1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Why do the 'pro-cable' side refuse to accept the science and do blind tests?

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by prog rock man, Aug 12, 2010.
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
  1. Prog Rock Man
    The other test would be to measure the audible signal that comes out of the speakers with one and then the other power cable. Then see if there is a difference and if there is, is it audible?
    For all of the testing that goes on, testing to establish actual audibility is the one that gets neglected the most. That is what I find that very odd with so much of the hifi market.
  2. xnor
    Microphones cannot capture the magic properties only true audiophiles can. :wink:
  3. Steve Eddy


    It's not clear exactly what he's measured or what the actual effect is on the component itself.
    In short, it doesn't shed any light on anything.
  4. Bricolage


    ABX tests actually use your ears. 
  5. sokolov91
    Doesn't the whole premise of "test anxiety", mood, receptive state, etc all point to how powerful psychological factors/ state of mind are/is? If you being nervous makes you unable to spot the difference between cables the it would outweight any differences the cables had in the first place. And, if they are so powerful, why is it so crazy to think that the entire phenomina is purely psychological?
    To me, many of these arguments are self defeating because people are not entirely sure of what they are discussing -which is fine, I will never claim to know everything or even close but psych is one I know well. Telling someone you worry about the mental state effecting the subjects ability to hear critically, then denying the apparent changes are psychological in nature is a little contradictory. The entire arguments cables don't work is one of psychology. Mind over matter and reality.
    If you guys go check logical fallacies, and start applying them to the cable debate, you will see an overwhelming number stack on the pro-cable side. So before we even get to the actual testing, the entire logic of the argument is very flawed, on many levels. 
    Now, to discount the entire concept because there is no evidence would be a logical fallacy too, however when reviewing and argument critically, it should be done impartially and focus on the strength of the argument alone. The argument that cables do not in fact make a difference is an extremely powerful one, and is backed up on many, many different levels. The pro-cable arguments, at the root are logical fallacies. So, the root of the argument is illogical... you get where I am going.
    What I wish people would do more often is evaluate peoples arguments, and not their opinion. That would lead to a lot friendlier (and shorter) cable debates. 
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies I got most of them to apply to the Pro-Cable side, and a few to the Anti-Cable side. 
    In a purely academic sense, the pro cable side would be viewed as nonsense.
  6. Uncle Erik Contributor
    PRM, I would not be surprised if people in the cable industry have performed audibility tests and then didn't publish them because they were inconclusive. There's no conspiracy here - anyone who produces actual results will, almost literally, win the lottery. Prove a difference and the jackpot is yours. There's every incentive to show positive results while there's almost no incentive to prove cables wrong. Even the most hardened skeptic would find it quite lucrative to produce results. They can make crow delicious.
    PointyFox likes this.
  7. Steve Eddy
    Hey UE.
    When you have a moment, could you shed a little light on your NFB/signal strangulation comment on the other thread?
  8. maverickronin
  9. sokolov91
    This might be taboo to talk about, but you could organize other experiments just to show much music is in the mind. 
    You could have some pretty mediocre headphone or speaker set up, and depending on what the subjects ingested prior to listening, their experience could be mind blowing despite the relatively low/mid-fi quality play back.
    It is all in the perception and its weight. 
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Share This Page