[KeithPhantom]

us

No, you’re the one who has to prove something, since you are the one doing the alternative claim, which must be tested against the null hypothesis (cables do not make any difference).

Now, getting strong statistical evidence of rejection of the null hypothesis (cables do not make a difference) with ears (were talking of differences easily in the range of -130 to -160 dBFS) would be a really impressive feat.

 

[dougms3]

No, you’re the one who has to prove something, since you are the one doing the alternative claim, which must be tested against the null hypothesis (cables do not make any difference).

Now, getting strong statistical evidence of rejection of the null hypothesis (cables do not make a difference) with ears (were talking of differences easily in the range of -130 to -160 dBFS) would be a really impressive feat.

Prove what to who?

If thats what you believe you go on wit yo bad self girl, I could care less. If you want me to believe that then you have to prove that to me.

^ what Bfreedma says.

When it comes to fidelity, wires can't "sound better" than audibly transparent. They can only sound different. There's a threshold of perception that they have to exceed for differences to be audible. There are reasons why a wire might not be audibly transparent for a particular purpose. You wouldn't use a hammer for the same thing you use a jewelers screwdriver. But when you buy an Amazons Basics or Monoprice interconnect, it is designed to be audibly transparent for a particular purpose... transmitting line level signal three meters transparently. If you use it for that purpose it should be transparent. If it's not, that will show up in a null test or a carefully controlled listening test. We don't have to test every wire in the world to say that consumer audio cables are all audibly transparent they are used for the purpose they were designed for. That would involve millions of tests. It's up to the people who claim that one cable sounds better than another to prove their claim.

When you say a very expensive interconnect made of the rarest of hand rolled unobtanium sounds better than a regular Amazon cable, I see no reason why that might be the case, so I immediately suspect expectation bias... which is fair because expectation bias is at the root of most errors in audiophila. Cables can't sound better, only degraded. Why would every cable in the world be degraded audibly identically except this one fancy schmancy cable? It makes no sense. It's clearly expectation bias.

If you have a wire that you think sounds better, pass it along for testing. Prove it. It's probably going to be a waste of time, but I'm sure someone will go to the effort if you allow them to make you eat crow when they prove you wrong. Making a claim of an unexpected result without proving it is a waste of everyone's time. You can throw around all sorts of scientific "what ifs" to try to muddy the waters, but it isn't going to impress me. I've seen all that too many times in the past. I know how these things play out. There will be a whole lot of theoretical back and forth and nothing will be offered in the way of specific evidence. All that needs to be said is, "show me a wire that sounds different when used for the purposes it was designed for".

Why don't you organize your thoughts calmly, because no one said anything about anything sounding better. It looks like you're having an argument with yourself.

It’s difficult to have this discussion when you can’t even keep the people you’re responding to straight. i made no claims about skin effect, though I do agree with @gregorio.

It’s also interesting that you presented math without being able to relate it to an actual product, then accuse those asking for relevant examples as “cable haters”. I don’t hate cables as clearly, cables are necessary, though I do dislike claims about cables that are irrelevant in any reasonable use case.

Since you can’t/won’t identify any products audibly impacted, how about doing the math and showing hard data for a cable length of 10 feet being audibly impacted by whatever you’re claiming. If you’re simply saying that we now have the capability to measure things in excess of 1000x beyond human hearing, sure, but why should anyone care when discussing audio claims and myths?

I don't recall ever responding to you but obviously you have some bias against higher end cables, I'll play along. What higher end cables have you tried?

 

[bfreedma]

Prove what to who?

If thats what you believe you go on wit yo bad self girl, I could care less. If you want me to believe that then you have to prove that to me.


Why don't you organize your thoughts calmly, because no one said anything about anything sounding better. It looks like you're having an argument with yourself.


I don't recall ever responding to you but obviously you have some bias against higher end cables, I'll play along. What higher end cables have you tried?

Nope. Not feeding a now obvious troll. Work on your game - come up with something new and interesting.

 

[dougms3]

Nope. Not feeding a now obvious troll. Work on your game - come up with something new and interesting.

Who are you having this conversation with?

Don't include me in your teen angst soliloquies.

 

[sander99]

What higher end cables have you tried?

Why would anyone want to try a higher end cable when for example a $1 or $10 cable is audibly transparent (audibly perfect, not audibly changing the signal)? Better than audibly transparent is not possible. If you have a cable that is audibly different from an audibly transparent cable then it is objectively worse. So all that someone "needs" to do to be sure he doesn't "miss out" on anything is test the cable he uses for audibly transparency (for example with a null test).

 

[dougms3]

Why would anyone want to try a higher end cable when for example a $1 or $10 cable is audibly transparent (audibly perfect, not audibly changing the signal)? Better than audibly transparent is not possible. If you have a cable that is audibly different from an audibly transparent cable then it is objectively worse. So all that someone "needs" to do to be sure he doesn't "miss out" on anything is test the cable he uses for audibly transparency (for example with a null test).

To verify your theory, put your theory to a practical test, that is unless you're afraid you might be wrong...

Amazon has a very lenient return policy, just saying.

 

[Vamp898]

Why would anyone want to try a higher end cable when for example a $1 or $10 cable is audibly transparent (audibly perfect, not audibly changing the signal)? Better than audibly transparent is not possible. If you have a cable that is audibly different from an audibly transparent cable then it is objectively worse. So all that someone "needs" to do to be sure he doesn't "miss out" on anything is test the cable he uses for audibly transparency (for example with a null test).

A really bad/cheap cable can have issues.

Up from a certain point, it doesn't matter.

So if you use an 100€ cable or an 4000€ cable doesn't matter

But there is a difference between an 1€ cable and an 100€ cable.

 

[71 dB]

A really bad/cheap cable can have issues.

Up from a certain point, it doesn't matter.

So if you use an 100€ cable or an 4000€ cable doesn't matter

But there is a difference between an 1€ cable and an 100€ cable.

A 100 € cable might be mechanically more reliable than a 1 € cable and that is one aspect.

The question is how should you spend the additional 99 € to get the largest possible difference? Maybe the best way to go is spend 10 € on a cable and 90 € on acoustical materials to absorb some early reflections?

 

[gregorio]

So you've done this null test with every "variable" correct?

Of course I’ve done the null test with every variable correct, why would I run an audio system or a test with deliberately the wrong gauge cables?

Like the aforementioned ofc, occ copper, spc, litz, gauges, pvc/ptfe/pet dielectrics, etc.

You mean have I tested every combination of every cable in every audio system? I’ve tested a fair few but obviously not every brand of cable in every audio system but that’s the point of science, I don’t need to, isn’t that obvious?

Presumably you don’t believe a “go faster” stripe/sticker can actually make a car go faster? How do you know it doesn’t, have you tried every “go faster” sticker on every model of car? Obviously you don’t need to, science knows enough about aerodynamics, power/weight and the other variables to predict a go faster stripe cannot make a significant difference and countless tests demonstrate no exceptions (punches) to this prediction.

What you call an analogy is an example hence it states IF d= 1".

I didn’t call it an analogy, you did! And, it is NOT an example, there are no consumer audio cables with a 1” diameter.

What if i told you I've seen consumer power cables with larger than 12awg conductors, ruh roh didn't see that punch coming.

1. OK, 10awg that’s an extra 0.02” of diameter. So no, I didn’t see that punch coming or felt it either!
2. If you’re talking about a power cable rather than an audio cable, then we’re talking about a max frequency of 50Hz or 60Hz and there is no skin effect at those frequencies even with 0000awg!

My point is that you are theorizing.

Nonsense, it could hardly be less theorising and more demonstrated in practice!

Your presented your personal experience and opinion as fact and i presented to you variables that you didn't account for.

1. What “personal experience”, you think maybe @bfreedma and I are the only people who have ever objectively tested power or audio cables in the last 150 years?
2. You keep stating there are variables we haven’t accounted for but the only such variable you’ve mentioned is one that never exists in a consumer audio system! There are potentially a number of skin effect variables but they do not apply to consumer audio or power cables. For example wire material, there are no consumer audio or power cables made of Aluminium, steel or other materials, so that variable is irrelevant, as is the variable of freq loss above the range of human hearing, as is the variable of wire gauge/diameter because we never use a gauge so wide as to cause any significant/audible skin effect HF loss.

There is no plausible way for either of us to prove anything without massive amounts of money, so we discuss, isn't that the purpose of this thread?

Why do we need to prove what has already been demonstrated/proven for a century or more? And, “Massive amounts of money” have already been spent. You think maybe the power and telecoms industries have never spent any money researching/testing wire variables for the last 150 years or so? Where do you think the equation you quoted came from?

If you want to dispute the long established/demonstrated science, you’re going to need to do way better than inapplicable examples, audiophile cable marketing or just claiming “you’re wrong because you’re cable haters”!! You can start, as others have suggested, with an actual (applicable) example.

G

 

[71 dB]

What higher end cables have you tried?

I have one 100 € Cambridge Audio RCA cable between my CD player and amp. It is by far the most expensive cable I have. I don't hear anything special in the sound, but the cable seems VERY reliable and I expect it to serve me well the rest of my life. I have had it for 20 years already. I think 20 € would be more sensible price for an 1 meter long RCA cable build that well, but it is what it is, niche market.

 

[gregorio]

If you want me to believe that then you have to prove that to me.

It’s already been proven, countless times over many decades. The differences, as @KeithPhantom stated have been proven to be around -130dB to -160dB, which can’t even be resolved by HPs/Speakers and therefore cannot be audible anyway. Nevertheless, numerous controlled audibility tests have been done and proven that differences at those level are inaudible. If you want to ignore all the proof and instead believe audiophile marketing (that has no reliable evidence/proof) that’s up to you but then why state “you have to prove that to me”? That makes no sense if you’re already ignoring all the proof!

But there is a difference between an 1€ cable and an 100€ cable.

Yes, there’s a big difference. They almost certainly look different, there’s a great deal more profit margin with the €100 cable and therefore a big difference in the marketing budget for them and, there *might* be a meaningful build quality difference but that would only be meaningful for some people, depending on usage. Is there an audible difference in audio performance though? You’ll need to provide some reliable evidence of that.

G

 

[dougms3]

Of course I’ve done the null test with every variable correct, why would I run an audio system or a test with deliberately the wrong gauge cables?

You mean have I tested every combination of every cable in every audio system? I’ve tested a fair few but obviously not every brand of cable in every audio system but that’s the point of science, I don’t need to, isn’t that obvious?

Presumably you don’t believe a “go faster” stripe/sticker can actually make a car go faster? How do you know it doesn’t, have you tried every “go faster” sticker on every model of car? Obviously you don’t need to, science knows enough about aerodynamics, power/weight and the other variables to predict a go faster stripe cannot make a significant difference and countless tests demonstrate no exceptions (punches) to this prediction.

I didn’t call it an analogy, you did! And, it is NOT an example, there are no consumer audio cables with a 1” diameter.

1. OK, 10awg that’s an extra 0.02” of diameter. So no, I didn’t see that punch coming or felt it either!
2. If you’re talking about a power cable rather than an audio cable, then we’re talking about a max frequency of 50Hz or 60Hz and there is no skin effect at those frequencies even with 0000awg!

Nonsense, it could hardly be less theorising and more demonstrated in practice!

1. What “personal experience”, you think maybe @bfreedma and I are the only people who have ever objectively tested power or audio cables in the last 150 years?
2. You keep stating there are variables we haven’t accounted for but the only such variable you’ve mentioned is one that never exists in a consumer audio system! There are potentially a number of skin effect variables but they do not apply to consumer audio or power cables. For example wire material, there are no consumer audio or power cables made of Aluminium, steel or other materials, so that variable is irrelevant, as is the variable of freq loss above the range of human hearing, as is the variable of wire gauge/diameter because we never use a gauge so wide as to cause any significant/audible skin effect HF loss.

Why do we need to prove what has already been demonstrated/proven for a century or more? And, “Massive amounts of money” have already been spent. You think maybe the power and telecoms industries have never spent any money researching/testing wire variables for the last 150 years or so? Where do you think the equation you quoted came from?

If you want to dispute the long established/demonstrated science, you’re going to need to do way better than inapplicable examples, audiophile cable marketing or just claiming “you’re wrong because you’re cable haters”!! You can start, as others have suggested, with an actual (applicable) example.

G

Again presenting your opinion and bias as if it were a fact. Post links or quotes with references if your goal is to "test a claim or myth", but we both know you dont have that otherwise it'd be here already. I'm not going to even bother engaging in this nonsense because you're just making up random things at this point.

You can't even comprehend that in a formula an an example is given for a calculation, like in all basic math. You take the example for a formula literally and point fingers "thats not real". Why don't you plug in your made up numbers in that formula and see what diameter you get, unless you're gonna say that "formula is not real" too.

Its obvious you can't even quote me properly because, I never said "you’re wrong because you’re cable haters”!!

"Otherwise why not just rename the thread to "cable haters" thread." This is what I said. Not the same thing is it, someone's brain has a habit of twisting words.

If you can't even remember or bother to look at what I posted 1 page ago, and replace what I said with your own narrative, you don't need me for this conversation.

Lol you've accounted for every variable in your "test" huh?, I think we're done here.

I have one 100 € Cambridge Audio RCA cable between my CD player and amp. It is by far the most expensive cable I have. I don't hear anything special in the sound, but the cable seems VERY reliable and I expect it to serve me well the rest of my life. I have had it for 20 years already. I think 20 € would be more sensible price for an 1 meter long RCA cable build that well, but it is what it is, niche market.

If you think 100 € is an expensive cable stick with your 1 € cables.

 

[gregorio]

You have some nerve demanding links/quotes to reliable evidence when you’ve completely failed to do so yourself.

Again presenting your opinion and bias as if it were a fact. Post links or quotes with references if your goal is to "test a claim or myth", but we both know you dont have that otherwise it'd be here already.

Encyclopaedia Magnetica and Wikipedia. Or how about this link which gives more pertinent detail regarding AWG sizes, skin effect depth and frequency.

But let me get this clear, are you seriously claiming that Wikipedia, encyclopaedia magnetica, various text books, pretty much all the universities and EE education facilities on the planet are ALL just quoting my personal opinion and bias as fact? Or, was your assertion just a lie?

I'm not going to even bother engaging in this nonsense because you're just making up random things at this point.

What, making up random things like 1” diameter consumer audio/power cables, skin effect affecting consumer power cables and my opinion being published as fact on Wikipedia, other encyclopaedias and the world’s education establishments? Pot, kettle, black!! You obviously shouldn’t “even bother” to engage with yourself!

And lastly, that’s a “no” then, you cannot post any reliable evidence of audible differences or of skin effect having any effect on consumer power cables.

G

 

[GearMe]

All this is because @71 dB made a joke? you're a hard public.

Agreed...don't disagree with the content but delivery could often use some work

 

[GearMe]

A 100 € cable might be mechanically more reliable than a 1 € cable and that is one aspect.

The question is how should you spend the additional 99 € to get the largest possible difference? Maybe the best way to go is spend 10 € on a cable and 90 € on acoustical materials to absorb some early reflections?

This!