[maverickronin]

@beeman
 
Here's a synonym for your first definition.  (Primary and secondary are the meat and potatoes, but tertiary is still something that doesn't actually exist.)
 
The point is, outside of chemistry, or getting high, (a specific group of organic molecules which have nothing to do with electrical or acoustic sciences) nothing ethereal actually exists in this universe, like it does in the fictional D&D universe.  If you actually had those powers in RL you'd be a super hero/villain as your resistance to being corrupted by power dictates, and if I were a super hero/villain I'd have better thing to use my powers on than being able to perceive minor differences in headphone cables.  I'd probably start out stopping crime and whanot until the power went to my head and I made myself dictator of some poor benighted nation somewhere, but that's just me.

 

[beeman458]

I'd probably start out stopping crime and whanot until the power went to my head and I made myself dictator of some poor benighted nation somewhere, but that's just me.
 
O-kay.  Moving forward.
 

 

[Uncle Erik]

maverickronin, of course the luminiferous æther exists. It was a widely accepted theory before the haters ruined it for everyone.


It is also possible to transmute base metals into gold. The skeptics are simply suppressing the evidence.


And all you need to know about your health is contained in your black bile, yellow bile, phlegm, and blood. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. They're simply trying to ruin the fun.

 

[maverickronin]

Darn skeptics!  They ruin everything!
 
Quote:

where has all the magic gone​

lost behind or lost along​

a victim of the pulse of our society​

don't you miss the ancient times​

the riddles and the subtle signs​

a relative perspective on reality  ​

 

[Uncle Erik]

I found this to profoundly improve my system:

www.instantwishmaker.com

Just put the CD in your system, make a wish, and it all comes true!

 

[maverickronin]

Wow...
 
And I thought The Secret was out there.  There is no limit to the crazy.

 

[Uncle Erik]

You haven't visited www.timecube.com, have you? Just try to disprove that one.

[Warning: seriously wacky and now begins with an offensive rant before getting to the crazy. It used to be nothing but crazy. For non-offensive weirdness, there's always zombo.com.]

 

[maverickronin]

I'm passingly familiar with it.  Time Cube is pretty much the pinnacle of internet wingnuterey, with its mix of incomprehensible rambling and web design that would have been laughed at in 1995.  I fear for my sanity so I haven't read the whole thing, but as far as I can tell he isn't trying to sell anything so I think he's more or less harmless.

 

[haloxt]

The time cube guy is a very good debater, pretty much everything he has said is technically unassailable. Those statements that can be questioned he will probably successfully sneak out of. His game is to make it easy for him to be misinterpreted, and when he is successful in this, he technically wins the debate. And his victory is made that much sweeter because his detractors think they are obviously right and he is obviously wrong, and to the degree they do so shows how poorly versed they are in rhetoric. People who understand his game do not dare challenge him in debate, because they know he has set up a near-impenetrable fortress of theory.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

 
Quote:

InnerSpace wrote:
 
Just accept that the sonic improvement will be very slight and very subtle.
 
Agreeing with your above, what the anti-cable guys don't get, for me, the improvement lies in about 1/10 of one percent and helps with clipping and opens cords up and helps with the decay of the cymbal or the pluck of a string.  Many times, the improvement lies below my listening threshold and is picked up on the emotional or ethereal level.  And by ethereal, that means untestable by today's standards.
 
.............

The problem with the above is that the majority of pro-cablers are no so clear that cables make up such a small part of the sound. It is easy to find exaggerated claims, which suggest that if do not have the cable, or you cannot hear it, then you are a bit sad and are missing out.
 
Again if the pro side all admitted that the differences are outwith what you can hear and are just emotional experiences in your head, there would more honest info for people to base their decisions on.

 

[beeman458]

haloxt wrote:
 
...because they know he has set up a near-impenetrable fortress of theory.
 
For most, insanity is a very small fortress of one which you walk around and leave in the distance, for others to massage.
 

 

 

[kickassdude]

For looks and respect, yes. For soundquality no.

 

[tim3320070]

Respect from a cable? Hmmmm. How about diamond and gold studded cables, like a Mr. T cable. Lady Gaga cable for the ladies? 20-30 lbs of bling ought to provide some wow factor.

 

[p a t r i c k]

Quote:

Agreeing with your above, what the anti-cable guys don't get, for me, the improvement lies in about 1/10 of one percent and helps with clipping and opens cords up and helps with the decay of the cymbal or the pluck of a string.  Many times, the improvement lies below my listening threshold and is picked up on the emotional or ethereal level.  And by ethereal, that means untestable by today's standards.

You are not going to hear a difference of 0.1 percent.
You say that the "improvement" lies below you listening threshold and is picked up on the emotional or ethereal level. Well, you don't have to define ethereal in case we don't understand.

 
This is absolute rubbish.
 
What you are "hearing" is auto-suggestion.
 
You've been taken for a ride by marketing hype.
 
That's the change that has been picked up on an "emotional level"

 

[p a t r i c k]

Quote:

 
In the simple, I spent some $380.00 bucks on my headphone cables and I got's no complaints.  A hundred and twenty-five bucks of that was for physical appearance stuff, sheathing and splitter.  Dang but I do love the look of my custom headphone cables.
 
In a question such as this, there's only one thing that counts, your listening pleasure.  Me?  I'm a very happy camper.
 
A word to the wise, if you're new to the listening game, you may or may not pick up a difference as cables aren't a night and day difference because they dwell in the world of nuances.
 
My experience, the sound stage was wider.  Cords on a piano opened up.  The single strike of a string, had a longer decay.  The tap of a cymbal both opened up and had a longer decay.  But, over all, the improvement only works on about one percent of the overall listening experience.  The point, is one percent worth it to you?  It is to me.  And here's the rub, your mind may not be in tune with what you're listening to, so you won't take benefit of that one percent.  No, it's not a rip off but yes, you might not pickup on the difference.

You paid $380.00 for your headphone cables.
 
There is one born every minute.
 
You say the difference these cables give is not night and day "because they dwell in the world of nuances".
 
Well you were easily conned out of $380.
 
I've listened to music through hi fi systems for over thirty years.
 
Lets look at these "improvements".
 
You write that "The single stroke of a string had a longer decay".
 
Well that is measurable. If the decay of is longer than it used to be, then this would be additional waves at the end of the wave form.
 
So, you are saying that if a signal is applied to one side of the cable then at the other side new additional waves have appeared prolonging decay.
 
This is ridiculous.
 
I think that in a blind listening test you would not be able to hear the difference between the stock cable and this $380 one.