Interesting power cord test

[rickcr42]

Quote:

I'll confess, I'm not sure what DBT-free means.

sorry man,a slight bad joke misunderstood and aimed at john jcb.

DBT=Double blind Test and a thing that causes so many arguments between the techy and the audiophile camps that it is not something that we care for around here in the name of civility -which head-fi has in spades over many audio sites.

so it is ME that needs to apologize to you for the misunderstanding.

I am sorry if my attempt at humor made you feel uncomfortable for even a moment and my only excuse is that i failed to use an emoticon to convey where i was coming from.that is why they are there-to convey "intent" when words alone can be misunderstood.

rick

 

[JohnFerrier]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 so there I was , minding my own damn business.........

Yep, I'm with ya, and the strangest damn thing happened....

http://www.lumberjack.org/westcoast/chokers.htm (a lucky hit)


JF

 

[Sovkiller]

IMO one more time this test demostrate that placebo effect is stronger that what we actually are able to realize. Not a bad thing, if you really feel that one thing is better and you are happy with it, go ahead and replace the whole system, but at the end, the reality shows that this is not a fact, at least can't be proved as such, the same happen some time ago with the use of some IC in some article that is around, and the same happen IMO with the Wireworld Cable Comparator CD, (I have a copy, if someone is ineterested in it let me know, anyway it was distributed free of charge, so they don't mind that any could copy it) on the CD they tested 15 different cables and recorder through them, IMO all sounded very similar if not the same, if anybody is interested in giving it a try, just PM me, and I will mail the disc without the covers, and in different order, you tell me later which cable is which......if you can of course

 

[Scrith]

I think the idea that blind A/B tests are the best way to judge audio equipment is inherently flawed. I think the brain has a tendency (sub-consciously, perhaps) to compensate for changes that makes it difficult (particularly for samples that are very similar) for the conscious part of the brain to differentiate between the two sources.

I think listening for an extended period of time to one sample and knowing that you are about to experience something different helps you analyze the differences better, in many cases.

The theory that double-blind tests are the only 100% accurate way of comparing two sources breaks down as soon as you accept the fact that the brain is not capable of perfect (bit perfect?) scientific analysis (something I think most people would agree with).

 

[rickcr42]

Sov man,that test is about the worst and about as invalid as any A/B test I have heard of in my life.

comparing cables by recording through them,burned to a CD after going through a sound card/ADC,then played back on a system AFTER a DAC stage where they will go through at LEAST two more stages of cables and no one can hear a difference ?

And that is a TEST of how a thing sounds ???!!!??????

Kinda like comparing TVs by having a video of the various TV screens played back on your own TV.

obviously anything on the screen will be colored by the television it is being viewd on,as are the cables colored by all the crap between the actual cable itself and the end listener.

Cover your eyes with tape then compare sunglasses-it would be as valid and maybe even more so.

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 Sov man,that test is about the worst and about as invalid as any A/B test I have heard of in my life. comparing cables by recording through them,burned to a CD after going through a sound card/ADC,then played back on a system AFTER a DAC stage where they will go through at LEAST two more stages of cables and no one can hear a difference ? And that is a TEST of how a thing sounds ???!!!?????? Kinda like comparing TVs by having a video of the various TV screens played back on your own TV. obviously anything on the screen will be colored by the television it is being viewd on,as are the cables colored by all the crap between the actual cable itself and the end listener. Cover your eyes with tape then compare sunglasses-it would be as valid and maybe even more so.

Not at all it Rick, it was not done like that, who told you that? Nope they have a recording studio, with high end equipment, no soundcards, no DACs, no nothing similar, they recorded on a tape through those cables, and later on transfer the master recording to a CD, anyway, I was not the one that did the test, so the complain should be directed to them, not me, in any case. But I'm assuming that if a company took the time and effort, in doing those tests this way, using ultra high end equipment, and their time, was not just because they are stupids, and want to do something really useless, don't you think???.........Even when at the end IMO it was...LOL...

BTW they were "comparing cables" not trying to determine in accuracy, how they sound, just trying to determine differences between them, like one is more detailed, extended, warm, etc....to do so IMO it doesn't matter in which system you play the recording, the one brighter will be brighter in any system later....

 

[rickcr42]

uh sov dude....in order to transfer to Cd you MUST go throgh an AD Converter stage to get to the digital domain which in turn HAS TO be converted back to analog at some point which in my mind is already two analog stages at the minimum between the cable and the ears.and since every single active device puts a sonic stamp on any signal passing through it i still fail to see how the test can be valid.
Unless i am missing something,and it does happen on occasion,the only valid test of any upgrade is in the context of the system it is to be used with and there is no "one size fits all" unless we all have the same exact equipment and the same taste in music plus what we find pleasing to listen to.
Side-by-side tests on a CD just don't do it for me man .Any results are colored by the in-between electronics just like looking at the world through rose colored glasses colors all.

Just me i guess

 

[tortie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

Great link. Thanks for the post.

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 uh sov dude....in order to transfer to Cd you MUST go through an AD Converter stage to get to the digital domain which in turn HAS TO be converted back to analog at some point which in my mind is already two analog stages at the minimum between the cable and the ears.and since every single active device puts a sonic stamp on any signal passing through it i still fail to see how the test can be valid. Unless i am missing something,and it does happen on occasion,the only valid test of any upgrade is in the context of the system it is to be used with and there is no "one size fits all" unless we all have the same exact equipment and the same taste in music plus what we find pleasing to listen to. Side-by-side tests on a CD just don't do it for me man .Any results are colored by the in-between electronics just like looking at the world through rose colored glasses colors all. Just me i guess

Rick:
I know that, and I do not agree with that procedure neither, it was not me who develop it, just for the records, for more information just take a look here.....but one thing I want to clear, the CD they offer sounds as any other CD, was recorded with the same procedure and equipment as any other if not better, not sure if it was originally recorded analog or digital, maybe it was digital, but which is the difference in testing your gear with that CD, or with any other, let's say The Dark Side of the Moon", the differences should be the same, the one that is dull is dull, the one that is bright should be is brighter.

IMO all of them sound pretty similar, and as I'm not a cable believer myself.....as I have stated many times, to a certain degree is OK with me, from this point on, or the differences are extremely subtle, to the point that I do not perceive them, or are inexistent.....at least to my ears OTOH, the Gear associated has an important roll, one equipment is more accurate than others, and will reproduce those differences in a more noticeable way, but as this is not my case neither (el cheapo gear here), so I will leave the cables for the gurus here, and will try to upgrade and tune the rest, that will give you a more noticeable effect for sure. IMO cables are just a tweak, to make a system more enjoyable, but them will not make you hate, or love, anything...if you does not before....



.

 

[rickcr42]

again sov i can not agree at all that this is a valid test of cables.Playing a recording of a cable through MY cables makes zero sense if I am trying to get to the way that cable sounds.and what about system matching ? A dull cable on your system may sound bright on mine and visa versa.
Not arguing with you personally man just the proceedure they used to validate a test that is doomed to failure if actual cable comparison is the goal.
A real cable requires a real world test with actual audio equipment and not a second hand recording with who knows what going on in the signal chain .

again i use the sunglasses analogy and maybe even up it to camera lense color filter status.Everything has a sound and hence must be inscluded in the results.A high definaition broadcast recorded on a DVD reacorder then transfered to regular DVD allowing me toi watch it does not mean i am watching the original broadcast but a reduced definition version of it.And my TV may reproduce it better than yours so the comprison would be moot if the discussion was about the picture quality.Get my drift man ? A copy of something is just that with each generation degrading the original.

again though dude,maybe it is just me and i am missing something like the point.But it seems screwy on the surface to use a recording and not the original in a system context with "known" sonics and impedances

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 again sov i can not agree at all that this is a valid test of cables.Playing a recording of a cable through MY cables makes zero sense if I am trying to get to the way that cable sounds.and what about system matching ? A dull cable on your system may sound bright on mine and visa versa. Not arguing with you personally man just the proceedure they used to validate a test that is doomed to failure if actual cable comparison is the goal. A real cable requires a real world test with actual audio equipment and not a second hand recording with who knows what going on in the signal chain . again i use the sunglasses analogy and maybe even up it to camera lense color filter status.Everything has a sound and hence must be inscluded in the results.A high definaition broadcast recorded on a DVD reacorder then transfered to regular DVD allowing me toi watch it does not mean i am watching the original broadcast but a reduced definition version of it.And my TV may reproduce it better than yours so the comprison would be moot if the discussion was about the picture quality.Get my drift man ? A copy of something is just that with each generation degrading the original. again though dude,maybe it is just me and i am missing something like the point.But it seems screwy on the surface to use a recording and not the original in a system context with "known" sonics and impedances

Again Rick, I do not agree with that procedure, and in part the final result I got here, was probably for that reason, I'm hearing the cable through my cables, but that is the way they explain it, and implemented it, what we could do other than dismiss the test....I was just trying to explain their points, OTOH maybe you are right, but i do not believe that they are completelly ignorant on that, ot the point of making such mistake, something we are missing, that is why I link the page, if you have chance, read it and see if you cna find any valid point there.....

 

[Hunter_Killer]

If you really put that much focus upon spotting minute (and possibly imagined) differences then I feel sorry for you. Youve forgotten what its all about.

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunter_Killer If you really put that much focus upon spotting minute (and possibly imagined) differences then I feel sorry for you. Youve forgotten what its all about.

If you read my sig, you will notice that this is the same I say, I have not upgraded my cables in years, I don't care about those little differences (while there are others bigger and more noticeable that you could go for, like a better ehadphone or amp)....and at the end, you should listen the music instead of the gear, I try to enjoy what I have, is the time for a change comes, well I will go for it....

 

[rickcr42]

hehe,this is gettin' to be a regular conversation man !

anyway................

when explained from their point of view it makes sense on the surface but if I was to record my system and also record my neighbors system and then sent you the CD to playback on your system do you really think you could make a judgement on whether mine is or is not better than my neighbors ? (it is but saying so would be bragging...ooops !

)
I don't see how it could be a valid test when all the "extras" of the Analog Input Buffer>AD Converter>CD Burner/Transport>DA Converter>Analog Line stage/Filters are all involved in the process .But even say it could be used as a valid comparison for arguments sake.Say the differences were wide enough to be clearly heard and compared easily.

This would still have no bearing on if the cable in question would sound good in your system man.Maybe you can hear which is brighter and which rolled off in the highs on the CD but with what load impedance was it tested ? Tube gear ? Solid State ? Class A ? Are there frequency peaks or dips in the electronics being used for the eval ?
Stating the equipment is "High Quality" or even "The Best Made" tells you nothing about the actual sound of that particular cable in the context of your system or needs.What if a particular cable has a peak in the frequency response that is right at the spot where your system has a dip ? You will end up with a smooth response and think the cable rules but on another system where both have peaks at the same point in the response it will come off sounding bright and edgy.How can i know from a "distance" and second hand what the overall system sonics were and its strengths and weaknesses unless i can use a known "control" componant or cable in the context of THAT system and do a one-on-one evaluation over time ?
I am exaggerating a bit on the cable response thing as an example of the possible flaws in the thinking.Most differences are very small and it would take a really really bad cable design to stand out from the crowd in a manner easily heard.The good ones,and that is most modern cables above a certain price point,,have only minor differences and it takes some time to do a proper evaluation and that with well known music so you know what to expect.These moinor differences are probably what is behinfd many choosing a cable for its looks over any sonic superiority.Since cables are now audio "art" it is not who has the best sounding but who has the best 'looking" cables that wins the votes.
And the fact is that most folks automatically choose anything different sounding immediately as better sounding but once the novelty of a new thing wears off and the serious listening begins,THEN you will hear past the initial "shock/awe" and decide if the cable in question is a step forward or a step back.
I think the hardest part of doing an actual reveiw is trying to explain to someone that has entirely different system requirements and maybe even musical taste how this sounds in a my system while touting the good or the bad qualities of said cable.A bad reveiw can hurt a manufacturer as a good one can help but this can only be a guideline and the real listening must be done by the potential customer.did i mention that cables are THE HARDEST review ?
No easy task and probably why i steer clear of the subjective arguments,the "this sounds better than example X" stuff and instead concentrate on the hookup/operation/design areas of audio.It is there that I feel comfortable in my knowledge ,hell maybe even cocky

BTW-the link was and is an interesting one.Anything that moves a discussion and does not turn into a flame war is a discussion where things can maybe be learned and that is a good thing.Nice find man

Fickle Rick

 

[Sovkiller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 hehe,this is gettin' to be a regular conversation man ! anyway................ when explained from their point of view it makes sense on the surface but if I was to record my system and also record my neighbors system and then sent you the CD to playback on your system do you really think you could make a judgement on whether mine is or is not better than my neighbors ? (it is but saying so would be bragging...ooops ! ) I don't see how it could be a valid test when all the "extras" of the Analog Input Buffer>AD Converter>CD Burner/Transport>DA Converter>Analog Line stage/Filters are all involved in the process .But even say it could be used as a valid comparison for arguments sake.Say the differences were wide enough to be clearly heard and compared easily. This would still have no bearing on if the cable in question would sound good in your system man.Maybe you can hear which is brighter and which rolled off in the highs on the CD but with what load impedance was it tested ? Tube gear ? Solid State ? Class A ? Are there frequency peaks or dips in the electronics being used for the eval ? Stating the equipment is "High Quality" or even "The Best Made" tells you nothing about the actual sound of that particular cable in the context of your system or needs.What if a particular cable has a peak in the frequency response that is right at the spot where your system has a dip ? You will end up with a smooth response and think the cable rules but on another system where both have peaks at the same point in the response it will come off sounding bright and edgy.How can i know from a "distance" and second hand what the overall system sonics were and its strengths and weaknesses unless i can use a known "control" componant or cable in the context of THAT system and do a one-on-one evaluation over time ? I am exaggerating a bit on the cable response thing as an example of the possible flaws in the thinking.Most differences are very small and it would take a really really bad cable design to stand out from the crowd in a manner easily heard.The good ones,and that is most modern cables above a certain price point,,have only minor differences and it takes some time to do a proper evaluation and that with well known music so you know what to expect.These moinor differences are probably what is behinfd many choosing a cable for its looks over any sonic superiority.Since cables are now audio "art" it is not who has the best sounding but who has the best 'looking" cables that wins the votes. And the fact is that most folks automatically choose anything different sounding immediately as better sounding but once the novelty of a new thing wears off and the serious listening begins,THEN you will hear past the initial "shock/awe" and decide if the cable in question is a step forward or a step back. I think the hardest part of doing an actual reveiw is trying to explain to someone that has entirely different system requirements and maybe even musical taste how this sounds in a my system while touting the good or the bad qualities of said cable.A bad reveiw can hurt a manufacturer as a good one can help but this can only be a guideline and the real listening must be done by the potential customer.did i mention that cables are THE HARDEST review ? No easy task and probably why i steer clear of the subjective arguments,the "this sounds better than example X" stuff and instead concentrate on the hookup/operation/design areas of audio.It is there that I feel comfortable in my knowledge ,hell maybe even cocky BTW-the link was and is an interesting one.Anything that moves a discussion and does not turn into a flame war is a discussion where things can maybe be learned and that is a good thing.Nice find man Fickle Rick

I will give up after this point, but just for clarification, I'm confused now, you confused me....LOL...yes I'm blaming you now...LOL....

Will you keep your same opinion on the test, even when you know that all the A....D....A converters and all those listed above stuff and parts of a system by you, and equipment used was the same in all cases, for all cables, and just the cable in question was chaged???

In other words, yes we are using our system, the only we have and the only we will use with the cables, but our system is the same to hear all the tests they made, with their same equipment always with the same piece of music always, the only thing changed in all cases was the cable in question, the rest was always the same for all tests, and from the instrument to our ears........if there is any diference, in any case, will be only due to the cable....IMO of course....but IME it was any.....all sounded pretty similar to me, if not the same.

Which will be the difference between this CD and any other CD to evaluate the cables, are not all CDs recorded in this similar way? Why then insist in calling one CD a reference CD or a master recording CD, if you never know the equipment they used, the cables they used, the equalization they used, etc....(same you were stating above right?) BTW they were not trying to sell any cable with the CD, indeed they even tested a monster cable, it is just a CD to show the differences between 15 cables of the market, including one of theirs, but they never stated this one of that is the best, just here is a CD with the differences in the cables, make your own conclusions....for this point of view IMO it is valid, for an exact evaluation of one particular cable of course it is not....