[bigshot]

How much R&D do you have to do on wires? All of the information on conductivity is already understood. All you have to do is just make a wire that works and that isn't exactly rocket science. The quoted bit there is complete hogwash designed to make ignorant people think their product is better than competing brands... but it isn't. As long as a wire performs to spec, it's the same as any other wire... Cardas = Amazon Basics.

 

[You Kay]

How much R&D do you have to do on wires? All of the information on conductivity is already understood. All you have to do is just make a wire that works and that isn't exactly rocket science. The quoted bit there is complete hogwash designed to make ignorant people think their product is better than competing brands... but it isn't. As long as a wire performs to spec, it's the same as any other wire... Cardas = Amazon Basics.

Obviously more R&D than you and I care to fully understand. In your honest opinion do you really believe all these cable companies are running a massive scam? I think you should think about what you write.

If you’re not interested or cannot hear a difference that’s fine. But you don’t have the right to say anybody who does hear a difference is stupid. What qualifies you to make these statements. I can pass a comment on any product developed with the same ignorance but I know that there is so much more that we need to learn and discover.

 

[Somafunk]

Jesus Christ, are we still doing cable bull?

 

[bigshot]

Obviously more R&D than you and I care to fully understand. In your honest opinion do you really believe all these cable companies are running a massive scam? I think you should think about what you write. If you’re not interested or cannot hear a difference that’s fine. But you don’t have the right to say anybody who does hear a difference is stupid. What qualifies you to make these statements. I can pass a comment on any product developed with the same ignorance but I know that there is so much more that we need to learn and discover.

First of all, I haven't called anyone stupid. Ignorance is simply not knowing, and simply gathering up verified facts and making an effort to understand how things work will cure that. Stupidity is not being willing to make that effort and refusing to understand when someone who knows more about the subject explains it. You are listening and gathering facts and attempting to understand, aren't you? I'm not going to ask you to just take my word for it. I'm going to point you to the facts so you can read and understand for yourself.

Assuming you are, the conductive properties of different metals are known. And a simple measurement will tell you what the differences are. The limits of human hearing have been studied and are understood as well and measurements are a good indicator of what is audible and what isn't. A cable either transmits a signal accurately from one end of it to the other, or it doesn't. A cable can't improve a signal, it can only degrade it by improper manufacture or design. Let's talk about interconnects... it is VERY simple to create an interconnect that transparently conducts a line level audio signal from one end to the other. A two dollar interconnect can do that just as well as a $900 one. I'd refer you to the first post in this thread that has ample proof of that... https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/

OK. Have you read that? So there's proof that all properly functioning cables sound the same. Why would anyone want to buy an expensive one? Maybe they pull and plug in their cables a lot and they want a stronger connector and reinforced cable skin. Maybe they have a lot of EMI and need extra shielding. Maybe they just like the look of cloth covering on their cables. These are all valid reasons to spend a little bit more... but sound quality isn't one of those reasons.

Why would a manufacturer want to make people think that their cable is better manufactured and performs better in some way than their competitors' cables? Well, that should be obvious. They want to convince you to buy their product, no someone else's. But if their product made a significant audible improvement, they wouldn't rely on sales pitch, they would show you the results of solid controlled listening tests proving that their product sounds better. They can't do that, so they publish pseudo-technical gobbledegook like the stuff quoted above, and they let their customers (who don't have any responsibility as a seller for the veracity of what they say) to make outlandish claims based on subjective impressions colored by bias and perceptual error.

Cable design has been pretty much the same for over a century. There aren't any patents preventing companies from using superior technology. And it costs very little to make a good cable. Companies in China do it in large quantities for pocket change. The reason that the audiophile press and retailers focus on fancy cables is because the mark up on them is astronomical. They may have to discount the amp you're buying to be competitive with Amazon, but if they can convince you to drop $100 or more on a cable to go with it, they've made a nice tidy profit on the sale.

None of this is illegal. It's just business. The old saying goes, "Caveat emptor." (Let the buyer beware.) It's up to you to make informed purchases if you want to get your money's worth. If you don't care about spending more than you need to, just go out and buy whatever is the most expensive. But don't fool yourself into believing that it sounds better because it cost more.

If you truly do want to cure your ignorance, I'd suggest you spend an afternoon going over the first post in this thread. There's a lot of info there that can help you make smart purchases, not stupid ones. https://www.head-fi.org/threads/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths.486598/

 

[You Kay]

Your comments simply imply that anybody who believes that cables sound different is stupid.

Firstly I have first hand experience. Different cables technologies sound different. Yes different cable designs will deal with Rfi differently. Shielding is one aspect of what affects the sound, Conductors another and so on. The shielding and fancy covers you speak of serve a purpose beyond the aesthetic.

You can read all the articles but I prefer to spend my time listening as that’s what this hobby is about. You can say it’s all in my head but I think what you’re saying is just as pathetic as you find my statement.

Keep your ignorant approach, I’m sure you’ll serve many people as ignorant as you very well. If you believe a dirt cheap cable serves the same function and sounds the same as one that has more conductors and better shielding or whatever else that’s fine. You’ve saved yourself plenty of money. I don’t like the extortionate prices for some cables. I would like it if they were more affordable as I have a budget just like many other audiophiles. But I’m not the manufacturer so I don’t determine the cost. I spend what I can but I won’t delude myself into thinking there isn’t a difference when I have heard it many times.

 

[bigshot]

Please tell me about your listening tests? Were they line level matched, direct A/B switched, blind comparisons with multiple trials averaged? Because if they weren’t they don’t mean much. Again, see the post I linked you to that has links to proper tests that back up what I say.

The difference between ignorant and stupid is that ignorance is just not knowing. Stupidity is refusing to know. I can’t call you stupid. You have to act that way for yourself.

 

[You Kay]

Please tell me about your listening tests? Were they line level matched, direct A/B switched, blind comparisons with multiple trials averaged? Because if they weren’t they don’t mean much. Again, see the post I linked you to that has links to proper tests that back up what I say.

The difference between ignorant and stupid is that ignorance is just not knowing. Stupidity is refusing to know. I can’t call you stupid. You have to act that way for yourself.

Lol ok. I don’t live life a/b/x blind testing. If you do then you’re a very sad person. But all the reviewers on sterophile, absolute sound and other hifi mags you read don’t seem to be doing blind testing. Neither do all the manufacturers of these products. Neither do most enthusiasts. I think you’re in the wrong hobby. Maybe become a research scientist. You may learn something.

 

[bigshot]

Sound Science doesn't seem like it's the best place for you. It appears that you've done nothing to remove the effects of bias or perceptual error from your comparisons. Subjective impressions are fine for the rest of Head-Fi, but in Sound Science, we require proof. I linked you to proof that as long as cables are free of design or manufacturing defects, they perform the same regardless of price. You just have your personal beliefs. Don't expect me to entertain them without proof. There's really no reason for me to bother to argue with you. All you know is what a salesman has told you. and you aren't interested in making the effort to know anything else. You're dismissed.

 

[You Kay]

Oh my goodness me. Do you really base your beliefs on white papers? Lol. This hobby is about listening not “oh I heard a difference, wait let me read up about it because my ear-brain mechanism could be fooling me”.

And you’ve stated subjective views are fine for headfi. Guess where you’re typing these messages. We are all here expressing our subjective experiences. I’m not here to prove anything to you. I’m reporting that I’ve heard differences in cables. It’s so blatantly obvious that it surprises me there are people like you in this world. I guess headphone, amplifiers and speakers sound the same to you as well right. But what’s pathetic to me is how you’re so adamant to prove your point. Anyway this conversation won’t get anywhere. You believe whatever you want as will I and the world is still spinning.

 

[bigshot]

I already said you're dismissed. I throw the small ones back.

 

[gregorio]

Your comments simply imply that anybody who believes that cables sound different is stupid.

Not necessarily, they could be intelligent but just misinformed. Alternatively, they could be both misinformed and stupid.

Firstly I have first hand experience. Different cables technologies sound different.

Under certain conditions that can be true, for example vastly different cable lengths, one of the cables being faulty, an inappropriate/incorrect cable for the task or some other user error.

Yes different cable designs will deal with Rfi differently. Shielding is one aspect of what affects the sound, Conductors another and so on.

Different shielding or conductors will affect the analogue signal being conducted but in a consumer environment to such a minuscule degree it will either not affect the sound at all or will affect the sound but way, way below audibility.

The shielding and fancy covers you speak of serve a purpose beyond the aesthetic.

Yes, they do, they serve arguably the most important purpose of audiophile cables, marketing!

Oh my goodness me. Do you really base your beliefs on white papers? Lol.

I can’t speak for anyone else but I base my beliefs on a combination of things: The scientific facts of signals and signal transmission, uncontested published scientific papers, objective measurements and controlled listening tests. What I don’t base my beliefs on is: Audiophile marketing, uncontrolled listening tests, consumer testimonials and reviews.

This hobby is about listening not “oh I heard a difference, wait let me read up about it because my ear-brain mechanism could be fooling me”.

This isn’t a hobby, the cable manufacturers do not make and sell cables for a hobby, commercial recordings are not made by hobbyists, etc. And, even amongst hobbyists there are differences; some are happy with just audiophile marketing and what they believe they’re hearing, while others are more serious and want to know the actual facts/science and if the differences they’re hearing are real/audible or just perceptual errors/biases.

If you’re in the first group that’s your choice but obviously, you should just stick to audiophile marketing forums and avoid sound science forums.

G

 

[gregorio]

While we’re at it, there are a few additional points:

We are all here expressing our subjective experiences.

This is the Sound Science discussion forum, so what we’re discussing is unsurprisingly mostly the science of sound/audio, not “our subjective experiences”.

I’m not here to prove anything to you. I’m reporting that I’ve heard differences in cables.

And how did you determine that you’re hearing differences in cables rather than just experiencing perceptual biases/errors? If you did not use a testing methodology that eliminates such biases/errors then your assertion is false because you do not know if you’re reporting that you’ve heard differences.

It’s so blatantly obvious that it surprises me there are people like you in this world.

This statement indicates ignorance of the facts and the exact opposite of what you’re claiming. If the differences are “blatantly obvious”, then it’s “blatantly obvious” the differences you’re experiencing are caused by perceptual biases because the actual differences in the signal between different cables are not even vaguely “blatantly obvious”, they’re minuscule.

I guess headphone, amplifiers and speakers sound the same to you as well right.

Why would you guess that? The actual differences between different headphones and different speakers are huge (compared to the differences between cables), well within the audible thresholds and can easily be differentiated under controlled listening testing. Amplifiers are a somewhat different story though. Your “guess” is like saying; “You can’t tell the difference between 5mph and 5.0001mph so I guess you can’t tell the difference between 8mph and 100mph”.

But what’s pathetic to me is how you’re so adamant to prove your point.

Why do you think it’s pathetic to defend the proven science/facts in a science discussion forum? And why isn’t it “pathetic to you” to come to a science discussion forum and make assertions contrary to the science without any reliable evidence and only ad hominem responses?

You believe whatever you want as will I and the world is still spinning.

Why do you believe the world is still spinning? How do you know the world isn’t stationary and everything else is spinning around the world? Isn’t the answer to both these questions “the scientific facts”? So, your analogy is backwards! We think “the world is still spinning” because the science (the physics of motion) dictates that it is. You on the other hand are making assertions contrary to the scientific facts, EG. That the world is not still spinning.

So which is it, are you agreeing with the science; that the world is still spinning and differences between cables are inaudible or are you disagreeing with the science; that differences between cables are audible and the world is not spinning?

G

 

[You Kay]

While we’re at it, there are a few additional points:

This is the Sound Science discussion forum, so what we’re discussing is unsurprisingly mostly the science of sound/audio, not “our subjective experiences”.

And how did you determine that you’re hearing differences in cables rather than just experiencing perceptual biases/errors? If you did not use a testing methodology that eliminates such biases/errors then your assertion is false because you do not know if you’re reporting that you’ve heard differences.

This statement indicates ignorance of the facts and the exact opposite of what you’re claiming. If the differences are “blatantly obvious”, then it’s “blatantly obvious” the differences you’re experiencing are caused by perceptual biases because the actual differences in the signal between different cables are not even vaguely “blatantly obvious”, they’re minuscule.

Why would you guess that? The actual differences between different headphones and different speakers are huge (compared to the differences between cables), well within the audible thresholds and can easily be differentiated under controlled listening testing. Amplifiers are a somewhat different story though. Your “guess” is like saying; “You can’t tell the difference between 5mph and 5.0001mph so I guess you can’t tell the difference between 8mph and 100mph”.

Why do you think it’s pathetic to defend the proven science/facts in a science discussion forum? And why isn’t it “pathetic to you” to come to a science discussion forum and make assertions contrary to the science without any reliable evidence and only ad hominem responses?

Why do you believe the world is still spinning? How do you know the world isn’t stationary and everything else is spinning around the world? Isn’t the answer to both these questions “the scientific facts”? So, your analogy is backwards! We think “the world is still spinning” because the science (the physics of motion) dictates that it is. You on the other hand are making assertions contrary to the scientific facts, EG. That the world is not still spinning.

So which is it, are you agreeing with the science; that the world is still spinning and differences between cables are inaudible or are you disagreeing with the science; that differences between cables are audible and the world is not spinning?

G

Lol you guys are a bunch of whiny little sods aren’t you.

Ok I won’t write out a lengthy boring reply because come on who wants to read that.

The differences between cheap interconnects or even a cheap usb cable and a well designed solid silver core well shielded interconnect I’ve tried is akin to a component change I’ve done in the past. My experience, my ears. Subjective but no more so than saying two amplifiers sound different or two speakers sound different.

Your so called a/b/x blind testing methodology also can be biased because it involves things such as recency bias. Even if tested randomly.

Thirdly and most importantly, there are many things that are present in the universe that cannot yet be explained or measured. We simply don’t have the tools are perhaps the tools aren’t sensitive enough or maybe we don’t know what we are looking for. I can completely accept that I won’t convince you. But to anybody else reading this, please just try it for yourself. If you can’t hear the difference fine. If you can then don’t let anybody tell you that if it can’t be measured it doesn’t exist. Also any psychoacoustic claims can also be made for speakers and amplifiers but these guys choose what they want to criticise.

 

[You Kay]

sorry accidently posted an edit

 

[gregorio]

Lol you guys are a bunch of whiny little sods aren’t you.

Yep, when someone posts a bunch of anti-science BS in a science discussion forum we tend to get like that, strange isn’t it?

[1] My experience, my ears. [2] Subjective but no more so than saying two amplifiers sound different or two speakers sound different.

1. You think your experience occurs in your ears?
2. Amplifiers and speakers do not have any subjectivity. They operate purely on the objective signal they are fed.

Your so called a/b/x blind testing methodology also can be biased because it involves things such as recency bias.

Sure, ABX testing is invalid because it may have recency bias while sighted subjective testing is valid because it has countless unavoidable cognitive biases.

Thirdly and most importantly, there are many things that are present in the universe that cannot yet be explained or measured. …

True but then of course we’re not trying to measure, record or reproduce “things present in the universe that cannot be explained or measured”, we’re recording sound waves which are explained and measured and have been for about 2 centuries or so. Didn’t you know that?

I can completely accept that I won’t convince you.

Yep, we’re strange like that. In a science discussion forum we tend not to accept audiophile BS that contradicts well established and proven science with nothing to back it up but fallacious arguments. We’re a mad, mad bunch!

G