Quote:
Originally Posted by evangellydonut /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Thanks for the link =)
a few thoughts that comes to mind -
1. These tests are done in "lab conditions", where they are talking about speaker wires that are presumed to be straight. When you have long headphone wires you don't know what to do and gets all tangled up and coiled, what happens?
2. When you inject other noise components, what happens? I have seen techniques used to filter and subsequently amplify signals that are several harmonics above and below signal of interest.
3. figure 8 clearly shows that there's a phase difference, due to delay in the cable among other things. I do not see the person doing a spectrum sweep across the entire audible spectrum comparing phase difference between 2 cables. (i suspect that it won't be any different, but i have no proof of it)
4. when doing very sensitive measurements, we were taught (and witnessed in lab) that the scope/spectrum analyzer's probe's quality makes a huge difference. There's no mention of understanding of this issue. Those 50 Ohm probes will get rid of a lot of details.
The article makes some good and valid points, but it's not something that can pass careful scrutiny. The way headroom perform their measurements, using a synthetic-ear of sort, is pretty good, since it takes a lot of unknowns out of the equation and only limited by the fidelity of the measurement equipment, which can be thought of as a "differential amplifier" when comparing 2 cables. I'm not arguing that cables make definitive differences, just that I haven't seen enough evidence either way to be convinced. I'm pretty sure there's a good reason why cable manufactures doesn't bother to publish charts while making wild claims, because it'd probably show virtually no difference. But in the end, it's the combination of the user, the placebo effect, possibly the cable, and other factors that swing people one way or another.
|
see, I've read plenty of similar arguements (like the one I linked, not yours, yours is "englightened", if you will), just none of them offered standing mesaurements
generally, there "is no difference", which means if something does exist, like you've said, its limited to our ears (in other words we don't have the right equipment to measure it, or accurate enough equipment to measure it, neither of these would surprise me (theres plenty of phenomena which we can't measure, or measure easily, with current methodology (and then you can be a real dork and let the "true sciences" people talk about Heisenberg-esque qualities of measurement
)))
BUT, with current technology, and current equipment, its inpercievable, TO the equipment (audio analyzers, oscilioscopes, spectrum analyzers, etc (honestly, I got a Q, if you're still at university, could you borrow their test equipment to run your own experiment? most universities have better test equipment than individual users, tech publications, and some private sector companies)), which means arguing it in ANY terms of "science", the naysayers will win by default (its a subjective claim of improvement against current data showing little to no difference (as in, difference may exist, but its more or less immeasurable (which goes back to subjective-ness "I can hear the difference between 0.003% THD and 0.0003% THD", even when theres papers that say thats impossible, from a scientific POV))
then, the next question has to arise:
if the machines are telling us "master, theres no difference, WE SWEARS IT MASTER" (yes, they're all Gollum)
but you're arguing "it may/has to exist", in a subjective nature, all, or at least a realistic majority of human subjects should report a difference, and it should be "the same" difference (for example if I say, all else equal, a 15" LF driver will produce more bass than a 6" LF driver, probably 99% of people I walk in front of the two and play some music for, will agree with it)
and as this thread, and probably a thousand more like it (on head-fi alone, then add in all of the other "stuff" on the internet about it, from both sides), show that it isn't "a standing majority", but that "cable believers" are a minority, or (at best) "half", and among these believers, theres MUCH disagreement over what a given cable will do or sound like (and it usually "sounds like whatever the owner wants it to sound like", reference all the "I got X cable for my hp's and it solved all of the issues, tightened up the bass, improved highs, un-veiled them, etc" threads), instead of "all 10 million of us believers feel that this APS cable sounds exactly like THIS, and does exactly THIS to the sound"
that debunks any potential of people being "genetically predispositioned audiophiles" (and I wouldn't buy into a theory that states some people are born better capable of hearing their systems
), because it isn't like color-blindness, or any other meterable predisposition (for example theres types of colorblindness, not "everyone for themselves")
inconclusive indeed.
