manueljenkin
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2015
- Posts
- 410
- Likes
- 218
Some YouTube videos show differences with power cables. Even the spectrogram and audio waveforms look different.
Last edited:
as I said, to me cables are cables.Where did I say absolutely accurately? I'm well aware of the principle of measurement uncertainty. Are you suggesting that the uncertainty in taking standard electromagnetic measurements (i.e. traceable to the SI reference) from a set of different cables is higher than that in the subjective assessment of their audible differences? I'm familiar with the former, not the latter, but I'd find that hard the believe!
Was it double blind? Controlled by a non-interested third party? Would you mind to share your methodology for replication and analysis?I was very skeptical that cables make much of a difference in sound quality. After hundreds of hours of doing A/B testing across all combinations of amps/dacs/streamers/headphones/IEMs/ear tips/cables/music source, etc, I have a decent feel for what improves sound and by how much across all of the 4 headphones, 6 amplifiers and 5 IEMs I own. I came in with an open mind and I only trust my own ears. I was a Jazz musician, so I have a pretty good ear.
After that exercise, I can say with some conviction that cable quality absolutely matters and makes a difference in sound quality. Much more than I expected. The biggest improvement was with my current Vision Ear VE8 IEMs. When I did a listening test across all of my demo tracks, I heard sibilance on certain tracks. Then, I read some reviews where other reviewers detected the same thing. For a person who is sensitive to treble, this is a potential showstopper for an audio product. I replaced the stock cable and silver plated cable that the prior owner included with a high end sliver plated copper wire and wow did that make a difference. There was a noticeable reduction in harshness of the highs and the sibilance is gone. The Sound stage increased as did the clarity and tightness of the bass.
So, to answer the question of the OP, there is nothing you can say or do to change what I have experienced with my own ears. Cable quality makes a difference to sound quality. Your opinion and your data does not trump my personal experience.
for the past 50 years, scientists have been sharpening their test equipments and methods, but to claim it is fairly easy, and that we have reached the summit point where we can measure absolutely everything accurately is nothing but an arrogant day dream.
How do you spell a raspberry being blown?No one is saying that. What we are saying is that we can measure everything HUMAN EARS CAN HEAR. g.
No, it was a double deaf. In one case, my ears were searing and hurt. In the other, they didn’t.Was it double blind? Controlled by a non-interested third party? Would you mind to share your methodology for replication and analysis?
No one is saying that. What we are saying is that we can measure everything HUMAN EARS CAN HEAR. Our testing equipment is more sensitive and accurate than our ears.
It's possible to measure differences between cables, but those differences are probably far below the threshold of hearing.
Why do you say that? I'm genuinely intrigued as to what measurands we could investigate to characterise human hearing better then we have done so far?How do you spell a raspberry being blown?
Blurrrrrrrrr....
You're not proposing a sound alternative though! I ask the same question, what else can we do, other than sit large groups of people in rooms and ask them to listen to things, analyse the data and draw conclusions from that data. What other measurands could we investigate to define "what" and "how much" we hear, that we haven't tried or defined already?. The limits/bounds of hearing perception is still not well defined scientifically yet. You love to speak your personal opinions, and disguise them as if they were facts.
You would not do straight measurements. You would use sound signatures and artificial intelligence matching programs to predict which sound would be preferred by a user based on their stored database of preferences as they relate to other peoples similar preferences. Patterns of preferences will predict quality.Why do you say that? I'm genuinely intrigued as to what measurands we could investigate to characterise human hearing better then we have done so far?
what is a sound signature? and surely we are still in a room full of blindfolded people to define preference?You would not do straight measurements. You would use sound signatures and artificial intelligence matching programs to predict which sound would be preferred by a user based on their stored database of preferences as they relate to other peoples similar preferences. Patterns of preferences will predict quality.
You're not proposing a sound alternative though! I ask the same question, what else can we do, other than sit large groups of people in rooms and ask them to listen to things, analyse the data and draw conclusions from that data. What other measurands could we investigate to define "what" and "how much" we hear, that we haven't tried or defined already?