[bigshot]

Did you make up this test with your daughter? Because it sure sounds like you were convinced there was an audible difference from the get go. You’re talking a blue streak about your expertise with pretentious phrasing and puffery and all of it seems designed to prove you’re right. People who come into this group trying to prove science is wrong are often willing to say anything to make their point. Their stories are often fabricated. They talk fancy and make a big deal about it. I smell a rat.

 

[gregorio]

Remarkably, both cables exhibit high-quality sound.

That’s a very odd thing to assert, straight out of the audiophile marketing playbook. The actual fact is the exact opposite, it would be remarkable if two cables designed for the task did not exhibit high-quality sound! In fact, it would be so remarkable that by far the most likely explanation would be that one was seriously defective! Again, audio cables are very simple devices that we’ve been making for well over a century and can mass produce for peanuts. Something is very wrong if differences are anywhere even close to audible.

Another consideration is whether she (consciously or unconsciously) possesses insights that enable her to respond accurately every time.

I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to, assuming you’re referring to picking up on inadvertent “cues”, then yes, certainly, unless she has some cognitive disability. There have been many blind/blind tests with children, some with subjects far younger than your daughter which exhibit this “Experimenter Effect”, it’s well studied and documented. Not to mention, if relatively unintelligent pet dogs can “respond accurately every time”, I wouldn’t expect a human child not to be able to.

While it may not be flawless, it should provide sufficient evidence (at least for me) to determine the truth of this matter.

Ah but then of course that would not necessarily have anything to do with actual sufficient evidence and indicate nothing other than your personal beliefs (what you personally believe constitutes “sufficient”). Unfortunately, you have (as you’ve already claimed to be “highly skeptical”!) a very high bar for ”sufficient” evidence in this instance, because there’s such a wealth of reliable evidence which contradicts your assertion and none that supports it. Hopefully your next round of testing will identify the real reason, as you’ve indicated you will include some objective measurements, I would also suggest a null test.

G

 

[old tech]

Is this a different take on the audiophile's wife hearing the difference from another room?

 

[blaked]

As others have alluded to, inadvertent cueing is a possible/likely cause here. In experimental psych it's sometimes referred to as the Clever Hans effect (see the link for background).

No matter how hard you try to control it, no matter how much you may think you're being "honest" and not consciously cueing the test subject, you cannot rule out unconsciously cueing the test subject. It's literally impossible. It could be anything from tone of voice to posture to breathing patterns to the sound a particular cable's connector makes when plugged in to... well, you name it.

That is why double-blind tests exist. To be valid, neither the test subject nor the tester can know the correct answer for any given trial. Designing an experiment to adhere to this level of control can be surprisingly difficult, depending on what's being tested and related factors, like the testing environment. (I had to do this kind of work in grad school back in the day, so I speak from experience... although I was working with nonhuman primates, not audiophiles....)

 

[BS5711]

If many of the contributors in the Water Cooler and Penon forums are to be believed you would fully expect a six year old with good hearing to pick the difference between cables !

The only difference a cable makes is in the mind of the listener but it seems at least 3/4 of the people that use Head Fi believe that cables alter sound, and I mean in a general sense not the oddball outlier cases.

Something else was going on with the 'test' described here, my guess is the post was fictitious and designed to get the science crowd to argue or the six year old in question could see some part of the cable and fibbed to dad.

 

[Davesrose]

There very well may be an audible difference between one "audiophile" pure copper headphone cable vs "audiophile" silver. Personally, I've found many "audiophile" silver cables to have issues with soldering the connector. That can change the conductivity (as well as longevity) of cable. I'm also using "audiophile" in quotes because these independent brands have no QC and are upcharging for taking a certain cable, encase it in a nice looking sleeve, and do some soldering to an interconnect (which with silver is more complicated than copper). I'm always amazed by how much money audiophiles are willing to pay for analog interconnect cables, as well as power cables. I've noticed there is a bias of "I spent this money thinking there wouldn't be a difference, and wow, there's a huge difference". Often, it can be demonstrated that this is purely from bias when even scientific measurement shows no difference. However, I think there are some "audiophile" components that will have audible differences because the QC isn't that great, their design is limiting, or they are intentionally coloring sound. For example, I like having digital sources, yet also enjoy having tube headphone amps (which I know adds coloration like like DSP or EQ). Since QC is questionable for silver cables, and that copper is more than adequate for carrying a signal, I'm completely happy with competent copper cables. They are easy to carry a full signal, and you don't have to pay "audiophile" prices for competent high quality sound.

 

[bigshot]

Something else was going on with the 'test' described here, my guess is the post was fictitious and designed to get the science crowd to argue or the six year old in question could see some part of the cable and fibbed to dad.

I'm guessing it's made up. The average six year old is probably more honest and truthful than the average audiophool.

 

[Dragonmilenario]

I’m going to report my own thread to the moderators for deletion. I am absolutely appalled by your behavior. You don’t know me, yet I see a lot of animosity in your comments, like a pack of hyenas fighting over a piece of meat.

Folks, I explicitly stated that it was a game, nothing scientific. Yet some of you insist on ridiculing me and claiming it’s all fabricated. It’s disheartening.

Let’s all take a deep breath and refrain from making personal remarks in the future. Carry on with your own pursuits, enjoy life and relax.

Best regards.

 

[gregorio]

I’m going to report my own thread to the moderators for deletion.

I’m sure this forum’s moderator is already well aware of this thread, seeing as he’s one of the participants who has responded to you!

I am absolutely appalled by your behavior. You don’t know me, yet I see a lot of animosity in your comments, like a pack of hyenas fighting over a piece of meat.

What behaviour do you think would be appropriate in response to a claim/assertion, made in a science discussion forum, which goes against ALL the science/facts/reliable evidence? How could this actually be a science discussion forum if such assertions were not refuted or at least challenged? … I therefore completely fail to see why you are “absolutely appalled“ by this behaviour, in fact I would be “absolutely appalled” by any significantly different behaviour! The only explanation for you being “absolutely appalled“ I can think of, is if you don’t know what science is, or didn’t realise this is a science discussion forum.

Folks, I explicitly stated that it was a game, nothing scientific. Yet some of you insist on ridiculing me and claiming it’s all fabricated. It’s disheartening.

Again, I’m not sure what sort of behaviour/response you expected (in a science discussion forum) to an assertion that contradicts the science/reliable evidence that is based on “nothing scientific”, just “a game”? You think maybe we should ditch science in preference to making sure you find our responses heartening?

To be fair, the suggestion that your post is “all fabricated” is an entirely reasonable assumption, it would hardly be the first time an audiophile has fabricated such an assertion/evidence, in fact it’s almost stereotypical! However, I personally don’t believe that’s the case in this instance. I personally just believe your self-evaluation of being “highly skeptical” is the opposite of the actual reality and you have therefore made various honest but incorrect assertions based on a combination of a highly flawed test and your acceptance of audiophile marketing/myths.

G

 

[bigshot]

You didn’t say it was a game. You said it was a test… a test that somehow convinced you of something that runs counter to the facts that 100 years of actual scientific testing have proven time and time again. We pointed that out and suggested that something was wrong with your test because it didn’t follow the established facts about cables, and you ignored that and kept on insisting your test was valid.

There aren’t a lot of possibilities here. If you insist that your test was properly conducted, then your results tell us that you’re not being totally honest with us. We don’t have to believe everything people say to us on the internet. We can look at it, compare what is being claimed to the reality of the situation and call it boloney if it doesn’t add up.

I think this is a game. It’s a game of poke those guys in sound science with a stick by pretending to have done a test. I call boloney here. I don’t even think you have a daughter. The rest of head-Fi is required to allow you to claim that down is up. We aren’t. People waste our time arguing things that can’t be true all the time. Some of them are just slow witted and couldn’t conduct a halfway proper test if their life depended on it, and some are disingenuous and make stuff up to “prove” their argument. I don’t think you’re slow witted.

 

[Dragonmilenario]

Now, it turns out that I don’t have a daughter either

Nevertheless, I’ve mentioned several times that this was more of an experiment with a little girl, treated as a game rather than a rigorous study. I lack the expertise and inclination to conduct a formal investigation. However, the results surprised me, and I believe my daughter (her name is Natalia, and she’s very much real—What ) might have noticed something. Perhaps a subtle variation in volume, impedance or sound... I tried to make the process fun but at the same time quite reliable, but I am not an expert. I’ve always been transparent about this. As I mentioned earlier, her grandfather intends to repeat the test more rigorously during Christmas, as he’s genuinely interested.

Still, if possible, I’d prefer to delete the thread. Shortly after posting it, I received a private message warning me about what would unfold—a curious turn of events.

If you review my posts, you’ll find that I’ve been a registered user since 2005. This is my first contribution related to cables. Why the **** am I going to make up such a story when I’ve consistently emphasized that I can’t guarantee anything due to my lack of expertise in blind tests and my daughter’s young age?

As I said, crazy.

P.S.: English isn’t my native language; I’m Spanish. Sometimes my language may lack precision or formality, and for that, I apologize.

 

[KinGensai]

bigshot is being a bit abrasive, but you are also presenting this as some sort of validating evidence for a claim that has not been proven to be valid, let alone solid (that choice of metals in and of itself leads to quantitatively measurable differences in analog output).

I don't mind you having fun with your daughter, I've done some informal stuff like that as a kind of party trick before, so I get it. The problem lies in you jumping to conclusions about a topic without considering other possibilities due to what are elementary mistakes in study design and execution introducing contaminating variables.

Does your daughter have never before documented super human hearing? I suppose it's possible given that some animals also possess super human hearing. I would suggest that the possibility is much higher that your testing methodology contaminated the results or something in that custom cable is introducing higher than normal impedance (I just double checked with a 80Ω adapter, it does indeed noticably darken the sound).

You have a nearly impossible hurdle to overcome given the preponderance of evidence supporting the "cable metal doesn't matter at the headphone scale" thesis.

 

[Svperstar]

What surprised me the most is that her 6-year-old definition aligns with what’s widely accepted in the community: silver-plated wire for sharpness and treble boost, and copper wire for musicality and smoothness.

Back in the day they used to say tube amps sounded "forward, raw, and alive" now tube amps are "syrupy and warm".

Were audiophiles right then or are they right now?

 

[castleofargh]

Let's all try to respect each other. OP shared his little adventure with a kid, he didn't try to redefine the laws of physics and AFAIK he seemed fairly open to our remarks about the limitations and possible flaws of his test. No reason to burn him alive just yet.

 

[Dragonmilenario]

I have agreed with one of the moderators to continue the thread. Please stop with the personal attacks and don't call me a liar and other nonsense, maybe you can call me unwise or inexperienced when it comes to blind testing or whatever.

Comments I expected from the thread:

"Oh, what a fun experiment, your daughter must have had a great time with her daddy. It was probably other things, it's impossible to tell the difference between two good wires, I recommend you try again taking more care and with these tips and blabla!"

Absolute disappointment with certain comments and attacks (from several users), you seem more like children than my (apparently fictitious) daughter.