[tennisplyr3]

doubtful. haha. it should make you content though with your 580s ^,^

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif People use the term placebo as if it's some sort of magical hypnosis or moral failing, but that's totally wrong. The concept as it applies to audio is very simple and makes sense to everyone with a brain in their head... When you try to determine the difference two very similar sources (that may or may not be identical) it's common for your mind to play tricks on you, suggesting a difference between the two that doesn't exist. It won't make black into white or up into down, but it can confuse the relationship between two identical shades of white, or something that is ever so slightly more up than another thing. See ya Steve

I agree, but only as to the consumers.

Those selling cable are something else.

I see raw materials marked up 3,000%, sometimes more.

All the labor involved is putting in an order at a Chinese factory, then cutting the cable to length and attaching connectors. You do have to write marketing copy and buy some print ads. Perhaps some viral marketing.

The profits must be staggering. Very few products have profit margins like this.

I am fairly sure this is not the placebo effect.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaddy /img/forum/go_quote.gif thats why i usually spend several days at different times listening to two comapritives, rather than deciding in one sitting.

More time just gives you more time to "convince yourself of the placebo". The best way to compare two very similar sounds is to do a direct, level matched, A/B comparison. Humans have a relatively short auditory memory. The accuracy of comparisons of very similar sounds made after 20 seconds or so drops off considerably.

But there's a fundamental error in the way a lot of people go about trying to improve their sound... It doesn't help to just randomly swap in different equipment. If it makes a difference at all, it just gives you *different* sound, not better.

The way to get *better* sound is to identify what's wrong with what you're hearing. Instead of listening carefully for improvements, you should be listening carefully for problems. 90% of the battle is identifying the problem in the first place. If you couldn't ever hear the problem, how can you expect to hear the improvement?

I see a lot of people in these forums randomly trying things. That's a better way to put stereo equipment salesmen's kids through college than it is to make your system sound better.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree, but only as to the consumers. Those selling cable are something else.

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public. There are a lot of cynical %#&@s in the high end audio business.

See ya
Steve

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif More time just gives you more time to "convince yourself of the placebo". The best way to compare two very similar sounds is to do a direct, level matched, A/B comparison. Humans have a relatively short auditory memory. The accuracy of comparisons of very similar sounds made after 20 seconds or so drops off considerably.

The oohashi et al. paper is interesting in that they use 200s for the samples and do an ABBA swap. While the paper is open to debate on several grounds their EEG thingies were interesting and their measurements did suggest that as one sample went from start to finish Alpha wave activity increased, but with the other sample Alpha wave activity decreased over the 200s. They posit that you need a minimum level of time to establish some emotional response and a consequently long interval to diffuse any prior effect.

 

[evilking]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif More time just gives you more time to "convince yourself of the placebo". The best way to compare two very similar sounds is to do a direct, level matched, A/B comparison. Humans have a relatively short auditory memory. The accuracy of comparisons of very similar sounds made after 20 seconds or so drops off considerably. But there's a fundamental error in the way a lot of people go about trying to improve their sound... It doesn't help to just randomly swap in different equipment. If it makes a difference at all, it just gives you *different* sound, not better. The way to get *better* sound is to identify what's wrong with what you're hearing. Instead of listening carefully for improvements, you should be listening carefully for problems. 90% of the battle is identifying the problem in the first place. If you couldn't ever hear the problem, how can you expect to hear the improvement? I see a lot of people in these forums randomly trying things. That's a better way to put stereo equipment salesmen's kids through college than it is to make your system sound better. See ya Steve

x2

The main reason I've stopped "upgrading", 100% contentment with my current rig. I'll only buy something else if my gear becomes less than what they are now (age, faults, etc) or if in the future I have a need that cannot be fulfilled without new/more expensive equipment.


EK

 

[Quaddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilking /img/forum/go_quote.gif x2 The main reason I've stopped "upgrading", 100% contentment with my current rig. I'll only buy something else if my gear becomes less than what they are now (age, faults, etc) or if in the future I have a need that cannot be fulfilled without new/more expensive equipment. EK

we all have our limits EK, some of us just havent reached those dizzy heights yet

 

[bigshot]

No, it isn't about not yet reaching the sound one is looking for. It's about not recognizing good sound when you hear it. It is very easy with careful tuning of a system to get top quality sound on a modest budget. And if you're constantly upgrading, you didn't do your research properly in the first place.

The reason people invest so much time and money into their rigs isn't because they are looking for better sound- it's because they are looking for some sort of random theoretical improvement to satisfy their OCD or shopping impulses.

See ya
Steve

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, it isn't about not yet reaching the sound one is looking for. It's about not recognizing good sound when you hear it. It is very easy with careful tuning of a system to get top quality sound on a modest budget. And if you're constantly upgrading, you didn't do your research properly in the first place. The reason people invest so much time and money into their rigs isn't because they are looking for better sound- it's because they are looking for some sort of random theoretical improvement to satisfy their OCD or shopping impulses. See ya Steve

I have OCD, and I resent that statement.

Well, actually, I resemble that statement somewhat. Although, only when money isn't involved. (Like in a video game.)

 

[AC1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, it isn't about not yet reaching the sound one is looking for. It's about not recognizing good sound when you hear it. It is very easy with careful tuning of a system to get top quality sound on a modest budget. And if you're constantly upgrading, you didn't do your research properly in the first place. The reason people invest so much time and money into their rigs isn't because they are looking for better sound- it's because they are looking for some sort of random theoretical improvement to satisfy their OCD or shopping impulses. See ya Steve

Oh great you got peoples social buying habits figured out now to. Just like how you are an expert on placebo, cables. Please, this is as much BS as the cable makers claims.

 

[Vul Kuolun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AC1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please, this is as much BS as the cable makers claims.

No it isn't. It's 100% spot on.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AC1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Please, this is as much BS as the cable makers claims.

I would have to work very hard to reach those dizzying heights!

See ya
Steve

 

[porschemad911]

Haha, all you need is someone to do a 'definitive' comparison of the two in a well known magazine (one you faithfully trust), and tell you that there is in fact, no difference at all between them.

To address the divergent thread, I think there's some merit to what's being said. If can't identify what's broken, you'll have a difficult time finding the right addition to fix it.

I had a system that I was very happy with (old Denon CDP, LDII+ and K-501). However, when my amp began to play up, I had a choice to make, and I chose to rebuild. The two main flaws I had were a slight lack of bass, and a slightly artificial forwardness in the upper midrange frequencies. Oh, and an unreliable amp!

So I selected components to address this, ie maintain the strengths and eliminate the weaknesses. After doing a *lot* of reading (and a little buying solely to compare), I ended up with the system in my signature. And what do you know, it has enhanced every strength and fixed every weakness of my previous setup.

And do I feel the slightest inclination to upgrade anything? No way! I can't for the life of me think of a single aspect of sound quality that I would change. Maybe there's something I don't know about, but I'm not about to play the needle in a haystack game.

Really though, how hard is assembling a system to enjoy listening to music on? All you need as a base is a set of components with a fairly flat frequency response and some semblence of a soundstage, including comfortable 'phones, an amplifier with plenty of power and a source that can keep time properly. Then if you want more bass, treble or whatever to suit your tastes, get an equaliser. Presentation can be adjusted.

 

[hciman77]

Quote:

Originally Posted by porschemad911 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Really though, how hard is assembling a system to enjoy listening to music on?

It took me 30 years to get into the "listen to the music and dont worry so much about the kit" mindset, now I am happy with my (cheaper in both real and absolute terms than it was in 1984) set up and can worry about other things like all the 1960s/70s music I missed first time around