The Science of Cables
ieales When trained listeners hear no difference, the purveyors claim inadequate biological capabilities.What test are you referring to? What "purveyors?" Fanboys poo-poo blind tests trained listeners pass with aplomb.It's not clear what you mean here. In any event, it's a misnomer that a listener "passes" or "fails" a blind listening test. Such tests aren't designed to test the listener - their purpose is to test the "device under test," which is why they call it a DUT. You really need an audiologist to test a listener. |
brucenitroxpro ... the reason there are so few articles on cables is... that MOST articles are so poorly researched that the questions they answer are not usually applicable to audiophiles ...Agreed. Not only are many tests poorly researched, but even the ones that are often leave unanswered questions, such as how the test was designed and administered. And then there are those that are based on deception; those prove nothing. But the extent to which even a scientific double-blind controlled test has value to an audiophile is debatable. You simply can’t question most audiophiles whose most important quality is their totally complete knowledge of what they THINK they know.I think most audiophiles do know what they hear, and that’s the most important thing. In fact, an audiophile is more likely to know what he hears than anyone else, which is one of the takeaways from the Laurel-Yanny controversy. |
... when led to believe that three popular cables were being compared, varying in size from a high-quality 12 AWG ZIP-CORD to a high-tech looking cable with a diameter exceeding an inch, the largest and sexiest looking cable always scored best - even though the CABLES WERE NEVER CHANGED and they listened to the ZIP Cord the entire time.That proves nothing. It’s not a scientific evaluation, but a parlor trick. ... I do not buy the claims of those who say they can always audibly identify differences between cables, even when the comparisons are properly controlled ...There are many people who do not accept the results of scientifically controlled, double-blind testing for audio purposes. |
itsjustme How does it prove nothing when subjects reported substantial differences, which, according to the test, could not have been there?It wasn't a valid "test." It was a deception, an illusion, a misdirection intended to produce an invalid result. That's not even remotely a scientific test. |
defiantboomerang The real science of "cables" is too difficult for most audiophiles to understand. Don't believe me? Try reading this book ... If you get through Chapter 8 and solve the problems in it (I have), then you can claim the moral right to talk about the science of "cables".Pardon me, but no one here needs to fulfill any requirement specified by you in order to acquire a "moral right" to talk about cables. |
kosst_amojanm @cleeds I'd expect this kind of mindless quip from you. The OP asks a very rational question that clearly went clean over your head. How do you properly pair components if you don't know what the measurements on them are like?Kosst, you might want to calm down, then carefully read the OP again. He doesn't mention a single thing about component measurements - he's talking about cables. And my response to him was in reference to his topic, which was cables. Now you complain about my comment, but reference it to components, which were not part of the conversation. So if anyone here has been "mindless," it's likely Kosst for not understanding the topic that's under discussion here. Or perhaps he is just cruising for an argument. It's difficult to tell with Kosst. |
prof
Claims about cables, especially extraordinary claims, ought to be able to pass the same vetting method as any other science.Agreed. But why is it that those who call for this vetting seem to always require that others do the work? Erik even has a thread called, "How I would measure audio cables" and he says it would be "super easy" to do. But: He can't be bothered. |
ieales "High End" means engineered for a purpose, not some charlatan’s pipe concoction for visual/cosmic appeal. Nordost speaker cables are in the YFJ [You’re Freaking Joking] category. First time I saw them I thought ...So you judged them unheard based on " visual/cosmic appeal?" That doesn’t sound like a high-end approach to me. First time I heard them, I was nonplussed.Confirmation bias, perhaps? |
ieales Confirmation bias? Not bleeding likely. Please don’t read into what I didn’t write. I did not say I compared them.You first judged the cables based on appearance alone: "High End" means engineered for a purpose, not some charlatan's pipe concoction for visual/cosmic appeal. Nordost speaker cables are in the YFJ [You're Freaking Joking] category. First time I saw them I thought, "How bad would my system have to be for these to make it 'better'?Then you listened: First time I heard them, I was nonplussed. The $100k system was 'nice' but did not engage me playing Miles, Queen or SFO. Yawn.Now you say you didn't compare them to anything else. It sure sounds like a classic case of confirmation bias to me. What makes you think that it wasn't? Are you immune to the effect? |
ieales Confirmation bias is ’experiencing’ a change where there is none.That is mistaken. Confirmation bias is allowing your conclusion to be influenced by your predisposed belief. That’s independent of the nature of any change. Confirmation bias appears to be what happened here. You first judged the cables based on appearance alone. Then you listened and concluded the same. You also stated: I did not say I compared them.So after your initial listen, you then did nothing to confirm whether your listening impression could be validated by anything other than your initial visual assessment. That’s classic confirmation bias. Having messed with the math, manufacture and sonics of multi conductor cables in decades past, an interleaved/interwoven construction clearly has electrical and sonic benefits.Again, an indicator of confirmation bias in this instance. |
jhills ... show me one other industry, tech or otherwise, that buys into or uses $1,000.00 per foot signal cable ...What’s your point? In any event, very few audiophiles spend $1,000/foot for audio cables. It’s amazing that the ones questioned and scoffed, on this forum, are the ones who actually have many years of experience at building or repairing audio components, or those who have many years of professional experience in the music or tech industry ...You may not have noticed, but everyone gets "questioned and scoffed" at here, so there’s no reason to take it personally. ... the wild claims of some of these high priced cable guys - some of which already facing, or have faced, suits and fines for false claims and improper business practices.To what "wild claims" do you refer? I’m aware of only one, isolated instance regarding a court challenge to cable industry practices. You claim to know about more of them: Will you please share details? This thread is about the science of cables, so am just sticking to what is actually the science and truth of cables ...If that’s true, you’ll be happy to provide some detail to accompany your own claims. |
jhills coated with Graphene; or filled with incredible, semi-conductor liquid; or made in USA ultra high grade, specially treated, conductors - with multi layers of high-tech shielding (actually come from China bulk conductor wire - the equivalent of 24AWG at about $.25 pr. ft ...Will you please tell us exactly which $1,000-per-foot audio cable you are referring to here? Will you please tells us which specific claims are troubling you? ... the wild claims of some of these high priced cable guys - some of which already facing, or have faced, suits and fines for false claims and improper business practices.Will you please be specific about these "suits and fines for false claims?" Can you cite more than one instance? |
jhills I’m not going to start dropping names here. Do a google search for high end audio cables. You might be shocked to find that $1K per ft. is on the bottom side of some.I’m not interested in any random cable, but the specific cable(s) you refer to here that lead you to question the claims made for them: ... coated with Graphene; or filled with incredible, semi-conductor liquid; or made in USA ultra high grade, specially treated, conductors - with multi layers of high-tech shielding (actually come from China bulk conductor wire - the equivalent of 24AWG at about $.25 pr. ft ...If you’re not willing to name the subject of your complaint, then there’s no way we can have a discussion about that. Perhaps that was your intent. You also stated: ... the wild claims of some of these high priced cable guys - some of which already facing, or have faced, suits and fines for false claims and improper business practices ...But again, you won’t be specific: Again, do a little digging. Is pretty easy to find ...Specifics, please. I’m aware of one case that involved a retailer, iirc, in the UK. I’m not aware of any other such instance and, I suspect, neither are you. I’m with this guy:thecarpathian jhills, you’re doing exactly what you’re accusing the cable companies of doing. Making an awful lot of claims without backing them up... |
jhills I have been trying to avoid a name game here ... OK here are two that claim to use Graphene in their cables: Courious Technologies - Graphene Matrix and Graphene Extreme; cerioustechnologies.comMad Scientist - Flexible Carbon/Graphene madscientist-audio.com ...So you're just going to name the cables, and not tell us the claims made for them to which you object? ... the wild claims of some of these high priced cable guys - some of which already facing, or have faced, suits and fines for false claims and improper business practicesSimilarly, you're going to reference these mythical "suits and fines," but not identify them? Is your dissatisfaction solely that some of these cables are expensive? |
glupson
It is simply hard to believe, unless you are a priori firm believer, that changes in anything which is already on a fairly decent level can be so impressive. Noticeable maybe, but Earth-shattering (or whatever other description gets mentioned) just does not seem believable.You are free to believe as you wish, of course. But once a difference is established, whether it is an "impressive" difference or not is purely subjective. After all, many people consider the whole HEA pursuit unworthy because for them, the result isn't worth the cost. |
bo1972 ... most people who work in audio have often a very limited level in insight and knowledge. Every time I speak to them it becomes clear that they often don’t know the answers on simple questions ... you first need to learn ... They can’t even answer it ... They even cannot answer this question either ... they know very little about it. It proves that they do not focus on sound ... I earn my money by outperforming all competitors ... I have spent thousands of hours in research and tests in over 20 years of time. With the goal to be superior to all other people in the world ... the whole world has been sleeping ... The reactions are always the same ... I knew this was the only way to understand and guide audio. There is no other option ...Beware the audio guru. |
schmelzerbrend1 posts
There is no clear soundstage at a live concert. That depends on the venue, where in the venue the listener sits and - to some extent - the presentation and orchestration of the music itself. It is hardly a universal truth that there is no soundstage at a live concert. |
bo1972 Audio is a shootout.A "shootout" is the worst way to choose an audio component. It takes time to evaluate an audio component's strengths and weaknesses. You have no F. clue what the properties are of each part in your system.Really? Please tell me what you know about my system and me. |
bo1972 Tru-Fi can easily prove and let you hear which aspects a product cannot reveal ... Tru-Fi is very complex and difficult to create. You can not even make one mistake. ... 100% nothing to do with personal taste ...For years, you’ve claimed here that you can prove your "Tru-Fi" claims. But you never have, you're too busy dishing up your word salad. |
bo1972 Again this can easily be proved by sound and shootoutIf your claims were so easily proved, you would have proved it here years ago. Instead, you persist with word salad, which is fine. But you’ve lost a lot of your credibility along the way. A "shootout" is the absolute worst way to judge an audio component, imo. |
bo1972 ... they are just facts ... Most people have no idea how much these different aspects influence the end result of your system ... they just have no F.idea ... you will never understand ... you are a dreamer ... Most cannot even answer these questions ... it gives you no F. insight into the aspects of sound and the influences on sound and stage ... it becomes just one big F. gamble ... you just don’t F. understand.What's your point here, Bo? Does it have anything at all to do with this thread?? |
elizabeth Seems we have entered "The Twilight Zone"This thread is about the science of cables. I think the moderators are simply trying to keep it from being hijacked by those who want to tell us how they can prove we’re effin’ stupid because we don’t follow their Tru-Fi protocol, or whatever. |
