Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of their review?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of... - Page 4

post #46 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post


Do you have any testable evidence to back this up? Objective data of any kind? 

this circular argument is just that. You win, No effort to debate from me as I enjoy my music as I hear it, not how someone tells me I should.

My point is not directed at the OP. It is directed at those that think that science has the world all packaged in neat, perfect explanations.
post #47 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

I would say that ICs are like tone controls.

They're not, unless you're speaking of ICs with gargantuan resistance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

But there are a lot of us that have found a difference worth change that don't have a bias other than liking the sound better.

While personal appraisals of worth are inescapably variable, I'm troubled by the lack of recognition of any bias on your behalf. I can think of a couple of the top of my head, leading with the classic of expectation bias. Indeed it's not the lack of electronics knowledge that frightens me so much with audiophiles but the lack of personal knowledge or understanding of psychology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

For those who need empirical data to tell them what to do or how to spend their money, buy a radio shack set and let live. Superman was a comic book character and couldn't save the planet, don't try.

Did you just attempt to portray a reliance on empirical observation as a weakness? That's rich! I think most people around here are talking about having some common sense rather than trying to be the next Ralph Nader.
post #48 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post


Don't feel offended or insulted, but my personal interpretation of the reason people hear differences between different cables is because of psychological factors related to sighted listening tests, esp. expectation bias.
How can you be sure that whatever differences you may be hearing aren't caused by the fact that you expect differences to be there?
This effect readily explains why even large changes that are reported during sighted listening tests suddenly disappear when done blind, even when switched by hand without a switch box. Additionally, the effect of expectation bias is so big it can even make unreactive substances measurably improve a medical condition, i.e. the well known placebo effect.
The fact that you hear differences does not mean there are differences. So out of honest interest I'm wondering how you are able to assert the differences you perceive as 'true', and not as a result of expectation bias.
Edit: and as liamstrain pointed out there are indeed cases where the cable has measurable negative effects on the system because it is not used as intended. But I think it's a fair assumption to make that those kind of situations don't occur in a normal audio chain with headphones.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

Sorry Germanium - you have not presented any evidence at all to support your assertion. There is no evidence that has been presented by anyone, ever, to support that cables ever have, or are even capable of making a difference.* That you believe you heard differences does not mean that the cables actually made a difference. 

 

* except for those instances where they are of insufficient gauge for the application, or otherwise made incorrectly and generating ground loops or etc.

 

While I agree that in many cases there is no scientific reason that there should be a difference other than the marketers say so & the reasons they give are not good scientific reasons, interaction of output impedance with cable capacitance in line level cabling is the primary diference that I was in fact able to hear. It was most easily heard with piano music which became lifeless with high capacitance cabling. The cables I made were under 100pf for one meter with connectors. All cables I tested that were available on the market & were in my price range had more than 125pf for one meter with connectors. These cables caused mild deadening of the piano sound & as I approached 200pf there was an increase in the deadening effect. My cables were 75pf with connectors for one meter & 56pf for 1/2 meter including connectors. You will not find any cables with lower capacitance on the market than my homemade cables. These were the cables that provided the most lifelike sound on piano. Piano is the most dificult instrument to reproduce as ther is a broad spectrum of harmonics & wide dynamicis in many cases. The losses are revealed very quickly on piano music more than any other. Some electric guitar works can also show it pretty well as well.The searing tone of an electric guitar that is played loud in it's upper registers gets lost pretty easily as well.

 

By the way I'm not trying to sell anything here so I have no reason to trump up my claims & as you see I do not say that cabling makes a diffeence everywhere or that I have even heard a difference everwhere. Certainly not with my computer sound setup but certainly so on my seperates.

 

My computer sound setup however is different as there is no difference in cabling sound  as far as I have been able to detect & the difference is a lower output impedance pushing these effects up beyond the audio range of human hearing. also the closer the output impedance is to the characteristic impedance of the cable the broader the frequency response of the system as a whole & the less cable sensitive your system will be. You want any visable on a scope sign of roll off to be well beyond human heaing as far as the cable-output impedance matchups are concerned

post #49 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

Superman ... couldn't save the planet, don't try.

 

Is that what you're going to teach your kids? Just roll over and show your yellow belly?

 

You need to man up and stop swallowing the pap you're being spoonfed.

 

w

post #50 of 1790
Quote:
"interaction of output impedance with cable capacitance in line level cabling is the primary diference that I was in fact able to hear."

 

 

1. What is the theory that supports this will have an audible effect? 

 

2. Did you do any blind testing to ensure you were level matching and eliminating bias? Or were you able to measure the signal changes (not just the impedance) to see if there were measurable differences? 


Edited by liamstrain - 5/7/12 at 3:32pm
post #51 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post


this circular argument is just that. You win, No effort to debate from me as I enjoy my music as I hear it, not how someone tells me I should.
My point is not directed at the OP. It is directed at those that think that science has the world all packaged in neat, perfect explanations.

 

You are free to enjoy your music. I do not intend to take that away from you. 

 

However. Truth matters. If you are telling someone that a cable change affected your listening experience, I would expect you to be able to back that up - otherwise you are perpetuation a mythology that costs people millions of dollars needlessly (even if you, yourself, are not selling anything). The world may not be packaged in neat, perfect explanations - but that is neither a reason to suggest that some things cannot be measured or tested usefully, or that audio is somehow exempt from the rules that do bind so many other things. Perfect explanations may not be attainable - but we can strive for robust, workable, predictive ones. That's how we progress...something mythology has never done for us.

 

I want to make audio better. Both for my personal enjoyment and the field as a whole. To do that, the first step is determining exactly where you actually can effect change. Rooting out money spent in the wrong areas, so it can be applied in the right ones is part of that step. 


Edited by liamstrain - 5/7/12 at 3:40pm
post #52 of 1790
Boys, these cable debates never end any differently. It becomes, prove it. The other side says, I don't care. It comes down to individual choice based on individual experience. Science tries to make a formula to explain the world around them and when it doesn't fit, they adjust their formula until it does. Art is in the eye (or ear) of the individual. Sometimes science has no explanation for it. There are literally thousands of these threads over the internet and they all end the same way. Oh yeah, says who? The scientist claims those not in conformance are foolish. Those that have found satisfaction in a difference don't give a rat's.

Good day all.
post #53 of 1790

Edited by anetode - 5/7/12 at 3:51pm
post #54 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

We all start off not believing because audio language is foreign and no references common to us noobs exist. It's when you start doing your own investigation that you begin to learn the language and magnitude of impact (if any).

I have found cables and power cords to have some impact. The things it impacted was not what I had experience listening for. When I went from a test cable back to my baseline cable, I could tell some slight variances. I would say that ICs are like tone controls. And as has been mentioned, not every component will have the same impact using that IC. Power cords also have an effect on some devices, in particular amps.

The big issue is whether the cost is worth the difference. The vast majority will conclude that no, it's not worth the cost. But taking price out of the equation and having the opportunity to try different setups at your leisure and with your gear is the only way to learn. I certainly wouldn't spend my money trying to find out. But if you get an opportunity to try some different items, it's worth trying for your own peace of mind. If the article or review has financial implications, keep that in mind. If a hobbyist is giving their experience and it's like a component upgrade, they are embellishing their purchase. But there are a lot of us that have found a difference worth change that don't have a bias other than liking the sound better. For those who need empirical data to tell them what to do or how to spend their money, buy a radio shack set and let live. Superman was a comic book character and couldn't save the planet, don't try.

The differences you hear is most likely a phycological effect, I know because I've been there, try conducting some fair blind-testing yourself and you'd see what I mean.

Either that or you have superhuman hearing abilities that I don't have.

 

Power cables? Don't even get me started until you've re-cabled everything from your regional power plant all the way to your home and change all of the infrastructures in between. Incase you don't know, power companies don't use OFC or silver to make their cables, nor are the cables in your house or what ever you live in (Unless you've already re-cabled them.)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

Quote:
"interaction of output impedance with cable capacitance in line level cabling is the primary diference that I was in fact able to hear."

 

 

1. What is the theory that supports this will have an audible effect? 

 

2. Did you do any blind testing to ensure you were level matching and eliminating bias? Or were you able to measure the signal changes (not just the impedance) to see if there were measurable differences? 

LOL, do keep in mind that cable capacitances are actually VERY small (in the magnitude of 1-10pF), This is smaller than the high-frequency filter capacitors used in amplifiers to remove unwanted supersonic frequencies and prevent oscillation in the amplifier (these capacitors are in the magnitude of around 100pF).

 

Yes the theory and fair blind-testing results are very important if you're trying to prove something here, the phycological effects plays a large role in our listening experience. 


Edited by b1o2r3i4s5 - 5/7/12 at 4:20pm
post #55 of 1790
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

Boys, these cable debates never end any differently. It becomes, prove it. The other side says, I don't care.
So one side has proof and one side doesn't... 
It comes down to individual choice based on individual experience.
Its already proven that individuals don't experience this differently when not under external influences so this won't help the case either.
Science tries to make a formula to explain the world around them and when it doesn't fit, they adjust their formula until it does.
But in this situation, it is not the case. The science is extremely consistent and empirical on this subject.
Art is in the eye (or ear) of the individual.
Sounds like you are attempting to elevate your statements rather than prove them.
Sometimes science has no explanation for it.
What does this have to with our current discussion though? The science is very clear on this subject. No measurable differences and participants also proved no audible differences that the human ear can perceive beyond that of machines.
There are literally thousands of these threads over the internet and they all end the same way. Oh yeah, says who? The scientist claims those not in conformance are foolish. Those that have found satisfaction in a difference don't give a rat's.
What are you talking about now? Science took real people, the people who said there was a difference and tested them. Its the people who were tested that you should blame. They claimed there was a difference and failed to recognize them. You are coming off as a bit nutty right now. There isn't a bunch of four eyed nerds roaming around in lab coats telling people about cables. The proof has been documented by magazines, audiophiles, radio hosts, reviewers and audio professionals who previous advocated cables and a few scientists in the mix. 

Edited by DNZGamer - 5/7/12 at 4:09pm
post #56 of 1790

I've heard some slight differences in certain cables (Piccolino for one), but the difference is not day and night of what a lot of people claim to be. Those that claim that there new ALO cable has opened up the mids, made there listening experience less fatiguing and less bright is just a psychology effect in which there brain is telling them they want to believe in a difference between stock and there ALO cable when there isn't any. Unless your cable's by default has some defect in it or is badly constructed then you will hear a substantial amount of difference. 

 

In the end, it's all about the aesthetics. You want to believe that there is a difference to make sure your new $500 cables are worth it, when there is no difference. It's sad to see that some spend 5x more on cables then there speakers or headphones.

 

My 2c.

post #57 of 1790
Thread Starter 

Well I am not surprised people here differences (slight differences or otherwise) because I know how strong psycho acoustics can be. I was trying to ABX test some FLAC and MP3 files. At first I heard no differences and after awhile my mind started perceiving really great differences. I was quite confident I was recognizing differences when I heard the first two tracks. Then I heard the third and fourth and they ALL sounded really different... needless to say I failed the test even though I was confident there was differences even when none should have existed.

 

I should also add that when it got to the point where I could recognize differences ( really low bit rate files), I realized I didn't know which one was better! Really sad but I think the minds perception will easily over weigh any minute audio quality changes.


Edited by DNZGamer - 5/7/12 at 4:40pm
post #58 of 1790
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefQon View Post

I've heard some slight differences in certain cables (Piccolino for one), but the difference is not day and night of what a lot of people claim to be. Those that claim that there new ALO cable has opened up the mids, made there listening experience less fatiguing and less bright is just a psychology effect in which there brain is telling them they want to believe in a difference between stock and there ALO cable when there isn't any. Unless your cable's by default has some defect in it or is badly constructed then you will hear a substantial amount of difference. 

 

In the end, it's all about the aesthetics. You want to believe that there is a difference to make sure your new $500 cables are worth it, when there is no difference. It's sad to see that some spend 5x more on cables then there speakers or headphones.

 

My 2c.

$500 cable? this is just sad....
A cable shouldn't cost more than around $20 because that's around the cost of cables used in professional audio (where the music is produced).
*Note: when I say "cables used in professional audio" I'm talking about patch cables and interconnects under 10m in length, certainly not long microphone cables running 10's of meters. 

post #59 of 1790
Thread Starter 

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Westone-UM3X-upgrade-cable-Baldur-MKII-/220744055558#ht_1002wt_1198

 

I bought my UM3x for the same price as these cables. Why would I not just buy $500 earphones rather than spend $250 on cables and earphones?

post #60 of 1790

To the OP:

What would you rely more on? An eyewitness explaining a scene, or a video of the scene/CCTV?

A camera doesn't lie, nor is it capable of bias and failure of recollection on its own.

Same goes for audio.

I think I read somewhere, the max you should consider spending on cables is 1-5% of your setup cost.


Edited by proton007 - 5/7/12 at 4:57pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Dilemma: Should I not believe any reviewers who talk about cables or just ignore that section of their review?