[120717]

Did you know that Pete of Double Helix Cables would have me believe that the cable sheathe would actually affect the sound?
I'm not talking about (metal) magnetic cable shielding either.
 
I think back to the post here about it being impossible to "develop" new cables - it was obvious to me that individual cables would
easily have the potential to affect sound in a much bigger way than your choice in non-metallic sheathing ever could. Nonsense?
 
Plug X sounds better than plug Y?
 
Problems:
 
1) The percentage of the circuit that said component is a part of
2) Weakest link in the chain reasoning
 
@maverickronin
 
In my experience moods/mental states and the placebo effect both have had more effect on my perception of sound than cables.
 
Assuming (significantly) different levels of quality exist at different price points, then plotting out every cable stock and otherwise on a logarithmic graph and picking something from each quartile
should ideally give you a situation where having the cable switched in a double-blind text  makes you turn on the music and think "wait - something's wrong here". Unlikely?
 
 
Paying for premium (equal/greater than the price of the headphones) cables is like spending $10 for an extra grain of salt on your burger.

 

[fishski13]

Quote:

My research was about 10 years ago, so no data now.  I based it on some early work Nelson Pass did, and you can easily google for it, there's a PDF floating around with the original results.  I did a variant on his work using different speakers as loads and found the results varied by speaker, as well as by cable.
 
The key thing is there's no perfect cable for all applications.  Some have great results through good luck, some through careful tests, occasionally through deliberate design.  Price isn't an indicator of quality, and it's important to listen because cables will vary.  
 
I don't really want to get into the math on complex impedances, but the simple fact is all cables are a RLC circuit, as are the loads, and as the parameters change, you can get quite measurable effects in transient response, frequency response, etc.  

the NP article is a good one.  it inspired me to whip up 3 different homebrewed ICs ranging from $10 to $200 in parts and perform my own DBT with the aid of a friend.  differences weren't difficult to hear, but i have to say the $200 IC weren't 'better', just different, and i could see where people would prefer one over the other depending on partnering gears.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

the NP article is a good one.  it inspired me to whip up 3 different homebrewed ICs ranging from $10 to $200 in parts and perform my own DBT with the aid of a friend.  differences weren't difficult to hear, but i have to say the $200 IC weren't 'better', just different, and i could see where people would prefer one over the other depending on partnering gears.

It sounds like you did a comparison blind test where you do not know which cable you are listening to and are asked to comment on each one. Consistently such blind tests result in differences sometimes being heard and results such as the expensive IC performing as well as each other or the cheaper one comes out as best. When people are asked to identify which cable is which in an ABX test, then the continual result is a failure to identify the difference between them.
 

 

[Willakan]

If it was a genuine double-blind test and you could provably distinguish the cables, there are lots of angry people waving oscilloscopes who demand that you do it again. I am among them, minus the oscilloscope.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

The answer to the original question is yes they do make a difference to some people (but not all and not all of the time) and yes they are snake oil as they rely on placebo to work.

 

[fishski13]

Quote:

It sounds like you did a comparison blind test where you do not know which cable you are listening to and are asked to comment on each one. Consistently such blind tests result in differences sometimes being heard and results such as the expensive IC performing as well as each other or the cheaper one comes out as best. When people are asked to identify which cable is which in an ABX test, then the continual result is a failure to identify the difference between them.
 

nope.  identified which cable was which.  29/30 correct.  i can write up the protocol and detail cable construction later, but i think either the goal posts would be moved or i would be called a liar.
 
i too have an oscilloscope, but we both no there would be no real measured differences.
 
btw, while i am a MOT, i don't sell cables.  i don't think my findings prove that more expensive = more better.

 

[fishski13]

I haven’t paid for a commercial cable in years.  I enjoy building my own and I’m able to custom cut the length so I don’t have a RFI rats nest behind the hi-fi rack.  The most I’ve ever spent on a pair of commercial ICs is $100 and $150 for S/PDIF.  I don’t have experience with any kilo-buck cable either.  I consider myself to have one foot in the objectivist camp and the other in the subjectivist camp.
 
Having played with various connectors, wire and geometry, I hear differences.  The 3 different ICs I used for this ABX are as follows:
- Cheap as peanuts 22awg shielded twisted pair mil-spec stranded silver plated copper with Teflon insulation from eBay seller ‘navships’ and Switchcraft RCAs at $1.30/piece.  Total cost $6 or so for 1m pair.
- Cardas 23awg shielded twisted pair enamel coated stranded copper with Teflon insulation at $3/ft and Switchcraft RCAs.  Total cost $25 or so for 1m pair.
- Jupiter 23awg solid silver with cotton insulation at $6/ft and Furutech Rhodium FP-106 RCAs at $150 for a set of 4.  The geometry is a little different than twisted pair.  Here I wrapped some nasal cannula O2 tubing from work with plumbers’ Teflon tape, then wrapped both the signal and ground wires in a double helix pattern around the tubing, parallel to one another with a gap of 3/8” or so.  On top of this I wrapped another layer of Teflon tape to protect the fragile silver/cotton wire.  No shielding.  Total cost $190 or so.
 
Associated gears:
-cheap DVD player, Benchmark DAC1, amp, K702.
 
The specifics of my ABX protocol are as follows:
-My gears, my room, and at my leisure.
-I picked 5 songs that I felt would give me the best shot at differentiating differences in the cables.  Some would call these ‘reference recordings’.
- 3 ‘rounds’ of comparing 2 cables A/B, with the 5 songs, total 10 trials per round, or 30 total.  I knew beforehand what the pairings were.  I would listen to one song with one cable, leave the room, would have my friend switch the cables, and then return to listen again.  For each round, I specified that 1 trial have no actual cable swap, for a total of 3 trials where there were no changes made.
 
I scored 29/30 – I missed a ‘no-change’ in the SPC vs. silver/cotton.  Enameled copper has a distinct sonic flavor that sets it apart from any other wire in my experience.  The difference between SPC and silver/cotton is less obvious.  I’ve owned all cables for 3 years or more with many, many swappings.    
 
I anticipate much criticism over the protocol, but my intent with this experiment was to set up an ABX that would somewhat emulate the process of how a ‘subjectivist’ would go about A/Bing cables but add some measure of performance with an ABX twist.  Personally, the subtle changes brought about with different cables cannot stand up to the scrutiny of the typical 'rigorous' ABXs that are often demanded here.  Could I perform the same results in an unfamiliar system – no.  Could I replicate with different song selections unknown to me before the test – again, probably not.   To be honest, I had to do a little ‘auditory training’ before the test to familiarize myself with changes. 
 
Like I said before, I’ve not heard any kilo-buck cables.  In my own experience, cables can bring about subtle changes, but I can’t say ‘night/day’ differences.  Do I have preference between any of my cables?  No, I think it depends entirely on the associated gears.  In the end i don't sweat it.     

 

[IPodPJ]

Did you do a screen capture of the 29/30 results?  I'm sure a lot of people would love to see that.
As a cable manufacturer myself I find it very hard to believe those results, only because no one has ever done that before.

 

[120717]

29/30 is unlikely, I know sets of headphones which would get lower rates for accurate guesses between them.
 
"waving oscilloscopes" gave an amusing mental image though.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Hi fishski. Your test is worthy of a thread on its own as it is the first recorded passed cable ABX. Others have said they have done so, but then failed to produce results or mixed blind compariosns with ABX tests.
 
My question is about volume, did you need to line level?

 

[Willakan]

This is very, very interesting. Obviously, to say I'm skeptical would be an understatement, considering that you seem to have accomplished something which has never been done before. Don't suppose you can measure the resistance/inductance/capacitance of the cables

?

 

[fishski13]

no screen shots - i have zero proof. 
 
i don't understand what's the big deal?  maybe i didn't make this clear enough, but i designed an ABX that i could pass.  i had to 'practice' by listening for subtle differences beforehand.  the Cardas wire has a distinct sound - this had a high probability of 20/20 correct.  the SPC to silver/cotton was much more difficult. 
 
unsighted ABX is stressful.  i attempted to make it as relaxed as possible.  like i said before, change up the protocol and i would have failed.
 
i don't have the link, but i remember reading about an ABX with ATC SCM12 loudspekers conducted in Spain.  i think it was a 70W high-end amp fronted by some other uber source vs. a 300W cheap amp and source.  having owned the exact ATC speakers for 6 years, and at the time i remember thinking to myself that ABX was set up for failure for most.  Progrock, can you find the link because i think you posted it?  thanks! 
 
no line matching per se, but hot swapping the ICs with the volume in the same position and adjusting the volume as necessary at the beginning for each new song when introduced in a round/cable pairing.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Could you repeat the test but match the volume. Not doing so it a clear flaw. All you need to do is listen to each cable sighted and ensure you cannot pick out one from the other by the volume alone and adjust such so they are the same, remember where the volume control is each time and ensure you cannot see the volume control during each test.
 
The blind test you refer to is here 
 
http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_marco.htm
 
 

 

[CrazyRay]

 

[Iqbal]

crazy vibrations