[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

So you don't think the subject of the test is a part of the protocol? That's the primary point of contention both sides have mentioned. Yes, the cable is a part of the protocol. Are there additional things said behind the scenes that might also have been issues? Sure, I don't have any way of knowing that and you don't either.
 
 

 
Did you take weasel lessons from Randi?
 
The man flat out lied in the Gizmodo interview.
 
"We're not going to go for [Fremer's] reference cables," Randi told us in an exclusive interview. "We're testing Pear Anjou cables. That was the original test.
 
That was NOT the "original test." This was the "original test," as stated by Randi himself in his post declaring the challenge over when Pear backed out.
 
We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.
 
If you need any more than that to see that the man's a weasel, then you'd make a good cult member.
 
se
 
 
 
 
 

 

[El_Doug]

no.  if there were, the cable debate wouldn't exist
 
Quote:

Is there any double-blind, or even single-blind test showing that people can reliably distinguish high-end cables from run-of-the-mill good cables?

 

 

[DaBomb77766]

Quote:

 
Did you take weasel lessons from Randi?
 
The man flat out lied in the Gizmodo interview.
 
"We're not going to go for [Fremer's] reference cables," Randi told us in an exclusive interview. "We're testing Pear Anjou cables. That was the original test.
 
That was NOT the "original test." This was the "original test," as stated by Randi himself in his post declaring the challenge over when Pear backed out.
 
We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.
 
If you need any more than that to see that the man's a weasel, then you'd make a good cult member.
 
se
 
 
 
 
 

Hmm.  What could he have to gain from all of this anyway though?  I'd always had respect for him for the Peter Popoff thing, but I'm not so sure not.  What was the actual reason why he chose to put an end to this deal of his?
 
Also, if you want to see real weasels, check out the "Discovery Institute"'s "reward" for finding "scientific proof" that evolution happened.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaBomb77766 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Hmm.  What could he have to gain from all of this anyway though?

The answer to that is an easy one. A cheap excuse to mock and ridicule Fremer and Blake without having to go through the time and expense to have actually allowed the challenge to be run.
 
That's his big schtick now, mockery and ridicule. It's what keeps his followers grunting and drubbing the table. Oh, and of course donating money to the James Randi Educational Foundation.
 
Quote:

 I'd always had respect for him for the Peter Popoff thing, but I'm not so sure not.

 
Yes. As I said previously, I'd always respected him as well. But there was simply no denying his duplicity in this instance.
 
Quote:

What was the actual reason why he chose to put an end to this deal of his?

 
What I said above was the actual reason. Here's the reason Randi gave:
 
We’ve just received this – as we expected – from Adam Blake, the CEO of Pear Cables, who had already agreed to participate in the proposed JREF tests of his Pear Anjou speaker cables:

At the request of Michael Fremer, with whom we have been communicating regarding his challenging of your assertions regarding high-end audio cables, we would like to inform you directly of Pear Cable's decision to not participate in your claimed challenge. While we support Mr. Fremer's efforts, and believe firmly in the performance of our products, we prefer that he simply use his own reference cables in his proposed test.

Please note the references here to “your assertions regarding high-end audio cables,” and our “claimed challenge.” These are the usual sort of juvenile ploys used by those who are well aware of their own presumptive and overblown claims. Let me correct Mr. Blake:

First: the JREF has made no “assertions” whatsoever in this matter; those were made by Blake and by Fremer, and we only offered to pay them one million dollars if they were able to support their fatuous assertions.

Second: the JREF prize offer is in no respect a “claimed challenge”; it is 100% genuine, fully outlined in print and widely advertised, and it constitutes a binding legal obligation on our part to pay the prize – one million US dollars – upon the success of any applicant. The funds are held by the investment firm of Goldman Sachs in an account specifically named, “The James Randi Educational Foundation Prize Account,” which at this moment of writing amounts to US$1,059,168.47, and is growing every day, though the prize only constitutes the first one million dollars. This is not – in any respect, a “claimed challenge.” It is very real and substantial.

Third – and most interesting – this retreat by Adam Blake effectively closes the current challenge, much to the relief of both Fremer and Blake, of course. Actually, I must admit that this was a rather clever way of squirming out of the huge dilemma in which these two blowhards found themselves. To repeat our proposition for the test, which I’ve already stated:

We are asking you [Michael Fremer] – and/or Adam Blake – to significantly differentiate between a set of $7,250 Pear Anjou cables and a good set of Monster cables, or between a set of $43,000 Transparent Opus MM SC cables and the same Monster cables – your choice of these two possible scenarios… This would have to be done to a statistically significant degree, that degree to be decided.

Returning to the rest of the cop-out just received from Adam Blake:

While we had initially planned to loan cable to Mr. Fremer for the test, upon consideration of your communications with him, as well as our doubts about the legitimacy of your misleading challenge (including the fact that you now personally claim that almost anyone can tell the difference between Monster cables and zip-cord), we do not wish to be involved. We do not expect this to hamper Mr. Fremer's efforts in any way.

Well, Adam, since you won’t provide a set of your marvelous cables for the test, and I’m sure that Fremer isn’t going to provide them, that closes the matter. Now, Fremer may decide to invest $7,250 in a set of these cables. Or, the Transparent people may send in a set of $42,000 wires for the test, but I’m damn sure not going to supply them…!

We’re now looking at the list of others who have expressed interest in taking the challenge in regard to regular-vs-ridiculous speaker cables. The requests are in chronological order, and the next person up for discussion will be announced.

As we so often say, stay tuned!
 
See if you can spot the blatant duplicity that Williati can't seem to acknowledge.
 
Quote:

Also, if you want to see real weasels, check out the "Discovery Institute"'s "reward" for finding "scientific proof" that evolution happened.

 
Don't get me started.

 
 
se
 
 
 
 
 

 

[Shike]

I thought Randi checked with his advisors, they said no way in hell would they let Fremer use his own cables, and at that point Randi said "screw it" and killed the contest.  Then he mocked Fremer and Pear.
 
Pear deserved to be mocked for pulling out as it showed lack of faith in their product, Fremer on the other hand deserves to be mocked for numerous other reasons . . . the cable contest not being one of them.
 
 
Randi and Fremer deserve each other if you ask me, but for entirely different reasons.

 

[williaty]

Thought I'd check up one last time before heading to bed as this has been highly amusing tonight.
 
No, I still don't see the problem. There were legitimate experimental reasons not to use Fremer's cables. Neither Fremer nor Transparent offered to supply the Transparent cables. Logical conclusion: test won't proceed. Was the way Randi phrased that needlessly rude? Absolutely.
 
Let me ask you this, are you upset the X-Prize foundation didn't supply the fuel or the rocket that got Scaled Composites into space? It's an equivalent situation, minus the mocking.
 
Another question: what would it have taken to make you happy? Are you actually upset that the JREF wasn't going to provide the cables or allow the test to be biased in favor of Fremen, or are you just wound up that they were dicks about it?
 
 
Anyway, I'll check back tomorrow to see what sillyness you've posted. You anti-science people really crack me up!
 
Have a good night, everyone.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

I thought Randi checked with his advisors, they said no way in hell would they let Fremer use his own cables, and at that point Randi said "screw it" and killed the contest.  Then he mocked Fremer and Pear.
 

 
Nope. Didn't happen that way at all.
 
As I said, Randi pulled the rug out from under Fremer BEFORE he'd talked to his advisors. The excuse he gave for not having talked to them at the time he pulled the rug was that he had to go to the hospital for a medical emergency on Friday night. He even posted a scanned image of the wrist band they put on him at the hospital in case someone didn't believe him.
 
Why he couldn't have simply waited until the next week to talk to his advisors God only knows. But the fact is, he had not talked to them at the time he pulled the rug out from under Fremer.
 
Quote:

Pear deserved to be mocked for pulling out as it showed lack of faith in their product, Fremer on the other hand deserves to be mocked for numerous other reasons . . . the cable contest not being one of them.

 
Won't argue with you there.
 
se
 
 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by williaty /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Anyway, I'll check back tomorrow to see what sillyness you've posted. You anti-science people really crack me up!

And you clueless, prejudicial people really crack me up.
 
You think because I'm defending Fremer here that I'm one of those "anti-science people"?
 
Your statement here clearly shows that you don't know the first goddamn thing about me, yet you prejudicially believe that I'm an "anti-science" person.
 
I'm the most science-oriented person you're likely to ever come across. I was banned on Audio Asylum's Cable Asylum for four years for holding the "anti-science" people's feet to the fire. So why don't you just toddle on over there, or better yet, Tweaker's Asylum, and see just how "anti-science" I am.
 
 
Quote:

Have a good night, everyone.

 
Good night.
 
I'll be expecting to see an apology from you in the morning.
 
se
 
 

 

[RexAeterna]

copper is copper. silver is silver. there is no magic in rca jacks. inductance has very little to do or any at all to a cables performance especially involving impedance. it's the resistance that matters most but that resistance is determined by the length your presenting. longer the wire,thicker the gauge you need. i know lot of people gonna hate me for this but there is no such thing as an ''audiophile cable'' and never will be. it's all marketing used to make sells. they all use the same copper. the same silver. only difference is the marketing,gauge used and how fancy it looks on the outside. it's not magic or not rocket science. just common sense really.

 

[Tomusic]

 
[size=medium]

It is obvious that most of you know nothing about cables
RCA is an analog CABLE but the signal can still be DIGITAL 
for example...you use a mini to RCA adaptor to connect you PC to your Ipod or amp..,it is still digital signal when it enters the amp(unless you have a DAC of course)...
 
and after it lives the DAC is doesn't make any difference at all for some reason
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 
​

[/size]

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Is there any double-blind, or even single-blind test showing that people can reliably distinguish high-end cables from run-of-the-mill good cables?

 


Quote:

no.  if there were, the cable debate wouldn't exist
 


 

 

Yes for the tests lots of them.
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 
The evidence does not deter those who hear a difference.

 

[WrxSTI]

Quote:

 
[size=medium]

It is obvious that most of you know nothing about cables
RCA is an analog CABLE but the signal can still be DIGITAL 
for example...you use a mini to RCA adaptor to connect you PC to your Ipod or amp..,it is still digital signal when it enters the amp(unless you have a DAC of course)...
 
and after it lives the DAC is doesn't make any difference at all for some reason
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths
 
​

[/size]

RCA is a connector.
Cable is cable. There is no analog or digital cable.
The signal going through a cable can be anything. In the case of RCA, both. It depends entirely on the connection/interface.
 

 

[DaBomb77766]

Quote:

RCA is a connector.
Cable is cable. There is no analog or digital cable.
The signal going through a cable can be anything. In the case of RCA, both. It depends entirely on the connection/interface.
 

That's not entirely true since cables can be designed to different specifications.  Some specifications work better for digital transmissions and some work better for analog transmissions...and some connectors are only ever used for digital transmissions even if it is technically possible to send analog signals through them (USB or HDMI being examples, though DVI is stupid and therefore doesn't count...and I guess by definition that also makes HDMI stupid so I guess that one isn't a very good example either).
 
So while an RCA connector itself doesn't care what goes through it, there are technically digital and analog cables, although the only "true" digital cables are those that are built to a certain spec (USB is the best example).

 

[jackmccabe]

Currently there is no evidence to support the idea that cables make an audible difference.
So I cannot understand why this argument continues
Are people really that stubborn, ignorant and arrogant that they will argue for something that they can provide no evidence for.
There is loads of evidence showing that cables do not make a difference and people can pick holes in this all they want, but they still have no evidence to support their claims.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

More evidence that interconnects make no difference. A test of various Monster cables, with one from Radio Shack and one from Tandy thrown in, conducted by a Robert A Cooper at MIT for a Batchelor of Science in Electrical Science and Engineering and Masters in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in 1998.
 
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/46225/41567257.pdf
 
The conclusion is that measurements failed to find anything which could account for sound quality differences. There is a faint possiblity with noise and THD+N, but there is no correlation with that and any cables price or construction, so there is no reason to buy any one cable over another.