[markl]

Quote:

I think this shows more about how convoluted some people's logic is than it does how cables sound!

Funny, to me, it shows how cable nay-sayers/agnostics will knee-jerk jump on anything that appears to "prove" them right (as seen in this thread, there's been some, let's say, "pre-mature" celebration going on), without fully examining what was actually measured by this test, and whether what was measured is at all relevant to the cable debate. I'm sorry if it requires the actual turning on of one's brain to do some evaluation of the test's merit, but it does. If that's too complex for some minds to encompass, oh well.

 

[SunByrne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danamr So now we have a new market, re-packaging Rat-Shack to look like high-end.

I believe a great deal of the religious war-style debate seen on cable-oriented forums is that there's a segment of the crowd claiming that this is exactly what many manufacturers are already doing.

I certainly don't think this test is conclusive on a variety of questions--several of the points made by folks like markl are germane--but it is kind of fun to see how it turned out, and I give Edwood a hearty salute for doing it. I like some of the other ideas, too, but I think Ed's already done enough work. Thanks, Edwood!

 

[geek707]

Funny

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovkiller What indeed is really funny (and sad for them at the same time) IMHO, is how people try to justify the investments they made, at all costs, even while, if it is true that this is not the optimal test to prove them wrong, at least they do not have anything better in their hands to show, that prove them right, other that what they say they hear...What leads me to the conclusion that the called "naysayers" at least are on a better position here regarding the credibility...

Better said than mine.

 

[crazychimp132]

One variable is left unaccounted for in this experiment: the subject's perception of what each material is supposed to sound like. Because of this, it is possible that all the subjects heard actual differences, but associated these differences with the wrong material. This experiement just shows the differences percieved between real cables and their stereotypes. This experiment would have been more valid if a second cable of each type were included, labelled to show its material. Then subjects could specifically tell, for example, if cable X sounded like a silver cable, not just the stereotype of silver.

 

[Jahn]

i admit it.

when i had the cables i swapped the tags

 

[Sovkiller]

I'm not 100% a cable naysayer, but this test at least should show that if different cables sounds different, as many of our "golden ears members" believe, there must be a marked difference between the Rat Shack one, and at least the solid silver cable, at least between those two, and none of them should miss that the Rat Shack should sound worst than the silver one, and most of the participants mixed their emotions precisely on those two...is that an evidence? For me it is sort of, for the rest well that is up to them...

What indeed is really funny (and sad for them at the same time) IMHO, is how people try to justify the investments they made, at all costs, even while, if it is true that this is not the optimal test to prove them wrong, at least they do not have anything better in their hands to show, that prove them right, other that what they say they hear...What leads me to the conclusion that the called "naysayers" at least are on a better position here regarding the credibility...

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danamr Funny, to me, how "some people" just cannot help themselves, and have to belittle views that don't agree with their own.

Nothing wrong with constructive critcism of viewpoints that are flat wrong or just illogical, and as markl correctly points out, some of the comments on this thread about what the test proves or disproves are not founded on an understanding of what the test actually involved, or are indeed illogical, which is the point I was trying to make in my previous post. You may consider certain comments to constitute "belittling," but pointing out an obvious flaw in an argument or point of view is what civilized discussion is all about. Avoiding name calling or insults would seem to take the "belittling" aspect out of it, and I haven't see much of that on this thread, which has been pretty civilized -- thus far.

 

[russdog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazychimp132 One variable is left unaccounted for in this experiment: the subject's perception of what each material is supposed to sound like. Because of this, it is possible that all the subjects heard actual differences, but associated these differences with the wrong material. This experiement just shows the differences percieved between real cables and their stereotypes.

That's exactly right. The test was a good idea, but I think the wrong questions got asked. There's no way to tell what, if anything, the results really mean.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazychimp132 This experiment would have been more valid if a second cable of each type were included, labelled to show its material. Then subjects could specifically tell, for example, if cable X sounded like a silver cable, not just the stereotype of silver.

Well, that depends on exactly what you hope the test might enlighten us about. If it's what sounds best, that's one thing. If it's about whether people can ID kinds of metal inside of cables, that's something else. Personally, I care about the former, not the latter. But other people might have different priorities.

This shows how important it is to be clear about what the testing is supposed to test *before* it happens. It's also why researchers always do small pilot studies, to work out bugs like this. I really appreciate the trouble people went to in order to do this. I wish it could be repeated after some discussion about exactly what the test is for.

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn i admit it. when i had the cables i swapped the tags

Except that you never had the cables, since you weren't on the sign up thread.

-Ed

 

[geek707]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS Nothing wrong with constructive critcism of viewpoints that are flat wrong or just illogical, and as markl correctly points out, some of the comments on this thread about what the test proves or disproves are not founded on an understanding of what the test actually involved, or are indeed illogical, which is the point I was trying to make in my previous post. You may consider certain comments to constitute "belittling," but pointing out an obvious flaw in an argument or point of view is what civilized discussion is all about. Avoiding name calling or insults would seem to take the "belittling" aspect out of it, and I haven't see much of that on this thread, which has been pretty civilized -- thus far.

I agree, and enjoy a constructive discussion. I did not say you were belittling anyone.

 

[SunByrne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS Avoiding name calling or insults would seem to take the "belittling" aspect out of it, and I haven't see much of that on this thread, which has been pretty civilized -- thus far.

Yeah, I mean, how could anyone take this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by markl I'm sorry if it requires the actual turning on of one's brain to do some evaluation of the test's merit, but it does. If that's too complex for some minds to encompass, oh well.

as belittling? I mean, who doesn't talk that that to their spouse/parents/co-workers/friends all the time?

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovkiller I'm not 100% a cable naysayer, but this test at least should show that if different cables sounds different, as many of our "golden ears members" believe, there must be a marked difference between the Rat Shack one, and at least the solid silver cable, at least between those two, and none of them should miss that the Rat Shack should sound worst than the silver one, and most of the participants mixed their emotions precisely on those two...is that an evidence? For me it is sort of, for the rest well that is up to them... What indeed is really funny (and sad for them at the same time) IMHO, is how people try to justify the investments they made, at all costs, even while, if it is true that this is not the optimal test to prove them wrong, at least they do not have anything better in their hands to show, that prove them right, other that what they say they hear...What leads me to the conclusion that the called "naysayers" at least are on a better position here regarding the credibility...

I think Spock used to refer to this a "resulting torrential flow of illogic." Perhaps that it is an overstatement in this case, but it does seem that you are jumping to conclusions that are unfounded. Among other things, your argument assumes that silver cables sound better than RS cables in ALL systems, which I don't think any cable "believer" would contend. You also ignore the fact, as noted by others above, that participants were basically forced into identifying a cable, which skews the results.

It is true that people with a bias will tend to discount test results that don't support a result they would like to see. But a person pointing out that a test result does or does not support a certain theroy does not necessarily mean the person is biased. The test and the results should be evaluated on their own merits, and it is clear that the "agendas" on both sides are starting to surface here and hinder a rationale discussion.

 

[Edwood]

I guess people prefer to see pretty pictures rather than read, or prefer to argue over semantics and endless hypotheticals.

So nobody actually read through the text of my Original Post in this thread?

Surprised no one caught on to the narrative...

-Ed

 

[Jahn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood Except that you never had the cables, since you weren't on the sign up thread. -Ed

Look under the name "Alex"

"How could you!"

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn Look under the name "Alex" "How could you!"

Oh yeah.

I forgot about your mind tunneling possession ability.

Careful when you talk to Jahn. He can possess your mind!

-Ed