measured and when subjected to blind testing. My only generalisation as such is that the previous sentence applies to all types of cables, digital and analogue. There is no religion in believing the science. Bear in mind when I joined this forum, I was sure that cables made a difference. I changed my mind because of nick_charles, uncle erik and doing my own reading on the subject. I did not come here having already decided on whether cables made a difference or not and then tried to find evidence that fitted that existing belief. The best evidence is that cables in themselves do not make a difference IMO.

You gave your own example. Again, science doesn't produce blanket statements. It is really that simple. What you're saying is, you have tested yourself and can't discern a difference, and this correlates with the conclusions of others. That's fine.  It's the same in my case: Nicks tests of low end cables correlate with my experiences, that if there is any difference in cheap cables (I tried computer cables vs. a couple of others) that it's not worth concerning oneself with.  I also am quite sure I could test myself such that I would pass or fail in discerning different levels of difference in the sound of two components, as I know enough about my own hearing ability at different frequencies and roughly what threshold I can discern things.

There is, regardless, a consistently large body of experience of a different sound when, say, all silver cables are used, vs. all copper. Personally I'm not going to write this off as mass placebo, I'd rather like to know what is going on, as they are two different metals with different physical properties. I'm not confident that what is believed to be the limits of our hearing are truly correct, as I've come across too much that it supposed to be impossible that people have done. So far, as it relates to hearing, our eardrums seem to be far more sensitive than our thinking or focus, at least without training.  I think it would be nice to explore our individual capabilities (as there is so much variance between people and would be more relevant to our hobby) than argue over a simple yes/no on a single kind of product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 


Prog Rock Man: I understand what you wish to believe and justify, but mis-using evidence to make your own generalisations is a gross abuse of science.  The purpose of science is to learn more about ourselves and the world, and universe, around us, not to justify religiously held beliefs.

Please give an examples of my supposed misuse of science, generalisations and 'religiously' held beliefs.

 

I have gone with the science, which shows no audible difference between cables when measured and when subjected to blind testing. My only generalisation as such is that the previous sentence applies to all types of cables, digital and analogue. There is no religion in believing the science. Bear in mind when I joined this forum, I was sure that cables made a difference. I changed my mind because of nick_charles, uncle erik and doing my own reading on the subject. I did not come here having already decided on whether cables made a difference or not and then tried to find evidence that fitted that existing belief. The best evidence is that cables in themselves do not make a difference IMO.

You gave your own example. Again, science doesn't produce blanket statements. It is really that simple. What you're saying is, you have tested yourself and can't discern a difference, and this correlates with the conclusions of others. That's fine.  It's the same in my case: Nicks tests of low end cables correlate with my experiences, that if there is any difference in cheap cables (I tried computer cables vs. a couple of others) that it's not worth concerning oneself with.  I also am quite sure I could test myself such that I would pass or fail in discerning different levels of difference in the sound of two components, as I know enough about my own hearing ability at different frequencies and roughly what threshold I can discern things.

 

There is, regardless, a consistently large body of experience of a different sound when, say, all silver cables are used, vs. all copper. Personally I'm not going to write this off as mass placebo, I'd rather like to know what is going on, as they are two different metals with different physical properties. I'm not confident that what is believed to be the limits of our hearing are truly correct, as I've come across too much that it supposed to be impossible that people have done. So far, as it relates to hearing, our eardrums seem to be far more sensitive than our thinking or focus, at least without training.  I think it would be nice to explore our individual capabilities (as there is so much variance between people and would be more relevant to our hobby) than argue over a simple yes/no on a single kind of product.

I have given more than my own example. The thread on Audiophile Myths has numerous examples. I am not going by my own experience, I am going with the experience of many. The Audiophile Myths thread does not contain the other numerous reports of failed blind tests where there is n description of procedure. Assuming they were not all duff, that makes for even more people who when asked to identify cables by sound alone, cannot.

I agree that there is an even larger group of people who say that they can hear a difference and that silver is brighter than copper is one of them. As much as mass placebo is an unsatisfactory answer to you, it does provide an explanation. As to whether it is the correct one, we do not know for sure.

As for cheap vs expensive cables, it is far easier and realistic for someone with the budget to buy expensive cables and test them against cheaper ones, than it is to do so the other way around. Nick has already had a lone of one expensive cable, tested it and found it to be so similar to the others than the difference is inconsequencial. If cable makers and those who won expensive cables are so confident, they can send their stuff to Nick and prove the likes of myself wrong.

Insufficient test parameters?

Too many people stating a hearing difference to call them all wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Camper 

Insufficient test parameters?

 

Too many people stating a hearing difference to call them all wrong.

They are not wrong in hearing a difference. The question is, what caused the difference, them or the cable?

So far, there is personal experience from some people which is often contradictory (I find such and such a brilliant cable, others disagree) that the cable causes the difference. But there is evidence by testing that the cables do not actually cause a difference that is audible, despite the claims made by many.