[TheMarchingMule]

don't you think it all matters on the impedance value the cable gives? Copper, cryo, and silver all have different impedance values, and that's probably what makes the final hearing difference.

Hope I'm not beating up part of the infamous dead horse here.

 

[bigshot]

The other aspect to consider is the threshold of audibility. A slight measurement difference that isn't audible doesn't matter. A lot of audiophile nonsense is based on improving numbers that don't represent sound that humans can actually hear. People spend hours in Brobnigagian arguments about inaudible sound.

However, there's plenty to be done for the numbers we can actually hear... equalization, room treatments, speaker design, etc... all make a huge difference. But these subjects are rarely discussed.

See ya
Steve

 

[Uncle Erik]

The problem with cables is that the cheap ones give you undeniably good sound.

Think about a $10 chocolate sundae. It's really good. But for an extra $500, you get the cherry on top. How many people will pay the extra $500?

Same with the cable argument. Assuming, arguendo, that cables "work," does the price justify the benefit? No.

Further, no one has ever been able to demonstrate a benefit. Not even the manufacturers offer anything to back their claims.

 

[FallenAngel]

Yeah, it's really hard to "back up" any claims. There are tons of different properties to the wire used, capacitance, resistance, impedance, dielectric properties of coating/sleeve. Of course it's basically impossible to say that any of these actually "sound" different because how something "sounds" is a subjective "measurement".

Then there is always the "does it work" argument which I think is really over-simplified. Does a cable "work" as in transmits sound, yes, all do, but by adding a huge amount of impedance, it also creates a voltage divider with the load and attenuates the signal; now whether this is "audible" is another story, but it can be measured.

I guess there really isn't any way around this; numbers don't prove anything "sounds differently" and claiming that something does actually "sound different" can't be proven with numbers. Stalemate.

 

[Golden Monkey]

If a cable attenuates the signal by adding impedance, can this not be offset by simply turning the voulme up? Forgive me if that's simplistic, I'm just wondering...

 

[Terminus Est 23]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Further, no one has ever been able to demonstrate a benefit. Not even the manufacturers offer anything to back their claims.

It's rather amazing, isn't it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenAngel Yeah, it's really hard to "back up" any claims. There are tons of different properties to the wire used, capacitance, resistance, impedance, dielectric properties of coating/sleeve. Of course it's basically impossible to say that any of these actually "sound" different because how something "sounds" is a subjective "measurement".

Double-blind tests that can show ANY sort of measurable consistency would be a good start.

it amazes me to see the level to which people will come up with excuses to ignore the results of double-blind tests. Pure and overwhelming denial.

"If the test doesn't yield what I believe to be true, the test must be flawed!"

I'm really glad that, for the most part, science doesn't work like that.

I've been in the situation myself, where something that appeared totally and overwhelmingly true to me was called into question. . . and I've argued bitterly about what I know my experiences to have been . . . and when the cold hard facts were laid out, I was completely and undeniably wrong.

Made me realize how strong (and incorrect) anecdotal evidence and desire can be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenAngel I guess there really isn't any way around this; numbers don't prove anything "sounds differently" and claiming that something does actually "sound different" can't be proven with numbers. Stalemate.

No, it's not a stalemate. The burden of proof is on the one making the claims that their product has a tangible effect.

I can claim that Santa Claus exists and you can NOT prove me wrong, you simply can't. That doesn't make my assertion somehow valid.

 

[mojo]

*double post*

 

[mojo]

One simple way to decide would be to get two cables, one with higher impedance. Wouldn't have to be expensive. Then do an ABX test.

I made an adapter once for some Beyer Dynamics that was basically an in-line resistor to increase their effective impedance with my amp. That made a small difference to the sound, but it was a 120ohm resistor. There is no way any cable will come even close to that, and especially if it's an interconnect it won't make any difference.

To be honest there is probably more variable in impedance from headphone to headphone due to manufacturing than between types of cable.

 

[Happy Camper]

Vanity. They do make a difference, how exclusive do you want to be?

 

[TheMarchingMule]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Monkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif If a cable attenuates the signal by adding impedance, can this not be offset by simply turning the voulme up? Forgive me if that's simplistic, I'm just wondering...

Nope. For me, the perfect example to prove this is the ER4P/S. It changes the sound (and its quality) slightly, but very noticeably. And the only difference between the ER4P and ER4S model is the impedance.

 

[Golden Monkey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope. For me, the perfect example to prove this is the ER4P/S. It changes the sound (and its quality) slightly, but very noticeably. And the only difference between the ER4P and ER4S model is the impedance.

Oh yeah...duh! Don't know why I didn't think of that, seeing as I have 4-P's and the adaptor, lol. It's a pretty darn big difference between the two flavors, that's for sure. Thanks!

 

[ingwe]

Differences may be perceived. However, evaluating the effect (favorable or not) is left to each listener's interpretation. After all, we are not fascists.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenAngel /img/forum/go_quote.gif I guess there really isn't any way around this; numbers don't prove anything "sounds differently" and claiming that something does actually "sound different" can't be proven with numbers. Stalemate.

Numbers are just a numerical indication of sound. A number can reflect a foghorn blast to the ear, or a whisper heard from a distance of ten miles. The idea is to get an idea of the scale by establishing thresholds of audibility through controlled A/B tests. Once you know that, you have your zero point, and then relative comparisons can be made.

It's easy to take an "all or nothing" approach to sound measurements... either sticking to them like the Bible, or dismissing them as inaccurate representations of subjective impressions. Both of these approaches have an element of truth, and both are full of bologna.

Numbers should be used to help quantify and identify aspects of sound. They should explain what we hear so we can move forward with theories about how to improve what we hear. That requires a sense of scale and a dose of common sense. No hifi nut should be without either.

See ya
Steve

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMarchingMule /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope. For me, the perfect example to prove this is the ER4P/S. It changes the sound (and its quality) slightly, but very noticeably. And the only difference between the ER4P and ER4S model is the impedance.

I would suggest replacing it with a cable that doesn't alter the sound. There are much better ways to color your response than by using inefficient cabling.

See ya
Steve

 

[Golden Monkey]

I wonder how WindowsX feels about numbers? "I can hear 25 thousand more numbers than YOU!"...