A fresh approach to cable analysis

@gdaddy1 

The biggest flaw is relying on your ears, that are connected to a very bias brain. The point is your brain is flawed and easily fooled. It's a human weakness. It's a reality that can NOT be trusted to make such dogmatic claims. 

Wait, if your brain is flawed and easily fooled, how can I trust your claim that my brain is flawed and easily fooled? Is your brain trying to trick me into thinking my brain is tricking me? My ears are ringing just thinking about it!

It may be true that all audiophiles are fools in believing that the next upgrade will be the last. But to go along with your dogma of not trusting oneself...typically, after cleaning my vinyl, I give myself a light concussion to reset the bias. It's only after the needle hits the record that I can hear the power cable. 

Not to talk too much about myself, but once I am fooled, I am twice as shy about it the next time I am fooled. And for the record, I won't get fooled again!

I want to add a small but telling contribution to bruce19’s original idea.

I recently opened up a cable I had purchased. What I found inside was an industrial-grade cable with instantly recognizable, fully documented physical characteristics. Nothing exotic, nothing proprietary — just well-known, widely available construction.

When I raised this with the manufacturer, the response was essentially that I didn’t fully understand what I was looking at.

And there it is.

No specifications offered. No technical counter-argument. No verifiable claims about what their process adds beyond the base material. Just the suggestion that the truth is somehow beyond what an observer can see — which, conveniently, can never be proven or disproven.

This isn’t unique to this one manufacturer. It is, as this thread has explored, the industry’s comfort zone. Expensive cables exist behind a wall of unverifiable claims, where the moment you get close to something concrete, the goalposts shift to the invisible and the immeasurable.

Bruce19’s instinct is sound. You don’t need to find something shocking inside a cable to make the point. Sometimes the most revealing thing is simply what the manufacturer says when you do look — and what they conspicuously don’t say.

Also, this is timely, as I play with Claude for the last month extensively and let it create this document over more than 50 iterations. And while the foreword is generic where it weights the arguments of the objectivists vs the subjectivists in a very smart and elegant way, the cables itself are tailored to my setup which is described.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ADUBpMjqCeMt4OKuvy-xmk1fvF1OSokE/view?usp=sharing

total111

I recently opened up a cable I had purchased. What I found inside was an industrial-grade cable with instantly recognizable, fully documented physical characteristics. Nothing exotic, nothing proprietary — just well-known, widely available construction. When I raised this with the manufacturer, the response was essentially that I didn’t fully understand what I was looking at.

Who was the manufacturer? Is there a reason you don't reveal their identity, and perhaps even the person there with whom you spoke?

This isn’t unique to this one manufacturer.

What other manufacturers have you spoken with regarding cable design and construction?

@gdaddy1 

Cable marketing fluff ≠ Actual cable performance

@gdaddy1 If you cut open a cable how would you know what you're looking at?Who knows what kind of copper is used or if it's been 'cryogeniclly treated or not. It could be anything.

+ 1 Cannot know sonic performance simply at looking at the metal, dielectrics, weave pattern, terminations, etc.