[theorist]

We have some lovely parting gifts for you...

What a free bit-perfect USB cable?

 

[bigshot]

MADE OF THE FINEST UNOBTANIUM!

 

[theorist]

MADE OF THE FINEST UNOBTANIUM!

What, shipped all the way from Pandora?

 

[bigshot]

Shipped all the way from the land of magical thinking where there's no science-- just phoolosophy!

 

[theorist]

Its not magical thinking, its simply the better music created by the audiophile ethernet connections to the Tree of Souls. Which, by the way, is made out of unobtainium.

PS I see how you can easily run up 15k+ posts in 13 years!

 

[bigshot]

I usually find that better musicians make better music. Wires usually have nothing to do with that.

Well.... are you leaving now?

 

[theorist]

Well.... are you leaving now?

Only when the discussion thread goes back to the sub-forum area where it correctly belongs, but you as everyone else are most welcome to come along, because discussion on this threat does not foreclose diverse beliefs and perspectives. Also, you have also demonstrated a sense of humour, as well as a love of beautiful little voles (we call it a dog in my part of the world).

 

[Brooko]

The name of this thread is: Why do USB cables make such a difference?

I was under the understanding that this was the 'DBT free part of the forum', at least according to the Moderator:
Yet now this appears to be moved to the science DBT subforum section. We all have are entitled to our believes, but mine certainly are not belonging here where positivism reigns as the only possible one correct and absolute truth.
If someone has hijacked this thread and moved it, can it be pleased put it back where it belongs, so we don't have to put up with dogmatically offensive and derogatory comments of this kind.

Not my call - was done by one of the Admins (personally I would have left it where it was - I thought some of the insights gained there were quite good). You can PM axelcloris if you feel it should be moved back (I think it may have been his call to move it).

And FWIW I do think it would be far more constructive for some SS members to take the same approach as Gregorio, and try to work explaining things rather than ridiculing. But ultimately you guys will need to work that out.

 

[bigshot]

If it gets moved back, give them all my love!

 

[bigshot]

FWIW I do think it would be far more constructive for some SS members to take the same approach as Gregorio, and try to work explaining things rather than ridiculing.

You haven't seen Gregorio when he gets on a roll!

All of us are happy to explain and share. The problem is that if someone is dug in deep with audiophoolery, they don't want to learn. They just want validation. And when we don't give them the validation they want, they get mean... That's my cue to stop trying to explain and turn to just trying to have fun with their pompousness.

 

[theorist]

All of us are happy to explain and share. The problem is that if someone is dug in deep with audiophoolery, they don't want to learn.

Not necessarily, Gregorio and others, suggested that I double blind test USB cables which I did, even following (until it became too tedious) his detailed protocol. See:

post #205.

Guess what? Right from the start of the DBT I could readily and repeatedly hear and identify the difference between the three USB cables that I and my cable swapper tested. Interestingly, the generic cable and the rather expensive one had less immediate difference than the intermediate priced cable, although my overall preference correlated with the price order.

Yes, I have seen all the explanation as to why this must be 'impossible', and courtesy of Gregorio and others I now understand much of the theory pertaining to this position starting from Shannon (1948) onwards, but these differences in USB cables are still perceptually there somehow. Hence my interest to understand why in this thread. I would be interested in your contribution to my understanding, not to mention humour and cool picture(s), but really don't find ev13wt's post, even though not directly aimed at me, helpful or constructive, as there is no need for that kind of negativity.

 

[castleofargh]

No thanks, I think I would rather go to dinner at the White House, at least the conversation there would be more intellectually stimulating.

maybe you can show your dissatisfaction without having to insult everybody here. you know this forum has rules right? I should delete this post but then I should probably remove about 15 of the latest posts. me being pro free speech really has a heavy cost on the SNR of a topic.
until now you've been more reasonable than most of the proponents of expensive cables, please keep doing so. or indeed leave, the forum is big enough. I did just that by unsubscribing before the topic was dumped in here, and my life was very fine.

 

[bigshot]

Guess what? Right from the start of the DBT I could readily and repeatedly hear and identify the difference between the three USB cables that I and my cable swapper tested.

How about introducing us to your "cable swapper" we would love to meet him!

 

[pinnahertz]

Not necessarily, Gregorio and others, suggested that I double blind test USB cables which I did, even following (until it became too tedious) his detailed protocol. See:

Guess what? Right from the start of the DBT I could readily and repeatedly hear and identify the difference between the three USB cables that I and my cable swapper tested. Interestingly, the generic cable and the rather expensive one had less immediate difference than the intermediate priced cable, although my overall preference correlated with the price order.

Yes, I have seen all the explanation as to why this must be 'impossible', and courtesy of Gregorio and others I now understand much of the theory pertaining to this position starting from Shannon (1948) onwards, but these differences in USB cables are still perceptually there somehow. Hence my interest to understand why in this thread. I would be interested in your contribution to my understanding, not to mention humour and cool picture(s), but really don't find ev13wt's post, even though not directly aimed at me, helpful or constructive, as there is no need for that kind of negativity.

I read through all of that the first time you linked to it and decided to withhold comment, but since you brought it up again...

Your test was certainly NOT a DBT, and absolutely did not follow the ABX protocol. There were uncontrolled biases, an nowhere near enough data was collected to draw a valid statistical conclusion, yet conclusions were drawn, and firmly presented as if they were conclusive. They were anything but.

 

[bigshot]

Pin, can I post the sad trombone again?