[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun I'm just wondering why there's so little skepticism at all in the believers camp, unless it realy goes into absurdity like brilliant pebbles.

The poll on Brilliant Pebbles is running 50-50, tied over whether they make a difference or not. That should tell you something about the folks who participate in these polls.

See ya
Steve

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot The poll on Brilliant Pebbles is running 50-50, tied over whether they make a difference or not. That should tell you something about the folks who participate in these polls.

That last statement doesn't make much sense to me. YOU participated in THIS poll, so what does it say about you? Also, many participants in this poll said they don't hear differences in cables, so what does the tally in the Brilliant Pebbles poll say about them? I can't really see the connection. Futhermore, even if you cahnge the focus of your comment to "affirmative respones" as opposed to "participation," I'm not sure what your basis would be for drawing a conclusion regarding affirmative responses in both polls, even if you could match up in some statisticallly signficant way the persons who provided the affirmative responses. Maybe I'm missing something, but you are frequently quite critical of what others say in terms of the logical bases for the statments they make, and yet you often make statements like the foregoing that seem to bear little relation to logic. But again, maybe I'm missing something, or maybe you just meant the comment as another gratuitous insult?

 

[883dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot The ergonomics of remote controls has gone downhill lately. Anyone with a recent electronic device that uses a remote will attest to the complete lack of logic of the placement of the buttons and the complexity and non-intuitiveness of menu options. I have remotes where the same button does three completly different things depending on what "mode" the remote is in. This lack of design can make a cd player irritating to use. I don't know what that has to do with the way wires sound, but it's certainly true. There seem to be three or four people whose egos give them problems with my posts. I'm simply stating opinions and giving supporting arguments to back them up. You should try to relax and not get so emotionally involved with discussions in internet chat boards. See ya Steve

Just letting people who could be influenced by these posts know the beliefs of people who make there opinions appear as fact

Edit...P.S. How does a good ergonomic remote control sound?

 

[Asr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TKO Head-Fiers, what I find most interesting about these discussions (before they degenerate into personal attacks, that is) is the lack of any scientific or experimental proofs into the phenomen. Surely, one would think that this would be easily measurable n'est-ce pas? What science has demonstrated, unequivocally, is that when a person physically sees the source of the sound (e.g. based on blind speaker testing research conducted at the National Research Council of Canada's laboratory by the acclaimed Dr. Floyd Toole) there is a psychological reaction. E.g. in blind-versus-sighted tests. These results were presented to the Audio Engineering Society (in 1994) and the conclusion stated: Google the National Research Council, Dr. Toole etc. and you might find some interesting articles on their experiments into psychoacoustics etc. The one key difference between speaker testing and headphone "testing" is that the headphone listener is not subjected to reflections and out-of-phase signals as occurs in a normal listening environment. Perhaps some of you will find this interesting... Perhaps not. Cheers.

When I have my GS-1 back from HeadAmp, I plan to conduct a formal experiment on the differences between cables, and cable burn-in as well. The dual inputs will make testing easy to do. Since my Arcam has two pairs of analog outputs, I'll be able to hook one Radio Shack-grade IC on one and my Silver Resolution Analog (or altenately my Analog Two) to another, and with the GS-1 I'll be able to flip between them instantly. As for the burn-in test, well I recently got another Silver Resolution Analog, hasn't even been opened yet. My current one has over 300 hours on it. Looking forward to finding out if cable burn-in really exists...

I'm sure there are those who would criticize me for not running such a test as DBT, but believe me, I'm a skeptic through and through. Initially I never believed in burn-in, but I've come to accept it - I just need to hear a change with my own ears, however subtle it might be. I try to be very hard on my ears - there are times where I'm not sure what I'm listening to, so I listen to it again and again, and then again. As many times as I need to in order to make sure there's a difference, otherwise I don't believe there's a difference. I triple-check my own hearing at all times to make sure I'm not hearing placebo - I'm against the concept of placebo. I'm a very scientific kind of person and I always run self-tests on myself to really make sure that I'm hearing what I'm hearing. You could say that to an extent, I don't trust my ears. Definitely not the first time anyway. There's a balance of belief and doubt involved in hearing cables and burn-in that a lot of people seem to forget about. You can't completely believe it, because the brain tends to make real what it's believing. And you can't completely doubt something either, that would just be rejecting hard core evidence if there's hard core evidence to support an argument.

 

[883dave]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun I know of 2 veeery anal designed blind tests made at a german hifi forum, test-setups were made conjointly between believers and skeptics. Results were absolutely contrary to the ones posted above. Reading posts like "haha they don't trust their ears, do they choose their women after measurements haha" tell me the real trenchline lies in self assessment, and the value one admits to the fact that human perception is everything but objektive. I just can not understand the complete lack of self criticism showing in the majority of posts on the subject. Of course do i not trust my own ears, when doing a comparison. Do you think, if i made a test today (and there was a "real" difference), i would hear it? Even if i told you that i was really skeptic about my own belief that there is no difference? I don't know about you, but everytime i try new gear, or another speaker placing, EQ-setting, etc, i'm hoping it will make difference/ improvement. Otherwise, i (and you) wouldn't try it. Don't you find it hard sometimes to isolate real improvement from the desire to have an improvement? Do you really believe, that knowing about the effects of wishful thinking, placebo, whatever you wanna call it, does protect you from undergoing this effects? Are some here really naive enough to believe that beeing skeptic about something does prevent your brain from affecting your perception? BTW, i'm not at all as sure as you might think because of my previous postings that cables make no difference. I'm just wondering why there's so little skepticism at all in the believers camp, unless it realy goes into absurdity like brilliant pebbles. I mean, when we buy a new car, vacuum cleaner, or whatever, we look at was the seller has to say, and if it makes sense. If there's obviously no data to back the sellers revolutionary(!) statements up, we usually get very critical. Why is hifi and esp. cables such an exception? How many threads are here about relabeled standard cables? To come to an end, i think the discussion is totally missing something: The fact, that if it really is true that reasonably designed cables used in a reasonable surrounding (esp. input- and outputimpedances) sound different is either aREAL BIG DEAL in psycho- and/or electroacoustics. It tells nothing less than there is a real huge gap in what we know today about perception of sound and electricity. The fact, that only sellers or people not familiar with the amount of knowledge already available in these territories devote themselfes to these phenomenons (and most of the time, heavily neglecting possible reasons acounted in the testperson itself) tells me more than any test, regardless of the results.

Are you saying that even when you do note differences in things you do not trust it unless there is verifiable proof to back up the difference?

And are you saying that you now just take everything in audio on face value, the sound that you hear is the best that it can be, any change that you may perceive is just your ears and brain playing tricks on you?

Do you also believe that if I produced a great number of "tests" that people were able to pick out wires 99.99% of the time you would then believe?

I have to wonder if you are here as an audiophile or just for the debate and arguments.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun I just can not understand the complete lack of self criticism showing in the majority of posts on the subject.

That's just because you think self-criticism autmatically leads to the same attitude as yours. I consider myself very self-critical in terms of audio and perception, yet every time I listen critically to my various cables, I get the confirmation that I was right: they sound different, and they show a constant characteristic. No doubt about it.

Quote:

...when we buy a new car, vacuum cleaner, or whatever, we look at what the seller has to say and if it makes sense. If there's obviously no data to back the seller's revolutionary(!) statements up, we usually get very critical. Why is hifi and esp. cables such an exception?

They're just as little an exception as other audio gear, such as CDPs, DACs, amps, headphones and speakers. I don't think many people are that much interested in what the seller has to say. The main and often only criterion is how it sounds to their ears. If they don't have access to the gear they're interested in, they possibly rely on a few reviews from people who have heard it. Or they buy it with a money-back guarantee.

Quote:

To come to an end, i think the discussion is totally missing something: The fact, that if it really is true that reasonably designed cables used in a reasonable surrounding (esp. input and output impedances) sound different is either a REAL BIG DEAL in psycho- and/or electroacoustics. It tells nothing less than there is a real huge gap in what we know today about perception of sound and electricity.

Since many years people hear sonic differences with amps (and AFAIK you're one of them), although the differences can't be measured. And nobody has complained about the so-called gap so far, not even the skeptics.

Quote:

The fact, that only sellers or people not familiar with the amount of knowledge already available in these territories devote themselves to these phenomenons (...) tells me more than any test, regardless of the results.

That's a very bold statement. So either you know all people devoting themselves to the cable phenomenon or you conclude that a missing theory is binding to a «science believer» that he must not hear differences.

I have successfully passed a cable blind test myself, so I trust the above statements. It's important to be familiar with the setup (and the acoustics in the case of speakers), a fact that's most likely not been respected in 99% of the «valid» (= failed) tests you have in mind. Futhermore, as Hirsch has stated in an earlier post, a chaotic pattern of samples is useless, since it doesn't represent a real-life condition and overstrains the brain -- and that's too often used.

I wonder how a skeptic like you would evaluate a guitar or a piano. A normal human being would do it by using his own pair of ears. But I'm sure there are measuring criteria especially developed for skeptics who don't trust their own ears. Or maybe there are instrument shops with dark rooms for blind tests?

.

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot I've been working in audio recording and post production for over 20 years. I've worked with a wide variety of pro grade equipment. You must be thinking of someone else.

Strange, I distinctly remember having a discussion with you about this on here. I don't have the best memory though, so I may be wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot There seem to be three or four people whose egos give them problems with my posts. I'm simply stating opinions and giving supporting arguments to back them up.

Did you ever give thought to the possibility that it could be your ego that is the problem?

 

[Vul Kuolun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ That's just because you think self-criticism autmatically leads to the same attitude as yours. I consider myself very self-critical in terms of audio and perception, yet every time I listen critically to my various cables, I get the confirmation that I was right: they sound different, and they show a constant characteristic. No doubt about it.

That's what i call lack of self criticism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ They're just as little an exception as other audio gear, such as CDPs, DACs, amps, headphones and speakers. I don't think many people are that much interested in what the seller has to say. The main and often only criterion is how it sounds to their ears. If they don't have access to the gear they're interested in, they possibly rely on a few reviews from people who have heard it. Or they buy it with a money-back guarantee.

To be more precise: It's about the seller tells you why you should pay him 200 Bucks instead if 20. This is what seperates the fair offer from the rip off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Since many years people hear sonic differences with amps (and AFAIK you're one of them), although the differences can't be measured. And nobody has complained about the so-called gap so far, not even the skeptics.

It's not about complaining. It's about estimating the importance of the phenomenon, and if the actual situation does leave the slightest hint of plausibility to it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ That's a very bold statement. So either you know all people devoting themselves to the cable phenomenon or you conclude that a missing theory is binding to a «science believer» that he must not hear differences.

It's about the question where the research on the issue is, an how many professionals (Music-/ Soundpeople, EE´s, Scientists) work on the issue or bother at all with it. And no, i don't count the sellers/manufacturers in here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ I have successfully passed a cable blind test myself, so I trust the above statements. It's important to be familiar with the setup (and the acoustics in the case of speakers), a fact that's most likely not been respected in 99% of the «valid» (= failed) tests you have in mind. Futhermore, as Hirsch has stated in an earlier post, a chaotic pattern of samples is useless, since it doesn't represent a real-life condition and overstrains the brain -- and that's too often used.

I find that one quite interesting, while it leaves the question open why there's such a huge gap in the estimation of the effects, showing in the fact that every slight bit of stress scares away the night and day differences. But the most important conclusion for me is:

The changes are evidently so small, they're far beyond a dimension worth discussing about. When a mood swing changes the result, oh well. For me, that is.
I would like to read statements like this in the threads where the noob asks which cable he should use to make his 650 brighter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ I wonder how a skeptic like you would evaluate a guitar or a piano. A normal human being would do it by using his own pair of ears. But I'm sure there are measuring criteria especially developed for skeptics who don't trust their own ears. Or maybe there are instrument shops with dark rooms for blind tests? .

That one is so poor. It definetly is beneath your dignity. And it isn't even funny.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr There's a balance of belief and doubt involved in hearing cables and burn-in that a lot of people seem to forget about. You can't completely believe it, because the brain tends to make real what it's believing. And you can't completely doubt something either, that would just be rejecting hard core evidence if there's hard core evidence to support an argument.

You make a very good point, which I would like to add to. I am a believer AND a skeptic, i.e., I don't believe it until I hear it, and even then, I am constantly reconsidering the issue, trying to eliminate the "placebo" factor, etc. And, like most "believers," I was a died in the wool skeptic who thought cables could not possibly make a difference -- but then I was converted when the differences I heard under certain circumstances were too hard to ignore.

I am also a skeptic in other ways. I don't believe that more expensive cables always sound better, as I have found in some instances that the less expensive cable sounds better. And sometimes, I don't hear differences between certain cables, or between certain types of cables in certain applications. I also think the "science" is worthy of serious consideration on this issue, and testing, if done properly, has value. But in the end, I must -- with the appropriate amount of skepticism -- trust what I hear. And I'm very confident that some cable differences are quite noticeable (e.g., the differences between the stock HD 650 cable and the Silver Dragon are quite noticeable to me.)

In any event, what is rather remarkable is that all of us "believers" get portrayed as if we have been predisposed to "believe" the moment we came out of the womb (as if we have some genetic deficiency or lack of immunity to "snake oil" syndrome), or we are portrayed (implicitly if not explicitly) as if we have checked our reason at the door anytime we listen to a cable. There certainly may be some folks like that among the believer camp who may be willing to believe anything. But it's not fair to assume that all of "us" or even most of "us" are like that, anymore than it would be fair to assume that all skeptics are egotisitical dogmatists who just troll these threads to make insults, merely because there may one or two who do that.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun That's what i call lack of self criticism.

I knew it!

Quote:

To be more precise: It's about the seller tells you why you should pay him 200 Bucks instead if 20. This is what seperates the fair offer from the rip off.

I wouldn't pay 200 if it sounds like worth 20 to my ears, independent of the seller's comments or justifications. I'm an adult person.

Quote:

It's not about complaining. It's about estimating the importance of the phenomenon, and if the actual situation does leave the slightest hint of plausibility to it.

I thought pausibility is dictated by psycho- and electroacoustics (= hard data), not device category.

Quote:

It's about the question where the research on the issue is, an how many professionals (Music-/Soundpeople, EEs, Scientists) work on the issue or bother at all with it. And no, i don't count the sellers/manufacturers in here.

You use an arbitrarily narrow definition. I'm sure many of the people who work in the cable business have a deep understanding of electroacoustics (and this certainly applies to many audiophiles). But since you exclude cable manufacturers from the «professionals», it's probably indeed a rare case to see professionals bother with audiophile cables -- they have other work to do.

Quote:

I find that one quite interesting, while it leaves the question open why there's such a huge gap in the estimation of the effects, showing in the fact that every slight bit of stress scares away the night and day differences.

Cables don't make night-and-day differences. Those are reserved to sound transducers (and room acoustics). And since these are the weakest link in the chain, they make it hard to notice the much finer upstream differences as long as you're not familiar with them.

Quote:

The changes are evidently so small, they're far beyond a dimension worth discussing about.

It's not up to you to decide that for other people. But it's alright if you personally don't care -- it's not necessary for enjoying music reproduction on a nevertheless high quality level.
.

 

[Vul Kuolun]

.

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

I wonder how a skeptic like you would evaluate a guitar or a piano. A normal human being would do it by using his own pair of ears. But I'm sure there are measuring criteria especially developed for skeptics who don't trust their own ears. Or maybe there are instrument shops with dark rooms for blind tests?

Quote:

In any event, what is rather remarkable is that all of us "believers" get portrayed as if we have been predisposed to "believe" the moment we came out of the womb (as if we have some genetic deficiency or lack of immunity to "snake oil" syndrome), or we are portrayed (implicitly if not explicitly) as if we have checked our reason at the door anytime we listen to a cable.

Is everyone offended yet? Offended and so defensive they can't think straight.

Bigshot says things that go against the grain of most members and he doesn't put it gently either (he's the Darth Vader of audiophilia?). I had a disagreement with him over the sonic differences of 16/44 vs 24/192 (post #38 The debate ending on page 3) but rather than exhaust myself in a war of words I hit the gear to learn if there was anything to learn. Nothing definitive was proven to me but I approached with an open mind and my position was much less confident.


Yeah it's an ego thing alright. I'm just glad I don't feel the need to be right and need for someone else to be wrong.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyeteeth Bigshot says things that go against the grain of most members and he doesn't put it gently either (he's the Darth Vader of audiophilia?).

As long as he doesn't turn to me one day and say: "No, Phil, I am your father."

 

[chrisco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot It's amazing that the results from DOCUMENTED double blind tests differ so greatly from these ANECDOTAL single blind ones. It's also amazing how fast certain posters will accept the results of these informally conducted, anecdotal tests when they coincide with their own belief, and vehemently reject differing results obtained from carefully controlled, documented testing. Why no complaints about testing parameters now? If I put an underline under the word "hoodoo" does it make it more self evident to reasonable people? See ya Steve

Quote:

Originally Posted by philodox Wow man, when you talk in CAPS it really drives the point home. Doesn't make you sound like an ass at all! I have yet to see a meaningfull well documented double blind test that relates to any cables which I have experience with. I'm sure you have a list of fun links hidden away in your Bookmarks. Care to share? It's amazing to me that people would blindly believe what someone else has written rather than actually trying something themselves and forming their own opinion. And I believe you are the gentleman that has never sampled a high end source, yet believes sources don't make a difference? ...but perhaps we should save that for another thread.

If either of you heard my equipment with a simply blind test with the two different interconnects you would be embarrassed as to how obvious the difference is. I am not talking for anyone else or any other equipment I am talking about the fact that with my equipment 5 people have via blind tests noticed the difference in SQ and identified which interconnect was which- post test……even someone with tin ears.

Given how blatantly obvious this difference is you are either calling me a liar or you have to accept that perhaps you just haven’t heard the difference that can/some times can be heard on certain equipment.

There is no in-between option here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot I've been working in audio recording and post production for over 20 years. I've worked with a wide variety of pro grade equipment. You must be thinking of someone else. See ya Steve

I don’t give a rats ass- you haven’t tested the same equipment as me.

I tell you what I will list the equipment and let you big shots go and get it and test it for yourself…..OK?

Sony Atrac player NW-HD1
Little Dot Micro + (100 hours play) normal gain
Sennheiser 595s (150 hours play)

The interconnects are

A) the one that comes with the Little Dot Micro plus from DavidZ

And B) the solid Silver mini to mini line-out cable from AudioLineOut.

All listening done via the Line-Out option.


Now guys if you want to be big shots- buy the darned equipment and do the exact same blind testing before affectively saying I am wrong/a liar.

Fair enough right?


I am not saying that you MUST have heard a difference between interconnects, you are the ones trying force you BS by saying that I MUSTN'T have heard a difference with my equipment even though you have never heard it and I have…..that is arrogant crap!!!



Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun I know of 2 veeery anal designed blind tests made at a german hifi forum, test-setups were made conjointly between believers and skeptics. Results were absolutely contrary to the ones posted above.

I am not interested.

I am not trying to tell you, you are wrong. You are on the other hand trying to tell me I am wrong. But I have listened to my equipment and you haven’t. I invite you to take the same test and go and buy the same equipment and do the blind tests for yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun Reading posts like "haha they don't trust their ears, do they choose their women after measurements haha" tell me the real trenchline lies in self assessment, and the value one admits to the fact that human perception is everything but objektive.

I love the way that you haven’t even understood the nature of the criticism that I made. You have simply taken the criticism out of context. You have read the title of the thread and in a half baked manner half read my post/scanned it at speed. If you take the time and go back you will find that my criticism of that individual did not relate to the title of this thread but was in fact a far more general/side criticism.

You talk about objective tests and the need for them. I was not referring in my criticism of the above individual about objective testing. I was criticizing someone who buys gear based upon measurements as opposed to his own listening preferences- end of story.

So having corrected you on that I’ll move on to your point about objective blind testing and also my reasoning for buying the interconnect I have- because you haven’t properly read what I wrote.

I stated that I bought the interconnect because;

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisco the one originally supplied was simply too long and twisted. Given I did not expect an improvement it is unlikely to be a placebo effect. Yet I was staggered by how much better my new interconnect was.

Now you tried to say that I expected a big improvement in SQ hence my reason for buying the cable…..maybe you should read posts?

Next regarding objective blind testing you say;

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun I just can not understand the complete lack of self criticism showing in the majority of posts on the subject. Of course do i not trust my own ears, when doing a comparison. Do you think, if i made a test today (and there was a "real" difference), i would hear it? Even if i told you that i was really skeptic about my own belief that there is no difference? I don't know about you, but everytime i try new gear, or another speaker placing, EQ-setting, etc, i'm hoping it will make difference/ improvement. Otherwise, i (and you) wouldn't try it. Don't you find it hard sometimes to isolate real improvement from the desire to have an improvement? Do you really believe, that knowing about the effects of wishful thinking, placebo, whatever you wanna call it, does protect you from undergoing this effects? Are some here really naive enough to believe that beeing skeptic about something does prevent your brain from affecting your perception? BTW, i'm not at all as sure as you might think because of my previous postings that cables make no difference. I'm just wondering why there's so little skepticism at all in the believers camp, unless it realy goes into absurdity like brilliant pebbles. I mean, when we buy a new car, vacuum cleaner, or whatever, we look at was the seller has to say, and if it makes sense. If there's obviously no data to back the sellers revolutionary(!) statements up, we usually get very critical. Why is hifi and esp. cables such an exception? How many threads are here about relabeled standard cables?

Firstly I have already explained that the criticism is a separate issue that you have taken out of context due to a poor reading of my post. But more importantly I said this;

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisco I asked five people to listen to my set-up with the old interconnect and the new interconnect. I did not allow those people to view which interconnect was connected at any given listen and each person was asked to listen to identical music from an identical start point for 30 seconds. There were four listens per person two with each interconnect. Results The AudioLineOut Solid silver mini to mini was stated as being a better quality sound every single time by all five people. 10-0 was the result on a blind test with five different people- one was someone with tin ears!! I do not think this was the placebo effect. Whether the set-up I have allows for such a difference that is far greater than that usually seen, whether it is something more prevalent with headphones with headphone amps etc I have no idea and cannot say.

So objective blind testing has been done with this equipment and the results were so obvious, beyond coincidence and without possible error or prior knowledge that the results at least in this instant were conclusive.

Now don’t lecture me about the need to be objective when I have been objective, don’t dredge up out of context criticisms because you are too lazy to read and don’t have the arrogance to tell me I am wrong when I have at the very least conducted objective blind tests with this equipment and you have never listened to it.

Like I say I am not telli8ng you or other people that you must have heard differences in the set-ups you have had……do not tell me that I and the people I know could not hear a difference in objective blind testing without having purchased and conducted the same testing….

Extend me the ****ing courteously of actually accepting what I say until such time as you have tested the same equipment in the same manner…..again fair enough right?


OH and can anyone else who thinks they're a smart ass buy the same eqipement and do the same objective blind testing also before suggesting I am an R S Hat.....fair enough?

 

[Davesrose]

this poll seems a bit biased to me.....I'm one of those that float in the middle....for digital connections, I don't think there's a difference at all. For analogue connections, I would say that the cable need only be as expensive as to have proper shielding. So I voted yes for that. All this cold treated hooby jadoob....if you want to spend hundreds on that, suit yourself. That's where I think there's more difference in source equipment. Granted I haven't listened to those $900 interconnects, but I probably won't be listening to the equipment that could discern those differences in quite some time.....if ever!