@jnjn
 
You seem overly concerned with hyperboles here. How many people care about the possibility of miniscule audio differences that cannot be reliably identified? We are discussing the audible difference to sound quality and the science forum does not mean you have to discuss hardcore science. I have no idea why you think this is logical.

That it can produce an audible difference to the human ear is unclear, but the tests show that whatever differences are present in cables it is clearly overshadowed by issues with how we perceive sound to the point that it is completely negligible after a relatively low level of quality has been met. What is the argument you are trying to bring in here? You keep making this fallacious science argument that has really nothing to do with the topic. Please stop using rhetoric instead of evidence.

If you want to say audio engineers don't like music, prove it. For someone who consistently requires scientific confirmation, you are making statements that you ask us to take at face value. I enjoy my modern recordings, what am I looking for in something like Born To Die to distinguish the issues of audio engineers not liking music? It is a legitimate question and you did not answer it. How are people suppose to be aware of these issues if questions regarding these issues are just met with pretentious and condescending insults?

Quote:

dnzgamer said:

@jnjn
 
You seem overly concerned with hyperboles here. How many people care about the possibility of miniscule audio differences that cannot be reliably identified? We are discussing the audible difference to sound quality and the science forum does not mean you have to discuss hardcore science. I have no idea why you think this is logical.

Click to expand...

I agree with you. But I have serious doubts about jnjn's science as well. 
And seriously, where do audio engineers come into the picture? 

You guys put a lot of energy into nothing.

Quote:

bmiamihk said:

You guys put a lot of energy into nothing.

Click to expand...

 
Better than putting a lot of money into nothing! 

What is your goal? The goal that one day no one will ever buy a cable thinking it will improve on the sound but that it will only look pretty? The goal of putting every company that claims that their cables will improve the sound out of Business? Or the goal is to waste time that you have cause you have nothing better to do then repeat like a parrot what you read over and over and over. I guess its a modern way men are able to interact with other humans and some kind of competition which also is a form of feeling alive in their solitude righteous life.

Quote:

bmiamihk said:

What is your goal? The goal that one day no one will ever buy a cable thinking it will improve on the sound but that it will only look pretty? The goal of putting every company that claims that their cables will improve the sound out of Business? Or the goal is to waste time that you have cause you have nothing better to do then repeat like a parrot what you read over and over and over. I guess its a modern way men are able to interact with other humans and some kind of competition which also is a form of feeling alive in their solitude righteous life.

Click to expand...

Neither. You can buy whatever you want, and there exists a seller for every demand.
For a lot others out there, who are on a limited budget/ do not know better, misleading them into spending money is a big ethical issue.

Thanks for helping.
Quote:

proton007 said:

Neither. You can buy whatever you want, and there exists a seller for every demand.
For a lot others out there, who are on a limited budget/ do not know better, misleading them into spending money is a big ethical issue.

Click to expand...

bmiamihk said:

What is your goal?

Click to expand...

To inform people that cables don't make an objective audible difference.

The goal that one day no one will ever buy a cable thinking it will improve on the sound but that it will only look pretty?

Click to expand...

Look pretty and provide a more appealing length.

The goal of putting every company that claims that their cables will improve the sound out of Business?

Click to expand...

Not out of business, but provide other goods and services to make up the difference. When/if the truth becomes accepted, those companies are going to need to be a little more creative to make profits.

Or the goal is to waste time that you have cause you have nothing better to do then repeat like a parrot what you read over and over and over.

Click to expand...

Sometimes repetition is the only thing that works. People have posted links to studies and offered up scientific evidence to show the effect of psychoacoustics on perception, but some people still want to hold on to the illusion. But hey, that's fine, just as long as new up-and-coming audio enthusiasts get to hear both sides and judge for themselves.

I guess its a modern way men are able to interact with other humans and some kind of competition which also is a form of feeling alive in their solitude righteous life.

Click to expand...

Or, we could just be snarky and take shots at people who are simply having a civil conversation to pass the time. *shrug*

Nice to know you care about others, keep it up.
Quote:

magick man said:

To inform people that cables don't make an objective audible difference. Quote:

The goal that one day no one will ever buy a cable thinking it will improve on the sound but that it will only look pretty?

Click to expand...

Look pretty and provide a more appealing length. Quote:

The goal of putting every company that claims that their cables will improve the sound out of Business?

Click to expand...

Not out of business, but provide other goods and services to make up the difference. When/if the truth becomes accepted, those companies are going to need to be a little more creative to make profits. Quote:

Or the goal is to waste time that you have cause you have nothing better to do then repeat like a parrot what you read over and over and over.

Click to expand...

Sometimes repetition is the only thing that works. People have posted links to studies and offered up scientific evidence to show the effect of psychoacoustics on perception, but some people still want to hold on to the illusion. But hey, that's fine, just as long as new up-and-coming audio enthusiasts get to hear both sides and judge for themselves.
Or, we could just be snarky and take shots at people who are simply having a civil conversation to pass the time. *shrug*

Click to expand...

prog rock man said:

Originally Posted by kiteki /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
 
Lots of talk and no cigars, just link to these cable blind tests already... positive or negative.
 
If they're negative, we can discuss if the blind test was valid or not, how extensive it was, if it was fair, etc.
......

Click to expand...

 
Positive tests here http://www.head-fi.org/t/513481/are-blind-tests-bogus-examples-of-blind-tests-with-positive-results
 
Negative tests here http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 

Click to expand...

 
Thanks a lot for the links you've compiled.
 
 
 

Originally Posted by jnjn /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

Originally Posted by kiteki /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Lots of talk and no cigars, just link to these cable blind tests already... positive or negative.
 
If they're negative, we can discuss if the blind test was valid or not, how extensive it was, if it was fair, etc.

Click to expand...

 
Your statement implies that if they are positive, the tests were valid and above discussion.  That cannot be the case.  If a test comes out positive, it is extremely important to subject it to even MORE scrutiny, as it is significantly diverges from a large body of negatives.
 

Click to expand...

 
My thought process was there's a certain number of negative results and no positive ones.
 
People keep referencing these cable blind tests without being specific, like your above post "a large body of negatives", well when someone links to a negative then we can discuss how valid / extensive / fair it is.  We don't currently need to discuss the positive results if there aren't any. =p  However, we can dicuss the reasons why there aren't any.
 
My hunch and experience on the situation is that the cable subject is more about the scientific view of how cables work plus the lack of positive blind-test results, which has led to the view that they all sound the same.  My hunch is that the amount of cable blind-tests with negative results is limited and most of the tests are flawed.  The reason I think so is that I see people speak of "countless tests" a lot without referencing any specific tests, and when I do see links to specific tests they're usually flawed. 
 
So, here's an example to illustrate my point.
 
When people actually do reference specific blind tests, I've seen this test linked to / held in high esteem - http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm
 
Ok so for starters, the speaker cables used on both rigs are exactly the same, so they're not testing speaker cables in this case.  Now let's skip straight to the test results...
 
 
This means 38 people were involved in the test, each person was given 1 choice as to which system they considered to "sound the best".
 
So, from these results we see 24 individuals claimed to hear a difference, and 10 of them 'correctly' identified the more expensive system as the better sounding one.  I'd assume you'd then take those 10 individuals to the side and keep testing them, right?  To see if they can continue to identify which system is which, with a statistical outcome beyond chance.
 
Instead, they leave these results as they are, satisfied that 14 participants declined, 24 claimed to hear a difference and only 10 selected the expensive system as different.  I'm assuming these results, to them, indicate that the differences in the expensive rig are too subtle for any further investigation, they write "Shouldn't the differences be so evident that it'd be a child's game to pick the best?"
 
In the right situation, you could compare DVD and blu-ray and get 14 people not seeing a difference, 14 preferring how DVD looks, and then discard the 10 which selected blu-ray as the best looking one.
 
In this case, it's much closer to comparing analog film reel to digital blu-ray, actually it's much more subtle than that, but if I go to the cinema I can't tell which one is playing, until I look behind me at the projector booth and see the actual tape reel.  That's doesn't mean there's no difference, just that I can't see it or don't care very much, like 99% of the population that goes to the cinema to watch a movie!  The 1% or less of the population which are videophiles and can tell the difference / care / are more sensitive to the differences (i.e. since they go to the cinema every day and have a fetisch for minor video presentation differences) can't be diluted into the same data pool as the 99% that don't care or can't see a difference like myself.
 
So, this particular blind test came up with a 'negative result', however... all it really proved is that
 
- Audican power cord (power cord)
- Lovan CDP rack (furniture)
- MIT Terminator 3 proline XLR (interconnect cable)
- Wadia 6, VRDS transport, 20 bit (CD player)
- YBA 2A (power conditioner)
- Classe CAP-80 (the speaker amplifier)
 
was favoured by 10 guys over another system in Somolinos, Guadalajara, Spain.
 
The other system was
 
- standard power cord
- standard furniture
- standard red/white RCA interconnect cables
- standard CD player
- no power conditioner
- Behringer A500 speaker amplifier
 
The only interesting components here from my personal point of view are the speaker amplifiers.
 
I'm not surprised 14 people couldn't hear a difference and 10 preferred the Behringer!
 
I'm not cherry-picking a flawed test here, I just covered this particular one because I've seen it linked to many times (for example on an objectivist blog) along with the Meyer & Moran study (which is an equally flawed study, for different reasons).
 
kiteki

Can a company survive by just making audio cables? Its pretty amazing. They have to be pulling in massive profits per cable.
 
You can check out some of the blind tests here: http://redspade-audio.blogspot.com/2010/06/blind-test-results.html (some cables, some amps)
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm

proton007 said:

Can a company survive by just making audio cables? Its pretty amazing. They have to be pulling in massive profits per cable.

Click to expand...

 
I don't know what the niche market of power cables is like but I'd assume that HDMI cables and interconnects (coax, optical, rca) which you see in normal electronics stores are the most successful.  I think Monster has had much more success with their headphones though.  I mean wearing a black Prada suit with an iPhone 4S and flagship Monster headphone seems to be one of "the" status symbols right now, whereas I don't think many people will care if you have a $500 imitation leather snake lying on the floor behind your stereo receiver.  Just speculation.
 
 

proton007 said:

 
You can check out some of the blind tests here: http://redspade-audio.blogspot.com/2010/06/blind-test-results.html  (some cables, some amps)
http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm

Click to expand...

 
~djcarlst
 
- $2.50 blister pack phono cable vs. PSACS Best
- $418 Type "T1" Biwire vs. 16 Gauge Zip Cord
- Type "Z" Biwired Speaker Cable vs. 16 Gauge Zip Cord
- $990 "T2" Speaker Cable vs. 16 Gauge Zip Cord
 
The first test is interconnects, the next three are from "Wired Wisdom: The Great Chicago Cable Caper", I think that's a magazine, if the study isn't actually available the results are semi-fictional.  I went looking for it and found this thread, someone said they couldn't find the magazine, Idk... amusing thread =p http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184&page=10
 
redspade-audio
 
- amp
- pre-amp
- spanish matrix hifi test (in my previous post)
- monster vs opus speaker cables - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=941184
Looks interesting, but I can't find any info on the cables apart from the brand name, and it says they stopped after 8 tests, while playing pool and eating pizza.
- AC power cords
- CD player comparison ($300 Sony versus $1800 player).
- CD "digital transports" CEC vs Marantz
- Stereophile amplifier comparison (Adcom versus VTL) - http://www.stereophile.com/features/113/index.html
- "Front end" comparison
- Integrated amplifier comparison
 

So, there wasn't really any blind testing here of speaker/IEM/headphone cables.  Apart from the Monster vs Opus one (flawed) and the missing magazine.
 
When looking for the Chicago magazine thing, I found this document which was sortof interesting, like claims (on page 5) from Cardas Audio on how to measure a cable... http://andreconsulting.com/Audio%20Equipment%20Snake%20Oil.pdf
 
Cardas says...
 
resistance
capacitance
inductance
conductancev
elocity of propagation
RF radiation and bsorption
mechanical resonance
strand interaction
hysteresish
igh filtering
wavy serial impedance and refections
electrical resonance
dissipation factors
envelope delay
phase distortion
harmonic distortion
piezoelectric effectsh
hall effect
field effect
voltage and current tracking
thermoelectric phenomenon effects
structural return loss
skin effect
corrosion
cross-talk
bridge-tap
interaction of all the above
 

Ok, I found the ~djcarlstrom ABX Chicago magazine thing - http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/Wired%20Wisdom.pdf
 
Haven't read it yet.
 
 
Edit:  Lol ok this is funny
 
 
It starts with "Mr. B" as he's called, a 46 year-old jazz-lover, using $416 USD worth of "exotic bi-wired speaker cable" referred to as "Type T1" thereafter.
 
When starting the ABX Mr. B says "Tom,  I gotta admit I cannot tell them apart.  There's no reason to continue" lol.
 
"Let me remind you Mr. B, you were to do 10 trials!"
 
So... Mr. B was pushed into continuing the test, which lasted for an hour and a half.  He scored 3 out of 10 correct.
 
"After the session, Mr. B looked crushed, likening the experience to his wife cheating on him.  He declined my offer to continue the test without the ABX box, insisting that it was the most sensitive method and further investigation was fruitless"
 
Give me a break... Mr. B!
 
My conclusion:  He had no idea what to look for.  The test is flawed since they don't say what the speaker cable is apart from "exotic bi-wire" whatever that is.
 
 
 
This man is called "Mr. C"... how quaint.
 
"He's a thirty-something year old audio salesman from a nearby high-end shop"
 
In this test we are once again using "Type Z" exotic biwired speaker cables (whatever that is)
 
Mr. C said the differences were vanishingly small and failed the ABX.
 
Moving on...
 
 
 
Now we're presented with "A 21-year old female with musical tastes ranging from Charlie Parker to Mozart"
 
Who's Charlie Parker?  Isn't that the guy in Spiderman...
 
This time we're using a "$990 Type T2 speaker cable" (how informative)
 
After a de-briefing on the high-end speaker and amplifier equipment, the test results for Miss 21 are "1/5, 2/4, 7/16" and the author scored 9/16, "all well within the bounds of chance", yes.
 
 
The post analysis says everything was within chance and the 16-gauge "zip cord" (USD $15) could not be distinguished from the expensive cables (with names like T2 or Type Z to keep the cables anonymous and not assassinate the companies I'm guessing).
 
I think this test was performed in 1994 (18 years ago!), it used three subjects and the information cited at http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_wire.htm is in conflict with these results, most likely fictional.
 
The magazine says four people (including the author) were involved in the tests, ~djcarlst says "1, 7, 2" and for the second test (Type Z cable) says "70 / 139 = 50%" (??)
 
The magazine article says the Type Z cable test was "12 trials in 45 minutes", that's it.  So the ABX data at ~djcarlst is most likely fictional, and thus would invalidate all data at that site and linking to it, not only speaker cables.
 

---

 
Well that was fun way to spend half my Wednesday... looking forward to the next speaker cable blind-test / ABX link out of the the supposed ocean of negative results.

I can conduct a binaural ABX comparison test- only if I could somehow obtain some product samples from cable manufacturers for HD650, that is. 

This one looks recent : https://sites.google.com/site/audiosocietyofminnesota/Home/april-2012-speaker-cable-listening-test