Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My cable test enterprise
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My cable test enterprise - Page 25

post #361 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post



No, I simply said that such circular arguments largely participated in by people who really don't know what they're talking about belongs here rather than in a forum dedicated to purely subjective impressions.  This is the appropriate place for all of the pseudo science discussions/arguments.  We have lots of people who know they don't have scientific explanations for what they think they perceive, and they're happy to discuss their perceptions with that understanding.  Then we have people who largely are no more knowledgeable re the science, but cloak their subjective impressions in the guise of science.  This is the place for that sort of "discussion."
 


Okay, so those who decide to test, measure, and compare in a way that removes personal bias are clearly lesser...  Because let's not kid ourselves, the Sound Science forum is a backwater where many never even venture for one reason or another - some of whom certainly don't visit because they think it may be confusing and/or too hard to understand - or that there is nothing important to be learned there.

 

 

 

Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum)

(46 Viewing)
Today at 8:39 am by kwkarth
14,426 161,278
 

Sound Science

(15 Viewing)
Today at 8:17 am by kwkarth
946 32,501


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post

This is the right sandbox for such discussions.  It wasn't my idea, someone smarter than me came up with the idea.

In other words Nick, this is the place for people who are here to argue, rather than here to learn.  There are exceptions that rule of thumb, but that, is the way it largely is.


Ahh, I see.  It's the place to put those who really do want to find out (utilize the scientific process... learn...) what the truth really is, and keep them away from everyone else so they can continue in their fairy-land of bliss (and sponsorship).

 

If that sounds provocative, it is, perhaps.  But no more provocative than saying that the Sound Science forum is for arguing and the Cables/Tweaks forum is for learning.  Because is it really learning if your geography teacher "teaches" you that the Earth is flat, saying it because he/she looks outside and "sees" that it is flat?  It's still flat of course, because despite all the evidence to the contrary, when I look outside it is still flat.  I know it is flat.  It doesn't matter what the scientists say - they clearly aren't measuring the right thing.

 

Because that's exactly what is going on here.

post #362 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackbeardBen View Post

Okay, so those who decide to test, measure, and compare in a way that removes personal bias are clearly lesser...  Because let's not kid ourselves, the Sound Science forum is a backwater where many never even venture for one reason or another - some of whom certainly don't visit because they think it may be confusing and/or too hard to understand - or that there is nothing important to be learned there.

 

 

Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum)

(46 Viewing)
Today at 8:39 am by kwkarth
14,426 161,278
 

Sound Science

(15 Viewing)
Today at 8:17 am by kwkarth
946 32,501

 

Ahh, I see.  It's the place to put those who really do want to find out (utilize the scientific process... learn...) what the truth really is, and keep them away from everyone else so they can continue in their fairy-land of bliss (and sponsorship).

 

If that sounds provocative, it is, perhaps.  But no more provocative than saying that the Sound Science forum is for arguing and the Cables/Tweaks forum is for learning.  Because is it really learning if your geography teacher "teaches" you that the Earth is flat, saying it because he/she looks outside and "sees" that it is flat?  It's still flat of course, because despite all the evidence to the contrary, when I look outside it is still flat.  I know it is flat.  It doesn't matter what the scientists say - they clearly aren't measuring the right thing.

 

Because that's exactly what is going on here.

I'm not interested in this argument.  You're going to have to live with it.
 

post #363 of 438

well it's the forum for technical arguing, and measuring the THD/SNR of cables won't learn anything to anyone...the OP needs to research more technologically advanced means to prove his point IMHO, as it's still very much a work in progress as far as I can see.

 

measuring sweeps through an analog oscilloscope might be a good start.

post #364 of 438
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post



No, I simply said that such circular arguments largely participated in by people who really don't know what they're talking about

 

We have multiple engineers, Scientists and Phds on this subforum , plus those who if not formally qualified have undertaken controlled tests of one sort or another to test hypoptheses driven by a sense of curisoity and a healthy skepticism of unsupported audiophile dogma, who merely ask for better evidence and who can frequently point to such empirical evidence both for and against a hypothesis. Agreed there is some unreflective "no it isn't" but there is much evidence provided to back the arguments here.

 

belongs here rather than in a forum dedicated to purely subjective impressions.  This is the appropriate place for all of the pseudo science discussions/arguments.  

 

This is just out and out insulting - again and again there are pointers to peer-reviewed journal articles testing hyoptheses.

 

We have lots of people who know they don't have scientific explanations for what they think they perceive, and they're happy to discuss their perceptions with that understanding.  

 

As long as nobody challenges that the experience is not illusory , in a court of law a witness can be asked "are you sure" which seems reasonable

 

Then we have people who largely are no more knowledgeable re the science, but cloak their subjective impressions in the guise of science.  This is the place for that sort of "discussion."

 

See above... LeePerry for instance with whom I seldom agree provides copious real data for his posts even if I think he fails to provide the data that really counts he uses a great deal of actual evidence for his posts and he is far from alone here

post #365 of 438

I'm not arguing with you Nick, this is where the thread belongs.  Thanks.

post #366 of 438


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post




Because DBT and these cable measurements are best marginalised in the Sound Science part of the forum. That way the pro cable side can continue to ignore the science and make spurious untested claims instead. Could we have a section called 'Bad Science' to marginalise all the 'night and day', 'golden ears', 'decent hifi kit, 'psyedoscience'' reasons as to why cables do make a difference?



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post



This is it. tongue_smile.gif
 


Rubbish. This is typical of so many on this forum and elsewhere in hifi world, evidence is provided and verified by testing, but because it goes against the grain, it is dismissed.

 

I am not a scientist, I am in the legal profession and I go with the evidence. Nick_Charles has provided significant evidence here that whilst cables do not measure the same, the differences are inaudible. Leeperry falls into the usual psuedoscience trap of 'here are scientific sounding differences, I can hear a difference and so that must be down to those differences'. But those links have another explanation, placebo. I want proof that there is a link between high end kit and jitter etc with distinguishable sound differences and/or proof that what they are experiencing is not placebo.

post #367 of 438

I think we may have gotten off on the wrong foot.  My intent was not to denigrate anyone in particular.

 

My point was to say that there are those who will argue all day long, using pseudo science, with those who approach things with a purely scientific method.  Neither side is open to the other, yet the controversy swirls around endlessly.  For me, that is not a productive discussion.  Neither side learns anything new, no problems or questions are settled, yada, yada, yada...  

 

I hope my position was a little more clearly stated this time.  I personally have great interest in the subject matter from both the scientific standpoint and the subjective observers standpoint, as I am personally invested in both camps.

post #368 of 438

Because of trolling these threads do get bogged down. But inbetween the round-a-bout psydeoscience of the pro cable side, there is a lot of good discussion and evidence. By moving this thread you have shown that all the pro side needs to do is troll any real science and evidence thread and it will be marginalised.

 

So, to be fair, if I troll 'recommend me a cable for $100' or 'cardas cables are night and day better than any other', will they too will be moved to Sound Science?

post #369 of 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Because of trolling these threads do get bogged down. But inbetween the round-a-bout psydeoscience of the pro cable side, there is a lot of good discussion and evidence. By moving this thread you have shown that all the pro side needs to do is troll any real science and evidence thread and it will be marginalised.

 

So, to be fair, if I troll 'recommend me a cable for $100' or 'cardas cables are night and day better than any other', will they too will be moved to Sound Science?

Why do you persist in THIS argument?  Could it be that this forum was created because some people tend to be argumentative and we needed a good place to try and contain the incessant argument? 

 

I didn't make this particular rule but I am here to enforce it.  If it's too complex or ambiguous for you to figure out, feel free to post when and where you wish, and when any of the moderating staff become aware of an out of place post or thread we will move, remove, or delete, the aforementioned and possibly repeat offenders as well...all for the greater good.
 

post #370 of 438

You can find some RMAA measurements of audio cables on this link: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/multimedia/display/scythe-kamabay_7.html

 

They also made some measurements on a top-end Creative soundcard, where the reviewer said that he had to do his subjective tests all over again because the Monster cable he used was really killing the SQ..he even provided RMAA measurements for all the cables he tried, but I can't find the link again. I'm quite sure I already posted it in this very thread last year anyway.

 

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post


evidence is provided and verified by testing, but because it goes against the grain, it is dismissed.

 

You honestly believe that a cable can be dumbed down to THD and SNR...and call it a day?

 

Here's a glimpse of what happens in a coax cable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_cable#Signal_leakage

post #371 of 438
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

You can find some RMAA measurements of audio cables on this link: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/multimedia/display/scythe-kamabay_7.html

 

The differences are indeed predictably very very small - the impact of the cable is minimal , none in combination with the amp give noise levels worse than -100db or a dynamic range of worse than 100db, nobody is ever going to detect the difference between crosstalk at -87.4db and crosstalk at -89.7 db - seriously. FR is within 0.1db at 20K a frequency where human sensitivity is terrible

 

They also made some measurements on a top-end Creative soundcard, where the reviewer said that he had to do his subjective tests all over again because the Monster cable he used was really killing the SQ

 

A subjective report - haven't we gone through this loop already !

 

..he even provided RMAA measurements for all the cables he tried, but I can't find the link again. I'm quite sure I already posted it in this very thread last year anyway.  

 

You honestly believe that a cable can be dumbed down to THD and SNR...and call it a day?

 

No, FR is much more important than both and that is easily measured and generally as flat as Holland.

 

 

Here's a glimpse of what happens in a coax cable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_cable#Signal_leakage

post #372 of 438
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

well it's the forum for technical arguing, and measuring the THD/SNR of cables won't learn anything to anyone...the OP needs to research more technologically advanced means to prove his point IMHO, as it's still very much a work in progress as far as I can see.

 

measuring sweeps through an analog oscilloscope might be a good start.



This is also a forum where DBT is an acceptable topic and regarded as a good means of determining whether a  perceived audible difference is real or not. Others have done tone sweeps of cables Pio2001 for instance and found the same low levels of differences, In the end what matters is whether a difference is audible or not, that is where DBT plays it's part. To date the DBTs do not provide evidence for audible differences between "normal" cables. If you genuinely believe that your cables are audibly different you are free to do your own DBTs. If you do find them to be audibly different I can guarantee that there will be measurable differences far above the 100ths of a db differences normally found.

post #373 of 438


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post



Why do you persist in THIS argument?  Could it be that this forum was created because some people tend to be argumentative and we needed a good place to try and contain the incessant argument? 

 

I didn't make this particular rule but I am here to enforce it.  If it's too complex or ambiguous for you to figure out, feel free to post when and where you wish, and when any of the moderating staff become aware of an out of place post or thread we will move, remove, or delete, the aforementioned and possibly repeat offenders as well...all for the greater good.
 


Sorry. I do not mean to argumentative, but I am inquisitive and persistent beerchug.gif.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post

You can find some RMAA measurements of audio cables on this link: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/multimedia/display/scythe-kamabay_7.html

 

They also made some measurements on a top-end Creative soundcard, where the reviewer said that he had to do his subjective tests all over again because the Monster cable he used was really killing the SQ..he even provided RMAA measurements for all the cables he tried, but I can't find the link again. I'm quite sure I already posted it in this very thread last year anyway.

 

 

You honestly believe that a cable can be dumbed down to THD and SNR...and call it a day?

 

Here's a glimpse of what happens in a coax cable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaxial_cable#Signal_leakage


In the table from your link, which differences are audible?

 

      Cables.png

post #374 of 438

 

Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

If you genuinely believe that your cables are audibly different you are free to do your own DBTs.


And what would I gain from it? I can DBT my $3 killer sounding shielded composite cable and my Belden 1794A/Canare cable anytime you want. Really. They sound so different that it's not even open for debate....but surely I'm a clueless victim of placebo, and France is rather far from where you currently reside I presume so you'd need to trust me on my good word.

 

All the cables DBT's I've read were done w/ analog cables in non-acoustically treated rooms and without Digital Room Correction. For what I know, the guys were listening to the room more than to the cables....and when you provide links to jitter hearing tests, they're always utterly flawed, like one was using mono signals recorded on tapes, or the other was using $5 headphones. The ppl who enjoy their music have nothing to prove to the non-believers. If everything sounds the same to you, then Hallelujah! one less thing to worry about I'd say[:la buvette]

 

Copper costs $10K a ton, I'm w/ you about the ppl who sell copper for the price of platinum...they use guru-like methods on gullible ppl. A well designed cable doesn't have to carry a 3 figures price tag...it does because the "pricier=better" circular logic is very much at play in the audiophile world.

 

This ebay seller has a lot of cheap coax cables: http://stores.ebay.com/Pro-Cables-Direct/Audio-Cables.html

 

Vampire, Acoustic Research, Philips and so know a thing or two about designing coax cables.

post #375 of 438

If you are so convinced, why are you not pumping out the DBTs to prove us wrong?

 

Whether a room is acoustically treated or not, so long as the only change is with the cable it will not matter.

 

I and I am sure other non believers thoroughly enjoy their music. What has that red herring got to do with anything?

 

I am sure Vampire etc do know about designing cables. Shame they do not publish signal and DBT tests as part of the design process.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › My cable test enterprise