/this...
keep trying! not sure how to say this without sounding 'arrogant' but why is it so hard to understand the above???
do those that fail to do so also have a liking for things like homeopathy?
Speaker cables, you DO get what you pay for!
- Thread starter mrk
- Start date
/this...
keep trying! not sure how to say this without sounding 'arrogant' but why is it so hard to understand the above???
do those that fail to do so also have a liking for things like homeopathy?
For more cable debating, see here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15600&highlight=
All 142 pages of it
. I admit, I haven't read it through, but I don't suspect it's conclusive 
Or even the amplifier debate!
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118943&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1
In case this thread is closed and people want to look further into it
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15600&highlight=
All 142 pages of it
. I admit, I haven't read it through, but I don't suspect it's conclusive Or even the amplifier debate!
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118943&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1
In case this thread is closed and people want to look further into it
We need to get to 100 pages to get at least some resolution
no for interconnects all you need is an output source such as a DAC with multiple line outs and you can compare cables on the fly through a press on the remote whilst playing material - i find it incredible that anyone thinks they can store how a cables sounds through memory, immense arrogance and elitism......and science has proved our memory is poor in this regard. (theres an article i read somewhere awhile back...google it).
but you'll never get dealers doing demos this way, at least i've never seen it and why would they shoot themselves in the foot when plenty of suckers are lined up to pay for exotic cables.
amps/speakers/sources all play a part in changing the sound signature, cables are for the gullible.
You do realise by saying this you are essentially saying that there is no value in people understanding the scientific method.
Evidence is important, but not as important as how you collect the evidence. Your ears are an incredibly bad way of collecting scientifically sound evidence. A\B\X trials, although not perfect, are a good way of removing many of the confounding factors involved with the problem of testing the efficacy of cable makers claims. It's a shame that they don't seem to want to get involved. I for one would like to see the results.
I've already said more than I wanted to, but the amount of people missing the points being made by some posters was annoying me.
I won't give my views on the cable debate, they're irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,790
- Location
- London
Marl, bit confused there - I know marscay might have come across frustrated but I don't think he was picking on you in particular - and with regards to the emotive responses from the science people, have you seen what some of the people have written on here about me in a completely unprovoked way? I think if anything it's usually the other way around, and if you're going to tar all people with the same brush..
Think you've missed his point there though with regards to the dealer
Ok!
We should all go paintballing! If you stand still long enough i might hit you!
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 4,790
- Location
- London
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 10,064
- Location
- Milton Keynes
Hahah can you imagine booking that...
Us: Hi, I'd like to book a round for a few guys on xxx afternoon?
Site: Ok... what group name do you want me to put the booking down as?
Us: Errm... 'Cable Confessions'?
Site: ....oook.
Us: Hi, I'd like to book a round for a few guys on xxx afternoon?
Site: Ok... what group name do you want me to put the booking down as?
Us: Errm... 'Cable Confessions'?
Site: ....oook.
now you're ganging up on me as well
No, wouldn't do that! Someone a few posts back was accused of being sane. I think its him and people like him we should go for;
I find it elitist that someone could think in this manner.
Have you even read the thread? I guess not, you've skimmed it at best.
I know the music I listen to and because I listen to those albums day in day out and have done for years I know exactly how they sound through my car system, portable system and home system (in which the OP refers to) so any change in the way said music sounds will be quickly obvious without even listening for it - hence why I created the thread in the first place.
I'm also the kind pf person that can pick out visual and audible differences in things without too much effort - no, I am not saying I have superhuman abilities or anything but, through my hobby, work and leisure activities I'm used to noticing small differences in things through both my eyes and ears.
I find your opinion blind and arrogant in fact that you'd find my view...well elitist and arrogant because it's far from that in actual fact, at leats I am open minded and open to debate instead of plastering my view into people that they are in fact wrong!
Last edited:
At the end of the day, this can only be settled by those claiming they can hear a difference proving this with something more than just 'well i can hear it when I listen'
ie. ABX / DBT
It isn't something anyone else can disprove beyond the articles and graphs linked earlier showing the differences between cables measured and calculated.
I could tell you I can hear a difference if I cover my speaker cables in ice packs to lower their temperature so they conduct better. No one here can disprove that but I could do an ABX test to prove it if I so desired.
Until the people claiming a difference do something to prove it rather than just throwing accusations of trolling around the place and making veiled references that peoples kit isn't good enough or their hearing is better than normal and they are immune to placebo etc. this thread will just go round and round and round in circles.
ie. ABX / DBT
It isn't something anyone else can disprove beyond the articles and graphs linked earlier showing the differences between cables measured and calculated.
I could tell you I can hear a difference if I cover my speaker cables in ice packs to lower their temperature so they conduct better. No one here can disprove that but I could do an ABX test to prove it if I so desired.
Until the people claiming a difference do something to prove it rather than just throwing accusations of trolling around the place and making veiled references that peoples kit isn't good enough or their hearing is better than normal and they are immune to placebo etc. this thread will just go round and round and round in circles.
Shouldnt it be the case that people that dont believe should do the DBT tests to prove what they are asserting is true, as the people that have bought the cables because they believe there is a difference are happy with their purchase. Its the non believers that are making the challenge therefore the burden of proof is on them.
Its the non believers that are making the challenge therefore the burden of proof is on them.
Even if these people banging on and on about DBT ABX CDEFG had a listen and could tell a difference, whos to say they wouldn't just lie and say there is no difference in the slightest
Some further thoughts:
Elitism. If this were the motors forum and a question was asked about steering feel, would you consider it reasonable for someone who'd only ever driven say an astra to call another member "elitist", because he'd commented on his experiences of driving an Elise, Ferrari and a Porsche?
Regarding proof. Lets ignore the direct question for a min, and consider a bit of philosophy
Kick starting this, here's a few definitions from dictionary.com:
"Proof: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth."
"Evidence: that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof."
There's been lots of comments about the requirement for scientific proof, inferring consistent measurements. I'm going to throw something in here of "do we know what we're trying to measure"? How many times have people turned around and suggested that some kit measures better than others, therefore must be better, eg.
- CD measures better than vinyl (bass response, pitch stability)
- transistor amps measure better than valve amps
- direct drive turntables over belt driven
and more recently
- high quality MP3 is indistinguishable from a WAV file
So why is it that people spend thousands on high end belt drive turntables and valve amps? Are they all simply mad and hallucinating?
Or, is it simply that we don't yet know what to measure?
Going back to the definition of evidence, look at the element of "grounds for belief".
That implies that if enough people believe, then it is evidence, and if the evidence contradicts the measurements we have available right now, is that necessarily wrong?
Put it another way, nobody to my knowledge can prove that God exists, but then on the other hand, you can't prove he doesn't, and for all we know, maybe he does.
Back in the audio realm, there are two polarised camps, those that are relying of measurements which may not be all encompassing and those who've put some time in to listen and think there is a difference.
How about we simply call it a truce. If you chose not to buy a cable because you think it's worthless, that's cool by me.
However, don't expect to consider it reasonable to come to me and say that I must be hallucinating if I believe that it does make a difference.
Elitism. If this were the motors forum and a question was asked about steering feel, would you consider it reasonable for someone who'd only ever driven say an astra to call another member "elitist", because he'd commented on his experiences of driving an Elise, Ferrari and a Porsche?
Regarding proof. Lets ignore the direct question for a min, and consider a bit of philosophy
Kick starting this, here's a few definitions from dictionary.com:
"Proof: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth."
"Evidence: that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof."
There's been lots of comments about the requirement for scientific proof, inferring consistent measurements. I'm going to throw something in here of "do we know what we're trying to measure"? How many times have people turned around and suggested that some kit measures better than others, therefore must be better, eg.
- CD measures better than vinyl (bass response, pitch stability)
- transistor amps measure better than valve amps
- direct drive turntables over belt driven
and more recently
- high quality MP3 is indistinguishable from a WAV file
So why is it that people spend thousands on high end belt drive turntables and valve amps? Are they all simply mad and hallucinating?
Or, is it simply that we don't yet know what to measure?
Going back to the definition of evidence, look at the element of "grounds for belief".
That implies that if enough people believe, then it is evidence, and if the evidence contradicts the measurements we have available right now, is that necessarily wrong?
Put it another way, nobody to my knowledge can prove that God exists, but then on the other hand, you can't prove he doesn't, and for all we know, maybe he does.
Back in the audio realm, there are two polarised camps, those that are relying of measurements which may not be all encompassing and those who've put some time in to listen and think there is a difference.
How about we simply call it a truce. If you chose not to buy a cable because you think it's worthless, that's cool by me.
However, don't expect to consider it reasonable to come to me and say that I must be hallucinating if I believe that it does make a difference.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 10,064
- Location
- Milton Keynes
Some of us are open minded... beyond resistance etc caused by insufficient cabling or bad connections, Im generally on side of cabling shouldn't cause a major difference as in simple terms all it is doing is acting as a signal path/conductor between components as an extention of the PCB, so if the signal is identical at the amp end, as at the end of the cabling, well there shouldn't be a difference , however if someone could prove to me beyond that there is a difference I'd be open to the idea.
Last edited:
To most people the differences in cables are small to nonexistent and like most things what sounds 'better' is predominately subjective. To spend many hundreds and even thousands of pounds on interconnects is not something I'd consider. I have taken home all sorts of different cables over the years to 'sample' them and most of the time I have heard little or no difference and where there is difference it's been so small it doesn't, to me, sustain the case for them. Each to their own at the end of the day and if someone feels that a thousand pound interconnects make their Krell sound better then all power to them.