scientific double blinded cable test

@geoffkait 

Just curious... in terms of information you are writing herein in response to the OPs post, why wouldn't you just link to articles you've previously written? Wouldn't your own time spent be better served if you were to perform your own cable reversal tests, listen for any audible differences, document same, and submit your findings as opposed to essentially re-entering all of your previous post?  
https://www.stereophile.com/content/wire-directionality-how-bad-it

Imagine how many audio/sound related claims would be disproved  if blind testing was used more often. 

Comes a time when the blind man takes your hand, says don't you see?

@geoffkait 

Your point about not linking to old posts because you may have more current data to offer is a fair reply. Thanks.

To your point about knowing that wire is directional, I'm using Belden 5T00UP speaker wire. Would you say that wire is directional? And, if you answer yes, would you say you could *hear* a difference if connected one direction or another?

If you answer yes to both, I have a business proposition - directly related to this thread - for you (or anyone who answers yes to both questions for that matter). Broadly, the proposition involves either a blind or double blind test where it is my position that you *cannot* reliably hear a difference, and it would be your position that you could reliably hear a difference.

If interested, and if the amount is worthwhile (low five figures?) we can have our attorney's draw up the contracts, establish an escrow account and so on. 

Trouble is blind tests don’t prove anything.

But they can disprove ridiculous claims.

I think the reality is that many who maintain there are no differences between cables (or other things in audio) don’t want to deal with the personal and/or financial implications of such differences being real. Denying differences are possible is their way of avoiding those implications.

To the contrary, I think that often (though not always) the reality is that those who maintain there is a difference between cables, etc. and who profess the superiority of one over the other have arrived at their decision in an almost completely subjective manner. The only objectivity in these cases might be the reliance on technical measurements by the manufacturer or third-party entity.

In my view, it really shouldn’t be all that unreasonable to expect that this same someone who professes superiority could detect whatever it is he/she feels is superior in a blind test.

Question becomes, why wouldn’t you want to subject yourself to a blind test in order to further confirm your belief?

EDIT:

It should also be noted that in no way am I hypocritical in this regard. If one refers to my posts at the time I obtained my Yggdrasil, I compared it my my Oppo and Emotiva. I didn't just haphazardly arrive at a conclusion it sounds better, I proved it to my satisfaction. Part of the proof process was bling testing. 

It seems to me that those who are clamoring for blind tests should be the ones conducting the blind tests.

@cleeds

You are correct. However, that is a generalization. Within the context of this thread specifically the blind test I'm advocating for should be conducted by the party who has the most to gain or loose by the result of the test. Clearly that would be Geoff, as he is the one who professes that wire has directionality. I'd have to think *he* would be interested to learn if he could actually hear a difference.

That’s exactly right! Skeptics always demand that True Believers do the blind test. As if that will prove skeptics were right, after all. The skeptics never do the blind tests themselves. What are they afraid of?

@geoffkait

But it is posts from people like you that create skepticism in the first place! The burden of proof to your outlandish claims lies with you, not those that are skeptical of them. 

Why would I deny or discount what I clearly hear, just because it doesn’t fit into someone else’s worldview? I don't need a blind test to prove to myself what I hear.

@tommylion

You wouldn't deny or discount what you hear just because someone else disagrees, doesn't hear what you do, etc. And you're absolutely correct that you do not need a blind test to prove anything to yourself.

So please allow me to ask your opinion - within the context of audio - how would one prove a wire is directional (i.e. can hear a difference oriented one way or the other) *without* a blind test?

So in some experiences, the "body" can discern before the mind.

@electroslacker

I agree.

I don’t know that one can “prove” that wire sounds different (better) in one direction over the other to anyone but themselves. Especially if the person(s) you are trying to prove it to is not open to the idea, or even hostile towards it. Either they hear it for themselves, or they don’t. The great thing is that if you hear a positive difference, you don’t have to prove it to anyone in order to enjoy the benefits of it.

For me, this hobby is not about proving anything. It is about enjoying, engaging with, and being moved by, music in my home.

I agree with you @tommylion. 

At the same though, and in the absence of any proof whatsoever, those such as Geoff who profess to hear positive differences in wire direction ought to keep that observation to himself (i.e. without posting on a public forum). It's akin to someone writing "I can walk on water", and then expecting that no one will chime back in asking for proof. And while the hobby is not about proving anything, it shouldn't/wouldn't hurt where possible and applicable. 

@geoffkait  with regard to your 03-12-2018 7:31am post herein, I'm not disputing the resistance measurement being different in one direction or another. I'll save that dispute for another time and thread, if you don't mind. 

But with specific regard to the listener evidence of all those on the forum who have reported hearing a difference in wire direction over the years, did any of that evidence involve any kind of blind testing?

From what I've read from you thus far within this thread, it has not. Hence my point that perhaps if those same listeners were to subject themselves to a blind test, they might (or might not) arrive at a difference conclusion. So without the blind test, the listener "evidence" is meaningless as far as I'm concerned. 

To your point "...anyone can try it for himself by reversing interconnects or speaker cables or a fuse. It’s not rocket science" of course. But to reiterate, performing that activity knowing what you have or have not reversed is completely, utterly and entirely different than not knowing (i.e. blind). 

That's fine, you needn't accept the observations of others. Please feel free to conduct your own blind testing, and to share the results with the forum.

Just to reiterate what I've already stated, I certainly do perform my own (with the help of an assistant) blind testing in cases where I hear (or believe I do) a difference, in order to confirm/deny my observation. 

But in cases where I'm *not* the one making a claim to hear a difference - and wire directionality is one such case - then in my view the onus ought to placed on the person (Geoff) making such claim, not the one (me) disputing it. 

At NASA there is a strict regulation to observe directionality of cables. Otherwise false discoveries could result like that at CERN where some neutrinos were faster than light.

Hi @nugat

And are the cables NASA uses where they must conform to strict regulation to observe directionality used as audio speaker wire?

Sorry, but no one here is obligated to test anything for your benefit.

@cleeds

No apology necessary.

You should know, I happen to agree with you (quoted above) completely.

Thing is, it’s my assertion that the "benefit" actually lies with the person making the claim, not with the person disputing it.

And please know, in no way am I intentionally wanting to be obstinate in my thinking here. But being able to hear a difference when speaker wire is reversed? Seriously? And to write that in a thread devoted to "scientific double blinded cable test". How *un-scientific" can that statement be? LOL.

The problem with the neutrinos was they went back in time and disappeared off the screen. Just like the De Lorean in Back to the Future. That’s how Superman saved Lois Lane, by racing around the Earth a bunch of times faster than the speed of light. Duh!

@geoffkait  

Are you sure you're not a Grateful Dead "Head"? You've obviously had way to much electric koolaid. :)

Obviously if a manufacturer could prove their high end cable to be audibly superior to others then you can bet one or more of the hundreds of manufacturers would be offering demonstrations - quickest way to make millions of $ so it is not like there is no incentive to prove the superiority of a product.

+1 

And, obviously if a forum member could demonstrate they could hear a difference with said cable oriented one way or the other, they would have taken me up on the offer I made herein this thread on 03-10-2018 6:55pm.

When a group of people all hear the same thing, at the same time, in the same setting, and under the same circumstances, double blind testing would be entirely redundant....  Double blind testing would only serve to dumb down an event which is in it's very nature.... 

@nonoise 

It's okay if we agree to disagree. All good :)

To my way of thinking, the fact that the group all heard the same thing is precisely the reason for the blind test; to do away with "bias". The blind test would serve as confirmation or further evidence. It doesn't dumb it down, it smartens it up.

So given your position on the matter, under what scenario should a blind test be used? 

About 2/3s of the way down in the article, they tried reversing cables and all of them heard a different, and better direction. It was quite obvious.

@nonoise

I looked at the article. You’re referring to the statement "We listened to 20 different cables. We directionalized them all first, of course. Every cable sounds different in a different direction. It’s small, but it sounds different. ."

Thing is, no where in the article does it mention they were able to hear a difference via a blind test.

This is the reason for the blind test; to take any bias out of the equation and draw a distinction between what one believes/thinks and what can be demonstrated repeatedly.

@geoffkait 

I thought we already established the cable is Belden 5T00UP speaker wire. 

All that you have to do to alter the sound of your cables is to disconnect them for a couple of minutes then plug them back in. Then you go aaahhh sounds better! And there is a good chance it WILL!!!! First you just cleaned your connection by some friction . 2nd you let any static charge bleed out. The 2nd one is a Direct TV trouble shooting protocol for 75 ohm cables.

But try hearing a difference disconnecting and reconnecting if that were performed blind :)

Seriously folks, I appreciate everyone's interest, whether you agree with my position, clearthink, or that of your own. 

But the bottom line is the offer I've made herein this thread is that of my own, so it stands to reason that so too are the terms. Apparently it's too much to ask that I be contacted privately. I'll let you guys determine in the court of public opinion who means business and who is "just another winkly dinkler".

This is completely not true the next step is to design the means by which the test will be conducted the place the test will be conducted the associated equipment that will be used with the test to be conducted the proctors to the test that we will have conducted and how the public will both be able to participate in the test to be conducted and/or witness for themselves the test to be conducted those are some of the preliminary matters that remain to be resolved and these will be reviewed, discussed, negotiated and agreed upon here in public or otherwise your $25,000 USD offer is ovbiously not sincere and you have undertaken the means to extricate yourself so which is it. Do you want to discuss this plan here or move it into the shadows and darkness where you can "chicken" out and then blame the outcome on someone other than yourself?

@clearthink

The idea of meeting with your first via skype is so I can gain a sense as to whether or not we could ever attain an agreement. Essentially saving myself the time and effort of needing to endlessly respond to your posts. Also, keep in mind that even if we do agree to terms, our attorneys need to set it to legal language. And, if your in another country that in itself can be an arduous process as laws are different. But in absence of skype meeting, I of course remain interested in reading here on the forum whatever else you can propose. 

My suggestions are independent of brand of cable.

Great.  Then your suggestions/recommendations should be moot. Please note that we are speaking here of subjective listening impressions, not objective technical measurements.

All else can remain constant. Meaning all gear (amp, speakers, music, volume level, whatever). It could even be conducted in an environmentally controlled room, or not.

Let’s not over complicate matters.

The only thing we need to do with the belden speaker wire is disconnect it from the speakers binding posts, disconnect it from the amps binding post, physically orient the cable in the opposite direction, reconnect to speaker and amp binding posts, play the same music passage and then have clearthink state, “yes, you have reversed the cable” or “no, you have not reversed the cable” and compare that statement to what actually just occurred with the cable. Seems to me he/she should be able to do this 100% of the time, just like if you played Amy Winehouse, then played Bod Dylan and asked if the music changed. It should be that simple and recognizable, according to clearthink (and you, Geoff).

TO: @clearthink

CC: All Interested Parties

To further show my good faith, I’ll spare you the PM back-and-forth.

My skype account is "gratefulhal", no quotes. *Please call this evening*.

Note I do not leave skype on 24/7 or every day for that matter.

Therefore, alternatively and as I asked previously, you should PM me anyway so we can exchange email address, etc. and arrange a time if we can skype, should we be unable to this evening.

Signing off Agon for now, only because I’m getting ready to sit down and - you guessed it - listen to some music!

The post I made earlier today to clearthink, which was a copy of the post I made earlier in the thread, and copied only because he couldn't find the original, has been removed by the forum moderator. I'm not sure why, but I will not dispute it.

Nobody said it was supposed to be speaker cable. Got coffee? ☕️ You keep bringing up blind tests. Have you done any? Care to let us know your results? 😀 Also, you obviously missed the entire point of article. As did both posters who provided link to article.

I realize nobody said it was supposed to be speaker cable. Yes, I have coffee. I'm bringing up blind tests because I happen to have read and understood the title of the thread. Yes, I have performed blind testing. Thank you Geoff. 

This article is from 1991 (I think) but just re-published and explains some scientific reasons why cables can sound differently. A good read for anyone interested or anyone who thinks audio need more science.

Those are interconnect cables, which are entirely different than speaker wire.

And yes, I certainly do agree there are scientific reasons why cables can sound different. Doesn't mean they do or will though. Pitting the scientific reasons against a blind test to determine if the listener actually does discern a sonic difference is also entirely different.

Uh, then why did you say,

“Those are interconnect cables, which are entirely different than speaker wire.”

Because I'm wanting to make 25 grand !!!!!!!!

......After all, you want this to be double-blind, correct? A much, much better approach is to employ an abx test and with the right equipment, no assistant is required. I’ve long found it interesting that so many who clamor for others to conduct double-blind tests actually don’t know how to properly conduct such a test.

@cleeds

Seems to me you’re skirting the issue. Regardless of the type of test or however conducted, the spirit in what I’m suggesting to those who purport to hear a difference is that *they* should take it upon themselves to validate what they believe, even if simply for their own confirmation. In other words, the only one that ultimately stands to benefit or gain an additional level of satisfaction would be the one making the claim that they can hear a difference, not the one who claims they cannot.

I'll maintain that for those who purport to hear a difference when they reverse their speaker wire really ought to perform their own blind testing (of course with the assistance of a trusted friend). 

This would be the best song to listen to in order to arrive at your conclusion. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5Z9-QCmZyw

An impasse?! Oh, my! How exciting. Did I predict that or what?

I don't know, however, you are well known on the forum for your clairvoyant capabilities. 

@clearthink

I appreciate your contacting me via PM. I believe it fair to write that you and I are at an impasse. Your refusal to skype first and foremost and insistence that we publicize here on the forum what in my view is personal means that we have “irreconcilable differences”. I thank you for your interest.

Step 6, make this required listening 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5Z9-QCmZyw

@chrisoshea

And lets not forget the Rolling Stones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnqH7W4me9o

And yes, in years past I have participated in open (sighted) A/B testing of cables, and subsequent single blind and double blind tests of the same cables and found that differences were easily detected in open testing, yet vanished without a trace in both blinded tests.

Thank you, @keithahughes

EDIT:

It also vanishes without a trace when dollars are involved.

Have you actually confirmed this by conducting a double-blind test? If so, please tell us how you conducted the test. Or ... are you just speculating?

Cleeds, I’m using Belden 5T00UP. It’s been tried both ways/direction. There is no difference without a blind test, so there is no need for me to try it blind. Unrelated to wire but related to blind testing, I have conducted a blind test where my DAC is concerned.

Also, my challenge (undefined but can be worked out) is open to you too.

@clearthink

Actually we (you and I) were doing fairly well in the very beginnings.

Only after I mentioned (privately) that my rationale for having to skype first is because seeing and hearing you lends additional credibility to the authenticity of your interest did things go awry. I went further to add that for all I know, and I’m not saying or implying you are, nevertheless it is a theoretical possibility, you could be a 14 year old school girl without the financial means and/or legal authority to enter into any agreement.

I’ll leave it for the court of public opinion to decide who means business, and speculate as to why you refuse to skype even after I posted my skype ID, and politely asked you to communicate.

>>>>Uh, hey, guys, the reason the differences don’t show up in blind tests is the same reason that Randi NEVER lost a Million Dollar bet.

Uh, hey Geoff, the reason reversing speaker wire doesn't show up in a blind test is because there is no audible difference.

Of course you will leave it to the court of public opinion that is exactly why I insisted from the beginning that all discussions regarding your "challenge" be conducted publically in this forum where you first proposed your "challenge" and not in secret except for those matters that are truly appropriate and proper to keep confidential such as account numbers and like matters.

@clearthink

Of course my challenge was posted in public on this forum. How else would I obtain the proverbial "sucker born every minute"?

Because the challenge was made publicly doesn’t mean that once engaged any other matters are public.

It’s apparent you and I cannot agree on even the most basic elements of my challenge. Imagine if you and I attempted to formulate any details. Not sure you would ever undertake my challenge in my lifetime.

You can’t cheat an honest man. 😛

Honest to the point of recklessness, self-centered to the extreme

Blind test advocates such as yourself claim that sighted tests are unreliable.

I'm not advocating for anything. So please, lets clear the air.

Cleeds, I think there is some confusion or misunderstanding in general (i.e. not just you) throughout the thread with regard to my posts herein the thread.


What I'm stating (and by extension offering in the way of a challenge), is that in cases where a person claims to be able to audibly hear a difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed, the person who is making that claim would NOT reliably audibly hear a difference if said speaker wire were reversed WITHOUT his/her prior knowledge to whether or not the wire was actually reversed.

As an EXAMPLE ONLY, the person making such claim that he/she can RELIABLY audibly hear a difference when/if reversing a cable should receive a passing grade when subjected to the following EXAMPLE PROCEDURE.

(1) The person subject to the test cannot see the equipment, but can hear (unobstructed) sound from it.

(2) A musical passage is played. In our example, lets play the Grateful Dead "Deal" (but we just as well could play the star spangled banner) from start to finish (or a few seconds or a few minutes, whatever).

(3) When Deal finishes, the person subject to the test waits approximately two minutes. The person is waiting for Deal (or the star spangled banner) to resume (play again from the beginning).

(4) During the wait, "another person or persons" would reverse, OR NOT reverse, the wire. In this context, reversing the wire means removing the wire (each channel of a two channel system, one channel at a time) from the speaker and the amplifier. Then, taking the ends of the cable that were on the speaker and attaching the ends to the amplifier, maintaining correct polarity, and repeating for the other channel. The speaker wire ends that were on the amplifier are connected to the speaker.

(5) The other person or persons in this EXAMPLE ONY is a known trusted source, who is/are the only person or persons to record whether or not the wire WAS OR WAS NOT reversed.

(6) The music resumes. The person subjected to the test listens until he/she is comfortable (upon completion or during the playback) in stating, "yes, the speaker wire has been reversed" or "no, the speaker wire has not been reversed". The person subjected to the test must make one or the other declaration within a specified amount of time.

(7) The person or persons other than the one subjected to the test records the response and compares the response to WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DID OR DID NOT DO with the speaker wire. Their recording indicates a "pass" or "fail" grade, attributed to the person subjected to the test.

(8) The aformentioned EXAMPLE ONLY procedure is repeated a number of times so that there is a VERY HIGH CONFIDENCE level that the person subjected to the test, passes or fails. For EXAMPLE, the test might be conducted 30 times, in which case Deal (or the star spangled banner) would have played 60 times. So the person subjected to the test (and who purportedly can audible hear a difference as to whether or not the wire has been reversed), would be expected to make the correct response (items 6 and 7) the overwhelming majority of the time (25?).

(9) Of the 30 EXAMPLE ONLY tests, the person or persons who have subjected the person who has listened compares the reponses to the agreed upon majority (25) and on that basis declares "yes, you can reliably detect whether or not ordinary speaker wire is reversed" or "no, you cannot reliably detect whether or not ordinary speaker wire is reversed".


Simple really, for those who purportedly can hear the difference.

I imagine that theory of yours should be filed under the heading, Wishful Thinking.

Theory or not, if I recall, you're not up for the challenge. 

Because you are making this offer the burden is on you to provide the specific terms of the offer and the means under which this test will be conducted and those means should be reviewed in public here by the forum members to insure that there is no fraud on your part after all you have promised $25,000 at stake!

@clearthink

You did mention (privately) that you and I should refrain on posting any dollar amount, on account of forum moderation (i.e. our posts are likely to be removed).

Realistically, I’ve already posted more than enough in this thread.

You, and everyone else subscribed to the thread and who have been reading it since its inception, are very much aware of the parameters (general framework as outlined in the example procedure) and you and all others are very much aware how to contact me - privately - if you have a genuine interest about pursuing my challenge and demonstrating that you can do the impossible.

I’m done with this thread.

Nothing to tell now; let the words be yours, I’m done with mine.

There is no need to take clearthink's garbled words for it.

+1

It is immediately apparrant for even a casual reader of the forum to correctly conclude that gdhal attempted to perpetrate a fraud upon the Audiogon community of audiophiles and the many posts of his that have been deleted by the moderators further support this simple observation.

I do recall a number of your threads were also deleted.

As to fraudulence, I look at a bit differently. As soon as I mentioned my rationale for wanting to skype - because seeing and hearing you lends credibility to the authenticity of your interest - and that it is a possibility you are merely a 14 year old school girl without the financial means and/or legal authority to enter into any agreement - did I validate your insincerity.

By the way, this thread is not ugly. The truth is sometimes ugly.

What proof is truth against all lies?

It’s unfortunate that this thread - which is about the science of double blind audio testing - has become one of the ugliest ever on Audiogon.

@cleeds 
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Disbelievers have the right to place a burden of proof on any individual(s) who state the *impossible*. Those who state the impossible are under no obligation to prove anything. The right to state whatever one happens to believe is granted to everyone. I may not agree with what you have to say/write, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. Anyone who can audible detect a difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed from speaker to amp and vice versa while maintaining polarity has an opportunity to <undefined term> benefit. All are invited as I do not discriminate but like any other professional require privacy. Inquire within. 

"Fake News"

Proof positive the post immediately prior to 03-19-2018 2:03pm is fake news is that it’s author deleted it.

"Um is not an answer" - Judge Judy

Is there something the matter with you? ~ Judge Judy

"If you tell the truth, then you don’t have to have a good memory" - Judge Judy

I didn’t delete it. Why would I? You cannot delete or edit your own post once it’s been there for 30 minutes.

They don’t keep me here because I’m gorgeous. They keep me here because I’m smart. - Judge Judy

That isn’t true. You may not *edit* after 30 min, but you *can* delete.

"Either you are playing dumb, or its not an act" - Judge Judy

I ain't often right, but I've never been wrong.

Do you have children?

26 y/o son. 29 y/o daughter.

Apologize for the removal of all of my posts, but that is out of my control.

Realistically, I’ve already posted more than enough in this thread.

Everyone subscribed to the thread and who have been reading it since its inception, are very much aware of MY parameters (general framework as *I* outline in MY example procedure) AND everyone is aware how to contact me - privately - if you have a genuine interest about pursuing my challenge and demonstrating that you can do the impossible.

I’m done with this thread.

Nothing to tell now; let the words be yours, I’m done with mine.