[cujobob]

We live in societies that re-brand everything and just mark it up. We pay extra all the time for name-brand pills that are no different from generic.

Cables CAN in-fact make a difference, just not a huge improvement in most cases. There are numerous studies online you can find that detail the science behind it. Same thing with the burn-in debate, which has plenty of evidence to support it. I do love it when sites claim things to be 'truths' without sufficient evidence. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, claiming them as fact is just ignorant.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif They don't, but when they then tell others in a public forum that improvement will be gained by spending a vast premium on a functionally identical item which in fact improves nothing, they are generally going to be questioned by others who know better.

First, you're making an assumption that "others know better" and that there is no basis for a reasonable dispute on this issue, and I disagree with that.

Second, if someone says they tried an upgraded cable and they thought it sounded better in their system, I suppose it is fine for someone to "question" that in a polite manner. However, the proponent does not have to "prove" anything. This is a hobbyists forum; not a science journal. And most people are here to enjoy the audio hobby and share their experiences with various equipment --- and have fun. Furthermore, virtually everybody knows about the debate and the arguments on both sides. How many times do folks need to say "high end cables are snake oil," blah, blah, blah? What is this deep seated psychological need some folks have to repeatedly trumpet this point of view?


Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It isn't at all, people spend extra all the time just because they believe something looks nicer, sounds better or just makes them feel good, when in fact the item actually does nothing of the sort. They are also completely entitled to do so.

I still don't understand how you can tell whether something sounds better to my brain.

 

[Audio18]

Another post about this.

Why? Audio is such a subjective experience and here people go back and forth and try to break down things into small and neat little categories of "truths and myths". Just enjoy the sound, if it sounds better to you, then go for it.

 

[scootermafia]

I am 100% sure that I can hear a difference between recabled HD800s and not recabled HD800s. If he wants to dispute that one, have at it. Bad gear, bad ears, bad cable --> not going to hear a difference.

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cujobob /img/forum/go_quote.gif Cables CAN in-fact make a difference, just not a huge improvement in most cases. There are numerous studies online you can find that detail the science behind it. Same thing with the burn-in debate, which has plenty of evidence to support it. I do love it when sites claim things to be 'truths' without sufficient evidence. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, claiming them as fact is just ignorant.

Let me clarify. Differences can be found using machinery, computers, whatever certainly. It is provable as fact that NO ONE can tell an audible difference beyond random chance by listening alone. If you are unable to demonstrate that you can hear a difference beyond guessing, you are going to be questioned by others who know you cannot hear a difference other than by guessing.

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif First, you're making an assumption that "others know better" and that there is no basis for a reasonable dispute on this issue..."

Of course there is. Scientific Method Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif How many times do folks need to say "high end cables are snake oil,"

I suppose as many times as other folks need to claim they're not. Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif I still don't understand how you can tell whether something sounds better to my brain.

I have no doubt that it sounds better in your mind. That you can demonstrate an actual audible difference exists by listening alone though, is easily provable as false.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is provable as fact that NO ONE can tell an audible difference beyond random chance by listening alone.

I think I know what you are referring to, and this is NOT an issue that is not without reasonable differences of opinion. You can say something is a fact all you want, or that something cannot be debated; that doesn't make it absolute truth.

And I'll say again that your point is best made in the Sound Science forum. That's were discussions of the scientific method and scientific testing belong -- not here.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I suppose as many times as other folks need to claim they're not.

Why? If someone says that they like cable X and it improved their system, why is it so important to you tell them that they're wrong? Perhaps you should engage in some introspection and figure out why it makes you feel good.
Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have no doubt that it sounds better in your mind. That you can demonstrate an actual audible difference exists by listening alone though, is easily provable as false.

No, it is not easily provable as false. I don't know anything about you, but you remind me of people -- including myself at one stage of my life -- who think they know everything.

In any event, if it sounds better in my mind, isn't that the point? We listen to music for enjoyment, don't we? Do you listen to music with pages of scientific data and tell yourself that what you see on the page sounds really good?

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think I know what you are referring to, and this is NOT an issue that is not without reasonable differences of opinion.

That this is a discussion forum and that statements of opinion are respected is beyond doubt. When someone states an opinion as fact though, it can and should be clarified. Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can say something is a fact all you want, or that something cannot be debated; that doesn't make it absolute truth.

I'll agree that the absolute definition of truth can be somewhat vague depending on context. The definition of scientific fact however is crystal clear. Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...your point is best made in the Sound Science forum. That's were discussions of the scientific method and scientific testing belong -- not here.

Although a bit semantic, I'm not discussing those items. I'm simply saying that statements of audible differences between interconnect cables must be regarded as opinion and not scientific fact.

 

[BIG POPPA]

To me I would rather spend the money and find out if the cables sound the same or not than just read another persons opinion. Thread Ninja's just make me giggle. You know the guy's who read everything online and become experts over night?

 

[883dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif They don't, but when they then tell others in a public forum that improvement will be gained by spending a vast premium on a functionally identical item which in fact improves nothing, they are generally going to be questioned by others who know better.It isn't at all, people spend extra all the time just because they believe something looks nicer, sounds better or just makes them feel good, when in fact the item actually does nothing of the sort. They are also completely entitled to do so. When they publicly tell others to do the same however, they should expect to be challenged.

I followed three links in your signature...the first was to Blue Jean cable, the second to Zu which proclaimed the Gede cable is $229.00, the third to Cardas for a V2 Headphone Cable, which I assume is for the HD600.

You seem to be sending conflicting signals. After what you have written why would you spend excessive money on at least two cables when you know it to be a fact that they can't make a difference?

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Therefore, my entitled opinion is that spending money on imagination is not the best course of action in achieving better sound.

 

[Happy Camper]

Who claims science is the monolith of truth? How many times have "facts" changed what "science" claimed as fact over history?

 

[ParadigmPenguin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Although a bit semantic, I'm not discussing those items. I'm simply saying that statements of audible differences between interconnect cables must be regarded as opinion and not scientific fact.

While what you say is logical, it should be noted that opinions can be based on fact. If I make note of an "audible difference" between two different scenarios, it is one based on my perceptions, not fact. However, the vast majority of the discussions in this thread are not purely formed by such means.

Notably, enjoyment is the most important piece of this hobby, in my opinion. If higher quality cables enhance my listening experience (be it even through atheistic or placebo effect) it could still well be worth the purchase.

Making choices based entirely on factual evidence would create for a cold listening experience.

 

[oatmeal769]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why? If someone says that they like cable X and it improved their system, why is it so important to you tell them that they're wrong?

I don't think they are wrong. What is wrong is when someone makes those statements as fact, and someone else seeking knowledge goes out and spends a lot of money for improvements that do not factually exist. Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif -- who think they know everything.

I know that thus far that no factual data exists to prove these claims. That is the great thing about scientific fact, it is never regarded as final truth. Right now though, there is zero data which proves otherwise. Therefore, my entitled opinion is that spending money on imagination is not the best course of action in achieving better sound. Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif In any event, if it sounds better in my mind, isn't that the point? We listen to music for enjoyment, don't we?

Of course. But we come to forums for many reasons, one of which is advice. As long as alternative views exist, I have just as much right to refute what you say in absence of fact, just as you have right to make those statements as factual.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Right now though, there is zero data which proves otherwise.

That is not correct. If you do a search on these forums and others, you will find data supporting audible differences between cables. You might not find the data persuasive, or you might have concerns about the methodologies, or you might believe the data is overwhelmed by contrary data, but it is not correct to say there is "zero data."

Look, those who say that cables don't make an audible difference, or that in most cases they don't make an audible difference, have a legitimate point of view. But you are making absolute statements, and overstating the case against cables, and in doing so, you are misleading people to the same extent as you say people mislead by stating "as a fact" that they heard a difference with their cables.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oatmeal769 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Therefore, my entitled opinion is that spending money on imagination is not the best course of action in achieving better sound.

You're perfectly entitled to come to that opinion in making your decisions. But you really don't have any basis to opine what others should do (especially others you know nothing about), unless they ask you.