[Tubewin]

A cable can only degrade a signal, it can't improve it. It either conducts the signal across with fidelity, or it doesn't. For a cable to convey a degraded signal, it either needs to be defective in manufacture, or a wire that isn't suitable for the intended use (length of run / impedance). There are six dollar Amazon Basics interconnects that are well manufactured and designed enough to conduct the signal properly. It's drop dead easy to find an audibly transparent interconnect. It only becomes more complicated with very long runs of speaker cable.

If one cable sounds different to you, it's likely that the comparison has been conducted without controls (sighted, no level matching, too few trials or too much time between samples). I'm going to go out on a very sturdy limb and say that you are basing your opinion on sighted impressions, not an actual listening test. The only other option is that there is something wrong with one of your cables and you should return it for a refund.

If I was not a fan of World's Best Cables, do you think Amazon Basics XLR's would convert me to a cable non believer? If xlr's can't improve a signal, why would I need to level match two different xlr's, honest question.

 

[bigshot]

The differences can be calculated mathematically and measured, and they fall far below the audible threshold. Surely you've heard this before. I can't be the first one to tell you this.

Order a set of Amazon cables and get someone to swap them in without telling you someday so you don't know. Hide it from yourself.

 

[Tubewin]

The differences can be calculated mathematically and measured, and they fall far below the audible threshold. Surely you've heard this before. I can't be the first one to tell you this.

I've heard rhetoric similar to yours from Audio Science Review. They deny everything that can't be measured. It's an interesting approach to a hobby. Not an approach I would take, but I respect it. My first experience with Topping products has repulsed me to other side of the bell curve on the whole "measurements over all" philosophy. So, I trust what I hear, not graphs or measurements. I hope we can find middle ground.

 

[bigshot]

You appear to misunderstand. There are differences, and they can be measured. The problem is that human ears are not able to discern differences that minute. The problem isn't the quality of the equipment, it's the limits of human hearing. There have been oodles of controlled listening tests that have confirmed this. See the links in my sig and the first post in this thread... https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/

If you make an effort to understand how things work, and you go to the trouble of doing a little testing and research, you can pretty easily find out the truth. If you depend on high end audio sales pitch, you're going to spend a lot of money on stuff you can't hear. They're going to tell you that better numbers on a spec sheet always sound better. They don't. If it reaches audible transparency, they sound exactly the same.

The truth doesn't always lie halfway between two opposing opinions. Sometimes people mislead you to get you to give them your money.

 

[Tubewin]

You appear to misunderstand. There are differences, and they can be measured. The problem is that human ears are not able to discern differences that minute. The problem isn't the quality of the equipment, it's the limits of human hearing. There have been oodles of controlled listening tests that have confirmed this. See the links in my sig and the first post in this thread... https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/

If you make an effort to understand how things work, and you go to the trouble of doing a little testing and research, you can pretty easily find out the truth. If you depend on high end audio sales pitch, you're going to spend a lot of money on stuff you can't hear. They're going to tell you that better numbers on a spec sheet always sound better. They don't. If it reaches audible transparency, they sound exactly the same.

The truth doesn't always lie halfway between two opposing opinions. Sometimes people mislead you to get you to give them your money.

There are times that I hear improvements with cheaper gear than boutique gear... hence why I felt compelled to share it in this thread, appropriately titled "Mogami interconnects". So I don't think it's misleading or that I was misled when I say that I preferred the much cheaper Mogami Gold over the Silver Dragon xlr's which costs more than five times the amount. If cheaper gear can sound better(subjectively) than more expensive gear, I would think it would be an occasion to celebrate as audiophiles, not used as an opportunity to further an ideology of measurements and graphs. Again, I'm not hear to debate whether cables matter or not, I'm on head-fi to share the journey.

 

[bigshot]

If you aren't applying controls, like bind comparison, short switching and level matching, what you had for lunch or how you are feeling that day can affect what you believe you hear. Humans aren't machines. We have biases and perceptual errors. If you are judging equipment, you need to make sure that you're comparing equipment and not your own perceptions.

It's really simple. It's how drugs are tested for effectiveness. It isn't a religious belief. It's common sense.

Now if you want to just go by feelings, that is fine. Go by feelings. But don't attribute your personal preferences to a wire. The wire doesn't have anything to do with it. As I said at the beginning. It appears that your impression and preference of one wire over another has nothing to do with the wire itself. There's no reason to believe it does. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any two commercially available interconnects that sound better or worse than each other.

 

[gregorio]

I've heard rhetoric similar to yours from Audio Science Review.

You should also have heard something similar at school! It’s not rhetoric, it’s a century and a half of solid basic science and engineering, upon which the modern world relies!

They deny everything that can't be measured.

Not just them but scientists and engineers for a 150 years or so! If there were something that couldn’t be measured with signals/cables, how would telecoms, audio and AV industries exist, particularly modern high speed comms?

It's an interesting approach to a hobby.

What’s really interesting is that you seem to think that the trillions of dollars spent in telecoms and music/audio/AV industries over numerous decades is somehow a “hobby”!

My first experience with Topping products has repulsed me to other side of the bell curve on the whole "measurements over all" philosophy.

“Measurements over all” is not a philosophy, it’s what audio is! If this wasn’t the case, there would be no digital audio or in fact digital age at all. Are you really claiming the digital age doesn’t exist based on nothing other than your “first experience with Topping”?

There are times that I hear improvements with cheaper gear than boutique gear... hence why I felt compelled to share it in this thread, appropriately titled "Mogami interconnects".

You felt “compelled to share” what you thought you experienced, in a science discussion forum? That’s perfectly fine if you’re going to ask questions about it but obviously isn’t OK if you’re going to use that experience as a fallacious basis to contradict science.

I'm on head-fi to share the journey.

The journey has already been taken, by Maxwell, Heaviside and hundreds of thousands of other scientists and engineers for over 150 years. Why would you want to share your journey, that’s obviously so seriously flawed, here?

G

 

[Tubewin]

You should also have heard something similar at school! It’s not rhetoric, it’s a century and a half of solid basic science and engineering, upon which the modern world relies!

Not just them but scientists and engineers for a 150 years or so! If there were something that couldn’t be measured with signals/cables, how would telecoms, audio and AV industries exist, particularly modern high speed comms?

What’s really interesting is that you seem to think that the trillions of dollars spent in telecoms and music/audio/AV industries over numerous decades is somehow a “hobby”!

“Measurements over all” is not a philosophy, it’s what audio is! If this wasn’t the case, there would be no digital audio or in fact digital age at all. Are you really claiming the digital age doesn’t exist based on nothing other than your “first experience with Topping”?

You felt “compelled to share” what you thought you experienced, in a science discussion forum? That’s perfectly fine if you’re going to ask questions about it but obviously isn’t OK if you’re going to use that experience as a fallacious basis to contradict science.

The journey has already been taken, by Maxwell, Heaviside and hundreds of thousands of other scientists and engineers for over 150 years. Why would you want to share your journey, that’s obviously so seriously flawed, here?

G

"I'm not hear to debate whether cables matter or not", I did not think this was hard to understand. Reading comprehension is not your strong suit?

Why are you pushing your ideology on people(me) who do not want anything to do with it? This thread is about Mogami interconnects, not whether or not you believe cables make a difference... It's going to keep coming back to "someone's" lack of reading comprehension...

"You felt “compelled to share” what you thought you experienced, in a science discussion forum", wait this was a science discussion forum? I did not get the memo. care to show me where it says that? Anywhere in the title or in the original poster's comment?

My question is if it isn't a "science discussion forum" (whatever that means), why are you hijacking this thread?

 

[gregorio]

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit?

Now that’s funny because:

Why are you pushing your ideology on people(me) who do not want anything to do with it?

I am not pushing my ideology, I’m pushing the facts/science and if you “do not want anything to do with” the facts/science, what on earth are you doing posting/arguing here in the Sound Science forum?

… wait this was a science discussion forum? I did not get the memo. care to show me where it says that?

You mean apart from the home page of this subforum and at the top of every page? Talk about reading comprehension, it’s even in Bold!!

So your quip about reading comprehension sets such a new height for hypocrisy, it’s laughable!

My question is if it isn't a "science discussion forum" (whatever that means),

It should have been, BEFORE you “shared” your nonsense.

why are you hijacking this thread?

Because you are hijacking this forum!!!

G

 

[bigshot]

Why are you pushing your ideology on people(me) who do not want anything to do with it?

This is not ideology. It's scientific fact. If you ask a question like this in a forum titled "Sound Science" (clearly labeled at the top of the page), you're going to get an answer that is based on scientific fact. If you want to look at the differences between cables in an ideological way, the rest of Head-Fi will accommodate that. It's silly to post subjective impressions here, and it's even sillier to expect not to be corrected when your personal ideology doesn't conform to scientific facts as they are established and well known for over a century.

If you were blathering without realizing you weren't in the blathering forum, it would be a good idea for you beat a hasty retreat to a forum where blather is encouraged.

 

[Tubewin]

Now that’s funny because:

I am not pushing my ideology, I’m pushing the facts/science and if you “do not want anything to do with” the facts/science, what on earth are you doing posting/arguing here in the Sound Science forum?

You mean apart from the home page of this subforum and at the top of every page? Talk about reading comprehension, it’s even in Bold!!

So your quip about reading comprehension sets such a new height for hypocrisy, it’s laughable!

It should have been, BEFORE you “shared” your nonsense.

Because you are hijacking this forum!!!

G

So you and people who share your beliefs did in fact hijack this thread? The original post had NOTHING to do with your "cables don't matter, measurements overall ideology" correct? This is a problem. How do you have the gall to point the finger at me when FACTUALLY this thread wasn't started or intended to further your beliefs? Reading comprehension... and yet, "I'm not hear to debate whether cables matter or not" still went over your head. We might need a moderator for this... this hijacking has gone long enough...

I retract what I said, didn't realize this was a thread under "sound science".

 

[Tubewin]

This is not ideology. It's scientific fact. If you ask a question like this in a forum titled "Sound Science" (clearly labeled at the top of the page), you're going to get an answer that is based on scientific fact. If you want to look at the differences between cables in an ideological way, the rest of Head-Fi will accommodate that. It's silly to post subjective impressions here, and it's even sillier to expect not to be corrected when your personal ideology doesn't conform to scientific facts as they are established and well known for over a century.

If you were blathering without realizing you weren't in the blathering forum, it would be a good idea for you beat a hasty retreat to a forum where blather is encouraged.

WHERE in the original post and title of this thread does it say "SCIENCE DISCUSSION FORUM". This measurements thing is really getting out of hand...

Ah I see it. To be fair I didn't stumble on this thread from that subtopic "sound science". I see, I found myself in the "wrong neighborhood". Well, I better get back to the "other side" of head-fi.

 

[gregorio]

So you and people who share your beliefs did in fact hijack this thread?

The science/facts is not a belief! This is the Sound Science forum and “this thread” was posted in here in the sound science forum. Therefore, responding with the facts/science is obviously not l hijacking the thread. You on the other hand are hijacking it, because “sharing” your fallacious experiences is not science. How on earth can you not know ANY of this?

WHERE in the original post and title of this thread does it say "SCIENCE DISCUSSION FORUM"

Again, at the top of every page, it says in bold: Sound Science!!

This measurements thing is really getting out of hand...

Digital audio IS a measurement, jeez! And if the previous height of hypocrisy wasn’t enough, you’ve take it even higher, well done! This (FALSE) statement of yours is a belief. So it’s OK “you pushing your ideology on people” here but it’s not OK for me to push the actual facts/science in the Sound Science forum? You seem to be having a particularly bad day, at least it’s good for a laugh!

G

 

[Tubewin]

The science/facts is not a belief! This is the Sound Science forum and “this thread” was posted in here in the sound science forum. Therefore, responding with the facts/science is obviously not l hijacking the thread. You on the other hand are hijacking it, because “sharing” your fallacious experiences is not science. How on earth can you not know ANY of this?

Again, at the top of every page, it says in bold: Sound Science!!

Digital audio IS a measurement, jeez! And if the previous height of hypocrisy wasn’t enough, you’ve take it even higher, well done! This (FALSE) statement of yours is a belief. So it’s OK “you pushing your ideology on people” here but it’s not OK for me to push the actual facts/science in the Sound Science forum? You seem to be having a particularly bad day, at least it’s good for a laugh!

G

Yep, but to be fair, the title was Mogami Interconnects, thought this was under cables, not sound science.

 

[gregorio]

Yep, but to be fair, the title was Mogami Interconnects, thought this was under cables, not sound science.

Oh dear, and after everything you stated about my reading comprehension, that’s funny!

Even if this were the Cables forum, you still think is OK to “push your (false) ideology on people”, contrary to the actual facts?

G