[TwoTrack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dex85 /img/forum/go_quote.gif that's exactly what i was talking about. DTB is valid and standard whenever the human subjective perception is involved but it's not valid for audiophiles. i never really understood the points against DBT.

I think DBTs are valid in many ways but sound has its own set of issues...how long in length should the samples be? Can the brain adequately distinguish sound differences in short sound bites for evaluation? What impact do others in the audience have on the test and an individual members results?

In my experience it is much easier to understand sound differences when you "live with" a piece of gear and have extended experience with it.

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif ??? He clearly talks to the noise and the scale of the measurement. It's pretty straightforward.

like THD and jitter, whether that noise is above the noise level that you can hear is another matter. I personally could hear at -70dB in Ethan's vid test but this was so so so small in an extremely quiet room at night also with highly detailed headphones.....

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dex85 /img/forum/go_quote.gif that's exactly what i was talking about. DTB is valid and standard whenever the human subjective perception is involved but it's not valid for audiophiles. i never really understood the points against DBT.

See my post earlier:

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif "Double-blind tests are the gold standard in every field of science' Correct. However, only if you isolate very single factor except that, which people don't do, therefore makes most ABX testing audio wise invalid. ABX testing is great only if you isolate those factors. e.g. the headphones must be at the same position on your head every single time, you must in the same position away from the loudspeaker in distance every single time etc..... This is why scientifically valid ABX testing in audio much harder than in other sciences, which the vid doesn't address directly. Otherwise, the vid's fantastic. I firmly believe in the theory of ABX however the way it's conducted by most people makes it scientifically invalid. Anyway, 13-14 bit audio is where it starts to get :S for me. 16-24 bits = zero difference.

Above = extremely valid issues with DBT.

 

[TwoTrack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi /img/forum/go_quote.gif like THD and jitter, whether that noise is above the noise level that you can hear is another matter. I personally could hear at -70dB in Ethan's vid test but this was so so so small in an extremely quiet room at night also with highly detailed headphones.....

The best test is to do your own experiment. Borrow a pricey AC cord from a local dealer. I bought a Cardas Golden Reference cord for my SACD player and it was anything but subtle in improvement. Not as significant as an amp or speaker change but still a nice bump in sound.

 

[TwoTrack]

I cannot agree on the 16 to 24 bit change. I hear improvements from word length very clearly even at the same sample rate. You can get a nice sense of this from many DVD-Audio discs that are done at 24/48 and compare those with the 16/44 CD version. My preference of course is for 24/176 or 24/192 or 24/96 where possible.

There's even a Ray Brown Soular Energy DVD-Audio that demos the improvement between 24/96 on one side and 24/192 on the other.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif The best test is to do your own experiment. Borrow a pricey AC cord from a local dealer. I bought a Cardas Golden Reference cord for my SACD player and it was anything but subtle in improvement. Not as significant as an amp or speaker change but still a nice bump in sound.

I think that's what we call subtle at best (arguably amp changes, even source changes if they're of similar quality, can be considered subtle).

You also haven't proven the change you "heard" had anything to do with the cable. You're just as fallible as any other human when it comes to placebo no matter what you say.

 

[Shark_Jump]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif The best test is to do your own experiment. Borrow a pricey AC cord from a local dealer. I bought a Cardas Golden Reference cord for my SACD player and it was anything but subtle in improvement. Not as significant as an amp or speaker change but still a nice bump in sound.

Two Track, if you don't mind me asking, are you a cable dealer or have any buisness interests in this area at all.

Just wandering, doesn't mean anything if you are, after all Mr Winer has interests as well.

 

[TwoTrack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think that's what we call subtle at best (arguably amp changes, even source changes if they're of similar quality, can be considered subtle). You also haven't proven the change you "heard" had anything to do with the cable. You're just as fallible as any other human when it comes to placebo no matter what you say.

There really is no evidence I can present that will convince you, that much is certain. Your mind is made up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shark_Jump /img/forum/go_quote.gif Two Track, if you don't mind me asking, are you a cable dealer or have any buisness interests in this area at all. Just wandering, doesn't mean anything if you are, after all Mr Winer has interests as well.

I don't mind at all. I have no interests at all in audio gear or cables. I'm just a part-time recording engineer and consumer of audio products.

 

[dex85]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...how long in length should the samples be? Can the brain adequately distinguish sound differences in short sound bites for evaluation?

one test have 4 samples, a 2-3 minute song seems about right to me, considering one will do one test a day. anyone claiming that is too long or too short need to work on his concentration. when comparing cables, audiophiles are often very specific about what they hear in certain parts of the songs (some even consider certain cables to be "faster"), but they are lost as soon as they are not aware of which cable they're listening to. thus they call DBT invalid.

Quote:

What impact do others in the audience have on the test and an individual members results?

why should there be any audience at all. do it at home with a friend, who will give you some sort of sign when equipment is ready (a tap on the shoulder or anything that won't give out an information). there shouldn't be any conversation between the two, imo tester should be hoodwinked to avoid the eye contact.
Quote:

In my experience it is much easier to understand sound differences when you "live with" a piece of gear and have extended experience with it.

that's why i said earlier to get familiar with cables first.
Quote:

Originally Posted by chinesekiwi ...you must in the same position away from the loudspeaker in distance every single time etc.....

good point and not so hard to achieve

all of those points can be tackled and overcome, if there is a will. but apparently there is no such will among golden ears. not to mention cables manufacturers.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif There really is no evidence I can present that will convince you, that much is certain. Your mind is made up.

What about yours?

"Hey guys, just believe me. I've done zero scientific testing and all my sources are questionable at best, but they totally make a difference"

 

[TwoTrack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif What about yours? "Hey guys, just believe me. I've done zero scientific testing and all my sources are questionable at best, but they totally make a difference"

Nice personal attack. I guess that's far easier than debating the scientific papers I posted supporting my view.

 

[Bmac]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry for more links but this is a nice test showing the differences from a power cord: Cardas Audio

This video proves nothing. So his cable makes a different graph than the other cable, which as far as we know could have been made from tin. It also doesn't show how this different cable could affect the sound of any reasonably well-engineered piece of audio equipment. If a power supply can't filter and regulate the power such that noise coming in on the power line audibly affects the equipment, then you should seriously consider buying better engineered kit.

 

[TwoTrack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bmac /img/forum/go_quote.gif This video proves nothing. So his cable makes a different graph than the other cable, which as far as we know could have been made from tin. It also doesn't show how this different cable could affect the sound of any reasonably well-engineered piece of audio equipment. If a power supply can't filter and regulate the power such that noise coming in on the power line audibly affects the equipment, then you should seriously consider buying better engineered kit.

Bmac,

Have you ever tried any better quality AC cords? Do you think they make any difference at all?

The value of the video is showing the decrease in noise from using a good power cable. There would be no other way for George to show the impact on actual sound quality. But I do see value in showing how better materials, geometry, etc. do contribute less noise.

I'm not a scientist or claim to be. My experience is in applied recording techniques and just tons of experimentation with the impact of power purity on my home audio system and on our hirez digital recordings.

The best I can do here is share my experience with others and link to papers that I believe are high enough quality to support my views.

Ultimately however it will come down to members here deciding for themselves.

If members are looking for me to do a scientific DBT study of cables and report the findings and various stats then I cannot provide that. I'd like to but my day job is running 60 hours a week now and my weekends are booked. Fortunately I have enough conference calls to still check in here occasionally.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nice personal attack. I guess that's far easier than debating the scientific papers I posted supporting my view.

Oh, and calling us all close minded isn't personal.

Mr. Kettle, why do you call me black?

I post evidence that contradicts those papers, but you decide they aren't good enough for you anyway. People respond to how a paper you posted is poorly done and doesn't offer any viable measurements, and you go off how we're close minded again. Most of your arguments against Mr. Winer are simply "nuh-uh". When someone asks that you do a legitimate study you sidestep it and blame it on close mindedness once more.

Quote:

If members are looking for me to do a scientific DBT study of cables and report the findings and various stats then I cannot provide that. I'd like to but my day job is running 60 hours a week now and my weekends are booked. Fortunately I have enough conference calls to still check in here occasionally.

So in other words . . . my post had summarized the situation pretty dang well.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwoTrack /img/forum/go_quote.gif The value of the video is showing the decrease in noise from using a good power cable. There would be no other way for George to show the impact on actual sound quality. But I do see value in showing how better materials, geometry, etc. do contribute less noise.

It's impossible to determine exactly what's being shown in the video.

It's not known what's at the other end of the cable hooked up to the TDR, nor is it known where the other ends of those power cords are going.

Suffice to say it wouldn't be difficult to stage a similar demonstration and get similar results using two identical power cords.

One thing the video does show is that George doesn't quite know what he's talking about.

A power cord's an integral part of any audio system. Because the transient energy in an audio system interfaces with the world, and the ground is its foundation. And the ground comes from the power cord.

Wrong.

se