[Whitigir]

you demonstrate a change with measurements, not with empty claims.  and if you want to make clear that the changes measured are really audible to you, then you may wish to prove it statistically in a blind test.
this is the sound science section not an episode of Ancient Aliens, please avoid absolutely ludicrous statements while demonstrating nothing like you just did in this post.

Well, if I am not able to post from my personal experiences and different cables as evidences, but have to be number and measurements, then my apologize, and I will disappear from the topic. I also have friend who can back up the claims, but known that not everyone has the access to hundred thousands dollars rig to measure and provide numbers.

Once again, it seems people still don't want to believe in digital cables to make the differences. I will just withdraw from the topic on my own. Thank you for your time, and apologize

 

[spruce music]

I am not here to debate or explain the science behind it, I don't know...all I know is that it does affect the sound and sonic performance, ............................
 

This statement means you are in the wrong sub-forum.  Subjective uncontrolled sound impressions go everywhere else, but not in the sound science forum.

 

[sonitus mirus]

Well, if I am not able to post from my personal experiences and different cables as evidences, but have to be number and measurements, then my apologize, and I will disappear from the topic. I also have friend who can back up the claims, but known that not everyone has the access to hundred thousands dollars rig to measure and provide numbers.

Once again, it seems people still don't want to believe in digital cables to make the differences. I will just withdraw from the topic on my own. Thank you for your time, and apologize

 
I would love to see a discussion about exactly how a cable can improve sound quality when transferring a digital signal, especially if the cable does not show any measurable metric that might make an appreciable difference.  You apparently seem to believe that you have one or more cables that qualify, now we need the basic measurements to move forward in the discussion. Lacking that, the next best thing might be a blind listening test to show that you are actually able to deduce any audible differences.  People frequently make claims only to be shown that they were mistaken when a blind test is conducted.  It is human nature.   We can discuss blind testing and double blind testing in a separate thread if necessary.  I'm here to learn, more than anything else.  There are many bright, wonderful people that participate in this forum, and anyone that is open-minded might appreciate the conversation.

 

[CanadianMaestro]

I'm open-minded. Somebody, please, convince me the digital cables are critical and worth my money.

Gimme some measurements to work with.

 

[gregorio]

I am a DIY and I have witness enough cases where Digital cables do make the differences. The science behind it ? No body know

 
Why are you lying? Science does know why people can perceive differences where there are none and has known for a long time! I appreciate that you personally might not know or understand that science but if that's the case you should say that you personally don't know, NOT that nobody knows because that's a lie.
 

My theory is that the processed digital is a continuous stream of signals that contains it own power and current, so the conductivity and the way a conductor is conducting will affect it travel and quality.

 
I don't get it, why do you feel the need to invent your own theory when a theory is not even necessary because science already knows how it works? Science doesn't need to speculate on how digital audio or the transmission of digital audio works because science invented digital audio! It's not as if digital audio exists in nature, ADCs and DACs do not grow on trees or form in rocks and science does not have to come up with some theory to understand or explain how/why it works. If science did not already know exactly how digital audio works, then digital audio would not exist!
 

I can say that digital cables is even more important than analog cables (aka headphones cables)

 
You can of course say anything you like; that the earth is flat or the moon is made of cheese for example. However, you would look rather foolish saying these things for two reasons: 1. Science knows both of those statements are false and 2. This is a science forum!
 
Instead of just "saying" ridiculous things, why don't you spend just a small amount of time and educate yourself a little about the science and history of digital audio? To get a basic understanding is not so hard and there are plenty of people on this forum who are willing help you. If you had just a little knowledge of the history of digital audio, you would know that the very reason it was invented in the first place was to solve the problem of analogue signal degradation in cables! In other words if, as you suggest, digital cables were more important than analogue cables, then the invention of digital audio would have been a complete failure and the whole idea of digital audio would have been discarded decades ago.
 

I am not here to debate or explain the science behind it ...

 
What a bizarre thing to say?! Why come to a science forum in the first place then? And, if you're not here to explain it, why provide your own theory to explain it?
 
G

 

[branislav]

OMG, another thread about cables making or not making a difference. Here's the thing, its not all about money, but if you have $200 headphone and $300 headphone amp (examples, Im sure there are exceptions), you are probably not going to hear any difference in cables. Or also you have a tin ears or a closed mind, or are just angry cos you know you can't afford that $1000+ interconnect you've been secretly looking at,lol....or maybe you're trying wrong cables. I will leave scientific explanation to others but you can have the best source, if your cables suck, the overall performance will suffer big time. Imagine source being a clear spring water (surely we can at least agree that source is important, lol) but if the pipes carrying the water are rusty, and nasty, well...needless to say, that's kinda what you're going to get at the end, almost regardless what you put in.

 

[carlchip78]

I don't know, I'm pretty sure the clear spring water is going to sound exactly the same as the rusty water going through those pipes. No?

 

[gregorio]

  [1] Here's the thing, its not all about money, but if you have $200 headphone and $300 headphone amp (examples, Im sure there are exceptions), you are probably not going to hear any difference in cables. [2] Or also you have a tin ears or a closed mind, or are just angry cos you know you can't afford that $1000+ interconnect you've been secretly looking at,lol....

 
1. That is a lie, one can hear differences where none exist even with incredibly cheap/poor quality gear. If you are going to bring up money spent on audio gear, then you loose, And, by a very large margin!
 
2. Ah yes, you have golden ears and the world's top audio professionals have tin ears. You must be a very rich man from hiring out your superlative hearing abilities, no? BTW, insulting others by telling them that they have closed minds, when your mind is obviously so closed to the actual facts/science, does not accomplish anything here on the SCIENCE forum except to make you look uneducated, foolish and hypocritical. I'm sure you do not wish to appear uneducated, foolish and hypocritical, so my advice to you would be: Educate yourself, don't cast aspersions on others (especially if you don't have any facts!) or, go and post in one of the forums where science/actual facts are deliberately avoided!
 
G

 

[carlchip78]

^^ What that guy said. 
 
 

  OMG, another thread about cables making or not making a difference. Here's the thing, its not all about money, but if you have $200 headphone and $300 headphone amp (examples, Im sure there are exceptions), you are probably not going to hear any difference in cables. Or also you have a tin ears or a closed mind, or are just angry cos you know you can't afford that $1000+ interconnect you've been secretly looking at,lol....or maybe you're trying wrong cables. I will leave scientific explanation to others but you can have the best source, if your cables suck, the overall performance will suffer big time. Imagine source being a clear spring water (surely we can at least agree that source is important, lol) but if the pipes carrying the water are rusty, and nasty, well...needless to say, that's kinda what you're going to get at the end, almost regardless what you put in.

Apologies for coming across as rude, intrusive or obnoxious.. etc. ahem. But, exactly how many thousands of dollars do you suggest one ought spend on a headphone rig so that these day/night - clear/rusty audible differences in those cables become apparent to the average enthusiast?

 

[carlchip78]

Just SchiitStirring folks, as you were..   

 

[Ancipital]

 I will leave scientific explanation to others

 
Bravo!

 

[gregorio]

   But, exactly how many thousands of dollars do you suggest one ought spend on a headphone rig ...

 
About $40 should get you a set of waterproof IEMs, then you can stand under a rusty pipe and a clean one, pour spring water over yourself and test for yourself. Better still, close your eyes and get someone else to choose which pipe, that way it'll be a blind test!
 
Honestly, some of the analogies audiophiles come out with just seem deliberately ridiculous. No one is suggesting for one minute using rusty pipes/cables. If you're going to make an analogy then at least make some attempt to make it analogous! For example, can you tell the difference between spring water passed down a couple of feet of (clean) copper pipe which cost $5 and the same spring water passed down a couple of feet of clean copper pipe which is gold plated, oxygen free and costs $1000? Analogies which are actually analogous would be quite novel and refreshing in many of the forums here!
 
G

 

[castleofargh]

don't get dragged into a debate about "there can be an audible difference" vs "there can't be an audible difference". that's a strawman argument, not the topic. of course there can be a difference, a defective cable being the most obvious example but not the only one. we all accept the possibility of an audible difference, that's what being open minded really means. but in this sub section going from being open to the possibility straight to claiming it's a fact, that requires those little things called proof.
 
 
real life analogy born to fail:
if I post like R Kelly that " I believe I can fly, I believe I can touch the sky", what I'm really saying is that I believe in something, I didn't claim I could actually do it, only that I believe I can. that's what we call an opinion.
now if I say "I can fly, and I've touched the sky many times, you only need real good shoes, special shoelaces and good toes", most people would be like: ".AVI or it didn't happen". and of course you would be justified to ask for evidence because I'm no longer saying I believe in something, I'm claiming it happened for a fact.
facts require evidence.
if you don't have evidence, you cannot prove something to others, therefore you should stick to cautiously expressing your opinion on the matter.
QED.

 

[spruce music]

   
About $40 should get you a set of waterproof IEMs, then you can stand under a rusty pipe and a clean one, pour spring water over yourself and test for yourself. Better still, close your eyes and get someone else to choose which pipe, that way it'll be a blind test!
 
Honestly, some of the analogies audiophiles come out with just seem deliberately ridiculous. No one is suggesting for one minute using rusty pipes/cables. If you're going to make an analogy then at least make some attempt to make it analogous! For example, can you tell the difference between spring water passed down a couple of feet of (clean) copper pipe which cost $5 and the same spring water passed down a couple of feet of clean copper pipe which is gold plated, oxygen free and costs $1000? Analogies which are actually analogous would be quite novel and refreshing in many of the forums here!
 
G

Yes, I can.  Copper can leave a taste.  Plastic too.  I don't disagree with what you are saying.  And it actually points out an issue about analogy.  Good analogies are not all that easy.  Sloppy ones are what you usually see.  Analogy often signifies either sloppy thinking or the resort of someone who doesn't really understand the issue.  Even when well applied they are an attempt by someone who does understand to communicate with someone who doesn't.  That is what makes them useful.  You just have to be very careful.

 

[sonitus mirus]

 
Yes, I can.  Copper can leave a taste.  Plastic too.  I don't disagree with what you are saying.  And it actually points out an issue about analogy.  Good analogies are not all that easy.  Sloppy ones are what you usually see.  Analogy often signifies either sloppy thinking or the resort of someone who doesn't really understand the issue.  Even when well applied they are an attempt by someone who does understand to communicate with someone who doesn't.  That is what makes them useful.  You just have to be very careful.

Well said; like a pitchfork tossing contest in the Everglades of procrastinating cantaloupe growth from within the garden of mechanical apathy. 

 
Time for me to listen to "Uranus, The Magician", which often seems to be appropriately named when visiting these discussions.  (Edit: Though, perhaps not spelled properly)