Quote:



Yes, "trusting your own senses" is a sort of paradigm, in this context. Again, "ideology" doesn't quite express what I mean: more of like a worldview, with differences not only in theories of how things operate but also in what building blocks you use to describe things, epistemological differences (whether something really exists), etc. Everybody has a worldview about audio, even those who don't have a theory about how it all works. If you hear something and you therefore assert it to exist, you are making assertions about existence and about fallibility that people operating from other worldviews may not do - perhaps assert different things, or use different ways to express the same thing.

Going back to my original reply, my point is that while it is fair to criticize somebody as dogmatic if they do not even allow the possibility of the existence of an effect, it is unfair to criticize them simply because of theory or ideology. There's an important distinction between ideology and dogmatism.

Quote:



On the contrary, there are many examples - from the history of mainstream science, no less - where (in at least the modern view) expectation bias and placebo effects led to repeated measurements, large research developments, and eventually entire scientific theories, which turned out to be solely in the eye of the beholder. I touched on this in an earlier post. I'll quote myself just once here
Quote:



Quote:



Agreed; I suspect I'll need to pick up some Zus or Nitrogens or something at some point and see where that winds up going. So far my only dabbling has been with the Quails, and while I do get warm fuzzies about them, I'm not really prepared to listen to them critically.

Quote:



There might have been some negative tests done at some point, I'll need to dig up some AES articles at some point and see what they've said. For the most part though, since cable differences lay outside the paradigms of modern audio engineering, it's not really an important problem for anybody, and therefore nobody researches it.

Or alternatively, you could argue that everybody on the objectivist side got convinced of their arguments 20 years ago and see no reason to revisit the issue. The original question came, and died, with the introduction of the first ABX tester and the AES articles relating to it.

Quote:



I'm still not sure I understand. Also, let's stick to amplifiers for a moment and not sources. It would seem to me that the issue is not the absolute level of THD for an amp, but the differences between the THD for one amp vs. another. Aren't those differences so negligible in a measurement sense that they should not be able to be heard? Is there something else other than THD that is being heard that explains the differences between the sound of amps? If so, can it be measured? Has it been? What I am trying to find out is whether someone can point to something that has been measured with amps that will explain why one might sound different from another (excluding different tubes)?

Quote:



Hi Phil,

I don't have a lot of time here, but maybe you'll like this.

I'm aware that in the late 80's Bob Carver challenged the editors of Stereophile magazine that he could match the sound of their favorite amplifier. They took him up on this. This has been referred to as something like the "Carver Audio Shootout"--it was kind of famous. Bob analyzed the transfer characteristics of their $10,000+ Conrad-Johnson (sp?) tube mono-blocks, and went to Radio Shack and purchased a small handful of parts. He modified his ~$400 solid state amplifer and they could *not* hear a difference in a blind test. The model of amplifier was 1.5, if people wished to have the same tube sound that fooled the editors of Stereophile magazine, they could purchase the 1.5T. Internally, this was known as the Carver Tweak...that amounted to a couple of resistors and a couple of capacitors.


JF

Quote:



Pardon me for being thick (maybe I'm too focused on Thanksgiving and football), but I don't understand the point you are making. Also, I'm not sure how it is responsive to my questions.

Quote:



Sorry, that was the best I could do. Enjoy Thanksgiving, football, and your stereo setup.


JF

Quote:



Wow, you just said a mouthful. Enjoy.

Anyone else want to come to Mr. Ferrier's aid?

Quote:



OK, fair enough, but I think that the cable-believers also believe the Zu colors the sound, no? (As well as most other aftermarket cables.) My assertion was that, b/c Zu did not submit a sample for measurement, it is a possibility that their cable has strange (R,L,C) values. Posts later by JaZZ may have indicated this is not the case.
Quote:



I certainly am skeptical, you are not mischaracterizing my beliefs. My skepticism is based on a few things:
1) My personal experience with ABX of audio codecs (which have a measurable effect on the music waveform)
2) My analog circuits and physics classes in university, which have taught me what (R,L,C) do to a cable, taught me about skin effect, taught me about RF interference, etc. (I am a junior in Computer Engineering.)
3) My own admittedly limited experience with headphones and speakers -- still more than many here -- how many can claim to understand how a crossover works and how many have assembled one?
4) The lack of any non-anecdotal evidence that cables have an effect

I do not own any headphone cables because I refuse to purchase them given my understanding of (A) audio (B) electronics.
Quote:



Not double-blind, reproducible. And not to "skeptics", to scientists.
Quote:



An independent scientist should be capable of reproducing your measurements given the same equipment. So you should describe the equipment and conditions.
Quote:



I said nothing of the sort and now you're just being churlish.
Quote:



Out of three skeptics I saw posting in the thread -- me, JF, and rodbac -- two of us have said we believe cables could cause differences. I suspect even JF would admit poorly-designed cables could cause differences, however he doesn't think the Zu Mobius causes differences. As to whether we know what signal characteristics are responsible for the sonic differences with amps, yes. Increased high frequency amplification = "bright". Increased mids = "detailed". Increased midbass = "hey Bob this sure is good" (to all the non-audiophiles out there )

Quote:



Phil,

Have you thought about asking the amplifier manufactures your questions? If it's difficult to get solid answers, you may ask yourself why. I could try to answer this for you, but I think you need to figure it out yourself.


JF

Quote:



Then what he said is correct: you consider skeptics to have an ideology but yourself to not have one.
Quote:



You *believe* cables cause a difference in sound that is not ascribable to psychosomatic effect. I and other skeptics *believe* that there are no non-explainable (i.e. non-measurable) differences in sound caused by cables which is not a result of psychosomatic effect. We both have beliefs, however mine is based on the scientific method and is objective, yours is based on your own experience, which science tells us is a poor judge (due to human psychology) and is subjective.
Quote:



Yes, actually, they are trained and have things like: several levels of studies, first in animals, then in humans; independent corroboration of effectiveness; peer review; etc.
Quote:



Then why is the JND at minimum 0.2 dB according to studies but measuring instruments can easily resolve hundredths of a dB?
Quote:



Unless the impression is unexplainable by scientific theory, but the imagined effect is explainable by scientific theory, aka the psychosomatic effect.
Quote:



ob·jec·tive adj
3. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair
So we are burdened by ideology? Right. Our ideology is "Results should be verifiable, and then once they are, we should attempt to explain them. If our theory doesn't fit with verifiable results, our theory is wrong." Your ideology is "I know what I hear, and I cannot be making it up, so I am right, ad that is that."
Quote:



Amps have measurably different frequency responses given input, this is the "transfer characteristic" JF was referring to. Carver was able to measure the frequency response of an amp and then modify his own amp to reproduce the sound. Thus the science of why amps sound differently is fairly well understood. Cables don't have measurably different frequency responses.

Quote:



No, because they are not the ones taking the positions that you have in this thread. I'm trying to understand your position and find out whether it is sound, and I'm having difficulty. You seem to assert with absolute certainty that different cables do not sound different (let's exclude poorly constructed cables) and you seem to assert as support for this proposition that cables to not measure differently. It seems to me, on the other hand, that you acknowledge that amps may sound different, yet it seems to me that they also would not measure differently (at thresholds that would be audible). You have not yet identified any way in which they measure differently (unless I missed it.) Thus, I am asking for an explanation of this apparent inconsistency, and you seem to be intent on dodging it. Why not humor me and provide it, even if it is fairly rudimentary? Or on the other hand, you could simply say: "I don't know."

Quote:



John, would you agree with this? Is this what you were saying?

Quote:



Okay, I'm going to try in a couple of hours (when I'm home). Amplifiers are not so clear cut as cables (that is why I've avoided them). Maybe in the mean time, you could humor me (since I assume you've passed the California state bar exam) with the legal definition of the word scam.


*EDIT*

Transducer THD: ~0.1% (probably, very best case)
Amplifier THD: <0.01%
Cable THD: <0.00001%

Amplifiers have measureable distortion. The best answer I've heard (credit: John Curl) that amplifiers sound differently is upper frequency harmonic distortion (specifically, high odd harmonics). Again, cables have *no* distortion.

*Please* think about what <0.00001% (-120dB) THD means, especially in light of transducers that distort ~0.1%.

From what I see, the cable business is *not* a scam. They simply don't make a claim that there is an improvement in sound.


JF

Quote:



We seem to be like two ships passing in the night. If two amps both measure at the same amount of THD (let's say for the sake of argument .01%), would that mean that they could not sound differently? If amps sound differently because of "upper frequency harmonic distortion," would they measure differently? What would the magnitude of the difference have to be, in terms of measurements, for it to be audible?

Quote:



Does the Zu color the sound, or does it in fact more accurately pass the amplifier's original signal through to the speakers?
I appreciate your schooling (BTW, I build my own speaker systems - including the crossover networks - so at least one of us here has some understanding of that type of thing), and the experience that you've had with audio, but I'm sceptical that you have anywhere near the experience with high-end audio gear that the majority of the participants of this web sight do. And that's kind of what I was gettting at when I inquired about the specific types and brands of audio equipment that you have had personal experience with - I didn't start hearing the differences in speaker wires and interconnects until I started upgrading my equipment to higher-end gear... the other stuff I had didn't have the resolution to reveal those differences. I first learned about high- end audio through such publications as Stereophile magazine, and when they woud talk about hearing differences in wires and cables, I too was sceptical. But like I said, when I started getting some higher-end equipment into the house, differences in wiring and cabling were became readily apparent, and then I understood what all the hoopla was about. And I suspect that perhaps you, and most of the other measurement/ABT folks in this thread, haven't had much- if any- experience with higher-end gear. So how about it - would you care to share with us the specific types/brands of amps, speakers, sources and cabling that you've had personal experience with? And how about the the other measurement/ABT naysayers out there... care to let us in on the hi-rez gear that you own/have had experience with? Because IMO, if it ain't hi-rez, you ain't going to hear the effects that cabling has on the sound that comes out of your speakers and or headphones (which are really just speakers that are little).