Funny. Truth is, almarg's position is nonsense. He claims a wire can give
"exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application". Exactly the opposite? Really? Good one. How about "at least very different" then? Well, define "very different". Since no two things are ever exactly the same gosh I guess he's got me. Except in that case, everything different, what has he really said? Nothing.
Precisely my point.
Yeah, no, not really. Almarg is doing the same thing the directionality people do when they point out there are in fact physical reasons that might explain directionality. Not saying any of almargs statements are wrong. Simply saying his conclusion, "exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application" is erroneous.
Also notice when the same "logic" is used to to show there may be some basis for directionality those reasons are mocked and derided. While almarg is doing the exact same thing only not only does no one notice they actually compliment him on it. People are funny that way.
Okay so first off I have no problem whatsoever stipulating everything almarg said is true and correct. Capacitance, etc can indeed cause things to sound different in different situations. Impedance too. Duh.
What I am trying to do however is point out the inherent weakness and ultimate futility of this point of view. Almarg says wires can yield:
Now its really funny everyone seems so in love with this. Yet nobody actually acts as if they believe a word of it. Oh they say you do. But I will now prove they do not.
Because if everyone really believed this then no one would be recommending any wire (or anything else) without saying it only works this way with such and such an impedance. Otherwise its "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)." Which no one ever does!
Capacitance would be a standard specification right up there with speaker sensitivity, and frequency response, and amplifier output. Which last I looked, its not. In fact no one hardly ever talks about it, except every once in a while someone enjoys showing off his mastery of technical jargon. And audiophools (who don't even really understand a word of it) fall all over themselves congratulating him on his genius.
Of course no wire ever made is capable of making anything its connected to sound exactly the same. Of course the physics of whatever its connected to does influence the performance. Duh. Congratulations. That's what I been saying: everything really does matter!
Nevertheless we cannot conclude from this that everything works " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" depending on what its connected to. If this was the case no one would read a review on anything. Why bother? If its going to sound completely different connected to different stuff, why bother? Riddle me that one, bat man.
You all read reviews. Therefore, you really do not believe a word of " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)".
No. In spite of however much electrical measurement jargon is thrown at it the fact remains any given wire (and tube, and transformer, and amp, and speaker, etc, etc on and on, forever) does indeed have its own recognizable sonic character. A character that does not magically transform itself into "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" every time its plugged in.
Neither does it have the power to make everything its plugged into sound exactly the same. How could it? How would one even know??? All we can hear is the resulting combination. So how could the premise even be tested? Its nonsense on stilts. Sophistry.
Go and listen. You will see.
Yeah, no, not really. Almarg is doing the same thing the directionality people do when they point out there are in fact physical reasons that might explain directionality. Not saying any of almargs statements are wrong. Simply saying his conclusion, "exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application" is erroneous.
Also notice when the same "logic" is used to to show there may be some basis for directionality those reasons are mocked and derided. While almarg is doing the exact same thing only not only does no one notice they actually compliment him on it. People are funny that way.
Okay so first off I have no problem whatsoever stipulating everything almarg said is true and correct. Capacitance, etc can indeed cause things to sound different in different situations. Impedance too. Duh.
What I am trying to do however is point out the inherent weakness and ultimate futility of this point of view. Almarg says wires can yield:
Now its really funny everyone seems so in love with this. Yet nobody actually acts as if they believe a word of it. Oh they say you do. But I will now prove they do not.
Because if everyone really believed this then no one would be recommending any wire (or anything else) without saying it only works this way with such and such an impedance. Otherwise its "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)." Which no one ever does!
Capacitance would be a standard specification right up there with speaker sensitivity, and frequency response, and amplifier output. Which last I looked, its not. In fact no one hardly ever talks about it, except every once in a while someone enjoys showing off his mastery of technical jargon. And audiophools (who don't even really understand a word of it) fall all over themselves congratulating him on his genius.
Of course no wire ever made is capable of making anything its connected to sound exactly the same. Of course the physics of whatever its connected to does influence the performance. Duh. Congratulations. That's what I been saying: everything really does matter!
Nevertheless we cannot conclude from this that everything works " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" depending on what its connected to. If this was the case no one would read a review on anything. Why bother? If its going to sound completely different connected to different stuff, why bother? Riddle me that one, bat man.
You all read reviews. Therefore, you really do not believe a word of " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)".
No. In spite of however much electrical measurement jargon is thrown at it the fact remains any given wire (and tube, and transformer, and amp, and speaker, etc, etc on and on, forever) does indeed have its own recognizable sonic character. A character that does not magically transform itself into "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" every time its plugged in.
Neither does it have the power to make everything its plugged into sound exactly the same. How could it? How would one even know??? All we can hear is the resulting combination. So how could the premise even be tested? Its nonsense on stilts. Sophistry.
Go and listen. You will see.
Precisely my point.
MC
"Can" means might, may, could. "Can" does not mean "does". Thus everything that follows is at best probability and imagination.“
While I have no knowledge of whether Almarg is a genius or a shill other than reading the quality of his posts and determining he is closer to the former, I find it fascinating that you are arguing against his comments and yet they allow for yours to be possible as well. He is laying out a thoughtful explanation of the science behind the Subjectiveness; In other words, YMMV.
Yeah, no, not really. Almarg is doing the same thing the directionality people do when they point out there are in fact physical reasons that might explain directionality. Not saying any of almargs statements are wrong. Simply saying his conclusion, "exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application" is erroneous.
Also notice when the same "logic" is used to to show there may be some basis for directionality those reasons are mocked and derided. While almarg is doing the exact same thing only not only does no one notice they actually compliment him on it. People are funny that way.
Not looking to pick a fight, I don’t really care enormously either way about cables, - if you want it and can afford it good to go- but what his point really drives home IMHO is the inconsistency in your position, that everything matters, and yet a single cable company, or one speaker company, or a contact enhancer company can solve every single need. By your own starting position- everything matters- reinforced my Almargs post- a variety of manufacturers cables would most likely be needed to meet all the variabilities.. I recognize and freely admit I am an audio dullard, but fully capable of debate.
Okay so first off I have no problem whatsoever stipulating everything almarg said is true and correct. Capacitance, etc can indeed cause things to sound different in different situations. Impedance too. Duh.
What I am trying to do however is point out the inherent weakness and ultimate futility of this point of view. Almarg says wires can yield:
exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application
Now its really funny everyone seems so in love with this. Yet nobody actually acts as if they believe a word of it. Oh they say you do. But I will now prove they do not.
Because if everyone really believed this then no one would be recommending any wire (or anything else) without saying it only works this way with such and such an impedance. Otherwise its "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)." Which no one ever does!
Capacitance would be a standard specification right up there with speaker sensitivity, and frequency response, and amplifier output. Which last I looked, its not. In fact no one hardly ever talks about it, except every once in a while someone enjoys showing off his mastery of technical jargon. And audiophools (who don't even really understand a word of it) fall all over themselves congratulating him on his genius.
Of course no wire ever made is capable of making anything its connected to sound exactly the same. Of course the physics of whatever its connected to does influence the performance. Duh. Congratulations. That's what I been saying: everything really does matter!
Nevertheless we cannot conclude from this that everything works " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" depending on what its connected to. If this was the case no one would read a review on anything. Why bother? If its going to sound completely different connected to different stuff, why bother? Riddle me that one, bat man.
You all read reviews. Therefore, you really do not believe a word of " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)".
No. In spite of however much electrical measurement jargon is thrown at it the fact remains any given wire (and tube, and transformer, and amp, and speaker, etc, etc on and on, forever) does indeed have its own recognizable sonic character. A character that does not magically transform itself into "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" every time its plugged in.
Neither does it have the power to make everything its plugged into sound exactly the same. How could it? How would one even know??? All we can hear is the resulting combination. So how could the premise even be tested? Its nonsense on stilts. Sophistry.
Go and listen. You will see.
MC
"Can" means might, may, could. "Can" does not mean "does". Thus everything that follows is at best probability and imagination.“
While I have no knowledge of whether Almarg is a genius or a shill other than reading the quality of his posts and determining he is closer to the former, I find it fascinating that you are arguing against his comments and yet they allow for yours to be possible as well. He is laying out a thoughtful explanation of the science behind the Subjectiveness; In other words, YMMV.
Yeah, no, not really. Almarg is doing the same thing the directionality people do when they point out there are in fact physical reasons that might explain directionality. Not saying any of almargs statements are wrong. Simply saying his conclusion, "exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application" is erroneous.
Also notice when the same "logic" is used to to show there may be some basis for directionality those reasons are mocked and derided. While almarg is doing the exact same thing only not only does no one notice they actually compliment him on it. People are funny that way.
Not looking to pick a fight, I don’t really care enormously either way about cables, - if you want it and can afford it good to go- but what his point really drives home IMHO is the inconsistency in your position, that everything matters, and yet a single cable company, or one speaker company, or a contact enhancer company can solve every single need. By your own starting position- everything matters- reinforced my Almargs post- a variety of manufacturers cables would most likely be needed to meet all the variabilities.. I recognize and freely admit I am an audio dullard, but fully capable of debate.
Okay so first off I have no problem whatsoever stipulating everything almarg said is true and correct. Capacitance, etc can indeed cause things to sound different in different situations. Impedance too. Duh.
What I am trying to do however is point out the inherent weakness and ultimate futility of this point of view. Almarg says wires can yield:
exactly opposite (or at least very different) results depending on the specific application
Now its really funny everyone seems so in love with this. Yet nobody actually acts as if they believe a word of it. Oh they say you do. But I will now prove they do not.
Because if everyone really believed this then no one would be recommending any wire (or anything else) without saying it only works this way with such and such an impedance. Otherwise its "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)." Which no one ever does!
Capacitance would be a standard specification right up there with speaker sensitivity, and frequency response, and amplifier output. Which last I looked, its not. In fact no one hardly ever talks about it, except every once in a while someone enjoys showing off his mastery of technical jargon. And audiophools (who don't even really understand a word of it) fall all over themselves congratulating him on his genius.
Of course no wire ever made is capable of making anything its connected to sound exactly the same. Of course the physics of whatever its connected to does influence the performance. Duh. Congratulations. That's what I been saying: everything really does matter!
Nevertheless we cannot conclude from this that everything works " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" depending on what its connected to. If this was the case no one would read a review on anything. Why bother? If its going to sound completely different connected to different stuff, why bother? Riddle me that one, bat man.
You all read reviews. Therefore, you really do not believe a word of " exactly the opposite (or at least very different)".
No. In spite of however much electrical measurement jargon is thrown at it the fact remains any given wire (and tube, and transformer, and amp, and speaker, etc, etc on and on, forever) does indeed have its own recognizable sonic character. A character that does not magically transform itself into "exactly the opposite (or at least very different)" every time its plugged in.
Neither does it have the power to make everything its plugged into sound exactly the same. How could it? How would one even know??? All we can hear is the resulting combination. So how could the premise even be tested? Its nonsense on stilts. Sophistry.
Go and listen. You will see.