[Shark_Jump]

So cable believers really DO hear improved SQ. But only because they believe it. e.g. It doesn't matter if there is no real physical improvement.

So don't argue against cables, because if you break this belief system you effectivly degrade the perceived improvement.

You nasty scientists, you're like the Grinch Who Stole Cables.

Pinning down the placebo effect | Life and style | BMJ Group

Quote "
What does the new study say?

The researchers found that placebos can have very real and positive effects on people's symptoms. For example, studies show that placebos given for pain relief can activate painkilling chemicals in the body, and placebos used for depression can produce changes in brain activity"

 

[b0dhi]

This is old news. But still pertinent. It's been brought up a few times in the more civilised discussions.

 

[Shark_Jump]

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is old news. But still pertinent.

OK. I thought placebo was a perceived change, I didn't realise it could actually manifest itself as real change.

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0dhi /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's been brought up a few times in the more civilised discussions.

?

 

[mesasone]

So what you're saying is that if you believe putting a couple of extra 99 into the purity percentage of a copper wire, your ears will reconfigure or recalibrate themselves so that the sound really does sound better?

Or are you suggesting that believing your fancy pants cable results in increased dopamine levels, which has little to do with the actual, measurable performance of the cable and everything to do with the belief? And as long as you believe that the cable is somehow special, it doesn't matter if it comes from a boutique manufacturer or Radioshack?

 

[haloxt]

mesasone, it just means hearing is dependent in part on the state of your mind, which contrary to that stupid article is not news-worthy. The only new thing about it is the physical manifestation of ulcers it has induced in me.

 

[Shark_Jump]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mesasone /img/forum/go_quote.gif So what you're saying is that if you believe putting a couple of extra 99 into the purity percentage of a copper wire, your ears will reconfigure or recalibrate themselves so that the sound really does sound better? Or are you suggesting that believing your fancy pants cable results in increased dopamine levels, which has little to do with the actual, measurable performance of the cable and everything to do with the belief? And as long as you believe that the cable is somehow special, it doesn't matter if it comes from a boutique manufacturer or Radioshack?

You tell me, I don't know the answer.

You are saying it is not possible for ears to physically reconfigure themselves, this is a very rational thing to believe.

But the analysis I quoted says placebo in the medical sense has been statistically proven to cause measurable physical changes in some patients condition.

So what are the implication of this for placebo effect in Hi Fi?

That the definition of Placebo effect is different for medicine and music? If true then this is an important finding for us is it not?

And if the definition of placebo for medicine and music are one and the same thing, then as long as these pro cable guys are believing there is a change and they are enjoying their music more because of it then so be it. In the end music is interpreted in our brain right? So even if there is no physical difference in the properties of the cables it doesn't matter.

The person with the best Hi Fi is the person who is enjoying their music the most.

 

[Guidostrunk]

My wife really had no clue to the audiophile world until recently, so i put her through a test today to make her own decisions on what cable she preferred. 1 being a mini to mini( ie. Radio Shack) cable going from her Sansa fuze to her P-51 Mustang. 2 being a high end LOD that i had purchased from a reputable builder from this forum( Average Joe).I asked her one question. Pick 1 of these cables to use and she said whats the difference, i said nothing really just see what one works for you and keep it. So i walked away for 5 min or so and came back and she had picked the LOD, so i said OK and proceeded to walk back out of the kitchen and she started to tell me why , In her own words the mini cable sounded like crap and then asked me why there is such a big difference. I told her there's a lot of people out there that would tell you your cray that its all in your mind. She looked puzzled after that and then listened to both of them again and kept telling me the same thing , " This mini cable sucks" so i dunno. This is coming from a person that just got started into the world of HIFI.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guidostrunk /img/forum/go_quote.gif My wife really had no clue to the audiophile world until recently, so i put her through a test today to make her own decisions on what cable she preferred. 1 being a mini to mini( ie. Radio Shack) cable going from her Sansa fuze to her P-51 Mustang. 2 being a high end LOD that i had purchased from a reputable builder from this forum( Average Joe).I asked her one question. Pick 1 of these cables to use and she said whats the difference, i said nothing really just see what one works for you and keep it. So i walked away for 5 min or so and came back and she had picked the LOD, so i said OK and proceeded to walk back out of the kitchen and she started to tell me why , In her own words the mini cable sounded like crap and then asked me why there is such a big difference. I told her there's a lot of people out there that would tell you your cray that its all in your mind. She looked puzzled after that and then listened to both of them again and kept telling me the same thing , " This mini cable sucks" so i dunno. This is coming from a person that just got started into the world of HIFI.

Wouldn't the LOD bypass the opamps in the circuit that a traditional mini-to-mini would use? That could potentially change the sound depending on their quality . . . I don't know all of the pertinent details so really can't comment beyond that.

 

[haloxt]

Shark Jump, your latest post reminded me of when Jesus explained placebo 2000 years before that article.

Matthew 9

1 And he entered into a ship, and passed over, and came into his own city.

2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. 3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. 4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? 5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? 6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7 And he arose, and departed to his house. 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Guidostrunk, I'd chalk that up to suggestion. There's a reason why you shouldn't see cables in a listening comparison. It introduces bias.

If your wife didn't know what she was listening to she would have found no difference.

Exactly the same as any other non-sighted listening test ever performed.

In 30+ years of argument, no one has been able to tell the difference between cables. Ever.

What would be an interesting test would be to have believers listen to something like a coathanger that has been soaked in saltwater for a month and then put it into a garden hose and tell them that it's some cryo 99.9999999999999 pure silver wire bathed in the tears of a virgin Tibetan monk that costs $30,000. Then record their impressions. They'd proably get a placebo high thinking that they were listening to something special.

If you could get orgasmic reviews from crap in a garden hose, I think it would disprove the possibility that the other stuff sounds good, too. The implicatuon would be that the sound depends entirely on expectation.

 

[Happy Camper]

Ever?

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif In 30+ years of argument, no one has been able to tell the difference between cables. Ever.

You can tell when a cable isn't built properly (no shielding and too thin of gauge to where it acts as an antenna, or sometimes if it has extremely bad conductivity do to an extremely poor soldering job).

If we're talking two properly built cables with no big measurable differences then by all means

 

[Guidostrunk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Guidostrunk, I'd chalk that up to suggestion. There's a reason why you shouldn't see cables in a listening comparison. It introduces bias. If your wife didn't know what she was listening to she would have found no difference. Exactly the same as any other non-sighted listening test ever performed. In 30+ years of argument, no one has been able to tell the difference between cables. Ever. What would be an interesting test would be to have believers listen to something like a coathanger that has been soaked in saltwater for a month and then put it into a garden hose and tell them that it's some cryo 99.9999999999999 pure silver wire bathed in the tears of a virgin Tibetan monk that costs $30,000. Then record their impressions. They'd proably get a placebo high thinking that they were listening to something special. If you could get orgasmic reviews from crap in a garden hose, I think it would disprove the possibility that the other stuff sounds good, too. The implicatuon would be that the sound depends entirely on expectation.

If you read my post she has no clue about cables,no suggestion was even made, i even made the statement to her that there was no difference in the 2 cables. obviously she heard a difference without me telling her that i believed one was better than the other. Basically the whole point of doing it was to see if there was a difference or I'm just insane. i dunno , i guess she's suffering from placebo.

I'm not going to get involved in this war about cables. Its like religion some are believers and some are not. I'll leave it at that.

 

[happyxix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guidostrunk /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you read my post she has no clue about cables,no suggestion was even made, i even made the statement to her that there was no difference in the 2 cables. obviously she heard a difference without me telling her that i believed one was better than the other. Basically the whole point of doing it was to see if there was a difference or I'm just insane. i dunno , i guess she's suffering from placebo. I'm not going to get involved in this war about cables. Its like religion some are believers and some are not. I'll leave it at that.

But if anything the LOD looks alot better than the radioshack cables. I'm not a believer of cables but I do believe after a very fast certain point, the only difference is the construction or durability and appearance of the cable that differs.

 

[koven]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guidostrunk /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you read my post she has no clue about cables,no suggestion was even made, i even made the statement to her that there was no difference in the 2 cables. obviously she heard a difference without me telling her that i believed one was better than the other. Basically the whole point of doing it was to see if there was a difference or I'm just insane. i dunno , i guess she's suffering from placebo. I'm not going to get involved in this war about cables. Its like religion some are believers and some are not. I'll leave it at that.

Not really, she probably just picked the cooler looking one.

Despite the fact that she doesn't know anything about audio, if she had any brains, the logical assumption would be the "fancier/more expensive" one works better. It's still a placebo.

Next time blind fold her and you swap the cables around, if she can guess the LOD at least 9 out of 10 times, then there might be some validity.