Reading your response it seems I have hit a nerve. Double blind tests can be flawed, and your arguments don't change my view about the best audiophile cables compared to cheap cables. I would suggest you research and listen to the better WireWorld cables. They have a design rooted in science. I base my view on clearly hearing the better natural timbre of acoustic instruments using Wireworld Silver Eclipse IC vs. a cheap cable. My musically trained ears (I have a BA in Music) tell me this is not an imaginary placebo effect.
the issue here is that your argument is vaguely about objective reasons that you don't explain(based on what you said so far,
@bfreedma most likely knows a lot more than you do about wires and electricity, so venture there at your own risks), and about a subjective anecdote which is not typically what convinces people about universal claims like yours. in the very best situation, once you have properly tested and demonstrated that 2 given cables sound different(something you haven't done here), you're still very far from having demonstrated that we benefit audibly from throwing big bucks at cables. which is your main opinion/claim.
also personally, when I see you discussing cables in general, and not specifying the specs of gears at both ends of the cable, my first thought tends to be "yup, he doesn't have a clue about what's going on in an electrical circuit". it can just be that you forgot to specify a few things, or that you're so very sure about being right that you talk matter of factly, but bad argumentation is rarely convincing.
next you argue that you know you've heard a difference. and also argue that blind tests can be flawed. true enough but then how do you confirm anything if not through a better blind test? you measure the improvement? if so we'd love it if you shared your data even if it's anecdotal it's still objective and hopeful correct data. but if your belief comes ultimately from misguided self confidence under sighted experiences, then to me and a core group of this section, your experience cannot and will not be significant. maybe you heard a difference, maybe not, I'll never believe you either way because you have no control to actually confirm any of your impressions as coming from sound and not from your fake test full of biases. it's a problem we absolutely need to address before going further. if we can't agree on a testing method, the rest is a waste of time for us all. we won't agree on the results, we won't agree on the interpretation of the results, it's all pointless.
I know that cables can have an audible impact for fairly typical reasons or usage conditions. I wouldn't use an IEM cable for my power line, I also wouldn't use a 50meter USB cable. they don't satisfy the standards for their respective use. engineers work hard to achieve stability and consistency, and that sometimes requires plugging a cable following a specific standard. other times the input and output of the gears have an order of magnitude or more between them in impedance and the signal is of such amplitude that RFI or other things like going from a 0.02ohm cable to a 1ohm cable would only barely register on a measurement rig, and completely fail to create an audible change. ultimately we're dealing with an electrical circuit and a cable is one more component in the circuit. a passive component aimed at having as little impact as possible, so most of the time, that's how much impact a cable will have. as little as possible. improving upon that, when we can, is obviously not going to make a big difference. at least so long as we don't try to mess up the specs on purpose.
and here is my issue, where is the law stating that more money gets me a cable closer to ideal specs? you seem convinced about that, but why? I've certainly seen anecdotes with cheap cables being crap that shouldn't be used. but I've also seen anecdotes of really expensive "audiophile" cables being way out of spec. and I've heard obvious differences on occasion from switching cables(in blind tests), but I also have many instances where I couldn't pass a blind test between 2 cables so long as they didn't create a noticeable volume change(or if I managed to volume match my little test). so I strongly disagree that anecdotal experience should be what we use to make our mind about cables in general. basically I disagree because it's a logical fallacy. I could come up with any conclusion I want about cables if all it takes is a random anecdote and some cherry picked correlation like price and "signal loss".
People start telling him he wasted his money because the more expensive cable allows more huger soundstage, accurate and detailed silky smooth mids and accurate treble that isn't heated or "razor sharp".
