[Wodgy]

Here's an interesting new article doing a shootout between Nordost Valhalla power cords ($2500) and generic power cords:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...s-12-2004.html

 

[john_jcb]

A very interesting article. Aside from the test one thing that caught my eye was this part:

"Finally, and perhaps of greatest significance, the time it took to switch cords was longer than the generally accepted 5 second length of human auditory memory. This reduced what Manny terms “the differential sharpness of perception” of participants."

If it really is 5 seconds or any reasonable multiple it makes me wonder about many of the comments we post here. I know I have compared amps or headphones where the time between listening sessions could be measured in days rather than seconds. When I have used an A/B box and do immediate switching the differences are far less than I perceive when the switching is more casual.

 

[JohnFerrier]

From the conclusion: "Using the blind ABX protocol, we failed to hear any differences between an assortment of generic power cords and Nordost Valhalla."

Guess this partly explains why the need to have an explict DBT-free zone.

*Music* is so much more interesting to listen to than differences in wires. To each their own.


JF

 

[Wodgy]

Well, strictly speaking this is only a single blind test, so it's allowed in this forum.

I think john_jcb's point is interesting. People in this test were complaining that 5 second delays were too long to make accurate comparisons, but often times we wax poetic about audible differences in things (not just cables) that we heard months ago. Head-Fi meets are good solutions to this, because we can compare gear much more quickly.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy Well, strictly speaking this is only a single blind test, so it's allowed in this forum. I think john_jcb's point is interesting. People in this test were complaining that 5 second delays were too long to make accurate comparisons, but often times we wax poetic about audible differences in things (not just cables) that we heard months ago. Head-Fi meets are good solutions to this, because we can compare gear much more quickly.

Yes, quick switching is the best way to detect any differences. However, some people claim that the differences are very obvious. Why does the obviousness disappear with 5 minutes? Is that worth $2,500 to anyone?

Interesting, post BTW.


JF
(Still interested to see an ABX test that supports that wire differences are audible. TIA)

 

[Budgie]

There in lies the problem with tweaks. My opinions about cables and other such tweaks, changed dramatically when I realized my perceptions were not an absolute gauge of reality, and that I can be fooled into believing things that, with further examination, were not as I initially believed them to be. I now only trust in improvments in my system, that when tested multiple times over a prolonged period of time, gives consistent results.

 

[null]

I really like how the article blabs on and on for almost 3 page-lengths before it gets to the actual test.

 

[ServinginEcuador]

Power cable testing is, IMHO, one of the hardest to perform. IMO, it should be done with two identical rigs, with the only difference being the single wire in question. Maybe they should rig a way to hook two power cords to some sort of box with minimal wire leading to the IEC inlet of the item under test. You could power off the unit, and switch the power feeding the unit over, power the unit back up, and be listening again within 10 seconds.

For IC testing I have a different opinion. This should be done using a single rig, but with two outputs from the same source, and a selectable input on the amp. This allows for near instantaneous switching from one to the next. It is also repeatable as many times as is necessary to verify the results, and easy to do. Then, and only then, do I count the results of a cable swap as conclusive and valid! Yes, this introduces a switch into the signal path, but a high quality one will have a near negligable impact on the sound, and it will be applied equally to both cables.

Preparing for my last article for SoundStage! really opened my eyes about music memory, and how easy it is to gloss over what we think we heard. I all but disregard the opinions of those who try and tell how a new item in their musical chain sounds after days, weeks, or months of time between their last time spent with the old item. Even removing and inserting an IC, PC, or tubes makes it extremely difficult to accurately remember the differences of many apsects of the sound.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ServinginEcuador Preparing for my last article for SoundStage!...

Hi Doug,

I read your article and know the conclusion you drew.

I don't think that it is valid that the listener knows the configuration of the system when he/she makes a judgment about the sound. It really must be blind otherwise it's an informed decision.

You mention the microphonics of the aftermarket cable (which most people will agree is a negative quality of a cable). Noticeable microphonics would need to be removed as a variable during the test process.

I'm all for people having great sounding audio, but I've seen no objective evidence that cables make a difference. If the listener knows the configuration of the setup, I don't believe that the test is objective enough.


JF

 

[ServinginEcuador]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnFerrier I don't think that it is valid that the listener knows the configuration of the system when he/she makes a judgement about the sound. It really must be blind, otherwise it's an informed decision.

John,

I'm confused about this point. Are you saying that if I participate in a test that uses MY system that I am somehow LESS accurate or inaccurate when introducing two power cables into the equation? Or, are you saying that those who are familiar with the system in the test will be able to hear the actual differences, which shouldn't happen? Or, are you saying that the best way to test something is to start with a 100% unfamiliar system, with unfamiliar music, and then try and determine what's going on when two variables are switched around?

I would think just the opposite. Using totally unfamiliar equipment will make the results LESS likely to be accurate. There are simply too many new variables to work with in this testing. By using a known system, one that I am very familiar with, I can easily switch between two items under test, and quickly tell which one sounds better, or that I prefer. I can also tell which one makes changes to which part of the sonic spectrum. When testing Wayne's Woodies CD3K I was easily able to tell the differences when comparing them to my familiar and stock cans. It took about 10 seconds to hear the main differences between the two, and within an hour I could have done a full review. The differences were immediately noticeable, and not in the least bit subtle.

In the case of my Equinox review, I elimiated everything possible from the realm of ambiguity in order to make sure I could accurately portray what I heard. The microphonics of teh cable is only an issue when one moves about WHILE the music was playing. While listening critically I tend to sit perfectly still and just listen.

I understand your viewpoint, I just hold the opposite opinion. I don't mind that you have your opinion, nor do I fault you for having it. I simply feel differently.

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

When I have used an A/B box and do immediate switching the differences are far less than I perceive when the switching is more casual.

easy the johnny ! this is a DBT free zone and ye be in peril of crossing the DMZ dude !

My take on any A vs B comparison is that most have no merit at all !

huh ?

that's right , no merit.How can a person evaluate something they have not lived with and do not know ? Sounding "different" does not always mean better though that is always the first thought.

"wow ! That sounded REALLY good" when all it was is different.Live with it for a while and then you will know if it actually is better but ten minutes will tell you nothing.

quick ancedote : A guy buys a DVD player with full intent to modify it begfore he even has listened to it in bone stock form just because everyone else says it is an improvement.The guy buys it,sends it out or deos the mod himself and then reports in a forum how much better it sounds than the stock DVD player.

Huh ?

How would this knucklehead know that ? what is his reference point for this "better" sound ? How does he know it is not a step backwards ?
It may very well be and actual improvement but unless compared directly with another identical unit over time any findings are suspect.
you need to live with a piece of equipment and KNOW it intimately then only do mods one step at a time then listen after each step or your findings are invalidated in my mind.Wholesale modifications will never tell you anything about which were actually worth it and which are just blowing smoke.

a person needs to know what to expect from a piece of known equipment using a disc they can damn near sing/play verbatum.How else to know when something expected is missing or something never before heard has appeared ?

no two hour five second cable swap will tell you anything unless you already want to hear it anyway unless it is a serious upgrade ,so much a step forward that it leaves no doubt and is easily heard.

just my take on comparing audio goods.for me it is "live with it" and then maybe some conclusion will come of it.If not go for the least expensive......unless you are one of those guys who think "if it looks good it sounds good" even without any evidence to back it up .

again,just me being me

 

[ServinginEcuador]

John,

OBTW, if you have a pair of Senn 650s, when I return to the states in 2006 I'll happily loan you mine with the Equinox cable and headphone splitter. If you don't think that cables make any difference, I would say that you won't think that way after hearing two 650s with a proper testing setup.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ServinginEcuador John, I'm confused about this point. Are you saying that if I participate in a test that uses MY system that I am somehow LESS accurate or inaccurate when introducing two power cables into the equation? Or, are you saying that those who are familiar with the system in the test will be able to hear the actual differences, which shouldn't happen? Or, are you saying that the best way to test something is to start with a 100% unfamiliar system, with unfamiliar music, and then try and determine what's going on when two variables are switched around? I would think just the opposite. Using totally unfamiliar equipment will make the results LESS likely to be accurate. There are simply too many new variables to work with in this testing. By using a known system, one that I am very familiar with, I can easily switch between two items under test, and quickly tell which one sounds better, or that I prefer. I can also tell which one makes changes to which part of the sonic spectrum. When testing Wayne's Woodies CD3K I was easily able to tell the differences when comparing them to my familiar and stock cans. It took about 10 seconds to hear the main differences between the two, and within an hour I could have done a full review. The differences were immediately noticeable, and not in the least bit subtle. In the case of my Equinox review, I elimiated everything possible from the realm of ambiguity in order to make sure I could accurately portray what I heard. The microphonics of teh cable is only an issue when one moves about WHILE the music was playing. While listening critically I tend to sit perfectly still and just listen. I understand your viewpoint, I just hold the opposite opinion. I don't mind that you have your opinion, nor do I fault you for having it. I simply feel differently.

Hi Doug,

You can evaluate your own system. However, *you* can't know the variable, if any, that changes during the evaluation.


Hi rickcr42,

I'll confess, I'm not sure what DBT-free means. I have a lot of respect for this site and the people that post here, so I stop if I should.


JF

 

[nanahachi]

DBT = double blind test

I am with SIE in this discussion. I want the only variable to be the new component I am evaluating. I listen to my rig intensely, everyday. When I placed a new PC into my system, I put on a CD I knew like the back of my hand, sat back, and listened, after having first listened to it with my original PC. The only variable was the power cord, and the differences were not subtle.

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nanahachi DBT = double blind test

Well, SBT is enough to seperate imagination from reality.


JF