amirm's request of testing the ability to discern the sound of different wire.

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by skwoodwiva, Mar 31, 2018.
Page 1 of 7
2 3 4 5 6 7
Next
 
Last
  1. skwoodwiva
    skwoodwiva said: ↑
    But the one type of silver on one channel vs pure on the other should not have caused harshness to be one one side of the room...

    amirm's response:
    Unfortunately you can be convinced that is the case even if the sound has not changed. Next time you perform this type of test have a loved one switch the cables, or not every day. Have them keep a log and you do the same as to whether you think there is a silver cable or not. At the end of the seven days, see what percentage you got right. In other words, make the test blind so that your perception of what is what does not impact the test outcome.

    To motivate your loved one and you to do the test, I will offer you $50 Amazon gift card to perform the test. Doesn't matter what the outcome is. You will get the $50. Just post the two logs when you are done and I will send you the gift card. Deal?
    Founder, Audio Science Review

    Basic plan:
    Great idea, but I have an easier one.
    I was going to make a nice cable for my Sony cans. So I make 3.
    1)Kimber, OFC, TFE jacket, 19 ga
    2)plated silver on 1 channel & Kimber the other.
    3) the Opposite-redundent not used.
    I could ID them by marks on plug shaft.

    The cables should be ready in a day or two.

    The test equipment is ready
    https://www.head-fi.org/posts/14140532/
    Screenshot_20180331-103618.png

    Does anyone have advice on a better way to Eq my phones than just playing a test record? Mine is not very good anyway.
    Would anybody post a many band test record?
    Ahh, a resource, an Audiophile of a high stature!
    https://www.head-fi.org/posts/14142737/

    I ask all commers to try his online blind test, not the AB testing. You cannot AB well unless you love the source music. The db, pitch, level discernment one.
    .5 db, 10c, 12k (sad 61 now, oh well), 2 ms & 65 db dynamic range.
    Report here no need for a zillion runs I will believe you.

    "
    @edgeworth
    Head-Fier
    Joined: Jan 18, 2014
    Posts: 75
    Likes: 18
    Can someone point me to any recent studies that have followed up very old AT&T work on training people to hear differences?

    I vaguely remember an old AT&T or Bell Labs study showing that people who could not identify a low frequency tone mixed in with noise were able to reliable identify the sound after it had been shown to them in non-blind conditions first?

    Also I wonder if audio engineers have databases that allow meta-studies of their work?

    I'm thinking that in this age of big data that the potential for discovering subtle but persistent effects is there.

    I'm minded of this when looking at the new biology studies of genes and intelligence. Many small scale studies could not find effects that were significant but when combined with other studies people have managed to publish studies (usually with enormous sample sizes on the order 500k or 1M participants) showing clear links between certain genes and a) educational attainment and b) IQ in serious bio journals.

    I rememberonce looking at a large cable test that seemed to show negative results but when I looked through the data it was clear that a subset of listeners could -- at statistically significant levels -- tell which cable was which. There was no followup nor paper on this and the people doing the test didn't respond to queries from me. But I haven't seen many studies that are large enough and recombinable enough to allow one to use the most sophisticated stats to ferret out subset effects. I am not an audio engineer though I work with large scale statistical data. So I'd appreciate it if an expert could give me some references.

    Thanks.
    "

    Ehh, Ni! IMG_20180401_025333652.jpg
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
  2. Glmoneydawg
    You sir are very brave.
     
  3. skwoodwiva
    Ni!
    I have always had acute & good herring! Do not abandon me now, slippery bastid

    More bio I neglected to include & why I mention Jon Risch.

    I was 16 when I walked into an audiophile shop and was mesmerized...
    My best forrey into audio was in 94 in NJ. Tops was closing a hi end Sony ES show room.
    I had bought the Sony pyramids
    http://www.audioreview.com/product/speakers/floorstanding-speakers/sony/ss-m7.html
    2- TAn Es 110w mosfets
    http://www.audioreview.com/product/amplification/amplifiers/sony/ta-n90es.html
    As well as the Sony
    DVPs9000 dvd player as a drive only & a good DAC- tubed.
    For 5 grand. Blew me away, Dam$ they were making great prototypes back then.
    I know my stuff & am not wealthy.

    Then there was the tweaks...
    You know wire physics is funny, when I first heard from an audiophile "freak" years ago that the silver plated copper conductors souned harsh in the top end, really what a nut.

    It is cheap to be had teflon salvage wire. Well after comparing this interconnect that I made to a pair of pure silver, again homemade, I found statement true.
    Yet it was only after upgrading all wire, everywhere to silver that I was sure. I put the old plated wire on one channel & the pure stuff on the other. The system was worth 18000.00 (more stuff added from other Tops) retail in '95. All Sony ES bought on sale. Go figure....
    The nut was Jon Risch.

    Now at 60 I am happy enough with my Sony mdr, Android, UAPP and 3 TB of DSD to fone, Arts whatnot.

    Why am I here? The biggy.
    Now I do know of a study done in 2001 proving hearing acuity in .1% of males. This is what I cannot find w/o going to the LA times
    I want to find this evidence of why there may be such audiophiles as I am.
    Key point in study qualifying the nature of this acuity: ability to discern the russeling of a leaf in the midst of noise, think hunter! Frequency range was normal as was absolute sensitivity. Woman had both the former advantages over men but none showed this acuity. This profile fits to a T the typical APs and their wives I have known.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2018
  4. skwoodwiva
    One cable down one to go, I only need a reference & one with one channel plated. The bass is notable, way better than the Belkin, of course this is 18 ga OFC Kimber

    20180402_120013_2.jpg 20180402_115519_2.jpg IMG_20180402_120711748.jpg IMG_20180402_121126386.jpg

    Music ready. Screenshot_20180402-122246.png Screenshot_20180402-122225.png Screenshot_20180402-122217.png Screenshot_20180402-122201.png Screenshot_20180402-122625_crop_540x518.jpg
    20180402_155714_1.jpg

    ^^^^ just in case but this is one size too small. To hide the ends.

    20180402_154503_2.jpg
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
  5. skwoodwiva
    Much Ni for skeptical trolls from The Jon Risch

    Quote
    There are other measurable phenomena relevant to cables, including microphony and dielectric absorption, but the audibility of these are not well established. Ben Duncan has measured dielectric absorption in polyethylene insulation on speaker cables (EWW, ?) It does seem to me that it is sensible, all other things (such as cost!) being equal, to use high-quality insulators with low DA, for instance PTFE, and to aim for high mechanical robustness and low microphony in cable construction, as is of course routine in the professional sound community. Building interconnects and speaker cable with these characteristics is not particularly expensive. In the high-end audio cable industry, by contrast, large premiums are regularly exacted for just these factors - the notorious Kimber Black Pearl is just one example.

    Further down the trail, there is a whole minefield involved in conductor geometry and materials. Copper? Silver? Gold? Silver-plated copper? Should the conductors be solid core or multistrand? Are there any diodic effects between adjacent conductors? How important is the presence of surface oxidation? Should one use silver solder? Again, at least some of these are definitely measureable, but their audibility may again depend on the environment and context that they are used in.

    This is a hugely contentious area of discussion within the audio community, with a wide spectrum of beliefs from "only R, C and L matter" to "I can hear the difference when I suspend my speaker cables off the floor with string". What is indisputable is that large sums of money are being gained from the business of selling high-end cables, and at least some of the claims of the cable industry are highly suspect.

    The bottom line is that "cable sound" is a complex issue, and it seems unlikely to me that a particular cable has a sonic attribute of its own, beyond what can be attributed to its first-order electronic properties, independent of what is attached to each of its ends.
    End Q of Jon Risch.

    More from Jon here https://www.southampton.ac.uk/~apm3/diyaudio/Connections.html
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2018
  6. gregorio
    1. Exactly! We make interconnects/cables for a few bucks which address all the issues. So why do audiophiles pay hundreds or even thousands to address those issues?

    2. Further down what trail? Whatever supposed sonic imperfections there are in the cheap interconnects/cables we (the pro sound community) are using, are already baked into the recording!

    3. Yes, there are measurable differences between cheap pro cables and ridiculously expensive audiophile cable BUT: 1. Those differences are so tiny as to be way below audibility and 2. Those differences are not always for the better!

    4. No it's not! There's little/no discussion of this in the pro sound community, let alone a "hugely contentious" one. In fact, the only place this is discussed is in the audiophile community and it's only "hugely contentious" when some audiophiles report significant audible differences, which are well below human audibility.

    5. That's being polite!

    6. No, it's an exceedingly simple one. In fact, there aren't many issues which are simpler! The only way in which we could possibly consider it complex is in terms of psycho-acoustics; perception and the exact biases involved in perceiving differences which aren't there (are inaudible).

    G
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2018
    sonitus mirus likes this.
  7. skwoodwiva
    Man I believe you are well out of your league, that Jon Risch, not me. He is sooo famous , a sound engineer in the audiophile mfgs pocket. A genius

    Man oh man...True that,
     
  8. gregorio
    Yet again: This forum is not about what you believe. This is the sound science forum, not a bible forum and what you personally believe is irrelevant, just the facts and the science.

    Hopefully you will get the message this time and won't need it explained to you any more times that this is not a bible forum!!

    G
     
    colonelkernel8 likes this.
  9. amirm
    THanks for trying the experiment. But I can't see how you can keep the identity of the cables from yourself. The whole point of the exercise i suggested was to make sure you did not know which is which.
     
  10. skwoodwiva
    I have a way!
    Absolutely. Soon. Let me verify me ears? I am 61 now, lol.
     
  11. skwoodwiva
    It has been 24 years since
    EDIT
    My
    EDIT
    first discovery of wire sound. IMG_20180401_144553004.jpg
    I may do it with a pc of vinyl zip cord too, easy
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2018
  12. gregorio
    And 6,000 years since god created the earth and the heavens but you still don't seem to realise that this is NOT the bible forum. How is that possible, where does it say "bible forum", how many times do you need to be told?

    G
     
    colonelkernel8 likes this.
  13. skwoodwiva
    You a Shame, truly
    Stay off my threads Thank you Sir
     
    bidn likes this.
  14. skwoodwiva
    Reference cable finish, now practice.
    Wow it has been 24 years I forgot how transparent teflon Kimber sounded so smooth.
    Here is my covering to prevent me from IDing the cables.
    IMG_20180401_202710716.jpg
     
  15. gregorio
    No, the shame is all yours!

    It might be your thread but what you're stating as fact does not belong in this forum, basic logic should tell you that! You say you believe I'm out of my league but how, when you have absolutely no idea what my league is? You state "cable sound" was first discovered 24 years ago but where is your reliable evidence for such a claim? And, PLEASE bare in mind this is the science forum and not a bible forum; here say, testimony, marketing materials and audiophile myths do NOT qualify as reliable evidence!

    G
     
    colonelkernel8 likes this.
Page 1 of 7
2 3 4 5 6 7
Next
 
Last

Share This Page