The funny thing is, if no DBTs had even been conducted I still wouldn't believe in cables. As I see it:
1. Existing science suggests cables do not do magical things to the sound. This is incontestable.
2. Audiophiles suggest they do, but fail to satisfy the burden of proof (reproducing these differences under controlled conditions). This is also rather hard to refute: Mr. Robert Harley of Stereophile presented a paper at the AES, declaring that there were audible differences in prettymuch everything, but they disappear under any types of controlled testing. If that's not an unfalsifiable claim with no supporting evidence (anecdotal listening reports are explained quite adequately with reference to psychology), I don't know what is.
With those two things being established, you can then logically go to step 3, exercising the mechanism by which we reject unfalsifiable claims with no supporting evidence as silly.
3. I hence do not give audiophile beliefs in cables any credibility.
DBTs are just trying to put things in the audiophile's court - (OK, so you think ears are better than everything. Fine, have a listen and distinguish these two things). The fact that cable believers reject this and then make out that the entire scientific argument rests on the DBTs done for their benefit says everything you need to know: you throw them a bone, but they stamp on it then try to stab you with the broken bits...
Edited by Willakan - 1/10/12 at 12:25pm