[DefQon]

Quote:

 
Do they use it at NASA?  Somehow I don't think IEM's should have superior cables to spaceships...

NASA doesn't use cables. They use photon-laser emitting diodes to get electrons from one source to another.
 
The Piccolino isn't just for IEM's, it's just for general audio applications, speakers, ic's, recabling headphones, iem etc etc.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

 
Do they use it at NASA?  Somehow I don't think IEM's should have superior cables to spaceships...

rflmao^

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

Truth is in the eye of the beholder and your eye views that spending money on a cable will not improve the sound and well great now you can save your change.

 
No. Truth is not subjective. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

 

[spkrs01]

Chesky Records' studio is completely cabled with Crystal, if that says or mean anything................. 

 

[liamstrain]

Aye (though I thought he used Nirvana cables), but there are plenty of fantastic recording and mastering studios that use bog standard Mogami/Belden/Canare and produce records of equal or better quality. David Chesky has marketed himself and his label as an "audiophile" producer. He's free to spend his money how he likes - and doing that probably does increase his sales for a limited market. I have not seen that it has any effect on his records though. 
 
It's like those speaker makers who put and market that they use Nordost wire for the 8" of cable inside the speaker. I guarantee if you get those engineers in a room sworn to secrecy, they'll tell you it's not for the sound, but because doing so gives them caché in the market, and some salespeople/buyers use that as a selling point. If the cable makers are smart (and they are) - they'll give away cableing to well reputed high-end makers, in exchange for a mention in the literature. Instant credibility.
 
So ultimately, it doesn't matter much what cable Chesky uses, since - among other things, we don't know *why* he uses what he does (did he get a discount? Is he supporting the business of a friend? Does he believe there actually is a difference? Does he have evidence? We don't know.) - and even if we did know why, his use of them alone is not evidence of their benefit ...just an appeal to authority (a common fallacy).

 

[bmiamihk]

My fact is that I noticed a change in sound with a Silver cable. Another fact is that I like the change.
Quote:

 
No. Truth is not subjective. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

 

[wakibaki]

If you do change the cable, how are you going to test that there's a difference?
 
At the very least you need to
 
1) disguise the cables so that they look superficially identical
 
2) have someone else change the cable or not, depending on a coin toss
 
3) have them leave the phones in a room and leave themselves without having contact with you before you come in.
 
Then you listen to the phones and write down which cable you thought was in use.
 
You have to do this multiple times, the assistant recording which cable was actually used and which cable you thought it was, A or B.
 
No cheating.
 
This is just to prove that you can hear a difference, never mind that one cable is better.
 
If you want to show that one cable is better, then you need multiple listeners, and they all have to write down 'better' or 'worse'
 
All you guys who insist there is a difference are wasting your time unless you have done something as rigorous as this, because it's well known that tests of all kinds involving human beings suffer from bias unless special measures are taken to exclude the possibility of it occurring. They have to do this with pills to avoid getting false results.
 
That's all she wrote. There's no point in coming on here and blathering on about what you can hear, how if we only tried it ourselves etc., etc., we've all got closed minds, science is rubbish...
 
If it wasn't for science you wouldn't have headphones or cables.
 
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 
w

 

[liamstrain]

 
Quote:

My fact is that I noticed a change in sound with a Silver cable. Another fact is that I like the change.

 

... whether the change you noticed was because of the cable, or because of your psychoacoustic bias (since you did not do blind testing to determine the cause of the change), is the debate. You have no facts which support that it is because of the cable, and all the ones that do exist suggest it was not.  
 
Glad you are happy with the change. 

 

[kiteki]

 
No. Truth is not subjective. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

 
I agree, truth is objective, even beauty to a certain extent.

 

[firev1]

I love this place. 

 

[bmiamihk]

Exactly just hear random cables, the shop lets me try them as long as I like and I did for 2 hrs at a time.
Quote:

If you do change the cable, how are you going to test that there's a difference?
 
At the very least you need to
 
1) disguise the cables so that they look superficially identical
 
2) have someone else change the cable or not, depending on a coin toss
 
3) have them leave the phones in a room and leave themselves without having contact with you before you come in.
 
Then you listen to the phones and write down which cable you thought was in use.
 
You have to do this multiple times, the assistant recording which cable was actually used and which cable you thought it was, A or B.
 
No cheating.
 
This is just to prove that you can hear a difference, never mind that one cable is better.
 
If you want to show that one cable is better, then you need multiple listeners, and they all have to write down 'better' or 'worse'
 
All you guys who insist there is a difference are wasting your time unless you have done something as rigorous as this, because it's well known that tests of all kinds involving human beings suffer from bias unless special measures are taken to exclude the possibility of it occurring. They have to do this with pills to avoid getting false results.
 
That's all she wrote. There's no point in coming on here and blathering on about what you can hear, how if we only tried it ourselves etc., etc., we've all got closed minds, science is rubbish...
 
If it wasn't for science you wouldn't have headphones or cables.
 
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
 
w

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

I love this place. 

 
We're not allowed to have this discussion anywhere else on the board. So dead horse or no, some people are new to it, and won't otherwise learn about the debate. You are free to ignore it. Most people do. More's the pity.

 

[bmiamihk]

Blind yep. Cables handed to me without brand, material or price. Hearing same 5 tracks. same volume. Picked the one that I liked without even knowing the price, rand , or material of the cable.
Quote:

 

 

[bmiamihk]

Science but not your science. You have some equipment to test if the sound changes? Or do you read a science book or surf the internet for science articles and read it and repeat what you read?
Quote:

Exactly just hear random cables, the shop lets me try them as long as I like and I did for 2 hrs at a time.

 

[kiteki]

 

 
The problem is the end user thinks the subtle differences may not always show up in a complicated blind test, which has been the case in the past.
 
The cable manufacturers should have enough free time to perform one here or there though and be able to localise the differences, I think the resuts would most likely look something like this... http://www.laventure.net/tourist/caps.htm
 
Anyway, copper is in abundance and fulfills at least 95% of it's task, the differences are not striking, we can spend money on different components, it's simple. =p