[plonter]

ok..maybe i was wrong about my assumptions a little, i guess i am one of the minority of audiophiles that this is important to them. by the way, i think that all the pro's are using the most high grade cables and equipment exist on the market.

don't get me wrong...i would also not spent a 500$ on an interconnect cable or something (i still got my logic) but i wouldn't go for a low grade one also.

in the poll, i chose the second option.

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes... I do, to some extent. I've studied it quite intensely in the past.

the major flaw I'm seeing in astrology is that it doesn't take leap years in account........so after +2000 years, their whole agenda is pretty messed up

Chinese astrology is based on lunar years I think? so there's a pretty big gap nowadays...considering 1 lunar year is equal to 360 days

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif the major flaw I'm seeing in astrology is that it doesn't take leap years in account........so after +2000 years, their whole agenda is pretty messed up

It's not leap years which cause problems, but the precession of the earth axis. So the astrological year (the first point of Aries) now begins with the constellation Pisces instead of Aries. The excuse from the astrologers' side is that in fact it isn't the constellations which are responsible for the astrological effects on humans, but 12 geometric segments from a geocentric perspective named according to the corresponding constellations 2000 years ago. And this paradigm seems to work.
.

 

[Drosera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif And this paradigm seems to work. .

Or at least, they can sell it like that. As tired as I get of anti-cablers demanding evidence, I would love to see the evidence for this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif Chinese astrology is based on lunar years I think? so there's a pretty big gap nowadays...considering 1 lunar year is equal to 360 days

Not quite, Chinese New Year still manages to fall at about the same time every year. Don't ask me how they do it though, apparently it's a lunisolar calendar.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drosera /img/forum/go_quote.gif Or at least, they can sell it like that. As tired as I get of anti-cablers demanding evidence, I would love to see the evidence for this.

No chance. Astrology isn't «exact science». Too many variables. It only works on the basis of intuition.
.

 

[Drosera]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif No chance. Astrology isn't «exact science». Too many variables. It only works on the basis of intuition. .

I dunno. I work in biology, an exact science only by approximation (

), as long as the sampling size is big enough you should be able to get a pattern...

Oh well, although it's intriguing, I guess we shouldn't derail the thread much longer.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drosera /img/forum/go_quote.gif I dunno. I work in biology, an exact science only by approximation ( ), as long as the sampling size is big enough you should be able to get a pattern... Oh well, although it's intriguing, I guess we shouldn't derail the thread much longer.

Derailling this thread can only be a good thing.

I have no qualms at all.

The problem is that each birthday horoscope contains 10-12 «planets», 12 zodiac signs, 12 houses, 4 main axes and a lot of individual aspects among the planets. All of these components interact with each other. There are different weightings for the planets and aspects, but the weight of a component can increase depending on the placement or the aspectation or both. The astrologuer has to interpret this complex graph to a final statement giving a holistic picture instead of a mix of single aspects. There's no single component which a statistical analysis could rely on.
.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

Astrology and cables, a match made in... err... heaven.

 

[olblueyez]

Propeller Beanies and idiots who mention blind testing, a match made in,,,errr,,,heaven.

 

[zeroibis]

If you showed a group of people some paintings and only one was real and the rest were copies and most people were unable to determine the difference are all the paintings the same!? Should a copy of the mona lisa be worth as much as the real thing!? Now logically a computer can detect the differences between the copy and the original but it does not change the fact that when looking at very subjective things like art you need people who are very expired in order to reach any true determination.

There are always going to be limitations to testing this as the equipment needs to be good enough to the point that the cables themselves are a bottleneck in quality. In addition you then are going to want people with lots of experience listing on equipment they are familiar with for extended periods. Also you will want them to listen to music that they personally enjoy and are familiar with. You then need to have enough samples to account for mood and any other conditions that may effect mental judgment. Does the sunset look as nice when your pissed off as when your in love (probably not). So you need larger sample to account for things like this. In the end it should be possible to do a test to get an answer the problem is that it requires way too much money and time.

So short of monies falling from the sky we are left with logic, reason and more importantly experience.

 

[El_Doug]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeroibis /img/forum/go_quote.gif when looking at very subjective things like art you need people who are very expired in order to reach any true determination.

a perfect conclusion for the cable debate! since none of us can reach a determination, we should consult dead people!!!



...ok i dont feel very quippy at 1:30am, but try to interpret that in the funniest way possible

 

[gregorio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plonter /img/forum/go_quote.gif it's to everyone's opinion(and wallet) whatever cable to use, but i personally think that if you invested in "high-end" system you should go and get some nice cables to compliment it, and not ruin all the investment in low-grade cables and parts.

Logic would suggest that higher quality, more expensive cables are going to perform better. It's this logic which has been played upon by the cable manufacturers and used to manipulate audiophiles. The simple fact is that low-grade cables, standard-grade or high-grade cables is all rubbish, there is no such thing. There is no property of so called higher grade cables which in any way make them perform better than so called low-grade cables, so in what way are they high-grade, high-grade compared to what, a dead fish? If you like them because they look pretty, that's all well and good but don't fool yourself into believing they are going to improve the sound quality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plonter /img/forum/go_quote.gif ok..maybe i was wrong about my assumptions a little, i guess i am one of the minority of audiophiles that this is important to them. by the way, i think that all the pro's are using the most high grade cables and equipment exist on the market.

I'm afraid even that assumption is incorrect. This cable debate only exists in the audiophile world, not the professional audio world. I've been in so many recording studios over the last 25 years I couldn't even begin to count them all, including some of the top studios in the world. They all use decent quality cable, this means probably around $5.00 a metre (3ft). Mention $200+ cables to a studio professional and they are likely to laugh at you, honestly! The equipment in the top studios is incredibly expensive, it's not uncommon to spend $60,000+ on a set of stereo speakers for example, let alone the mixing equipment, ADCs, etc. Every aspect of sound quality is investigated and tweaked but this doesn't include cables because everyone knows they make no difference. Go and look online at audio magazines aimed at the professional audio market, you won't see any adverts for expensive audiophile cables. As I said before, this debate about cables does not exist in the professional audio world, it is only some audiophiles who seem to believe expensive cables magically affect sound quality.

For all the cable believers out there, while you're listening to your $500 cables bare in mind the cables used to create what you are listening to were probably 100 times cheaper!

G

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you like them because they look pretty, that's all well and good but don't fool yourself into believing they are going to improve the sound quality.

that's an argument a famous recabler gave me actually! he said the stock DT770 straight cable was very poor quality because the wires are not even sleeved...the 3 wires are touching each other(beyer saved $$$ on this, and simply added some varnish so they don't short)....but supposedly it'd make the signal crossfeed

mind you, it's not quite mono! yet the wires are not litz braided

strangely the stock DT770 coiled cable has 3 sleeved wires...

 

[Bullseye]

^Gregorio, well spoken, but it is sad to say that most believers here will just skip your post or do as if it hadn't been written...

The thing that they still don't seem to get is that you put at the end of a product the word "audiophile", you sky rocket the price, say it does wonders, and start selling like candy... People won't question why it has to be better than other thing that does exactly the same thing, and just try to find changes that are not there.

In the end is all about justifying one buy...

 

[bdh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've been in so many recording studios over the last 25 years I couldn't even begin to count them all, including some of the top studios in the world. They all use decent quality cable, this means probably around $5.00 a metre (3ft). Mention $200+ cables to a studio professional and they are likely to laugh at you, honestly! The equipment in the top studios is incredibly expensive, it's not uncommon to spend $60,000+ on a set of stereo speakers for example, let alone the mixing equipment, ADCs, etc. Every aspect of sound quality is investigated and tweaked but this doesn't include cables because everyone knows they make no difference. . . . For all the cable believers out there, while you're listening to your $500 cables bare in mind the cables used to create what you are listening to were probably 100 times cheaper! G

I can believe that! All you have to do is listen to the SQ of the vast majority of albums.

I just wish I knew one of these professionals, so he could come here and I could easily point out the differences in my systems.

I only know two amatuer recording engineers -- one could care less about sound quality and the other can easily hear the differences in cables.