[robm321]

Those that like the sound of a particular cables will use them. Those that don't, won't and there will never be a consensus and no one will be influenced by arguments on either side, so carry on with your bad selves.
 
That is all 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Those that like the sound of a particular cables will use them. Those that don't, won't and there will never be a consensus and no one will be influenced by arguments on either side, so carry on with your bad selves.
 
That is all 

That there will never be a consensus is true. That no one will be influenced by arguments on either side is not true. The cable believer side is very influencial, just read this and most other hifi forums where people constantly post concerns and questions about cabling and get advice to buy different ones, change their kit or accept their ears are not up to the job. Then when the other side appears and suggests there is no need to worry as cables inherantly make a difference they get sidelined, trolled or banned.
 

 

[k00zk0]

Quote:

Originally Posted:

In the same way homeopathy does work, just not for the reasons many homeopathists think it works.

 
There is more to reality than we know.
 
Studies that conclude really radical things are often quickly repeated by peers to confirm results. This is a rather old one and the best that someone has done is say "unlikely", referencing that there is no active ingredient in the preparation, so it "shouldn't work".
 
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/3/7
 
Mice poisoned with arsenic, given extremely low quantities (almost non-existent) of arsenic as the remedy, had significantly better outcomes than the ones given no treatment. It even further said that in a separate experiment, dilutions of arsenic to low levels gave rats a better outcome too. Nobody has disproved this so far. Assuming there were significant (But tiny) quantities of As in the medication, an effect called hormesis could speak for the outcome, but some of these homeopathic remedies apparently have one or zero molecules of the active chemical in a normal dose.
 
~~~
 
Play a chord to a non-musician, followed by a different chord. Ask them which sound was higher pitched. There will be unanimous consensus about which sounds higher. With further testing, we realize what seemed to the listeners to be a single sound is a chord made of three distinct notes, and the dominant note in the higher sound is, in fact, higher, but the other two notes could have been pitched lower than the lower-sounding chords' quieter two notes. So for the most part, the listeners were approximately two thirds wrong. Now imagine if actually, each of the three notes making the chord were actually chords themselves, each actually a set of notes too fine for us to distinguish with our ears or instruments. Once again everything seems right when viewed one way from the current perspective but may be different in an unknown one.
 
As square waves are actually an infinite number of sines added together, when viewed with the understanding that sines are the raw building block of sound, sine waves are an infinite number of square waves added together, if one recognizes the square as the simplest signal type. Given that the current finer understanding of reality takes "fluid" amounts of energy such as a waveforms' magnitude being any floating point value when viewed from the understanding of relativity, and describes them in quanta, discrete, uniformly sized packets of energy, the square wave (on, or off) seems to be the better candidate for the raw "building block" of sound. When viewing sound energy propagation through air, it simply presents itself as sines, because that is how we view air molecules interacting. How do they intraact?
 
All our theories are supported by evidence leading back to the theory and vice versa, but the whole system is only correct when viewing it as humans with our limitations of matter/energy manipulation and interaction. It can be correct but it can be wrong when viewed more broadly. The notion of time, which we all plainly understand and see this very second, is completely synthetic and made up as a product of viewing the objective reality in the way that we happen to.
 
Perhaps the emotional, mental understanding, feel, and thought or perception of the music travels not as the measurable electrical and mechanical energy representing the sound, but within a yet unmeasurable format such as the spins (or some quality/behavior of particles, I don't know anything about physics) of the matter that forms a solid physical coupling from source component to brain. The measurable electrical and mechanical effects in the wire and air come as a product of this higher-level propagation.
 
In a nutshell: If it sounds better it is better. =D

 

[sailorman]

 
Quote:

I wish I could attribute a name to this, but the idea is recurrent enough. One destroys worldly possessions and fake worth (money) as a way to mentally detach from everything but real, primal emotional being. Listening to music is one of these things. When you can comfortably toss 5000 dollars into a fire, you are mentally relaxed enough to let the audio penetrate your skull and connect fully with your consciousness.
 
There are rainforests far away that harbor the most beautiful sonic scapes. I could lie in some places I've been (any place outdoors is starting to do it for me) and live without food or water as long as I focused on the sound which is automatically appreciated and eternally fuelling. I'd bet some rich audiophiles would burn everything in order to be placed into such a reality containing sound that no system could reproduce.
 
There is also the idea that these cables can be somewhat of an investment (like an art piece or precious gem). Those who feel and believe in the unexpressed energy of everything, (whether the belief is rooted in real physics at quantum or as-of-yet not understood realms, or more simplistic views) can claim their cables, having only had electrical flow representing high-end audio move through them, have appreciated in value as their energy has been further refined over time. The order of the tracks played through them would count, and everything else. The words spoken within earshot of the cable, it's compass directions and who has look at the light reflecting off of it before...
 
I've a number of 99 cent interconnects in my current system.

O.K.  I bit.  At your suggestion, I destroyed all my possessions and fake wealth. (I'm typing this from the library).  
 
I'm mentally detached and feeling pretty primal. I've arranged to borrow some audio gear, but alas, I've hit a roadblock.
 
I forgot to save the $5000 I need to toss into a fire to verify if I'm mentally relaxed enough!!  Drat! 
 
I really want to be sure, so hows about sending me $5000 so I can continue my experiment.  Oh... I'll need some matches too.
 
TIA
 
Wooo Wooo...

 

[sailorman]

dupe

 

[Willakan]

@Koozo:
The British government ordered a commission to have a look at homeopathy. Their conclusion was that there was no evidence that it worked at all, as the only tests which demonstrated a positive effect were inconclusive and often fatally flawed in methodology.
As for the rest of your post, not sure if serious.

 

[k00zk0]

One must detach from facts to consider alternate realities (which may be the true ones). The general idea of what I'm saying is prevalent though and can be metaphorically expressed by a sign that says "caution, avoid sign". There is nothing factually incorrect about the sign or it's message but when viewing it as a whole in its surroundings, it's existence is kind of a fallacy. We don't know what our surroundings are outside of what we have observed. And when we figure out what they are, there will once again be another world in which the current understanding is correct when self-referencing, but is a synthesized set of rules within a broader system that governs and produces the inner one as a product of finer interactions.
 
Think of it like the understanding that there are water molecules, gas molecules, oil molecules.. actually all of these are the same thing, when you look at it on a finer scale. They're all the same atoms, but the interactions between the atoms leads to the creation of the molecules. The molecule itself is an abstract idea produced by the binding energy of the atoms.
 
Zoom in (or out, viewing more broadly) some more and all the different atoms are again, the same thing. The same p, n, and e. Just with different amounts of energy in between them binding them, producing different forms. Again, these particles are all made of smaller ones, quarks, once again in different configurations. The interaction of a finer system gives rise to new coarser entities, measurable using instruments made of the same coarse entities, the only ones they can interact with, and thus give data to for measurement. Given that energy is now understood to travel as packets (quanta) and not a fluid amount, there would be smaller yet undiscovered building blocks than even quarks. How is the finer-level energy relevant if audio is only present on the coarse network as mechanical or electrical energy, interacting with neurons on the same scale? There are as many, if not more theories of consciousness that place the fundamental interactions of matter/energy which lead to perception on the quantum level than on the coarser physical measurable one of atoms making up molecules making up neurons. The point is that just because it is not measurable with machines, does not mean it is imperceptible. Unless one is made to believe so, and discard sensitivity to information traveling at finer scales than measurable.
 
If an oscilloscope had consciousness, only then it could tell you whether or not the cable really makes a difference. For now all it can tell you is the magnitude of the gradient of electron density across a conductor. Nothing says for sure that sound is a product of this gradient and not the producer of it.

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

Quote:

Those that like the sound of a particular cables will use them. Those that don't, won't and there will never be a consensus and no one will be influenced by arguments on either side, so carry on with your bad selves.
 
That is all 

That there will never be a consensus is true. That no one will be influenced by arguments on either side is not true. The cable believer side is very influencial, just read this and most other hifi forums where people constantly post concerns and questions about cabling and get advice to buy different ones, change their kit or accept their ears are not up to the job. Then when the other side appears and suggests there is no need to worry as cables inherantly make a difference they get sidelined, trolled or banned.
 

They tend to get banned because they resort to being abusive -- calling people deluded, among other things. Mind you, that happens with people who attempt to railroad opinions to the point of putting down people who disagree with them about any subject. That isn't fun, and we're here for fun aren't we? It's not fun when people are calling you names because you choose to buy something. The influence may seem imbalanced because the only influence the "cable non-believers" have is to make people stop posting about them at all to avoid being abused. 

 
It's a hobby, like anything else. Lets say my hobby was cycling. I could buy a simple bike or buy something with a bunch of fancy marketing about the materials and all that crap, but it wouldn't necessarily make me ride any better (though I'm sure for pro riders some of it does). However, most people who are into any kind of hobby are into the gear and the experience of using it. Why do people buy tube amps and zillions of tubes to roll? For the fun of it and the slight differences in sound between the tubes.  You could say it is crazy, but then you could argue any hobby is. Ever met anyone who seriously collects stamps? 

 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

It is usually the cable believers who resourt to abuse and cry out 'so you say I am deluded?', not the other way around. It takes two to tango, so when threads go downhill, do not blame one side only.
 
 

 

[robm321]

^ I could be wrong here, but you appear to have some unresolved issues towards those that prefer to use cables other than the lamp chord ICs that come with components. 
 
My advice mirrors a couple of posts above, enjoy the hobby and don't let those with different opinions affect you so much. State your opinion and move on.
 
And if you're getting banned or flamed over and over, maybe adjust your approach towards others. It has a lot to do with how people respond to you. 

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

One must detach from facts to consider alternate realities (which may be the true ones). 

Aannnd, you've lost me. No. I'll stick with facts, thank you. If you are going to make a claim about something physical (a cable) - and expect me to not ask that claim to be tested (finding facts), then I have no time for you. You've moved into mental masturbation and mythology. 
 
 
 
Quote:

The point is that just because it is not measurable with machines, does not mean it is imperceptible. Unless one is made to believe so, and discard sensitivity to information traveling at finer scales than measurable.

 
 
Ah - this is different than detaching from facts. It is recognizing where facts have limits. I have no problem with this - facts adjust as our understanding grows. In the meantime, however, you do NOT get carte blanche to make wild claims, and then say it must be true, but that we just cannot measure it yet. You have to say, "I believe this, but cannot prove it."

 

[Willakan]

I always get confused when I see chains of logic approximating: "Science is not perfect. Therefore, you must hold my (INSERT UNFALSIFIABLE BELIEF THAT STRETCHES CREDULITY TO BREAKING POINT HERE) in equal regard with science, because all opinions are valid and stuff..."

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

^ I could be wrong here, but you appear to have some unresolved issues towards those that prefer to use cables other than the lamp chord ICs that come with components. 
 
My advice mirrors a couple of posts above, enjoy the hobby and don't let those with different opinions affect you so much. State your opinion and move on.
 
And if you're getting banned or flamed over and over, maybe adjust your approach towards others. It has a lot to do with how people respond to you. 

I am sorry but think you are wrong. I have not been abusive to anyone, but have received a lot of abuse. I post evidence and disagree with people and that upsets them which is more of an unresolved issue for them.
 
Fair enough, enjoy the hobby and I have never said people should not buy expensive cables and they do improve sound quality for some people, sometimes and in different ways. My point is that only side gets to present its case and that side makes inaccurate psuedoscientific claims, which IMO is wrong.
 
I would recommend reading 'Bad Science' by Ben Goldacre and 'Why do people believe in Weird Things' by Michael Shermer to see how pseudoscience, history and economics is misused and can cause serious problems. I know cables are not in the same league as global warming, homeopathy and the MMR scandle, but it is still a multi-million pound industry founded on nonsense.
 

 

[robm321]

^ I agree that these types of discussions get people heated, and I know that people throw around nonsense on both sides of the argument. Everyone thinks they are a scientist or physicist on headfi which can get annoying also. 
 
I know the attempt is to get people to go back and forth in a mature manner. But, honestly, its been tried and is rarely successful on this subject. Those that notice a clear difference between cables after swapping them back and forth may not be able to provide proof, but they are not loons getting tricked by their brain or influenced by adds. That's condescending and insults intelligent people. Some cables are a rip off and overpriced. There is a lot of nonsense with cable marketing and high end audio in general, but that doesn't make the whole market illegitimate. 
 
The simple fact that there is not going to be an answer which can be backed up by science at this point makes this type of discussion ripe for flame wars. 
 

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

Those that notice a clear difference between cables after swapping them back and forth may not be able to provide proof, but they are not loons getting tricked by their brain or influenced by adds. That's condescending and insults intelligent people. 

it is not meant to be condescending, or imply they are not intelligent. The brain is very complex, and those people DO hear differences. The problem is, it does not appear to be due to the material or construction of the cable. Placebo is a powerful and real effect. 
 
 
 
Quote:

The simple fact that there is not going to be an answer which can be backed up by science at this point makes this type of discussion ripe for flame wars. 

 
 
This is the problem I have. Those of us on the science side DO have an answer backed up by science. That answer is that the cables have not been shown to have an audible effect. That is backed up by science. Also backed up by science are numerous psychology studies showing how people will believe that they hear and see differences in various things, when none exists - based on a wide number of factors. 
 
The reason why it gets ripe for flame wars, is those on the subjective side (for lack of better term) - do not accept the science. They believe otherwise, regardless of a complete lack of evidence to support their position - and in direct conflict with evidence that contradicts it. Not that the science does not have an answer. It just doesn't have the answer they want.