[The Monkey]

Actually, for once I find myself kind of agreeing with beeman. Not for his reasoning, but the basic premise that if the same amp is being used to drive all these shiny and not so shiny cables, then why should we need to volume match? At the very least, isn't it interesting that a cable affects volume? Is this something that happens often? Regardless, I would think that data from both matched and unmatched would be useful because if indeed there is a difference and it can only be attributed to volume, then that's interesting, too, to me at least. Of course, this all assumes that the same amp is being used for all listening tests.

 

[Yoga Flame]

 
Quote:

If there's any significance, it's at the extremes of the music in the one percent or less range.  Enough of a difference to make me hit the hip, but not enough that I don't see the difference being easily masked by the addition of switch boxes and added connectors.

I'm not sure I understand you 100%. But if you are saying that the differences between (cable A) vs (cable B) is less than the difference between (cable A) vs (cable A + connector), that is something I can accept.
 
As for the volume issue, I doubt anyone disagrees with you that cables can change the volume. What the anti-cable side is saying is that the volume is the only real audible difference.

 

[beeman458]

If there's any significance, it's at the extremes of the music in the one percent or less range.
 
I'm not sure I understand you 100%. But if you are saying that the differences between (cable A) vs (cable B) is less than the difference between (cable A) vs (cable A + connector), that is something I can accept.
 
What I'm trying to convey in the first sentence is that the difference I hear isn't heard equally across the audio spectrum as most of the audio spectrum (the recorded material) is rendered perfectly fine.  In a recorded piece, the differences that I hear are minor differences such as the decay of a single plucked string, the opening up of a cymbal strike or the reduction of clipping in the case of a high note.  The difference is the opening up of a piano chord or there being a greater sense of the recorded space.
 
As for the volume issue, I doubt anyone disagrees with you that cables can change the volume.
 
Then, folks would have to agree that cables do make a difference.
 
What the anti-cable side is saying is that the volume is the only real audible difference.
 
Actually, what the anti-cable side is saying, based on your above is, that's "the only real audible difference" they're able to perceive.

 

[QRomo]

 
Quote:

It's not about what you find interesting or what you don't find interesting as it's about detecting the differences.  Volume is one of the differences.

 
Okay, I see we're approaching the question slightly differently. You're discussing the more general question of "do cables make a difference?" where as I'm looking at it from the more pragmatic standpoint of "how do I determine if I hear differences between cables, and if so, how do I best go about identifying which I prefer?". So it's in that sense that I say volume differences aren't interesting. 
 
Quote:

That's a straw man argument as there's no bumping of the gain going on.  Set the gain on the amp and let the cables themselves carry the day.  Cables are as neutral of an object as you're going find.  They have no power source so they shouldn't be able to add or subtract from the listening equation, yet they do.

 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's not physically possible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's not physically possible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's not physically possible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's not physically possible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's not physically possible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
It wasn't intended as a straw man, more an illustration of how psychoacoustics can affect our perception. If I'm trying to determine if I prefer one cable over another, I don't want to erroneously attribute a "higher quality" sound to one cable when it is really just slightly louder.
 
Incidentally, powered (or "active", as is the common term) devices are only required to add to a signal. Passive devices can affect the signal by attenuating and phase shifting (and maybe some other effects; I'm no expert). For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up. All cables exhibit some degree of resistance, capacitance, and inductance, which may or may not change along its length, so there's definitely a physical basis for believing cables can affect sound. The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's physically impossible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter. 
 





Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Personally, I'm surprised that nobody has challenged this point as it's as glaring of a gaff as the noon day sun in a desert, in the middle of August, in the northern hemisphere.  First, you're not comparing two pieces of equipment.  Why?  Because you're comparing headphone cables and what is it you're comparing, the ability of one to tell the differences between the two cables.  Volume is one of these differences and if you find need to level match, then you're admitting, before the test starts, that yes, there's a difference.  No level matching allowed.  And no switch boxes as the added boxes will mask over the difference custom cables make.  We're now back to there's "never" going be a valid test, so folks need to just learn to enjoy, or not enjoy and stop getting their shorts in a bunch over what others, such as myself, are want to buy.

 
My guess is that people on the pro-cable side don't challenge this point because they're approaching the question in a similar manner as myself, and in that vein volume differences aren't meaningful. 
My guess is that people on the pro-cable side don't challenge this point because they're approaching the question in a similar manner as myself. Since they accept that cables can make a difference, they're more concerned with differences in cables that affect the listening experience and level matching makes it easier to do this (and I contend should be done to eliminate the previously mentioned psychoacoustic effect).
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 /img/forum/go_quote.gif

I'll even go one better.  Let's assume that I'm all wet and cables are just that, totally bogus.  If folks want to buy snake oil and buying snake oil makes them happy, let them.  Anything else is just another case of folks sticking their noses in other people's business where it doesn't belong.  I do draw the line at killing endangered species when products such as Viagra are commonly available.

 
Agreed on this point. No need for anyone on either side of the divide to get all "holier than thou" on anyone else. I do find posters who take a non-dogmatic and thoughtful approach to the debate interesting to read, though.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

I do draw the line at killing endangered species when products such as Viagra are commonly available.

 

(And if it lasts for more than four hours.....)

 

Oh, yeah, like I want to go walking into my doctors office with that complaint. 
 

"Hey Doc., can you do anything for me?"

 

 
This gives new meaning to the term "cable discussion". 
This gives new meaning to the term "cable discussion".  

 
 
As an aside, I want to murder the head-fi post editor.
 
 
EDIT: On The Monkey's point, while I don't find volume differences to be interesting from a sonic standpoint, I do find it quite odd that they should exist in the first place. It seems to me that the cable and headphones form a voltage divider, and if that's the case the cable would have to have a pretty high resistance per unit length to be audible (assuming sane cable lengths). For interconnects, it would have to be ridiculously high. Hard to believe that anyone would use such a poor conductor in a cable. I've never noticed it myself, but I'm willing to believe the reports of others. There must be something else going on that's beyond my limited understanding.

 

[beeman458]

QRomo wrote:
 
Okay, I see we're approaching the question slightly differently. You're discussing the more general question of "do cables make a difference?" where as I'm looking at it from the more pragmatic standpoint of "how do I determine if I hear differences between cables, and if so, how do I best go about identifying which I prefer?". So it's in that sense that I say volume differences aren't interesting.
 
From your pragmatic view, that's where I break out what I'm listening for such as the lack of clipping or an improved sense of the depth or overall space of the sound stage; presents.  There's also issues which surrounds emotional responses to the recorded material.  Many times I find that I'm not able to honestly hear a difference but the change of the cable brings about an emotional well being or if you will, it brings a smile to my face and I find my shoulders relaxing when particular passages are played.  That's a win in my book.
 
For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up.
 
To keep it simple, just like you can't line level and no switch boxes allowed, can't do your above to cables either as that's also cheating.
 
The reason the anti-cable side contends a cable can't have an audible effect is not that it's physically impossible, but that the relevant physical properties of the cable are too small to matter.
 
Me?  I think they're working real hard to make up a cover story as to why they can't hear a difference.
 
My guess is that people on the pro-cable side don't challenge this point because they're approaching the question in a similar manner as myself.
 
Me?  I think folks whiffed it and didn't realize it because it's the elephant in the room that's not being discussed.  Kinda hard to miss.
 
Since they accept that cables can make a difference, they're more concerned with differences in cables that affect the listening experience and level matching makes it easier to do this (and I contend should be done to eliminate the previously mentioned psychoacoustic effect).
 
Sorry, no line leveling allowed cause that's a difference.  Just like no switch boxes allowed as that adds the character of the switch box to the mix.
 
Personally, in the case of headphone cables, I don't think one can create a valid DBT test.  Folks on the anti-cable side can talk a good story but in the end, their story becomes a poorly written screen play where one has to ignore the obvious in order to make the plot work.
 
Let's see, I'm going cause mass audio nervosa by adding the acoustical confusion of many cables, trickery by the addition of who knows what, coupled with short term memory problems, add unrealistic test evaluation parameters, switch boxes and line level out the gain differences as well as who knows what sonic confusing devices and then declare you a placebo ladened fool because I made sure to remove the analogue nature of the human sensory system in the resulting analysis.  In short, the anti-cable lobby thinks creating test parameters that are guaranteed to create fail is rational behavior.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Seems the anti side of things are starting to give in on this point? If two cables are attenuated at the same level and one is louder for what ever reason, doesn't seem there is a good reason for it? Hmmmmmmmmmmm...........
 
Quote:

 
As for the volume issue, I doubt anyone disagrees with you that cables can change the volume. What the anti-cable side is saying is that the volume is the only real audible difference.

 

[AVU]

 

Quote:

Actually, for once I find myself kind of agreeing with beeman. Not for his reasoning, but the basic premise that if the same amp is being used to drive all these shiny and not so shiny cables, then why should we need to volume match? At the very least, isn't it interesting that a cable affects volume? .

 
Sure, to simplify, just leave it - don't volume match.  Let the users decide.
 

Quote:

QRomo wrote:
 
While strictly true, volume differences are not interesting unless there are other differences that go with them (distortion, frequency response, etc.). I doubt anyone would be willing to pay extra for a cable whose only effect can be nullified by a simple turn of the volume knob.
 
Again, removing the volume difference, removes differences and the whole point of the exercise is to answer the question; do cables make a difference and can you hear these differences?  Volume differences, are a difference. 
 
Level matching actually makes it easier to spot meaningful differences as it allows you to compare both components from a common baseline, kind of like how you line up two objects with a common reference point when trying to determine which is longer.
 
The point of the exercise is to see if there's a difference and volume, is a difference.  
 
Folks at this point, need to accept the point that this is a conundrum which based upon current state of the industry, is unprovable and the decision to buy or not buy is something one is going have to independently make on their own.  Hear a difference, wonderful.  Don't hear a difference, equally wonderful.  If one is worried that it's all a scam, don't buy any cables except for inexpensive but well made zip cord models. 

 
Volume difference is not a difference I, or many others, care about.  When I was comparing two amps, one was a little louder than the other.  It may it a bit more of a pain to compare the two, but eventually I decided that the louder one was also the worse sounding one overall.  So the individual adjusts the volume, not a big deal.  The point is, who would pay $300 more for a cable if they can get the same sound by turning the knob a bit?  The idea is absurd on its face. 
 
But moreover, I really don't like this idea that because there's some confusion about this issue, that we have to throw our hands up and declare it "a conundrum" that's simply going to persist.  That position heavily favors the exotic cable manufacturers.  The whole point of regulatory agencies like the better business bureau is to actively intervene and disrupt the natural state of capitalism that would have sellers say anything they want to make a sale and buyers having no recourse other than to getting screwed.  Reminds me of the "debate" over global warming.  You can have 5000 scientists agree on something, and then a dozen oil industry paid shills argue the opposite, and all of a sudden there's a controversy and we just have to throw up our hands and say it can't be decided one way or another?  That's an abdication of critical thought.
 
Quote:

Yoga Flame wrote:
 
The pro-cable position is that there are significant differences between the cables.
 
That's not a claim that I've made.  If there's any significance, it's at the extremes of the music in the one percent or less range.  Enough of a difference to make me hit the hip, but not enough that I don't see the difference being easily masked by the addition of switch boxes and added connectors.

Beeman458, then this isn't about you.  
 
I'm trying to decide whether to spend as much money as I spend on an amp on new cables, because I've been told they are a massive improvement in the sound.  I want to hear a massive improvement, because these cables cost a massive amount of money, and I want to see whether they're worth it.  
 
There are many people on this forum who spend as much on cables as they do on their amp / dac / headphones.  I want to see whether cables could possibly justify what, on its face, seem to be ridiculously outscale prices.  

 

 

[QRomo]

 
Quote:

From your pragmatic view, that's where I break out what I'm listening for such as the lack of clipping or an improved sense of the depth or overall space of the sound stage; presents.  There's also issues which surrounds emotional responses to the recorded material.  Many times I find that I'm not able to honestly hear a difference but the change of the cable brings about an emotional well being or if you will, it brings a smile to my face and I find my shoulders relaxing when particular passages are played.  That's a win in my book.

 
I remember hearing about a study where the subjects were shown pairs of images that were different in some way that could not be consciously perceived by the subjects. My memory is vague about this, but I think their eyes were perfectly fine, it was a disconnect somewhere in the brain that blocked certain visual stimuli from reaching their conscious mind. When asked if the two images were different, they would respond that they couldn't tell them apart. They were then asked to pick which they preferred, and despite not consciously registering a difference and feeling like they were picking at random, the experiment showed they exhibited a statistically significant preference for one image over the other. Very neat.
 
So while I believe it's possible that smile you get is purely psychological, I think its also quite possible you're subconsciously registering an audible difference that you can't consciously detect.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 
 
For instance, the addition of just a single capacitor and resistor to your headphone cable could act as a low pass (rolled off highs) or high pass (rolled off lows) filter, depending on how you wired it up.
 
To keep it simple, just like you can't line level and no switch boxes allowed, can't do your above to cables either as that's also cheating.

 
Oh, I wasn't suggesting that you would want to do this to a cable, just using it as an example of a passive device capable of altering the signal passing through it.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by beeman458 
 
Since they accept that cables can make a difference, they're more concerned with differences in cables that affect the listening experience and level matching makes it easier to do this (and I contend should be done to eliminate the previously mentioned psychoacoustic effect).  
Sorry, no line leveling allowed cause that's a difference.  Just like no switch boxes allowed as that adds the character of the switch box to the mix.

 
Is it your contention that level matching completely invalidates cable comparisons? The only difference that is removed by level matching is the volume difference. All other differences are preserved, so long as your volume knob isn't fundamentally broken. One can therefore conclude from a positive result that the cables are different in addition to the level difference, while a negative result would conclude that no difference was heard except for the level difference.
 
Quote:

Personally, in the case of headphone cables, I don't think one can create a valid DBT test.  Folks on the anti-cable side can talk a good story but in the end, their story becomes a poorly written screen play where one has to ignore the obvious in order to make the plot work.

 
I agree that it's pretty hard to do a headphone cable DBT as removing all non-auditory cues that might influence the listener is difficult. However, if we assume we can take different cables and make them all seem identical from the outside (same appearance, weight, length, etc.), I think it's possible to create a meaningful test. I would simply give you (in the general sense, not singling out you specifically, beeman) several of these outwardly identical cables (labeled 1, 2, 3, etc.) and let you take them home and evaluate each for as long as you like. Since I know you don't like trickery, I'd even go so far as to stipulate that no two cables are identical to each other, though I don't think that restriction is strictly necessary. You then go through exactly the same process you go through when evaluating a new cable, whatever it may be. There would be no restrictions on how or when you must change cables, nor any time limit on how long you have to evaluate them. Once you're satisfied, I would then ask if you heard any differences between any of the cables, and if so, to give a qualitative description of what those differences were. You could of course make those observations while you listen, not necessarily at the end of the test. I'd also ask you to rank each cable in terms of preference, both with and without ties (without ties to account for subconscious perception). I'd then randomly relabel the cables and have you repeat the exercise several times. The degree of consistency in your rankings and descriptions of differences across multiple trials would then determine whether the differences you heard (or subconsciously perceived) are audible differences. Note that I wouldn't expect the descriptions and rankings to be identical for each trial in order to produce a positive result, just enough consistency to be confident that the results aren't simply random.
 
Granted, this would be quite time consuming, especially if you tried doing this with many subjects. Not to mention you'd probably be hard pressed to find people that would actually want to spend the hours upon hours comparing the same set of cables over and over again. I know I wouldn't, nor would I really want to conduct such a test, so I doubt something like it will ever happen. However, on first pass, it seems to me that this sort of experiment would address a lot of the problems people have with DBT/ABX tests. The only difference between how the subject would evaluate a cable he bought and one used in this test is that the test cable's identity is hidden. Everything else is the same (same gear, same environment, same listening procedure), so if he hears differences under normal circumstances those same differences should be audible under test. Of course, if anyone disagrees, feel free to elaborate.
 
Quote:

Let's see, I'm going cause mass audio nervosa by adding the acoustical confusion of many cables, trickery by the addition of who knows what, coupled with short term memory problems, add unrealistic test evaluation parameters, switch boxes and line level out the gain differences as well as who knows what sonic confusing devices and then declare you a placebo ladened fool because I made sure to remove the analogue nature of the human sensory system in the resulting analysis.  In short, the anti-cable lobby thinks creating test parameters that are guaranteed to create fail is rational behavior.

 
I don't want to open up this can of worms again, as I've seen you post at length in the past about the various problems you have with DBT/ABX tests in audio. I doubt you want to rehash it all again. I'll just say that I disagree with some of your conclusions and leave it at that.

 

[beeman458]

AVU wrote:
 
Volume difference is not a difference I, or many others, care about.
 
Then that settles it.  Since you don't care, it doesn't count; ad hoc rulemaking.
 
The point is, who would pay $300 more for a cable if they can get the same sound by turning the knob a bit?  The idea is absurd on its face.
 
No it's not.  Why?  Because the discussion is about cables making or not making a difference.  What the discussion isn't about, is what you find "absurd."
 
But moreover, I really don't like this idea that because there's some confusion about this issue, that we have to throw our hands up and declare it "a conundrum" that's simply going to persist.
 
Well, so far, after many, many decades, that's all that's been accomplished, the persistency of the question.
 
That's an abdication of critical thought.
 
Actually, it's quite the opposite as it's critical thought that's kept the question alive all these decades.
 
I want to hear a massive improvement, because these cables cost a massive amount of money, and I want to see whether they're worth it.
 
If those are your expectations, then headphone cables aren't for you as two points, these aren't massive amounts of money (that's aggrandizing) and second, the improvement is in the nuances and can't be characterized as "massive."
 
There are many people on this forum who spend as much on cables as they do on their amp / dac / headphones.  I want to see whether cables could possibly justify what, on its face, seem to be ridiculously outscale prices.
 
It's their money to spend as they see fit, what do you care?  Also, as to the price, what was Tiger spending for a single night that he could have gotten at home for no charge?  The point, it's all relative and the relativity of cost (value) needs to be taken into consideration to the size of a person's bank.

 

[beeman458]

Is it your contention that level matching completely invalidates cable comparisons?
 
Absolutely.
 
The only difference that is removed by level matching is the volume difference.
 
I don't know so I can't say as the above qualifies as an opinion as opposed to a fact.
 
All other differences are preserved, so long as your volume knob isn't fundamentally broken.
 
Again, I don't know as again, the above qualifies as an opinion as opposed to a fact so I can't say.  But let's face it, the fact that there's a level difference alone, tells one that a difference exists.
 
One can therefore conclude from a positive result that the cables are different in addition to the level difference, while a negative result would conclude that no difference was heard except for the level difference.
 
Here's the rub, what constitutes a "negative result" as the seventy percent requirement, on it's face flies in the face of the human sensory system being an analogue system and is an invalid standard of proof.  And the subjective nature of testing procedures concludes nothing other than the anti-cable guys need to feel good about themselves because they can't hear a difference.
 
Since I know you don't like trickery, I'd even go so far as to stipulate that no two cables are identical to each other, though I don't think that restriction is strictly necessary.
 
Absolutely it's necessary.  Cables need to be what one says they are and nothing else.  If there isn't a difference among cables, then there's no need for trickery.  If there's a need for trickery, then there's only one reason for it, because there's a difference.  If one is going be concentrating on differences, then there needs to be differences to concentrate on as creating audio mirages is just another form of trickery.
 
Granted, this would be quite time consuming, especially if you tried doing this with many subjects.
 
Think about it.  What difference does it truly make.  If one wants custom cables, let them.  Why the need for all the effort other than there's a deep seated need to prove there's not a difference because someone's listening ego is out of joint.

 

[QRomo]

 
 
Quote:

Here's the rub, what constitutes a "negative result" as the seventy percent requirement, on it's face flies in the face of the human sensory system being an analogue system and is an invalid standard of proof.  And the subjective nature of testing procedures concludes nothing other than the anti-cable guys need to feel good about themselves because they can't hear a difference.
 

 
 
There's no "seventy percent requirement" that I'm aware of. The actual threshold for rejecting the null hypothesis ("cable differences are inaudible") depends on the design of the experiment. In the case of an ABX style test, the usual criterion is that the sequence of responses have less than a 5% chance of happening by pure chance, or a 95% confidence level. Since an ABX test is a sequence of yes/no style answers, you can expect to score 50% on average by just flipping a coin, so right away the threshold will be greater than 50%. It's actually dependent on the number of trials conducted. This works out to 70-80% for a smallish number of trials, but goes down as you increase the number of trials. For instance, if my math is correct, for 100 trials one would only need to score 55 or more to produce a statistically significant result. In fact, the way I understand it, a score of 45 or less would also be statistically significant, as if you're getting significantly fewer correct results than random chance there's almost certainly something interesting going on.
 
I doubt this alters your stance at all, but I thought I'd point out that the "seventy percent requirement" is not some arbitrary number chosen to guarantee a fail. It sounds more like your objection is with ABX style tests rather than the seemingly high threshold of significance as that's a consequence of only having two choices for each result. Devising a test that gives more choices will significantly reduce that threshold (for instance, with 4 choices and 25 trials, my math says a score of 10 or more would be statistically significant).
 
 
Quote:

Since I know you don't like trickery, I'd even go so far as to stipulate that no two cables are identical to each other, though I don't think that restriction is strictly necessary.
 
Absolutely it's necessary.  Cables need to be what one says they are and nothing else.  If there isn't a difference among cables, then there's no need for trickery.  If there's a need for trickery, then there's only one reason for it, because there's a difference.  If one is going be concentrating on differences, then there needs to be differences to concentrate on as creating audio mirages is just another form of trickery.

 
 
I added the extra stipulation to make the idea more palatable to you, but I don't see anything wrong with slightly changing the experiment so that the subject is told his set of cables may or may not contain duplicates. In fact, one could argue that by telling the subject that each cable is different from each other that you create a minor expectation bias that could influence how the subject evaluates each cable. 
 
Quote:

Think about it.  What difference does it truly make.  If one wants custom cables, let them.  Why the need for all the effort other than there's a deep seated need to prove there's not a difference because someone's listening ego is out of joint.

 

I'm in full agreement that if someone wants to go for broke with custom cables, they're welcome to and I hope they enjoy themselves. And there's no question that there are people on both sides of the debate that have a strange desire to prove the other side wrong. However, it doesn't follow that any attempt to explore the subject matter is some sort of ego trip. In my case, it's simple intellectual curiousity. Anytime a large number of people's expectations differ significantly from scientific expectation I'm interested to know why. There's usually a lot to be learned from both sides while trying to figure it all out.

Since I know you don't like trickery, I'd even go so far as to stipulate that no two cables are identical to each other, though I don't think that restriction is strictly necessary.
 
Absolutely it's necessary.  Cables need to be what one says they are and nothing else.  If there isn't a difference among cables, then there's no need for trickery.  If there's a need for trickery, then there's only one reason for it, because there's a difference.  If one is going be concentrating on differences, then there needs to be differences to concentrate on as creating audio mirages is just another form of trickery.

 
 

Quote:

Since I know you don't like trickery, I'd even go so far as to stipulate that no two cables are identical to each other, though I don't think that restriction is strictly necessary.
 
Absolutely it's necessary.  Cables need to be what one says they are and nothing else.  If there isn't a difference among cables, then there's no need for trickery.  If there's a need for trickery, then there's only one reason for it, because there's a difference.  If one is going be concentrating on differences, then there needs to be differences to concentrate on as creating audio mirages is just another form of trickery.

 
 

 

[Prog Rock Man]

I used to rate a cable upgrade as being successful if I heard an increase in volume with the volume control remaining the same. I have written about that here and on the What Hifi forum in the past and was roundly shouted down for being obsessed with high volume and loudness and not understanding what a volume control was for.
 
At the time of most of those upgrades it was great having more control over the volume because the volume pot on my Rega Mira amp was hard to set and went very quickly from too quiet to too loud. The best cable I bought was one from Russ Andrews that had attenuation built into it. There was actual science behind that with a chart to match the output to inut voltage and see how much attenuation was needed. The voltage out put on the Arcam CDP was matched to the input on the amp and I got twice the usable volume range that i had before. That made later night listening more pleasurable as I was getting a slight increase in volume, which as shown above is a way of selling equipment by making it sound better.
 
I have in the past posted that I thought volume changes cause by cables could be mistaken for improvements in cables. I noticed that with the three ICs that I have used between my present DAC and amp. But now, using headphones and having an amp with a much better volume control, overall volume is not as important as I can easily get the volume I want and over a wide range.
 
The attenuated cable had been genuinely useful. But that had lead me to believe all cables would be useful, until I found out it was really the amp and its volume control that was the issue. I would rather have an amp with a decent volume pot that have to use cables to try and sort the difference.
 
I have also noticed a difference between two headphone extension cables and volume. A £3 Sony one that appeared to strangle the music compared to a £5 ThatCable Loops one that opened up the sound again
 
I think that volume control is a genuine difference in cables and it is great to come back to this discussion to find that there is now a discussion on that issue.
 
(I am on Beeman's ignore list as I have used his language to others against him by imitating him and he really did not like being spoken to the way he speaks to others. So he will not know that I agree with him that volume is a difference between cables.)
 
However, if volume control is going to be accepted as a difference, then we cannot concentrate purely on the cable. This has to be done in relation to the other equipment being used. So if an amp has a good volume control and the voltage from the source is the same or less than the input, then the cable will have no effect.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

The switchbox is a non-issue.  Most of you are running cables into a switchbox inside your gear.  If using a switch obfuscates the sound, then anyone claiming to hear a difference in using a cable must be imagining the difference.

I think your assumptions may be simplistic or presumptuous in some cases.
 

 

[JustPhilbo]

Is it probable that a volume difference between cables is due to an inherent measurement difference?  Given two cables that measure the same, or very close, how would it be possible for a perceivable volume difference to exist? 
 
If cables measure significantly different, then it is possible and perhaps probable that they would differ in measurable volume by vanishingly small amounts. 
 
However, in the case of well engineered cables with similar measurements, I find it hard to believe that a truly significant volume difference would exist. 
 
So, I would suggest that with the exception of very poorly engineered cables, the volume difference argument might be a bit specious. 
 
What was the required volume change again for *most* humans to note a change?  I seem to remember .5 DB, but that is probably off target...
 
Do we have metrics for how much of a resistance change would be required to alter the volume past such a point of perception?

 

[The Monkey]

I think your assumptions may be simplistic or presumptuous in some cases.
 

Disagree; and i will leave it at that.





As for cable differences, what physical properties would cause music heard through Special Cable Brand X to be (actually) louder than Basic Cable Brand Y? Further, is this a phenomenon that is regularly observed or is this just limited to a few anecdotal posts? EDIT: Just noticed that Philbo's volume questions are much better articulated than my own, sorry.



Finally, in response to Poppa's post, your belief that one side is "caving" is a good example of how personally pro-cablers take this stuff. As a believer in DBT, i dont care if a difference is shown--I don't care if it ends up that cables do make a difference. If so, great! If not, great! In other words, i have no horse in the race as to whether or not they make a difference--i just want some facts. I am sick and tired of the constant braying by ill-informed fools posing as experts on this site misleading new members into thinking it is a fact that they must spend hundreds of dollars or more on wire when if fact no one knows that to be the case--factually. So sick of it that my days here are numbered.



Please note Poppa, that the above is not meant to be an attack on you. I respect your experience. But you are in the minority here these days. The shills and the ignorant are the loudest posters here now and their advice is sought out with eagerness and regularity.





Get rid of DBT! Get rid of facts! Be careful what you wish for....