Cable auditions - Hard Work?


Does anyone find it to be "hard work" to audition cables? I find that I have to be 'fresh' before I can begin to listen to cables. After I begin, I can only listen, with the intensity needed, for a period of about an hour.

As I do A/B comparisons, it sometimes seems, my impressions change as I listen. Sometimes the differences are so small or subtle, that I question if I'm hearing a difference at all. Have I lost it?

How do you folks do your cable auditions? I'd really like to know.

Thanks
paul
oldpet

Showing 7 responses by yuri777

Washline: The bottom line is this: Without doing blind A/B testing, your emotions and the fact that you spent big bucks on power cables will influence what you are hearing.
A/B testing is not enough.

Are you willing to bet you will be able to tell the difference between your expensive power cable and a cheap one in a blind test, consistently over 50% of the time?
I am willing to bet money you can't.
Anyone in the Northern NJ / NYC is more than welcome to stop by and take me up on my bet...
Here is the power chord double blind test link folks:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_4/feature-article-blind-test-power-cords-12-2004.html
Guys, don't take this personally, but unless you have done Blind ABX tests with your power cords and interconnects, it is all subjective.. you know what is playing, and you may think you hear a difference instead of really hearing one.

Stereophile magazine even did a blind A/B test with different high end amps, and most of the subjects couldn't tell the difference between them!
yep, entire amplifiers, not ICs, not Power cords..

Just a few days ago i was testing the digital outputs of my Musical Fidelity Tri Vista 21 DAC against the analog outputs of my Yamaha S2500 when playing a CD, using my transformer-based passive preamp as an A/B switch.
I couldn't tell them apart, and i doubt anyone could.
The DAC really makes a difference in units not having a great analog stage, but once you start to get in the high end of things, is hard to tell the difference.
While the Trivista 21 is one of the best DACs made, a Stereophile Class A unit, i was kind of dissapointed the analog stage of the S2500 sounded just as good, with no upsampling..
I am going to do further tests / blind tests with different CDs to see what i can hear..
Cheers
The cable business is mostly a scam.
One website did a double blind test consisting of 10 so called "audiophiles" testing really expensive cryo treated power cords against a cheap power cable of the Home Depot variety.
None of the audiophiles could tell the difference
between either set of cables.

I am not saying there is no difference.. there may be one, but is not something our human ears can detect.

Some websites have banned any discussion pertaining double blind testing in their forums, because they know once people realize they have been scammed by cable companies and other silly hi-fi gadgets, the gadget and cable sponsors will take their money and advertise somewhere else.

Spend your money somewhere else...

I dare anyone claiming that you can positively tell the difference between ICs, to test any of their expensive ICs against my home made Belden coax ICs on a set of blind tests, and consistently tell the difference between them.
You are welcome to bring your own music if you wish.. I am located in Northern NJ, and have BAT, Plinius, Monarchy audio, Maggies, Musical Fidelity and custom made equipment.
Mr Jafox
Maybe the whole point of my posts is that once one reaches an high echelon in the quality of the components in one system, things such as one interconnect cables or fancy power cords make no difference.

You are obviously misconstruing what i am saying here: I am not saying that there is no difference in audio components.. there are marked differences between certain things, but after myself and two other people failed to tell any differences between the same album on SACD and remastered CD on a blind test, i decided to revise my thinking, and evaluate my own perspective on what i am hearing.

Maybe the system we did the SACD vs. CD test on wasn't high-end enough?
maybe two people in their twenties and one in his thirties are going deaf?
maybe the universal player we used for testing sucks?
maybe the SACD was implemented poorly?

The only way to find out the truth is through what you call "silly" testing... the same type of testing statisticians and scientists have been using for years. Very silly indeed.
Sorry, not all of us have silver ears like you, and i need more reliable methods than my own subjectivity to find out what REALLY sounds better.

Does the $1400 trivista tube DAC really sound better than the analog output stage on the Yamaha S2500?
Why should it sound better? just because it is more expensive or because it has great reviews on Audiophile?
Has anyone actually done a real blind test comparison between both units..?

Maybe the analog stage on the Yamaha S2500 is implemented well enough, so there is no audible difference?
You assume i should be hearing a difference, and my point is.. maybe there is none, and that is what intend to find out.

Mr. Jafox... maybe the Emperor is not wearing any clothes.
Mr. Jafox
If i can't even trust my own subjective hearing, i don't think i can trust the subjective hearing of others, specially people who can hear "differences" in power cords, bybee quantum filters, shakti stones, granite stands and speaker cables lifters, LOL

If you want to believe in audio voodoo and marketing hype, go ahead, i will stick to my silly scientific methods, which hopefully will have more validity than the "experience of others"

To anyone who is so sure of your golden ears, i invite you to stop by my place and do some blind tests to see what we can hear.... maybe i am wrong, but at least i am open minded enough not to call blind tests "silly"

Folks, don't believe everything you read.
Lateguestsnomore:
John Atkinson's 5% "golden eared" population is actually statistically incorrect, as you can read here:

http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_speaker/wishful_thinking.htm