Quote:
So we know the cable debate will go on forever. Sorry if this has been posted already, but has anyone tested an amp's output to see if there is a measurable difference between different tubes or opamps? I hear a difference between an OPA2132 and OPA2107 and a GE 5963 and a Sylvania 5963. I am guessing they wouldn't measure any different at the output, but I could be wrong. But if they don't measure any different, doesn't that mean there are things that test equipment can't account for? Just a thought. If I had the equipment and know how, I would gladly do the tests myself.
I think this is a good point.
My own contribution in most of these discussions is to raise the issue of auto-suggestion. It is most likely auto-suggestion which people are reporting when they claim differences in the sound of cables. I'm not saying that there is no difference between cables, but rather that the auto-suggestion eclipses any differences that there might be and can create perceived differences when there is none.
However auto-suggestion comes with all hearing activity. Another very powerful drive for auto-suggestion is that something will sound better because it is scientifically demonstrate-able that it is a better design.
Simply "knowing" that you are listening to something that is a better design will be enough to drive a great deal of auto-suggestion.
Even though something really is a better design doesn't mean that its improvements will be audible.
So, the auto-suggestion will often eclipse any sound differences that may or may not be picked up by the ears.
People, such as myself, who tend like like scientifically good design are of course given to auto-suggestion just like anyone. We are presented with, perhaps, a higher resolution digital format and so we immediately start "hearing" additional details. However it might be that the higher resolution format simply doesn't make any real world difference. Our perceived improvements are auto-suggestion.
The voodoo cable manufacturers know very well that "scientific credibility" matters. Although their fans often eschew scientific methods, at the same time the voodoo cable manufacturers will fill the descriptions of their products with pseudo science. They use pseudo science to add credibility and with that credibility will come auto-suggestion.
So, scientific credibility matters a lot. However what is left out is quantification.
Earlier I mentioned how a higher resolution digital format may be perceived as better simply as a result of auto-suggestion. Even though it actually is better, measures better, the perception of improvement comes not from its inherent "betterness" rather simply from the auto-suggestion the listener adopts knowing that it is better.
The problem here is quantification. Yes, it is better, but no quantification is given as to how much better and no suggestion as to the likelihood of that improvement being audible.
The best way to combat auto-suggestion is through well controlled blind ABX tests. This is as true of identifying difference or qualitative benefits between audio equipment that is differentiated by sound scientific design differences as it is between equipment that is different by other types of design difference.