[dazzer1975]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus Must not be in this thread.

It was on page 1 of this thread whereMarkl refers to sceptics as young, inexperienced and financially inadequate.

My responses didn't help the situation, but being a cable believer, as I have had to state for the umpteenth time now and yet still drew comments attacking me for being a sceptic???? I didn't think calling all sceptics young and poor would really provide the best foundation for rational debate.

Look how the thread has turned out and look at the ones who are being accused most vehemently of engaging in personal attacks.

Deal with those who perpetrate personal attacks but don't turn a blind eye when those doing the attacking happen to share the same cable beliefs.

At the point Markle made his post, was there really need for it, and in such a provocative manner?

However, that is probably more indicative of a culture of personalities and clique's as opposed any sort of cable belief, as evidenced by the fact I called into question Markl's way of broaching the debate and I get attacked for not believing in cables and the same pattern has continued through the thread.

Now regarding the "debate", do I think cables make a difference, yes,

can I explain or quantify what diference they make to me personally in any scentific way, no,

do I want to listen to and hear the sceptics opinions and scientific data regarding the science and technical details of equipment including cables, yes,

will it detract from my music and equipment journey and discovery, no

Will I continue to try new equipment including cables as and when I can afford them or want to try a different sound even if I have read and heard all about science's lack of evidence for this, yes.

Is it healthy to recognise and listen to differing opinions, yes

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yotacowboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't have proof either way... ...and actually, I'm quite happy with that predicament. without getting too philosophical, I quite enjoy the idea that there is no universal truth in this matter. What I don't enjoy is when other people make certain universal claims, and blame their beliefs on a perversion of empirical science or a perversion of subjective beauty.

In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists.

 

[Vul Kuolun]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Must not be in this thread. I've replied to markl's comments twice in this thread: post #60 and post #64, neither of which had to do with a kiddy pool. My comments in both of these posts were specifically related to the exchange between markl's and Sovkiller. I was basically saying that I agreed with markl. If his reviews of headphones and amps and so forth are credible, then why would his reviews of cables not be credible? That was the context.

The term "kiddy pool" wasn't used in the context of your posts #60 and #64, that's right, i messed this up accidentaly. Sorry for wrongly accusing you.
But the point doesn't change, you aplauded a primitive personal attack that says nothing else than what i summarised here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/3921583-post402.html

Nothing against expressing your private viewpoint on a subject as a mod, but if i was a mod, sorry, i'd just refrain from supporting primitive ad hominem attacks.

Imagine the reputation you could have gained in the wooden ears camp gently reminding at this point of the discussion that these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussion loose all the fun, like mbriant just did above.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenkelby /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks. How would you propose we deal with posts (not people) that are not respectful and courteous?

As a group, we should agree to not tolerate disrespectful and discourteous behavior. The moderators don't have time to police everything. It's up to us to demand it from ourselves.

I've learned an interesting thing from internet chat boards. I used to think that people reacted based on their beliefs and what they knew. I've discovered that many people react emotionally, and logic or the topic at hand have nothing to do with it. There are some people around here who would disagree violently with me if I said "the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East". I always try to respond in kind- if someone is listening and thinking, I'll politely share what I think and listen to what they say and consider their arguments. If they're pissy or rude, I tell them where they can get off the bus. The worst thing for trying to learn or figure things out is to become entrenched in "sides".

The goal of all this isn't to win. It's to try to illuminate the truth from our own particular angles All opinions are not created equal. The ones that stand up are the ones that are well supported. But some opinions are just poor opinions, regardless of how vigorously you believe in them and no matter how aggressive you are in promoting them.

See ya
Steve

 

[yotacowboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists.

logically, yes. epistemologically, well, I'm not sure.

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pabbi1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Steve, I have read well in excess of a hundred of your (5000) posts which immediately pounce on someone's observation of a cable difference with the 'wire don't matter' mantra.

Oh! Well, I can help you with that. If you don't want to hear what I have to say, you are under no obligation to read my posts. Please just happily skip by them. Rest assured that there are people who do appreciate my contributions here. I'm not here to live up to your approval, and I'm not requiring you to pay attention to what I say. You can be sure that when you offer unsolicited opinions on the value of my contributions, I'll be doing exactly the same for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pabbi1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Guess not - the only thing you fear is people not seeing your omniscient posts

straw man... ad hominem...

Quote:

Originally Posted by pabbi1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry - I got your response the first time I read it, and have seen nothing new since.

Why did it take you reading hundreds of posts to come to that conclusion? I'm sure your time is valuable. Please by all means, go read something else.

See ya
Steve

 

[Riboge]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists.

I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be?

"The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'.
"The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'.

Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth.

That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way.

 

[Kees]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vul Kuolun /img/forum/go_quote.gif .... But the point doesn't change, you aplauded a primitive personal attack that says nothing else than what i summarised here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/3921583-post402.html Nothing against expressing your private viewpoint on a subject as a mod, but if i was a mod, sorry, i'd just refrain from supporting primitive ad hominem attacks. Imagine the reputation you could have gained in the wooden ears camp gently reminding at this point of the discussion that these are exactly the behavioral patterns that make the discussion loose all the fun, like mbriant just did above.

Could you explain how Markl's post was a "primitive personal attack"?

Could you explain how your posts (this one for instance) is helping any in the discussion?

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yotacowboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif you have the ability to provide me with information - but when, and how that information becomes MY knowledge is entirely up to me.

That's pretty much self evident. There are people here who have benefitted from my contributions, and there are people here who I have benefitted from. This is the internet. Sort out the information that interests you and do with it what you will. Filter.

I won't bother to comment on the jaw dropping irony of this "me too" reply to yotacowboy's quote above... You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

See ya
Steve

 

[yotacowboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riboge /img/forum/go_quote.gif I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be? "The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'. "The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'. Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth. That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way.

thanks, dude.

...and exactly why that little "logical fallacy" is a huge can of worms, and why i prefaced it... we could spend decades, even centuries, muddling around in that discussion - so be warned! it's a fun one!

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riboge /img/forum/go_quote.gif I hate to get involved at this level at this point but this is one of the most maddening pseudo-arguments of the believers in the sameness of all well-made cables. It's all in your assumed narrative: Do you envision a group of folk who from the beginning believe all wire sounds the same being challenged by a new person claiming to hear a difference? Or, do you envision a world in which many but not all people hear a difference being challenged by someone insisting they all sound alike as must be? "The" negative in the first is 'Cables don't always sound the same'. "The" negative in the second is 'Cables don't ever sound different'. Why is it logical to "assume that no difference is there until evidence...exists" when thru all of human history man has begun with the evidence of his senses, even though lately we have learned to overrule this sometimes when other kinds of evidence meet the burden of disproof? Whether the initial belief is that something is or is not the case, the burden of proof has always been on those who wish to establish a different truth. That still leaves room for argument about which came first. All I'm saying is it is not obvious or certain which is the negative, so proof/evidence is relevant either way.

You can measure any two well-made cables you want and all the measurements we can come up with will be, within testing error, identical. It's impossible to disprove the claim that 'well there's a still a difference that your instruments can't see' since no matter how precise the equipment gets the claim can still be made. The burden of proof is on the person that claims a difference exists, since scientific methods can't detect any such difference.

 

[Kees]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif In case you hadn't noticed, it's impossible to prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim a difference exists - logically, we must assume that no difference is there until evidence for a difference exists.

Nonsense.
What you are saying is that before Newton formulated the laws of gravity "we must assume that objects didn't fall".

 

[bigshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yotacowboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif So when someone says, "Cables have never, will never and could never make an audible difference to anyone, anywhere, at any time, under any circumstance" - I must ask, how do they know it all?

Who has said that? I certainly haven't. It's perfectly possible to create a cable that changes the sound. It just isn't possible to create a cable that sounds more accurate because it conducts better than an average well made cable.

See ya
Steve

 

[Uncle Erik]

Sorry I did not reply earlier, but thank you, Markl, for the explanation of your experience and how you came to notice differences in cables. There was a Pinot behind that, after all.

You've said that the skeptics are unable or unwilling to try a cable. Alright, I'll try one. What interconnect do you recommend, as compared to Blue Jeans, that will make an obvious difference? And would you recommend a SACD or two that will highlight those differences?

I am willing to risk $200-$300 on an interconnect. And I would prefer to buy a used one from Audiogon, as well. I figure that would probably get something that retailed around $500-$600.

I have a decent selection of headphones, so I will listen with whatever ones you think will be most revealing of the differences.

If I do not hear the difference, I'd like to mail you the two cables and a reference disc or two. You can listen and point out where the differences are, then send them back.

No, nothing scientific. However, I am willing to do this on your terms and discuss what happens publicly. What do you think?

 

[stevenkelby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif You can measure any two well-made cables you want and all the measurements we can come up with will be, within testing error, identical.

Even if 2 cables measure differently, who's to say they sound different? Couldn't you just say "sure they measure different but not enough to be audible, therefore, they sound the same?"