[inexactscience]

And?
That's your idea of irrefutable proof? Did you listen to all 4 cables and hear no difference? If yes what was the point of going any further? If you did hear a difference and obtained those measurements then you have only proved your measurements showed no difference. That's about as relevant as weighing each cable and basing your conclusions on the differences in weights.
I find it impossible to believe that after all this rigorous experimenting with so many different cables by so many different people that there wasn't at least 1 case where a difference was heard.

I have too much on my plate to do proper research at the moment, but here's my recollections (ie, take the following with a grain of salt).

There are studies that show that people can hear a difference in DACs and cables, demonstrations, too. Problem is that none of these studies followed a replicable method and all had significant issues with their methodology.

Personally, I've used several different cables for IEMs, ranging from "gold" to silver or copper from Litz to the cheapest Chinese import. The only time I heard a difference was when I wanted to hear a difference. When I actually tested myself, even though I knew I'd changed a cable, there was no difference. It was all in my head.

Funny, I stopped impulsively buying cables after that.

It's not scientific, no. Audio appreciation is - to me - an inexact science. Audio reproduction and the physics (for lack of a better word) behind it are not.

I got suckered, sure. But unlike others, I don't need to go all Biff Tanner to justify my purchases or feel better about myself.

 

[chef8489]

Why? I'm not trying to prove anything. If you can't hear any difference in cables good for you. If I or anyone else does hear a difference good for us.

Saying you hear a difference and not willing to do a proper dbx test and measurements disqualifies you in the sound science forum. You can take the placebo and talk all about it in the reg forums.

 

[lasker98]

Saying you hear a difference and not willing to do a proper dbx test and measurements disqualifies you in the sound science forum. You can take the placebo and talk all about it in the reg forums.

Wow. This is like an alternate reality in this corner of Head-Fi.
Bye bye.

 

[Tachyon88]

Wow. This is like an alternate reality in this corner of Head-Fi.
Bye bye.

Lucky for you, you can choose any placebo reality you want ! ;p

 

[chef8489]

Wow. This is like an alternate reality in this corner of Head-Fi.
Bye bye.

Well the other portion is all about money while this portion is about science. Don't let the door hit you as you leave.

 

[inexactscience]

Wow. This is like an alternate reality in this corner of Head-Fi.
Bye bye.

Why do you think this is like an "alternate reality", though?

 

[redrol]

[edit] about 10 posts too late

Cables are scams. If you want to argue the cable is non microphonic to the point it has zero mass and floats in the ambient air currents.. nice! If you want to argue it is unbreakable and will last 50 years... cool. If you want to argue you like wearing a blingy necklace consisting of an IEM cable... nice! Anything else is snake oil scam territory.

 

[redrol]

[edit] my posting is not in order, my apologies

 

[bigshot]

This being the Sound Science part of Head-Fi I naively assumed the "Science" part implied at least some minimal effort at experimentation since experiments are such a huge part of science.

Most of us here in Sound Science perform controlled listening tests, some of us are even experienced in precise measurements. You might have some things to learn about science yourself, but you won't learn anything when you come out swinging like that. You'll just get ground into the dirt and run off butt hurt.

I suggest you look at this post and read it. It's a good place to start.

TESTING AUDIOPHILE CLAIMS AND MYTHS https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/

You also might find the links in my sig file eye opening as well.

EDIT:

Sounds like a classic case of expectation bias to me.

In this case, we are judging you, not sound quality. We have that right because you entered this thread with a chip on your shoulder judging us. I've just handed you a place to start that will help you integrate into this group. If you don't want to make the effort, then I reserve the right to think the same way of you as the other posters do.

If there is anything in those articles you don't understand, we would be happy to explain it. If you question any of the conclusions, we will give you evidence to back it up. I have no intention of just throwing stupid insults back and forth. If you choose that route, you're on your own and the grinding into the dirt and butt hurt can commence.

EDIT AGAIN:

Wow. This is like an alternate reality in this corner of Head-Fi. Bye bye.

Aww... I had already written this whole post before I noticed you'd left. Goodbye! Sorry about your butt hurt. Feel free to tell everyone in other parts of Head-Fi how utterly horrible we are in Sound Science. That's what everyone does when they drop in here and say dumb things and get their hat handed to them.

 

[inexactscience]

[edit] about 10 posts too late

Cables are scams. If you want to argue the cable is non microphonic to the point it has zero mass and floats in the ambient air currents.. nice! If you want to argue it is unbreakable and will last 50 years... cool. If you want to argue you like wearing a blingy necklace consisting of an IEM cable... nice! Anything else is snake oil scam territory.

I think part of the problem is that the approach to the issue is somewhat backward, at least in terms of the title of this thread.

Beyond that, I think there's a lot of talking over one another, and the actual point is lost.

So, what is the actual point? What do we really want to know?

It seems to start as "Do cables make an audible difference?"

And then there's a second aspect which comes in that I think starts arguments: "Do cables make an audible difference to me?"

When we ask if cables make an audible difference, we must also answer the question, "How do we know if cables make an audible difference?"

That question is easily addressed: measure it. The technology is there, and it's more precise than human hearing.

This also allows us to know the answer to a related question: "How could cables make an audible difference?"

Again, this is an answerable question. The short version is that if the cable represents a change in resistance, inductance, or length (and your cable isn't long or short enough to do that), it may raise or lower the voltage it delivers to the transducer by comparison, changing the output volume only. Impedance also plays a role if the transducer has varying impedance across different frequencies AND the cable resistance (characteristic impedance?) is high.

However, high cable resistance (characteristic impedance?) is categorically undesirable. Why? Because the output would vary depending the transducer. Imagine that you make sunscreen, but it doesn't provide the same UV protection to any two people. Some people would be fine, others burned and no way to tell who would burn or who would be fine ahead of time.

Worse still, unpredictable changes in certain frequencies by a transducer would significantly impair the ability for an end user to accurately reproduce the source sound. He or she would have to impedance match or EQ to get the desired end product. A cable manufacturer would have to be a colossal schmuk to make a cable that would have unpredictable results based what gear the end user had; there would not be happy customers. You wouldn't have a product that could reproduce the same result in almost any scenario.

All of the above consequences, by the way, are measurable. We would know if they occurred, because we would see changes in the transducer frequency response. That we have someone measuring cables which shows no changes to the frequency response gives strong evidence that those cables do not make any changes to the sound characteristics.

Frankly, I'm not aware of any cable - that isn't f'd up (ie, defective) in some way - that produces a measurable difference.

But none of the above answers the question: "Do cables make an audible difference to me?"

As I wrote previously I had thought I had heard differences in cables, when I wanted there to be a difference. I'm human, however, and that means I'm subject to cognitive biases, such as expectation bias as I just wrote, confirmation bias, the placebo effect, and more.

When someone isn't cognizant of these biases or how they skew our perceptions, I believe that's when we get someone who has verified to themselves that the answer is "yes" cables make a difference. This is where I think we get the Biff Tanners coming in and arguing because they are answering one question (rightly, I would say, because that's what they experienced), and aren't aware that others are discussing a completely different series of questions. Questions which have specific, measurable answers.

One question I have for those who do believe cables make an audible difference: how could a cable make an audible difference that isn't measurable in some way?

I've never seen a satisfactory answer to that one.

Night everyone and thanks for coming to my screed.

 

[bigshot]

If there is an audible difference, the best way to prove that is in a blind, level matched, direct A/B switched listening test. If it's audible at all, it will be audible in a controlled listening test. No manufacturer I know of willingly submits their product to public blind listening tests. They know what the outcome will be. So they pepper their website with "unsolicited testimonials from satisfied customers" full of outright bologna- the kind of unsupported claims the manufacturers themselves would be opening themselves up to a lawsuit if they said it themselves. The whole high end audio world is driven by the marketing departments- retail stores, websites, magazines, reviewers. The truth is Amazon Basics cables work as good as any expensive interconnect you can buy, a $10 Apple dongle DAC sounds as good as the most expensive DAC you can buy, and a cheap cMoy Altoids tin headphone amp does the job perfectly as well as long as your headphones are designed to work with standard headphone amps. Midrange and even budget equipment sounds better now than it ever has. It's gotten to the point where you should shop for features, personal preference and usability, not sound quality.

 

[KeithPhantom]

not sound quality

Except in the world of transducers, where we can’t make these follow simple compensation curves or even agree which one is the best approach.

 

[bigshot]

There was a recent study that showed that headphone price didn't correlate with quality. And it's possible to EQ midrange headphones to sound as good as high end ones. Speakers cost more in general.

It's possible to not spend a lot if you know what you are looking for and shop wisely.

 

[Steve999]

There was a recent study that showed that headphone price didn't correlate with quality. And it's possible to EQ midrange headphones to sound as good as high end ones. Speakers cost more in general.

It's possible to not spend a lot if you know what you are looking for and shop wisely.

Is this the study?

https://asa.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1121/1.4984044

I predict that some day, there will be headphones that you can use with NO headphone cables, have excellent sound quality, and a built in DAC, EQ and headphone amp. You will be able to further fine tune them with a mobile app. You will be able to stream to them using nearly any streaming service. You will be able to cancel out ambient noise so that you can more fully enjoy high dynamic range content and hear finer details at reasonable volumes. You will be able to use them with a voice-activated smart assistant if you choose. The on-board EQ will adapt to volume level and how good the seal is. They will be ultra-comfortable and have excellent sound quality. Yes! I predict it! How cool is that? My friends, that will be the day!

 

[bigshot]

Welcome to the future, Steve999! You're soaking in it!