[BassDigger]

 
The most likely explanation is either a) it is completely and solely your brain playing tricks on you, or b) the IC had a significant difference in resistance leading to a volume difference which is perceived by your brain as being different in not just volume, but things like "neutral" or "soundstage" etc.
 
If you really are an EE degree holder, you should know that a sighted listening test (ie "by feel") isn't proof that a difference exists.  Measure it with oscilloscope and show it.  

EDIT:  I'm also an EE degree holder, and I specialized in analog and digital signal processing at that.  But then again as I said this shouldn't matter a single bit, as the merit of the argument lies in the theories themselves, not the person presenting them.

 
I've been a cable 'believer' for decades, based on my own experiences, But now I'm trying to keep an open mind and understand why I've heard the differences that I have, between different cables, in different situations. I did, however, learn that brand name cables are typically a rip-off.
 
Anyway, I do believe in the adage that sound is more important than measurement; if it sounds good, but measures bad, you're measuring the wrong thing. I strongly believe in logic, cause and effect and that we should use our common sense, but it's also true that we (however clever) certainly do not understand and cannot explain everything, measurable or not. E.g. Einstein and quantum theory.

 

[prot]

And yet within the same chain of equipment, if I compare, say, a solid core silver DIYed IC and a Plussound Type 6 copper Litz I don't hear huge sonic differences however when I add in a DHC Fusion IC and a DHC Complement 4 IC into the mix, I hear that the fusion is very neutral in comparison to my first 2 ICs. And the complement 4 IC sounds crystal clear with huge bass in comparison to the first 2.


So here I have 4 different ICs. Two with miniscule differences and two with huge audible differences. I did not change anything else in my equipment chain. What is your explanation for this? I sound irritated and annoyed but I really am interested to know more about this impedance issue you speak of.
I think my reply can reply yours too. And I DID demo all these ICs side by side. I didn't read about them beforehand.

your cable tests should be at least BT ... better DBT or ABX. Otherwise, the probability of brain-tricks is way too big and makes the whole comparison irrelevant.
and maybe you should try to take it all a bit less personal ... all that matters in a science forum are the numbers and the methods ... my DAC, your ears and john's cables are just not relevant ... also, statements like "but, but I heard it" are irrelevant in a science forum unless the tests were done 100% by-the-book ... nothing personal, just science

and just as "cable lecture" for you, here's a serious cable review with measurements, physics details, etc: http://www.audioholics.com/gadget-reviews/kimber-kable-8pr/kk4pr-8prmeasurements
Also interesting http://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/top-ten-signs-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-oil

 

[nanaholic]

  Anyway, I do believe in the adage that sound is more important than measurement; if it sounds good, but measures bad, you're measuring the wrong thing.

 
The only problem with this statement is that "sounds good" is subjective, only measurement is objective.  Apples and oranges.  
 
You are perfectly free to take what you think sounds good and go with it, but it's not okay to twist that into something else like "I like that sound coming from this IC A more than the IC B, therefore there must be some difference in the cable that doesn't show up in measurements"

 

[sonitus mirus]

If I think I am hearing a difference where none should exist between 2 properly designed cables, the next step is to try and determine if I truly am capable of hearing a difference.  As has been mentioned, any cable test should remove bias, and getting the kids to agree simply won't cut it.  References to monitored cable tests have been provided that demonstrate that no audible difference is found.  If an audible difference is proven to exist through proper testing, than the next step is to determine what might be responsible for causing the differences.  At this point, it would most likely be discovered that there was some obvious flaw of some other anomaly that was causing the difference.  
 
I would be shocked if an audible difference was proven to exist, yet no measurable difference could be found that would explain the result.

 

[lookingforIEMs]

I'm off I guess... smart people here who know a lot more than I do... I'm not even studying this **** so I don't comprehend a lot of the stuff here... have a nice discussion guys...

 

[Joe Bloggs]

I graduated with an BSE and aced all of my calculus, statistics, and analytical geometry courses. Similar results in post graduate school studying nonlinear differential equations, more statistics, mulitdimensional calculus and the like including some courses that were shared with PhD students.

I asked about an A-grade. Regardless, Arn, I know you and simply do not believe a word you say. Your latest claim regarding speaking with JD only cements the idea. Sorry, but you've earned it.

And what of your grades?

I don't see what's so incredible about a man of Arny's age and long standing in the audio field speaking with John Dunlavy. Did he specify when this happened in his long life and career?

 

[arnyk]

Who did I call a moron? No one. I said it would take a moron to design a cable with so much inductance and/or capacitance so to have an actual audible effect. Do you know of anyone designing such cables?

se

 
There are several companies who sell cables that allege that they contain  electrical networks that *match* the cables to the equipment or some such nonsense. Some of these have been tested or torn down and found to have regular electrical components. either resistors, capacitors, and/or inductors. I believe that MIT Cables are a supplier of this kind of product.
 
I know of no evidence that this kind of equipment provides any audible benefits, if your goal is high fidelity. They may act as non-engineered, non adjustable ( nice way to say useless or potentially harmful) equalizers or not.

 

[superjawes]

And what of your grades?

I don't see what's so incredible about a man of Arny's age and long standing in the audio field speaking with John Dunlavy. Did he specify when this happened in his long life and career?

Alright, I know I engaged with this earlier, but let's drop the grades thing. We're straying off-topic and toward personal attacks.

Bringing up our school transcripts or demanding them from others isn't going to help anyone.

 

[arnyk]

And what of your grades?

I don't see what's so incredible about a man of Arny's age and long standing in the audio field speaking with John Dunlavy. Did he specify when this happened in his long life and career?

 
 
It actually happened a number of years ago probably late in the last millenium, when JD was a regular poster on rec.audio.opinion and/or rec.audio.high-end. We conversed online (which is in the Usenet archives) and over the phone. John sent me a number copies  of letters and white papers that he had written, bound in a loose-leaf binder.
 
There is a guy posting on this thread named Fear3000, who  was probably around when some of the above happened. Based on what I recall about him, he would probably rather die than say anything that would possibly enhance my credibility.
 
If Shaffer is as smart has he claims he would know that I was born and raised in the good Ole' USA and over here we have things that are probably comparable to A-grades, but not exactly the same.  A-grades are not part of my life, but do I know that I'm wildly overeducated.
 
That he finds incredible what he says he finds incredible might even tell us something about what he does  and does not know.

 

[arnyk]

Alright, I know I engaged with this earlier, but let's drop the grades thing. We're straying off-topic and toward personal attacks.

Bringing up our school transcripts or demanding them from others isn't going to help anyone.

 
 
The personal attacks have been of your creation Jaws, and you are the one who called me a bald faced liar on the topics of my grades and my past relationship with JD.
 
If the kitchen is too hot for you, stay out of it!
 
Nice job of  not taking responsibility for your actions - again its there for all to see and reach their own conclusions about.

 

[superjawes]

For an on-topic post, here are some good reasons to buy a new cable:

1. Length. You need to connect stuff. Connecting stuff is easier if you have the right length. Too short is bad, but too long means that you have to coil up or strap back the excess cable. Get a good length the first time and your life will be easier.
2. Durability. This can be big on headphone cables since you will be constantly interacting with them. The more you interact with the cable, the more durability you will want.
3. Style. Again, this mostly applies to headphone cables. If you want to show off, go ahead and flaunt it!

Never buy a cable specifically to improve SQ (unless the old cable is broken). There simply isn't enough evidence to prove that you will get an improvement (just subjective "I'm sure it sounds better!" anecdotes). Spending that cable budget on better components is more likely to provide a real SQ improvement, and you'll be happier with the results.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

I'm not trying to provide any evidence nor do I care to. My comment lead to the Scientific Process, which, ironically, is the last thing practiced on this board. Science. A fun word to say, a great trump card to spring on an unsuspecting noob, but a very difficult thing to comprehend (result-wise) without the methodology in place. In fact, the more you learn, the less you feel like you know. But, hey, you guys know it all. lol

I once asked this forum what was the highest level mathematics and/or physics course folks passed with an A-grade. Crickets. There's a shocker.

@arnyk No, it was Shaffer. It was Shaffer right? :blink:

 

[superjawes]

The personal attacks have been of your creation Jaws, and you are the one who called me a bald faced liar on the topics of my grades and my past relationship with JD.

If the kitchen is too hot for you, stay out of it!

Nice job of  not taking responsibility for your actions - again its there for all to see and reach their own conclusions about.

Nice job confusing me with Shaffer you meanie!! T_T

 

[arnyk]

   
I've been a cable 'believer' for decades, based on my own experiences, But now I'm trying to keep an open mind and understand why I've heard the differences that I have, between different cables, in different situations. I did, however, learn that brand name cables are typically a rip-off.
 
Anyway, I do believe in the adage that sound is more important than measurement; if it sounds good, but measures bad, you're measuring the wrong thing. I strongly believe in logic, cause and effect and that we should use our common sense, but it's also true that we (however clever) certainly do not understand and cannot explain everything, measurable or not. E.g. Einstein and quantum theory.

 
The issue of sounds band and measures good is pretty well understood now. A lot of it became well understood in the 80s and 90s.  Zwicker and Fastl are two good names to know and read up on.
 
We found that we needed some better measurement techniques to get a better view of equipment performance. The advent and popularization of FFT-based measurements helped with that.
 
We also found that a lot of "sounds good" was due to personal bias, and when we started getting a grip on that with DBTs, it largely melted away.

 

[arnyk]

Nice job confusing me with Shaffer you meanie!! T_T

Sorry!
 
If you look at the post, I was mislead by the forum quoting mechanism. yes. it was $haffer.