Why pick on cables ?

[gregorio]

1) All I will say is yes, I have researched Litz Construction, that I will promise you. I don't need to provide the links as I'm sure you can find them.
2) Of course I have heard all styles of gear, from $10.00 to $100,000 dollars.
3) The reason you don't hear expensive cables is because you don't personally "G" hear cables working, and [3a] science does not measure the event.
But that does not mean they are affecting the sound from the better in most cases. [3b] But no, not with cheap gear, sorry, they do affect the sound but not as much. [3c] The reason graphs don't show cable improvements is do to the equipment not being sensitive enough. As gone over in my previous posts.
[4] Once again "free plugin 25 years ago" we are talking about measuring cables and not plug ins, a regular IEM graphing set-up, you obviously don't use or know about.

1. You were not asked for your promise that you researched Litz wire, you were asked to provide reliable evidence to support your claims, which yet again you have failed to do!
2. Great so you admit you haven’t heard ultra expensive rigs!
3. Your first sentence is obviously false. It has nothing to do with me not “personally hearing cables working” because. A. I must obviously hear cables working otherwise I would never hear any audio and B. How does me personally not “hearing cables working” affect the numerous ultra expensive rigs I’ve used that were built and used by other people, who had no idea what I personally hear?
3a. If science cannot measure the event, as you falsely claim, then there would be no audio recordings, duh!
3b. But you’ve just admitted you’ve never heard ultra expensive rigs!
3c. Yes, you’ve posted that lie previously but do you realise that just repeating the same lie does not make it true? Equipment is far more sensitive than your hearing!
4. This too is nonsense, I did not mention a free plugin that measures plugins, I mentioned a free plugin that measures “pace”, which you falsely stated could not be measured!

Again, nothing but the same BS and refusal to support any of your claims with reliable evidence. So stop with the BS!!

G

 

[Redcarmoose]

1. You were not asked for your promise that you researched Litz wire, you were asked to provide reliable evidence to support your claims, which yet again you have failed to do!
2. Great so you admit you haven’t heard ultra expensive rigs!
3. Your first sentence is obviously false. It has nothing to do with me not “personally hearing cables working” because. A. I must obviously hear cables working otherwise I would never hear any audio and B. How does me personally not “hearing cables working” affect the numerous ultra expensive rigs I’ve used that were built and used by other people, who had no idea what I personally hear?
3a. If science cannot measure the event, as you falsely claim, then there would be no audio recordings, duh!
3b. But you’ve just admitted you’ve never heard ultra expensive rigs!
3c. Yes, you’ve posted that lie previously but do you realise that just repeating the same lie does not make it true? Equipment is far more sensitive than your hearing!
4. This too is nonsense, I did not mention a free plugin that measures plugins, I mentioned a free plugin that measures “pace”, which you falsely stated could not be measured!

Again, nothing but the same BS and refusal to support any of your claims with reliable evidence. So stop with the BS!!

G

Of course I have heard the ultimate rigs, I'm not going to name drop but Ive been to shows with some of the best manufactures, hearing good gear is easy, I don't really know what you are implying?

Of course I have heard the TOTL rigs.

HA, why would I research Litz wire for you! What? All the information is readily accessible to the theories contained on-line?

Experiments with equipment is far more sensitive than our hearing? So wait, you're saying everything can be measured at this point? Nope.

We are going round and round with the same arguments, and this is getting old, time to put this thread to bed for me. You can take that anyway you want to. See you. It's been fun. Bye-bye.

There is no definitive answer as to why some don't hear specific metallurgy/design values of cables working to enhance sound quality.

 

[gregorio]

Of course I have heard the ultimate rigs, I'm not going to name drop but Ive been to shows with some of the best manufactures, hearing good gear is easy, I don't really know what you are implying?
Of course I have heard the TOTL rigs.

Huh, you’re contradicting yourself. You stated you’d heard gear from 10.00 - 100,000 but the ultra expensive gear/rigs cost hundreds of thousands or millions. So unless you think 100k is more than millions then you’ve already admitted you haven’t heard ultra expensive rigs! And you’ve been to shows, you’re joking? Sure, shows have world class acoustics lol.

HA, why would I research Litz wire for you! What? It is readily accessible to the theory contained on-line?

You don’t need to research Litz wire for me, I’ve already done that. What you need to do is provide reliable evidence for your claims regarding Litz wire. Stop deflecting!

So wait your saying everything can be measured? Nope.

If it can’t be measured then it can’t be recorded and if it can’t be recorded then how can you reproduce and hear it?

We are going round and round with the same arguments, and this is getting old, time t put this thread to bed for me.

No we’re not going round and round with the same arguments, we’re going round and round with you just posting the same BS and refusing to make any valid arguments. I’m still waiting for your (valid) argument of how cables can break the laws of physics, but nothing except more BS! And, denying the facts, contradicting science, posting made-up BS and refusing to provide even a shred of reliable supporting evidence does not “put this thread to bed for you”, unless you consider running away from the truth to be “putting it to bed”?

There is no definitive answer as to why some don't hear specific metallurgy/design values of cables working to enhance sound quality.

Oh good, lies and deflections in bold now. You refusing to learn or accept the facts does not mean the facts don’t exist and that you can post whatever BS you can think up without being refuted!

At least you running away saves us from you repeating your BS yet again, at least until you do it again next time!

G

 

[BS5711]

I guess that blind test isn’t happening.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Buddy, I surely believe the first big photos of different cables, connectors, and IEMs with laptop are yours because the lighting isn't the best. You claim your degree is photography, yet somehow not the best with photography. Photography was just another elective with me when I was pursuing my BFA. We were talking about the last one: the graphic of "Totem Cable". Well for Pete's sake: I have been involved with 3D graphics: this is obviously a 3D rendering, and a bad one at that.

OK, if you're going to continue to maintain that a $20 IEM will not reveal the detail of a $500 cable? Sorry, Even several thousand dollar table setup will not show a difference with a $500 cable.

HA, this is not a photography forum, and we are not concerning ourselves with photography, we are conveying concepts of audiophile products?

No I didn't go to Brooks Institute to learn product photography. At this point you are really kind of a troll? You really are! Truly you don't get the point of this forum? I mean this is an enthusiasts web site. You're even concerned about the Penon drawing? LOL Calling it bad, your missing the total point here. The Penon drawing gets the concepts across, my personal photographs are the best I can do with non-professional equipment. I'm not a commercial photographer, I'm a Bio-medical Photographer who did scientific medical photography. Jeeze! I am perfectly happy with my photography here, your saying it is over-size?



Somehow your critique is on my photography, what does that have to do with cables? Stick to the topic at hand?

I guess that blind test isn’t happening.

Yes, trash talking my education and calling me out as a liar, doesn’t exactly sit well with me continuing. Have fun, maybe I will do it somehow.........as I finished a review and posted it today, despite posting here, so anything is possible! Cheers!

 

[2leftears]

Stop it with the trolling and personal attacks. It doesn't look good and isn't accepted on Headfi.
If someone doesn't like being attacked, or seeing someone being attacked, consider the report button. I know that many people live by "snitches get stitches" or a slightly more chivalrous version of it, but I don't see it that way. To me, it's a mean(the only one you have, actually) to try and clean the forum.

One side shows it has no argument by using straw man and a long list of correlation=causation fallacy. The other side shows it has no argument by using personal attacks. Everybody loses.
I get it. When the same person keeps using the same non arguments and false logic, I too start getting personal because at some point the problem is that person. It's a fact. But obviously, it's kind of weak of us to go and attack people. And it is not allowed(small detail). Less of that is better.

This is getting very tiring.

An epistemological clash of different philosophical paradigms. That is bound to turn acrimonious sooner or later, except perhaps in the course of epistemological studies itself.

This can only end if both 'sides' decide to leave each other alone. Which means not posting pseudoscientific ideas and beliefs in the Sound Science forum, and not posting scientific facts with inflammatory intent in the Equipment forum. Unfortunately Head-Fi posting rules are not set up to support this in an equitable way, hence all the inflamatory debates here in the Sound Science forum.

Whilst I'm not a fan of it in terms of the fight against misinformation, I can understand the rationale of not allowing discussion of ABX and blind testing in the other Equipment forums. But given the manner in which that has been implemented, really this would only be fair and effective if this were accompanied by a similar forum rule against posting pseudoscientific beliefs and 'facts' in the Sound Science forum. That would be plain common sense, even if that wouldn't actually help fight the spread of misinformation and disinformation; after all Head-Fi is a marketing platform first and foremost as anyone with more than a single brain cell should realise.

In essence, those who visit the Sound Science forum with the intent of 'educating' the scientists about pseudoscientific beliefs and the 'fallacies' of the scientific methods, and then get upset about these 'debates' in the Sound Science forum turning acrimonious with personal attacks (however much that may actually be against Head-Fi posting etiquette), should realise the above for themselves without waiting for a new posting rule, and simply refrain from posting material here that they know will cause a sh!t show. Please.

Those who believe in the science of sound can be wise with their money and spend it where they know it matters

Those who believe in the pseudoscience of sound can spend it whichever way makes them feel better

 

[colonelkernel8]

Cable geometry as well. Not all Litz configuration wires sound the same. Some can sound warm or bright with the same material (copper for example)

Oh jesus christ

 

[castleofargh]

Oh jesus christ

It's still a statement supported by nothing, but it's more realistic than someone who always associates a specific sound to each of those variables.

 

[JamoBroGuy]

I didn’t want to get involved in this discussion. I thought my previous message to Red would be the last one. But this is just getting ridiculous.

@Redcarmoose. You have never once done a proper blind test and instead passionately believe that your faulty human perception is 100% objective reality, plus you’re trying to convince us of that false belief.

Reading your posts genuinely made me shake my head in disbelief. Why are you so against science, and why are you trying to spread this anti-science BS in Sound Science of all places? If you want to post BS, the other 99% of Head-Fi will welcome you with open arms. But here, we discuss objective reality, and in objective reality, cables do not make an audible difference unless there’s some weird impedance mismatch going on. Copper “sounds” warmer because the colour of copper is warm. Silver “sounds” brighter because the colour of silver is bright. Due to you presumably being a human being, these things will bias your perception in sighted listening.

We’re all trying to tell you the objective facts, and you’re just deflecting it over and over and over with countless fallacious arguments. No matter how hard we try, we just cannot get to you. If this is your usual behaviour when presented with objective facts, then I think it would be best if you stick to the rest of Head-Fi instead of plaguing Sound Science threads with audiophile BS.

I’m sorry if this sounded harsh, but Sound Science is for facts, not audiophoolery.

 

[bigshot]

I guess I missed the name calling. All I saw was the same old BS claims get trotted out over and over again after they’ve been proven false and dismissed many times in the past. That’s when I quit answering specific points and just summarize the arguments as BS. It doesn’t lead the thread in any productive direction, but you’ve got to answer BS when it’s spread out.

It's still a statement supported by nothing, but it's more realistic than someone who always associates a specific sound to each of those variables.

Ask him! I’m sure he would be happy to assign a specific sound to each one!

 

[Davesrose]

Yes, trash talking my education and calling me out as a liar, doesn’t exactly sit well with me continuing. Have fun, maybe I will do it somehow.........as I finished a review and posted it today, despite posting here, so anything is possible! Cheers!

You were the one trotting out the name calling. If you had a degree in art, you’d know what criticism is. One of the things you learn freshman art is to develop a skin towards criticism. I could have made it more constructive by saying you have good composition, but your lighting is off. You need to better isolate your subject. Does that make my statement better? And what does photography have to do with this thread? You post your photos of company supplied cables taking up a majority of the page. I thought people might be more entertained with photo talk, but I'll cease and let this resume to the age old topic. This “troll” says don’t let the door hit you while you’re leaving. Even though you say you’re done with the insistence of audiophile terms being factual, I have a feeling this thread is still going to go down that route.

 

[colonelkernel8]

There is no definitive answer as to why some don't hear specific metallurgy/design values of cables working to enhance sound quality.

There 100% is a definitive answer here and it's completely obvious. We don't hear it because there's nothing to hear. You can't hear it either; you're relying on knowing what you have connected to differentiate the cables. You, like everyone else, would fail a double blind test of cables because there is simply nothing there to differentiate.

 

[theveterans]

You, like everyone else, would fail a double blind test of cables because there is simply nothing there to differentiate.

Huge assumption there. With Hifiman Susvara, I could easily pass a DBT AB test using stock provided cable (Silver + Copper crystalline) against an aftermarket OFC/OCC copper cable. With other headphones, not so much since those headphones aren't resolving enough

 

[JamoBroGuy]

Huge assumption there. With Hifiman Susvara, I could easily pass a DBT AB test using stock provided cable (Silver + Copper crystalline) against an aftermarket OFC/OCC copper cable. With other headphones, not so much since those headphones aren't resolving enough

This is such a stereotypical audiophile response, it genuinely makes me wonder whether or not you’re just trolling.

 

[Davesrose]

There 100% is a definitive answer here and it's completely obvious. We don't hear it because there's nothing to hear. You can't hear it either; you're relying on knowing what you have connected to differentiate the cables. You, like everyone else, would fail a double blind test of cables because there is simply nothing there to differentiate.

Yes, but the first premise was that it should be so obvious that a long list of audiophile terms of perception should be included in the pantheon on science. They should be innate scientific units of measure.

This is such a stereotypical audiophile response, it genuinely makes me wonder whether or not you’re just trolling.

Sorry for my edit to try to reply to the above post: still haven't found the solution for not being about to double post. After spending a week with veterans, I truly do think he believes this. After interacting with him when it comes to digital data, I notice he focuses on any differences in measured noise with an oscilloscope must mean it's also a difference that shapes the 1s and 0s of a digital stream. And because of that, there must be a difference with digital audio.