[eucariote]

Currently working off a 2 million dollar grant.. Sadly it's all allocated to shiny widgets.

But with two cables and enough samples from a blind tester (guesses as to which sounds 'better'), you can figure out if they can truly hear a difference between the cables.

 

[haloxt]

Why should I or anyone else contribute to a science that is firm in its belief that cables make no difference? Even if it happens, just like 320kbps was proven audibly different from lossless, all you can do is shove it down the throat of science and hope most of it stays down. And most of it won't, it will regurgitate it and you will have to try to shove it down again, and after many years science will still refuse to accept it in whole, with all these idiots telling you you're wrong. When science is so bulimic, you just don't bother contributing anything to it, despite its pleas for you to shove crap down its throat.

 

[eucariote]

??? If you're referring my posts- I'm pointing out a universal technique for answering empirical questions. As far as I've seen, nobody has done that test with cables. So my conclusion about the effectiveness of cables was "nobody knows".

But I'm ready to accept the results of such a test, regardless of outcome. Just as I accept the conclusion that L-dopa leads to statistically significant increases of the chemical that is otherwise missing in the brains of people with Parkinson's, so alleviating their symptoms. Which was shown using said technique..

Reject the technique if you want, but I (and the rest of the human race) would like to see a workable alternative

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Young Spade /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now I'm not saying that I'm entitled to the knowledge that it doesn't and I fully advocate the education of others when they're wrong because who likes people who unknowingly spread wrong information? But once you explain it to someone, remember that they are entitled to their own opinions and sadly some people just aren't going to listen.

... and listen to what truth exactly? The crux of the matter lies in that question. We often think we have a handle on the truth and it's really not so. If you hear a difference and a test or many tests for that matter, do not demonstrate what you hear, then you have one of two choices... a) count yourself as being misled OR b) count the experiment/s as invalid or misleading. You move on from there. Which option you choose depends on how convincing the difference was for you. There are various barometers one can choose to convince oneself either way. For instance, you tend to see or hear what you look for. What of someone who hears a difference he wasn't really expecting or cared to hear? What of someone who hears a difference that is detrimental, i.e., a difference he/she doesn't want to hear?? I am personally tending towards believing that they do make a difference. As with all things so controversial, differences aren't always apparent or marked. I trust my own ears on this one.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haloxt /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why should I or anyone else contribute to a science that is firm in its belief that cables make no difference?

Do you believe this is the case in this instance, or just that of a particular sect on head-fi? If that's the case, then this represents a very serious impediment in any genuinely serious effort in finding the truth in all of this. If you don't seek then you will not find. I trust my own ears enough to not be interested in empiric proof on this one. Afterall, in this entire business you have to trust your ears or else you'll obsess over and confuse yourself about a lot of stuff regarding headphones, amps, dacs etc.

This amp sounds better than that one. This power supply makes a difference. Are these observations during any of our listening experiences really true? Do we DBX all our experiences to validate them? Some subjective differences we can never hope to resolve through experimentation.

 

[haloxt]

I wouldn't trust any "scientific proof" that cables make a difference unless everyone involved in the tests and anyone who can be cross-examined submit themselves to various lie detection tests. The time for disinterested research is long past, all you have are people who are entrenched in their fanaticism to disprove or prove cables with method and analysis flawed by their irrational interest in being right, and it's only a matter of time before some idiot cheats in a DBX to "prove" cables make a difference. Neither side is capable of providing a proper method to test the mathematical or conceptual adequacy of the idea of audible cable differences because they are too busy squabbling. Anyone interested in controversial aspects of audio, whether jitter, circuit design and components, or burn-in, should steer clear from proving things to science because science is already set in its beliefs, and if you want to make any kind of progress you must ignore their whining. Just take for example how so many people on head-fi still insist burn-in isn't real when there's been measurements suggesting big changes in speaker drivers from burn-in. Do they ever admit they are wrong or apologize they may have reached a premature conclusion or try to invalidate the experiment scientifically? Or do they just keep running around saying burn-in isn't real while completely ignoring the burn-in measurements?

 

[Skylab]

Audio cables absolutely do make a difference - without them, you get no sound.

 

[Shark_Jump]

... only if you plug them in.

 

[b0dhi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eucariote /img/forum/go_quote.gif But I'm ready to accept the results of such a test, regardless of outcome. Just as I accept the conclusion that L-dopa leads to statistically significant increases of the chemical that is otherwise missing in the brains of people with Parkinson's, so alleviating their symptoms. Which was shown using said technique..

You'll notice they didn't simply ask the patients what their L-DOPA levels were. They measure them. The same is required in audio. I.e., measure the effects on the brain, not to simply rely on the highly fallible, subjective, conscious assessment of the listeners (blinded or otherwise).

 

[Publius]

There's a vast difference between what works to win a logical argument like this, and what works to actually convince people to question their beliefs.

For most people, the most effective way to challenge their beliefs about cables is to invite them to DBT their own claims - not to read the results of others, but to practice it themselves. Obviously this doesn't prove much in the wider debate, but it has a vast effect on the tester, who sincerely has a belief of audibility. It's one thing to claim "cables make a difference!" but it's an astoundingly different thing to claim "that, right there, did you hear that? That's the difference with this cable". Demonstrating the falsehood of the latter, through a blind test, doesn't disprove the former claim in any way, but has far more relevance to the utterer.

Generally, people reconciling such beliefs with a negative result in a well-run ABX test of their own listening will either reject their own beliefs, or engage in all kinds of ad-hoc arguments which make them look foolish and radicalize their beliefs. At which point they're a lost cause anyway.

Pio2001 got a huge amount of mileage that way with power cable tests conducted through a French forum; I remember him claiming how many people were deeply impressed by the results.

 

[tvrboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Publius /img/forum/go_quote.gif There's a vast difference between what works to win a logical argument like this, and what works to actually convince people to question their beliefs.

This is true. People can and will believe easily demonstrable falsehoods. Look how many people believe that Obama wasn't born in America. Or the moon landings were faked. Or the Earth is 5,000 years old. I wouldn't worry so much about cables. I would worry about the mass delusions that are much more dangerous...

 

[eucariote]

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif You'll notice they didn't simply ask the patients what their L-DOPA levels were. They measure them. The same is required in audio. I.e., measure the effects on the brain, not to simply rely on the highly fallible, subjective, conscious assessment of the listeners (blinded or otherwise).

Assessing discrimination abilities in humans from conscious reports is absolutely routine, and can be measured and analyzed statistically to the point of quantifying a significance score. In fact, the measurement and analysis of choice responses of brain-altered (blind, autistic , etc. etc.) humans is one of the main techniques for establishing relationships between brain systems and behavioral function.

See post # 9 for instructions on how to apply hypothesis testing, measurement and statistical analysis to settle the question of whether cables have perceptible auditory effects

 

[Leny]

The cable 'debate' reminds me of religion. There are about 2,000 different religions in this world all claiming to be absolutely 'right'. Makes me smile. Must be some seriously pi553ed-off gods up there! Perhaps they should argue it amongst themselves... or maybe they are too busy arguing about cables?

And we have all these folks in forums and magazines claiming that their cable assessments can't be wrong, claiming that they are absolutely 'right', claiming that their subjective opinion is 'fact'; all misleading those innocent people who follow-on seeking the facts and the truth... all so very, very sad. A magnificent indictment of human stupidity. Makes me glad I'm an alien.

 

[immtbiker]

This is why we, as mods, and not members, almost always need to close any threads about cables, religion and politics.
It always proves to be a no-win situation with two separate camps pitching their tents, trying to prove why they're right.
Which almost always turns into heated debates that include slandering.
I, personally hear ginormous differences in cables and burn-in affects, but if you don't, the you are either not as sensitive as me, or are a very lucky person.
I wish I couldn't hear the difference between lampshade cable right out of the box, and a Siltech IC with 300 hours of burn-in.

All I ask, is that the non-believers take one thing in mind. Since the split seems to be around 50-50, then just try to keep an open mind to what the other 50% are saying. Every headphone from $300 - $3000 have changed monumentally to me, after at least a minimum of 100 hours of play. That, and there are a good deal of manufacturers that insist on a minimum of burn-in.
With that said, just keep an open mind that it might be possible. One of the biggest changes that I've ever heard in a phone was the HF-2's. They sounded horrible out of the box (IMHO) but improve drastically after 60 hours.
If you don't hear it, then that's fine too.

No one is going to win "whether components benefit from burn-in, or that their god is better than anyone else's, or that a donkey is better than an elephant when it comes to politics.

But, I will leave you with one thought. If no one thought that their religion was better than anyone else's, then we would have no reason for so much death and destruction and the world would be a much more productive place, and we would be much farther along in loving each other.

I come in peace.
To serve man (it's a cookbook, dammit, a cookbook).
[/end of rant]

 

[Happy Camper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leny /img/forum/go_quote.gif The cable 'debate' reminds me of religion. There are about 2,000 different religions in this world all claiming to be absolutely 'right'. Makes me smile. Must be some seriously pi553ed-off gods up there! Perhaps they should argue it amongst themselves... or maybe they are too busy arguing about cables? And we have all these folks in forums and magazines claiming that their cable assessments can't be wrong, claiming that they are absolutely 'right', claiming that their subjective opinion is 'fact'; all misleading those innocent people who follow-on seeking the facts and the truth... all so very, very sad. A magnificent indictment of human stupidity. Makes me glad I'm an alien.

Well even aliens aren't to bring religion into these topics. Even saying "religion" can be an offense.

Besides, everyone knows the Gods use plasma connections.